Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 118 June 19, 2019
Pages 28429–28714
OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER
VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:32 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\19JNWS.LOC 19JNWS jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTWS II Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019
The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) Subscriptions: and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Government Publishing Office, is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general (Toll-Free) applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published FEDERAL AGENCIES by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public Subscriptions: interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Email [email protected] issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents Phone 202–741–6000 currently on file for public inspection, see www.federalregister.gov. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration The Federal Register Printing Savings Act of 2017 (Pub. L. 115- authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication 120) placed restrictions on distribution of official printed copies established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, of the daily Federal Register to members of Congress and Federal the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. offices. Under this Act, the Director of the Government Publishing The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. Office may not provide printed copies of the daily Federal Register It is also available online at no charge at www.govinfo.gov, a unless a Member or other Federal office requests a specific issue service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office. or a subscription to the print edition. For more information on how to subscribe use the following website link: https:// The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the www.gpo.gov/frsubs. authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6:00 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published and includes both text and graphics from Volume 1, 1 (March 14, 1936) forward. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800 or 866-512- 1800 (toll free). E-mail, gpocusthelp.com. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $860 plus postage, or $929, for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $330, plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover. Mail to: U.S. Government Publishing Office—New Orders, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000; or call toll free 1-866-512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, see bookstore.gpo.gov. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 84 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.
.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:32 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\19JNWS.LOC 19JNWS jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTWS III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 118
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
Agriculture Department Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 28459 Submissions, and Approvals: Application Package for the Grantee Progress Report Data Collection, 28512 Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PROPOSED RULES Proposed Establishment of the Tualatin Hills and Defense Department Laurelwood District Viticultural Areas, 28442–28450 See Army Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau Submissions, and Approvals, 28513–28514 NOTICES Arms Sales, 28514–28516 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Privacy Act; System of Records, 28516–28517 Submissions, and Approvals: Application and Permit for Importation of Firearms, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Ammunition and Defense Articles, 28589 NOTICES Recommendation 2019–02, 28517–28526 Army Department NOTICES Education Department Meetings: NOTICES U.S. Army Science Board; Federal Advisory Committee, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, 28512–28513 Submissions, and Approvals: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System 2019–20 through 2021–22, 28542–28543 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Applications for New Awards: PROPOSED RULES Education Research and Special Education Research Medicare Program: Grant Programs, 28533–28538 Secure Electronic Prior Authorization for Medicare Part Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program, D, 28450–28458 28538–28542 Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems, 28526–28529 Coast Guard Strengthening Institutions Program, 28529–28533 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Energy Department Submissions, and Approvals, 28566–28572 See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Commerce Department Authority to Import and Export Natural Gas, etc.: See Foreign-Trade Zones Board Cameron LNG, LLC, 28544–28545 See International Trade Administration Freeport LNG Development, LP, 28543–28544 See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES Commodity Futures Trading Commission Pesticide Product Registration: NOTICES Applications for New Active Ingredients, 28549–28550 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Aviation Administration Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Daily Trading Records PROPOSED RULES Requirements for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Airworthiness Directives: Participants, 28510 Airbus SAS Airplanes, 28431–28434 Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements: The Boeing Company Airplanes, 28429–28431 Pre-Enactment and Transition Swaps, 28511–28512 Amendment of the Class D Airspace: New Iberia, LA, 28440–28442 Comptroller of the Currency Amendment of the Class E Airspace: NOTICES Ashland, KY, 28439–28440 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Amendment of VOR Federal Airway: Submissions, and Approvals: V–159 in the Vicinity of Hamilton, AL, 28434–28436 Interagency Guidance on Asset Securitization Activities, Establishment of Class D and E Airspace: 28626–28627 Wichita, KS, 28436–28437 Reverse Mortgage Products; Guidance for Managing Establishment of Class E Airspace: Compliance and Reputation Risks, 28625–28626 Lander, WY, 28438–28439
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:15 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\19JNCN.SGM 19JNCN jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with CONTENTS IV Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Contents
Federal Communications Commission Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Authorization of Production Activity: Submissions, and Approvals, 28550–28551 GlaxoSmithKline, PLC, Foreign-Trade Zone 93, Raleigh/ Durham, NC, 28459 Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Health and Human Services Department Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations, 28574–28575 See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Major Disaster and Related Determinations: See Food and Drug Administration Guam, 28573–28574 See Health Resources and Services Administration See National Institutes of Health Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Combined Filings, 28545–28549 Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS, 28562– Filing: 28563 Henley, Greg, 28548 Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications, 28546– Health Resources and Services Administration 28547 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Federal Maritime Commission Submissions, and Approvals: NOTICES Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program Recipient Compilation of Agreements Filed, 28551 Best Practice Strategies and Interventions, 28561– 28562 Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Standardized Work Plan Form for Use With Applications NOTICES to the Bureau of Health Workforce Research and Meetings; Sunshine Act, 28551–28552 Training Grants and Cooperative Agreements, 28560– 28561 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration The Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education NOTICES Program Eligible Resident/Fellow FTE Chart, 28559– Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, 28560 Submissions, and Approvals: Hours of Service of Drivers Regulations, 28616–28617 Homeland Security Department Commercial Driver’s License Standards: Application for See Coast Guard Exemptions: See Federal Emergency Management Agency Navistar, Inc., 28618–28619 See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Entry-Level Driver Training; Application for Exemption: See U.S. Customs and Border Protection United Parcel Service, Inc., 28623–28624 Hours of Service of Drivers; Application for Exemption: Housing and Urban Development Department Turfgrass Producers International, 28621–28623 NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Vision, 28619–28621 Submissions, and Approvals: Housing Counseling Training Grant Program, 28578 Federal Reserve System NOTICES Indian Affairs Bureau Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank NOTICES Holding Companies, 28552 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Federal Trade Commission Leases and Permits, 28580–28581 NOTICES Amendment to Liquor Control Ordinance: Proposed Consent Agreement: Comanche Nation, 28580 SecurTest, Inc., 28552–28554 Interior Department Fish and Wildlife Service See Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES See Indian Affairs Bureau Habitat Conservation: See National Park Service Coastal California Gnatcatcher; Categorical Exclusion for See Ocean Energy Management Bureau 93–129 Ltd, Orange County, CA, 28578–28580 Internal Revenue Service Food and Drug Administration PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Section 199A Rules for Cooperatives and Their Patrons, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, 28668–28706 Submissions, and Approvals: Content Requirements for Over-the-Counter Drug Product International Trade Administration Labeling, 28555–28557 NOTICES Data to Support Social and Behavioral Research as Used Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, by the Food and Drug Administration, 28557–28559 or Reviews: Postmarket Surveillance of Medical Devices, 28554– Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic 28555 of Korea, 28461–28462
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:15 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\19JNCN.SGM 19JNCN jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Contents V
Certain Steel Nails From the Socialist Republic of Exemption; Reissuance: Vietnam, 28460–28461 Exelon Generation Co., LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, 28591–28595 International Trade Commission NOTICES Ocean Energy Management Bureau Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, NOTICES etc.: Proposed Grant Area and Request for Competitive Interest: Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe From China, Commercial Renewable Energy Transmission on the 28588–28589 Outer Continental Shelf Offshore New York and New U.S. Trade and Investment With Sub-Saharan Africa: Jersey, 28582–28587 Recent Trends and New Developments, 28587–28588 Postal Regulatory Commission Justice Department NOTICES See Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau New Postal Products, 28601
Labor Department Postal Service NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Product Change: Submissions, and Approvals: Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 28601 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 28589–28590 Presidential Documents Maritime Administration PROCLAMATIONS NOTICES Special Observances: Funding Opportunity: Father’s Day (Proc. 9906), 28707–28710 America’s Marine Highway Projects; Corrections, 28624– EXECUTIVE ORDERS 28625 Committees; Establishment, Renewal, Termination, etc.: Federal Advisory Committees; Evaluating and Improving National Endowment for the Humanities Utility (EO 13875), 28711–28713 NOTICES Meetings: Securities and Exchange Commission National Council on the Humanities, 28590–28591 NOTICES National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Application: See National Endowment for the Humanities Tortoise Tax-Advantaged Social Infrastructure Fund, Inc. and Tortoise Credit Strategies, LLC, 28605–28608 National Institutes of Health Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: NOTICES Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 28601– Meetings: 28602 Center for Scientific Review, 28563–28566 NYSE Arca, Inc., 28602 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, The Depository Trust Co., 28602–28605 28565–28566 National Institute on Drug Abuse, 28564–28565 Small Business Administration NOTICES National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Disaster Declarations: NOTICES North Dakota, 28609–28610 2018 Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, 28489– Oklahoma, 28609 28510 Major Disaster Declarations for Public Assistance Only: Endangered and Threatened Species: Idaho, 28608–28609 Endangered Species Act Listing Determination for Iowa, 28609 Alewife and Blueback Herring, 28630–28666 Minnesota, 28608 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: State Department Chevron Richmond Refinery Long Wharf Maintenance NOTICES and Efficiency Project in San Francisco Bay, CA, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, 28474–28489 Submissions, and Approvals: Navy Target and Missile Launch Activities on San Application for A, G, or NATO Visa, 28610–28611 Nicolas Island, CA, 28462–28473 Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Auschwitz-Birkenau Artifacts Exhibition, 28610 National Park Service Finding Light in the Darkness Exhibition, 28611 NOTICES Delegation of Authority to the Director of the Foreign National Register of Historic Places: Service Institute, 28611 Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 28581–28582 Surface Transportation Board Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Exemption: Seven County Infrastructure Coalition Rail Construction Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Oyster Creek Nuclear and Operation, Carbon, Duchesne, and Uintah Generating Station, 28595–28600 Counties, UT, 28611–28616
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:15 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\19JNCN.SGM 19JNCN jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with CONTENTS VI Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Contents
Temporary Trackage Rights Exemptions: Veterans Affairs Department The Kansas City Southern Railway Co. From Norfolk NOTICES Southern Railway Co.; Norfolk Southern Railway Co. Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, From The Kansas City Southern Railway Co., 28616 Submissions, and Approvals: Alternate Signer Certification, 28627 Transportation Department Financial Counseling Statement, 28627–28628 See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration See Maritime Administration Separate Parts In This Issue
Treasury Department Part II See Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric See Comptroller of the Currency Administration, 28630–28666 See Internal Revenue Service Part III U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Treasury Department, Internal Revenue Service, 28668– NOTICES 28706 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 28575–28576 Part IV Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Presidential Documents, 28707–28713 Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Family Unity Benefits, 28576–28577 Naturalization Oath Ceremony, 28577–28578 Reader Aids U.S. Customs and Border Protection Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for NOTICES phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, of recently enacted public laws. Submissions, and Approvals: To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Application-Permit-Special License Unlading-Lading- electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/ Overtime Services, 28572–28573 accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism and the address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or Trusted Trader Program; Correction, 28572 manage your subscription.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:15 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\19JNCN.SGM 19JNCN jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Contents VII
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
3 CFR Proclamations: 9906...... 28709 Executive Orders: 13875...... 28711 14 CFR Proposed Rules: 39 (2 documents) ...... 28429, 28431 71 (5 documents) ...... 28434, 28436, 28438, 28439, 28440 26 CFR Proposed Rules: 1...... 28668 27 CFR Proposed Rules: 9...... 28442 42 CFR Proposed Rules: 423...... 28450
VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:33 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\19JNLS.LOC 19JNLS jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTLS 28429
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 118
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER • Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail The FAA will post all comments, contains notices to the public of the proposed address above between 9 a.m. and 5 without change, to http:// issuance of rules and regulations. The p.m., Monday through Friday, except www.regulations.gov, including any purpose of these notices is to give interested Federal holidays. personal information you provide. The persons an opportunity to participate in the FAA will also post a report rule making prior to the adoption of the final For service information identified in rules. this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial summarizing each substantive verbal Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data contact the agency receives about this Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster NPRM. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Blvd., MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA Discussion 90740–5600; telephone 562–797–1717; Federal Aviation Administration internet https:// The FAA has received several reports www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view of separation of the lower aft wing-to- 14 CFR Part 39 this referenced service information at body fairing panel 194E during flight. In two of these reports, damage from the the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, [Docket No. FAA–2019–0399; Product separation of that panel was also found 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. Identifier 2018–NM–149–AD] on an adjacent fairing panel. In another For information on the availability of report, the panel was found loose. The RIN 2120–AA64 this material at the FAA, call 206–231– airplanes with loose or missing panels 3195. It is also available on the internet Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing had accumulated between 1,270 and at http://www.regulations.gov by Company Airplanes 43,200 total flight hours, and between searching for and locating Docket No. 550 and 15,800 total flight cycles. The AGENCY: Federal Aviation FAA–2019–0399. FAA determined that the nutplates Administration (FAA), DOT. Examining the AD Docket common to the forward edge of the ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking panel could become worn or damaged. (NPRM). You may examine the AD docket on In addition, worn or damaged nutplates the internet at http:// on the support structure for the wheel SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a www.regulations.gov by searching for new airworthiness directive (AD) for all well panel 193D, which is adjacent to and locating Docket No. FAA–2019– the 194E fairing panel, may also be a The Boeing Company Model 737 series 0399; or in person at Docket Operations airplanes, except for Model 737–100, contributing factor to the loss of the between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 194E fairing panel. This condition, if —200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 through Friday, except Federal holidays. series airplanes. This proposed AD was not addressed, could result in The AD docket contains this NPRM, the separation of fairing panel 194E. prompted by reports of separation of the regulatory evaluation, any comments lower aft wing-to-body fairing panel received, and other information. The Related Service Information Under 1 194E (‘‘fairing panel 194E’’) during street address for Docket Operations is CFR Part 51 flight, due to worn or damaged listed above. Comments will be The FAA reviewed Boeing Service nutplates on the support structure. This available in the AD docket shortly after Bulletin 737–53–1307, dated January 12, proposed AD would require repetitive receipt. 2012. This service information describes inspections of fairing panel 194E, wheel procedures for repetitive inspections of well panel 193D, and support structure FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Pohl, Aerospace Engineer, fairing panel 194E, wheel well panel for discrepancies, and related 193D, and support structure for investigative and corrective actions if Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des discrepancies (including incorrect necessary. This proposed AD would torque at the fasteners and worn and also require rework of the panels and Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206– 231–3527; email: [email protected]. damaged nutplates and fastener holes) support structure, which would and corrective actions (including repair terminate the repetitive inspections. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and replacement of nutplates and FAA is proposing this AD to address the Comments Invited fasteners). This service information also unsafe condition on these products. describes procedures for rework of the DATES: The FAA must receive comments The FAA invites you to send any panels and support structure, including on this proposed AD by August 5, 2019. written relevant data, views, or related investigative actions (general ADDRESSES: You may send comments, arguments about this proposal. Send visual inspection of the panel and using the procedures found in 14 CFR your comments to an address listed support structure for damage) and 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following under the ADDRESSES section. Include repair, which together would eliminate methods: ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2019–0399; Product the need for the repetitive inspections. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to Identifier 2018–NM–149–AD’’ at the This service information is reasonably http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the beginning of your comments. The FAA available because the interested parties instructions for submitting comments. specifically invites comments on the have access to it through their normal • Fax: 202–493–2251. overall regulatory, economic, course of business or by the means • Mail: U.S. Department of environmental, and energy aspects of identified in the ADDRESSES section. Transportation, Docket Operations, M– this NPRM. The agency will consider all 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room comments received by the closing date FAA’s Determination W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, and may amend this NPRM because of The FAA is proposing this AD Washington, DC 20590. those comments. because the agency evaluated all the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28430 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
relevant information and determined found. Related investigative actions in were initially delivered with acceptable the unsafe condition described an AD could include, for example, parts, thereby subjecting those airplanes previously is likely to exist or develop inspections. to the unsafe condition. in other products of the same type The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is Airplanes from line number 3533 design. used in this proposed AD. Corrective through any airplane with an original Proposed AD Requirements actions correct or address any condition airworthiness certificate or an original found. Corrective actions in an AD export certificate of airworthiness dated This proposed AD would require could include, for example, repairs. on or before the effective date of this AD accomplishing the actions specified in would be subject to the initial the service information described Differences Between This Proposed AD inspection requirement of this proposed previously, except as discussed under and the Service Information ‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD AD, but the inspection would not be and the Service Information,’’ and The effectivity of Boeing Service required to be repeated if the airplane except for any differences identified as Bulletin 737–53–1307, dated January 12, can be demonstrated to have the post- exceptions in the regulatory text of this 2012, is limited to Model 737–600, reworked configuration of Boeing proposed AD. –700, –700C, –800, –900, and –900ER Service Bulletin 737–53–1307, dated For information on the procedures series airplanes, line numbers 1 through January 12, 2012, as specified in and compliance times, see this service 3532 inclusive. However, the paragraph (h) of this AD. (Note that the information at http:// applicability of this proposed AD ‘‘Parts Installation Limitation’’ specified www.regulations.gov by searching for includes all Model 737 airplanes except in paragraph (i) of this AD would still and locating Docket No. FAA–2019– for Model 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, apply.) 0399. –400, and –500 series airplanes. The Costs of Compliance The phrase ‘‘related investigative FAA has determined, as has the design actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. approval holder, that affected parts can The FAA estimates that this proposed Related investigative actions are follow- be installed on future deliveries. AD would affect 983 airplanes of U.S. on actions that (1) are related to the Because the affected parts are rotable, registry. The agency estimates the primary action, and (2) further the FAA has determined that these parts following costs to comply with this investigate the nature of any condition could later be installed on airplanes that proposed AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Cost on U.S. Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators
Inspection ...... 8 work-hours × $85 per hour $0 $680 per inspection cycle ...... Up to $668,440 per inspection = $680 per inspection cycle. cycle. Rework ...... 25 work-hours × $85 per hour 0 $2,125 ...... Up to $2,088,875. = $2,125.
The FAA has received no definitive This proposed AD is issued in (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation data that would enable the agency to accordance with authority delegated by in Alaska, and provide cost estimates for the on- the Executive Director, Aircraft (3) Will not have a significant condition repairs specified in this Certification Service, as authorized by economic impact, positive or negative, proposed AD. FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance on a substantial number of small entities with that order, issuance of ADs is Authority for This Rulemaking under the criteria of the Regulatory normally a function of the Compliance Flexibility Act. Title 49 of the United States Code and Airworthiness Division, but during specifies the FAA’s authority to issue this transition period, the Executive List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Director has delegated the authority to Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation section 106, describes the authority of issue ADs applicable to transport safety, Incorporation by reference, the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: category airplanes and associated Safety. Aviation Programs, describes in more appliances to the Director of the System The Proposed Amendment detail the scope of the Agency’s Oversight Division. authority. Accordingly, under the authority Regulatory Findings The FAA is issuing this rulemaking delegated to me by the Administrator, under the authority described in The FAA has determined that this the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section proposed AD would not have federalism 39 as follows: 44701: ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under implications under Executive Order that section, Congress charges the FAA 13132. This proposed AD would not PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS with promoting safe flight of civil have a substantial direct effect on the DIRECTIVES aircraft in air commerce by prescribing States, on the relationship between the regulations for practices, methods, and national Government and the States, or ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 procedures the Administrator finds on the distribution of power and continues to read as follows: necessary for safety in air commerce. responsibilities among the various Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. This regulation is within the scope of levels of government. that authority because it addresses an For the reasons discussed above, I § 39.13 [Amended] unsafe condition that is likely to exist or certify this proposed regulation: ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding develop on products identified in this (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory the following new airworthiness rulemaking action. action’’ under Executive Order 12866, directive (AD):
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28431
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– the actions required by paragraph (h)(1) or Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., 2019–0399; Product Identifier 2018– (h)(2) of this AD, as applicable. MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600; NM–149–AD. Accomplishing the actions in paragraph telephone 562–797–1717; internet https:// (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD terminates the www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this (a) Comments Due Date repetitive inspections required by paragraph service information at the FAA, Transport The FAA must receive comments by (g)(1) of this AD. The requirements of Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des August 5, 2019. paragraph (i) of this AD continue to apply. Moines, WA. For information on the (1) Rework fairing panel 194E, wheel well availability of this material at the FAA, call (b) Affected ADs panel 193D, and the support structure, 206–231–3195. None. including accomplishment of all applicable Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June related investigative actions and repair, in (c) Applicability accordance with Part 3 of the 14, 2019. This AD applies to The Boeing Company Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Michael Kaszycki, Model 737 series airplanes, certificated in Service Bulletin 737–53–1307, dated January Acting Director, System Oversight Division, any category, except for Model 737–100, 12, 2012. All applicable related investigative Aircraft Certification Service. –200, –200C, –300, –400, and –500 series actions and repairs must be done before [FR Doc. 2019–13020 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] airplanes. further flight. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P (d) Subject (2) Verify that fairing panel 194E, wheel well panel 193D, and the support structure Air Transport Association (ATA) of have the number and type of attachments America Code 53, Fuselage. specified in the post-reworked configuration DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (e) Unsafe Condition of Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1307, dated January 12, 2012. Federal Aviation Administration This AD was prompted by reports of separation of lower aft wing-to-body fairing (i) Parts Installation Limitation 14 CFR Part 39 panel 194E (‘‘fairing panel 194E’’) during As of the effective date of this AD, no flight, due to worn or damaged nutplates on person may install a fairing panel 194E on [Docket No. FAA–2019–0439; Product the 193D wheel well panel and support any airplane identified in paragraph (c) of Identifier 2019–NM–037–AD] structure. The FAA is issuing this AD to this AD, unless fairing panel 194E, wheel RIN 2120–AA64 address separation of fairing panel 194E. well panel 193D, and the support structure (f) Compliance have the number and type of attachments Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS specified in the post-reworked configuration Airplanes Comply with this AD within the of Boeing Service Bulletin 737–53–1307, compliance times specified, unless already dated January 12, 2012. done. AGENCY: Federal Aviation (j) Alternative Methods of Compliance Administration (FAA), DOT. (g) Repetitive Inspections and Corrective (AMOCs) ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Actions (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, (NPRM). (1) For airplanes with an original FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs airworthiness certificate or an original export for this AD, if requested using the procedures SUMMARY: We propose to supersede certificate of airworthiness dated on or before found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012–22– the effective date of this AD: Within 24 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your 18, which applies to all Airbus SAS months after the effective date of this AD, do principal inspector or local Flight Standards Model A330–243, –243F, –341, –342, a general visual inspection for discrepancies District Office, as appropriate. If sending and –343 airplanes. AD 2012–22–18 of fairing panel 194E, wheel well panel 193D, information directly to the manager of the and support structure, and do all applicable requires repetitive inspections of the certification office, send it to the attention of three inner acoustic panels of both related investigative and corrective actions, the person identified in paragraph (k)(1) of in accordance with Part 1 and Part 2 of the this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9- engine air intake cowls to detect Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing [email protected]. disbonding, and corrective actions if Service Bulletin 737–53–1307, dated January (2) Before using any approved AMOC, necessary. Since we issued AD 2012– 12, 2012. All applicable related investigative notify your appropriate principal inspector, 22–18, we have received additional and corrective actions must be done before or lacking a principal inspector, the manager reports of engine air inlet cowl collapse. further flight. Repeat the inspection of the local flight standards district office/ This proposed AD would retain the thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000 certificate holding district office. requirements of AD 2012–22–18 with a flight cycles. (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable reduced compliance time and reduced (2) For airplanes having line numbers 3533 level of safety may be used for any repair, and subsequent with an original modification, or alteration required by this repetitive inspection intervals. This airworthiness certificate or an original export AD if it is approved by The Boeing Company proposed AD would also provide for an certificate of airworthiness dated on or before Organization Designation Authorization optional modification that is the effective date of this AD: If the initial (ODA) that has been authorized by the terminating action for the repetitive inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, to make inspections. These actions are specified shows that fairing panel 194E, wheel well those findings. To be approved, the repair in a European Aviation Safety Agency panel 193D, and the support structure have method, modification deviation, or alteration (EASA) AD, which will be incorporated the number and type of attachments specified deviation must meet the certification basis of by reference. We are proposing this AD in the post-reworked configuration of Boeing the airplane, and the approval must to address the unsafe condition on these Service Bulletin 737–53–1307, dated January specifically refer to this AD. 12, 2012, then the repetitive inspections products. required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD are (k) Related Information DATES: We must receive comments on terminated. The requirements of paragraph (i) (1) For more information about this AD, this proposed AD by August 5, 2019. of this AD continue to apply. contact Alan Pohl, Aerospace Engineer, ADDRESSES: You may send comments, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, using the procedures found in 14 CFR (h) Terminating Action 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA For airplanes with an original 98198; phone and fax: 206–231–3527; email: 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following airworthiness certificate or an original export [email protected]. methods: certificate of airworthiness dated on or before (2) For service information identified in • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to the effective date of this AD: Within 72 this AD, contact Boeing Commercial http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the months after the effective date of this AD, do Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data instructions for submitting comments.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28432 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
• Fax: 202–493–2251. We will post all comments we [which corresponds to FAA AD 2012–22–18] • Mail: U.S. Department of receive, without change, to http:// to require repetitive SDI of these air inlet Transportation, Docket Operations, www.regulations.gov, including any cowl acoustic panels on both engines. M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Airbus personal information you provide. We developed mod 202395, installation of Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey will also post a report summarizing each improved inner acoustic panels, and Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. substantive verbal contact we receive • published the modification SB, which Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of about this NPRM. constitutes an optional terminating action for Transportation, Docket Operations, the SDI. Consequently, EASA AD 2011–0173 M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Discussion was revised to introduce this optional Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey We issued AD 2012–22–18, terminating action. Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, Amendment 39–17256 (77 FR 70366, Since that revised [EASA] AD was issued, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday November 26, 2012) (‘‘AD 2012–22– new events of Rolls-Royce Trent 700 engines air inlet cowl collapse have been reported. through Friday, except Federal holidays. 18’’), for all Airbus SAS Model A330– For the material identified in this These events only occurred on pre-mod 243, –243F, –341, –342, and –343 202395 engine air inlet cowls. Prompted by proposed AD that will be incorporated airplanes. AD 2012–22–18 requires these findings, Airbus performed new by reference (IBR), contact the EASA, repetitive inspections of the three inner calculations of the SDI threshold/interval Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 acoustic panels of both engine air intake values and those of the Acceptable/ Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 cowls to detect disbonding, and Repairable Damage Limits, leading to an 89990 1000; email [email protected]; corrective actions if necessary. AD amended inspection programme. internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may For the reasons described above, this 2012–22–18 resulted from reports of [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA find this IBR material on the EASA extensive damage to engine air intake website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. AD 2011–0173R1, which is superseded, and cowls as a result of acoustic panel requires the SDI of affected parts at amended You may view this IBR material at the detachment. We issued AD 2012–22–18 threshold(s) and interval(s), and, depending FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 to address disbonding, which could on findings, repair or replacement of affected South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For result in detachment of the engine air parts. This [EASA] AD also allows a post- information on the availability of this intake cowl from the engine leading to mod aeroplane to be modified, either material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. ingestion of parts, which could cause partially or completely, to pre-mod It is also available in the AD docket on configuration [which terminates the need for failure of the engine, and possible injury the repetitive inspections]. the internet at http:// to persons on the ground. www.regulations.gov. The initial compliance time for the Actions Since AD 2012–22–18 Was Examining the AD Docket special detailed inspection is within 12 Issued months after an installation or You may examine the AD docket on Since we issued AD 2012–22–18, we inspection, or 6 months after the the internet at http:// have received additional reports of effective date of the AD, whichever www.regulations.gov by searching for engine air inlet cowl collapse and made occurs later; but not to exceed 24 and locating Docket No. FAA–2019– a determination that there should be a months since the last inspection. The 0439; or in person at Docket Operations reduction of the existing compliance compliance times for the corrective between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday action are before further flight and through Friday, except Federal holidays. time and repetitive inspection intervals required by AD 2012–22–18. before 10 flight cycles since the last The AD docket contains this NPRM, the inspection, depending on the condition. regulatory evaluation, any comments The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the The repetitive inspection interval is 12 received, and other information. The months. street address for Docket Operations is European Union, has issued EASA AD listed above. Comments will be 2019–0042, dated February 27, 2019 Explanation of Retained Requirements (‘‘EASA AD 2019–0042’’) (also referred available in the AD docket shortly after Although this proposed AD does not receipt. to as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the explicitly restate the requirements of AD FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 2012–22–18, this proposed AD would Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, for all Airbus SAS Model A330–243, retain all of the requirements of AD International Section, Transport A330–243F, A330–341, A330–342 and 2012–22–18, except the existing Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South A330–343 airplanes. The MCAI states: compliance time and repetitive 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; inspection intervals are reduced. Those telephone and fax 206–231–3229. Occurrences were reported on A330 requirements are referenced in EASA aeroplanes fitted with Rolls-Royce Trent 700 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AD 2019–0042, which, in turn, is engines, where the air inlet cowl was found referenced in paragraph (g) of this Comments Invited with extensive damage, as a result of acoustic panel collapse. The technical investigation proposed AD. We invite you to send any written results revealed that these occurrences were relevant data, views, or arguments about Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part caused by panel disbonding. 51 this proposal. Send your comments to This condition, if not detected and an address listed under the ADDRESSES corrected, could lead to in-flight detachment EASA AD 2019–0042 describes section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– of an air inlet cowl acoustic panel, possibly procedures for repetitive inspections of 2019–0439; Product Identifier 2019– resulting in damage to the aeroplane, and/or engine air inlet cowls having certain NM–037–AD’’ at the beginning of your in damage to the engine by ingestion of parts, part numbers, repair or replacement of comments. We specifically invite and/or injury to persons on the ground. any engine air inlet cowl that has comments on the overall regulatory, To initially address this potential unsafe disbonding, and an optional condition, Airbus published the inspection economic, environmental, and energy [service bulletin] SB (original issue up to modification that terminates the need aspects of this NPRM. We will consider Revision 03), to provide instructions for for the repetitive inspections. This all comments received by the closing [special detailed inspection] SDI of the three material is reasonably available because date and may amend this NPRM based acoustic panels of air inlet cowl. the interested parties have access to it on those comments. Consequently, EASA issued AD 2011–0173 through their normal course of business
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28433
or by the means identified in the Proposed Requirements of This NPRM FAA final rule. This proposed AD ADDRESSES section. This proposed AD would require would, therefore, require compliance accomplishing the actions specified in with the provisions specified in EASA FAA’s Determination and Requirements AD 2019–0042, except for any of This Proposed AD EASA AD 2019–0042 described previously, as incorporated by differences identified as exceptions in This product has been approved by reference, except for any differences the regulatory text of this proposed AD. the aviation authority of another identified as exceptions in the Service information specified in EASA AD 2019–0042 that is required for country, and is approved for operation regulatory text of this AD. compliance with EASA AD 2019–0042 in the United States. Pursuant to our Explanation of Required Compliance will be available on the internet http:// bilateral agreement with the State of Information www.regulations.gov by searching for Design Authority, we have been notified In the FAA’s ongoing efforts to and locating Docket No. FAA–2019– of the unsafe condition described in the improve the efficiency of the AD 0439 after the FAA final rule is MCAI referenced above. We are process, the FAA worked with Airbus published. proposing this AD because we evaluated and EASA to develop a process to use Costs of Compliance all pertinent information and certain EASA ADs as the primary source determined an unsafe condition exists of information for compliance with We estimate that this proposed AD and is likely to exist or develop on other requirements for corresponding FAA affects 47 airplanes of U.S. registry. We products of the same type design. ADs. As a result, EASA AD 2019–0042 estimate the following costs to comply will be incorporated by reference in the with this proposed AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS FOR REQUIRED ACTIONS
Cost per Cost on U.S. Action Labor cost Parts cost product operators
Retained actions from AD 2012–22–18 ..... Up to 20 work-hours × $85 per hour = Up $0 $1,700 Up to $79,900. to $1,700.
ESTIMATED COSTS FOR OPTIONAL ACTIONS
Cost per Labor cost Parts cost product
Up to 154 work hours × $85 per hour = Up to $13,090 ...... (*) Up to $13,090.* * We have received no definitive data on the parts costs for the optional actions.
We estimate the following costs to do of any required actions. We have no way that might need this on-condition any necessary on-condition action that of determining the number of aircraft action: would be required based on the results
ESTIMATED COSTS OF ON-CONDITION ACTIONS
Cost per Labor cost Parts cost product
Up to 34 work-hours × $85 per hour = Up to $2,890 ...... (*) Up to $2,890.* * We have received no definitive data on the parts costs for the on-condition actions.
The new requirements of this We are issuing this rulemaking under Certification Service, as authorized by proposed AD add no additional the authority described in Subtitle VII, FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance economic burden. However, the Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: with that order, issuance of ADs is optional modification, if done, would ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that normally a function of the Compliance result in additional costs as specified in section, Congress charges the FAA with and Airworthiness Division, but during the ‘‘Estimate costs for optional actions’’ promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in this transition period, the Executive table. air commerce by prescribing regulations Director has delegated the authority to for practices, methods, and procedures issue ADs applicable to transport Authority for This Rulemaking the Administrator finds necessary for category airplanes and associated safety in air commerce. This regulation appliances to the Director of the System Title 49 of the United States Code is within the scope of that authority Oversight Division. specifies the FAA’s authority to issue because it addresses an unsafe condition rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, that is likely to exist or develop on Regulatory Findings section 106, describes the authority of products identified in this rulemaking We determined that this proposed AD the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: action. Aviation Programs, describes in more would not have federalism implications detail the scope of the Agency’s This proposed AD is issued in under Executive Order 13132. This authority. accordance with authority delegated by proposed AD would not have a the Executive Director, Aircraft substantial direct effect on the States, on
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28434 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
the relationship between the national ingestion of parts, which could cause failure approval of an AMOC, provided the Government and the States, or on the of the engine, and possible injury to persons procedures and tests identified as RC can be distribution of power and on the ground. done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or responsibilities among the various (f) Compliance changes to procedures or tests identified as levels of government. Comply with this AD within the RC require approval of an AMOC. For the reasons discussed above, I compliance times specified, unless already certify this proposed regulation: done. (k) Related Information 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory (1) For information about EASA AD 2019– (g) Requirements action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 0042, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer- 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures AD: Comply with all required actions and +49 221 89990 6017; email ADs@ (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); compliance times specified in, and in easa.europa.eu; Internet accordance with, European Aviation Safety www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this 3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Agency (EASA) AD 2019–0042, dated Alaska; and EASA AD on the EASA website at https:// February 27, 2019 (‘‘EASA AD 2019–0042’’). ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this EASA 4. Will not have a significant (h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019–0042 AD at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, economic impact, positive or negative, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For on a substantial number of small entities (1) For purposes of determining information on the availability of this under the criteria of the Regulatory compliance with the requirements of this AD: material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. Flexibility Act. Where EASA AD 2019–0042 refers to its EASA AD 2019–0042 may be found in the effective date, this AD requires using the AD docket on the internet at http:// List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 effective date of this AD. www.regulations.gov by searching for and (2) The ‘‘Remarks’’ section of EASA AD locating Docket No. FAA–2019–0439. Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 2019–0042 does not apply to this AD. safety, Incorporation by reference, (2) For more information about this AD, Safety. (i) No Reporting Requirement contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Although the service information Engineer, International Section, Transport The Proposed Amendment referenced in EASA AD 2019–0042 specifies Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th to submit certain information to the St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and Accordingly, under the authority fax 206–231–3229. delegated to me by the Administrator, manufacturer, this AD does not include that the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part requirement. Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June 10, 2019. 39 as follows: (j) Other FAA AD Provisions Michael Kaszycki, The following provisions also apply to this PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS AD: Acting Director, System Oversight Division, DIRECTIVES (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance Aircraft Certification Service. (AMOCs): The Manager, International [FR Doc. 2019–12877 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, BILLING CODE 4910–13–P continues to read as follows: has the authority to approve AMOCs for this Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION § 39.13 [Amended] 39.19, send your request to your principal ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by inspector or local Flight Standards District Federal Aviation Administration Office, as appropriate. If sending information removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) directly to the International Section, send it 2012–22–18, Amendment 39–17256 (77 to the attention of the person identified in 14 CFR Part 71 FR 70366, November 26, 2012), and paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. Information may [Docket No. FAA–2019–0431; Airspace adding the following new AD: be emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC- Docket No. 19–ASO–9] [email protected]. Before using any Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA–2019–0439; RIN 2120–AA66 Product Identifier 2019–NM–037–AD. approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal (a) Comments Due Date inspector, the manager of the local flight Proposed Amendment of VOR Federal We must receive comments by August 5, standards district office/certificate holding Airway V–159 in the Vicinity of 2019. district office. Hamilton, AL (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any (b) Affected ADs requirement in this AD to obtain instructions AGENCY: Federal Aviation This AD replaces 2012–22–18, Amendment from a manufacturer, the instructions must Administration (FAA), DOT. 39–17256 (77 FR 70366, November 26, 2012) be accomplished using a method approved ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (‘‘AD 2012–22–18’’). by the Manager, International Section, (NPRM). Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; (c) Applicability or Airbus SAS’s EASA Design Organization SUMMARY: This action proposes to This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, modify VHF Omnidirectional Range A330–243, –243F, –341, –342, and –343 the approval must include the DOA- (VOR) Federal airway V–159 due to the airplanes, certificated in any category. authorized signature. (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any planned decommissioning of the (d) Subject service information referenced in EASA AD Hamilton, AL, VORTAC navigation aid Air Transport Association (ATA) of 2019–0042 that contains RC procedures and which provides navigation guidance for America Code 71, Powerplant. tests: Except as required by paragraph (j)(2) a segment of the route. The Hamilton of this AD, RC procedures and tests must be VORTAC is being decommissioned as (e) Reason done to comply with this AD; any procedures part of the FAA’s VOR Minimum This AD was prompted by reports of or tests that are not identified as RC are Operational Network (MON) program. extensive damage to engine air intake cowls recommended. Those procedures and tests DATES: Comments must be received on as a result of acoustic panel collapse. We are that are not identified as RC may be deviated issuing this AD to address disbonding, which from using accepted methods in accordance or before August 5, 2019. could result in detachment of the engine air with the operator’s maintenance or ADDRESSES: Send comments on this intake cowl from the engine, leading to inspection program without obtaining proposal to the U.S. Department of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28435
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 Comments that provide the factual basis dated August 13, 2018, and effective New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building supporting the views and suggestions September 15, 2018. FAA Order Ground Floor, Room W12–140, presented are particularly helpful in 7400.11C is publicly available as listed Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1 developing reasoned regulatory in the ADDRESSES section of this (800) 647–5527 or (202) 366–9826. You decisions on the proposal. Comments proposed rule. FAA Order 7400.11C must identify FAA Docket No. FAA– are specifically invited on the overall lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace 2019–0431; Airspace Docket No. 19– regulatory, aeronautical, economic, areas, air traffic service routes, and ASO–9 at the beginning of your environmental, and energy-related reporting points. aspects of the proposal. comments. You may also submit The Proposal comments through the internet at http:// Communications should identify both www.regulations.gov. docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– The FAA is proposing an amendment FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace 2019–0431; Airspace Docket No. 19– to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Designations and Reporting Points, and ASO–9) and be submitted in triplicate to (14 CFR) part 71 to modify the subsequent amendments can be viewed the Docket Management Facility (see description of VOR Federal airway online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/ ADDRESSES section for address and V–159 due to the planned publications/. For further information, phone number). You may also submit decommissioning of the Hamilton, AL, you can contact the Airspace Policy comments through the internet at http:// VORTAC. The proposed route change is Group, Federal Aviation www.regulations.gov. described below. Administration, 800 Independence Commenters wishing the FAA to V–159: V–159 currently extends Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; acknowledge receipt of their comments between the Virginia Key, FL, VOR/ telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is on this action must submit with those DME and the Huron, SD, VORTAC. The also available for inspection at the comments a self-addressed, stamped FAA proposes to remove the airway National Archives and Records postcard on which the following segment between the Vulcan, AL, Administration (NARA). For statement is made: ‘‘Comments to FAA VORTAC, and the Holly Springs, MS, information on the availability of FAA Docket No. FAA–2019–0431; Airspace VORTAC due to the planned Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) Docket No. 19–ASO–9’’. The postcard decommissioning of the Hamilton, AL, 741–6030, or go to http:// will be date/time stamped and returned VORTAC which provides navigation www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ to the commenter. guidance between Vulcan and Holly ibr-locations.html. All communications received on or Springs. As amended, V–159 would FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace before the specified comment closing consist of two sections. The first section Designations and Reporting Points, is date will be considered before taking would extend between Virginia Key, FL, published yearly and effective on action on the proposed rule. The and Vulcan, AL, as currently charted. September 15. proposal contained in this action may This would be followed by a gap in the be changed in light of comments route between Vulcan, AL, and Holly FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul received. A report summarizing each Springs, MS. The second section would Gallant, Airspace Policy Group, Office substantive public contact with FAA extend between Holly Springs, MS, and of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation personnel concerned with this Huron, SD, as currently charted. Administration, 800 Independence rulemaking will be filed in the docket. A low altitude area navigation Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; (RNAV) route (T-route) is being telephone: (202) 267–8783. Availability of NPRM’s developed to replace the airway section SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An electronic copy of this document proposed for removal. In the interim, Authority for This Rulemaking may be downloaded through the alternative routing would be available internet at http://www.regulations.gov. via airway V–7 between Vulcan, AL, The FAA’s authority to issue rules Recently published rulemaking and the Muscle Shoals, AL, VORTAC; regarding aviation safety is found in documents can also be accessed through then airway V–54 between Muscle Title 49 of the United States Code. the FAA’s web page at http:// Shoals and Holly Springs. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ Domestic VOR Federal airways are authority of the FAA Administrator. airspace_amendments/. published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, You may review the public docket Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, describes in more detail the scope of the containing the proposal, any comments and effective September 15, 2018, which agency’s authority. This rulemaking is received and any final disposition in is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR promulgated under the authority person in the Dockets Office (see 71.1. The VOR Federal airways listed in described in Subtitle VII, Part A, ADDRESSES section for address and this document would be subsequently Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and published in the Order. section, the FAA is charged with 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, Regulatory Notices and Analyses prescribing regulations to assign the use except federal holidays. An informal of the airspace necessary to ensure the docket may also be examined during The FAA has determined that this safety of aircraft and the efficient use of normal business hours at the office of proposed regulation only involves an airspace. This regulation is within the the Eastern Service Center, Federal established body of technical scope of that authority as it would Aviation Administration, Room 210, regulations for which frequent and modify the VOR Federal airway route 1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA routine amendments are necessary to structure in the eastern United States to 30337. keep them operationally current. It, maintain the efficient flow of air traffic. therefore: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant Availability and Summary of regulatory action’’ under Executive Comments Invited Documents for Incorporation by Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant Interested parties are invited to Reference rule’’ under Department of participate in this proposed rulemaking This document proposes to amend Transportation (DOT) Regulatory by submitting such written data, views, FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; or arguments as they may desire. Designations and Reporting Points, February 26, 1979); and (3) does not
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28436 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
warrant preparation of a regulatory Issued in Washington, DC, on June 12, 741–6030 or go to http:// evaluation as the anticipated impact is 2019. www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ so minimal. Since this is a routine Rodger A. Dean Jr., ibr-locations.html. matter that will only affect air traffic Manager, Airspace Policy Group. FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace procedures and air navigation, it is [FR Doc. 2019–12892 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Designations and Reporting Points, is certified that this proposed rule, when BILLING CODE 4910–13–P published yearly and effective on promulgated, will not have a significant September 15. economic impact on a substantial FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: number of small entities under the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Administration, Operations Support Federal Aviation Administration Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Environmental Review Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 14 CFR Part 71 76177; telephone (817) 222–5857. This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance [Docket No. FAA–2017–0890; Airspace SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Docket No. 16–ACE–10] with FAA Order 1050.1F, Authority for This Rulemaking ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and RIN 2120–AA66 The FAA’s authority to issue rules Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final Proposed Establishment of Class D regarding aviation safety is found in regulatory action. and E Airspace; Wichita, KS Title 49 of the United States Code. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the AGENCY: Federal Aviation authority of the FAA Administrator. Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Administration (FAA), DOT. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, Navigation (air). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking describes in more detail the scope of the (NPRM). agency’s authority. This rulemaking is The Proposed Amendment promulgated under the authority SUMMARY: This action proposes to described in Subtitle VII, Part A, In consideration of the foregoing, the establish Class D airspace and Class E Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that Federal Aviation Administration airspace designated as surface area, at section, the FAA is charged with proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as Beech Factory Airport, Wichita, KS. The prescribing regulations to assign the use follows: FAA is proposing this action for the of airspace necessary to ensure the safety and management of instrument safety of aircraft and the efficient use of PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, flight rules (IFR) operations at the airspace. This regulation is within the B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR airport. TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND scope of that authority as it would DATES: Comments must be received on REPORTING POINTS establish Class D and Class E airspace or before August 5, 2019. designated as a surface area at Beech ADDRESSES: Send comments on this ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 Factory Airport, Wichita, KS, to support proposal to the U.S. Department of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations continues to read as follows: Transportation, Docket Operations, at the airport. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, West Building Ground Floor, Room Comments Invited 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) Interested parties are invited to 366–9826, or (800) 647–5527. You must participate in this proposed rulemaking § 71.1 [Amended] identify FAA Docket NO. FAA–2017– by submitting such written data, views, ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 0890; Airspace Docket No. 16–ACE–10, or arguments, as they may desire. 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, at the beginning of your comments. You Comments that provide the factual basis Airspace Designations and Reporting may also submit comments through the supporting the views and suggestions Points, dated August 13, 2018, and internet at http://www.regulations.gov. presented are particularly helpful in effective September 15, 2018, is You may review the public docket developing reasoned regulatory amended as follows: containing the proposal, any comments decisions on the proposal. Comments received, and any final disposition in are specifically invited on the overall Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal person in the Dockets Office between regulatory, aeronautical, economic, Airways. 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday environmental, and energy-related * * * * * through Friday, except federal holidays. aspects of the proposal. FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Communications should identify both V–159 [Amended] Designations and Reporting Points, and docket numbers and be submitted in From Virginia Key, FL: INT Virginia Key subsequent amendments can be viewed triplicate to the address listed above. 344° and Treasure, FL, 178° radials; Treasure; online at http://www/.faa.gov/air_ Commenters wishing the FAA to INT Treasure 318° and Orlando, FL, 140° traffic/publications/. For further acknowledge receipt of their comments radials; Orlando; Ocala, FL; Cross City, FL; information, you can contact the on this notice must submit with those Greenville, FL; Pecan, GA; Eufaula, AL; Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation comments a self-addressed, stamped Tuskegee, AL; to Vulcan, AL. From Holly Administration, 800 Independence postcard on which the following Springs, MS; Gilmore, AR; Walnut Ridge, AR; Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Dogwood, MO; Springfield, MO; Napoleon, telephone; (202) 267–8783. The Order is Docket No. FAA–2017–0890/Airspace MO; INT Napoleon 005° and St. Joseph, MO, ° also available for inspection at the Docket No. 16–ACE–10.’’ The postcard 122 radials; St. Joseph; Omaha, NE; Sioux National Archives and Records will be date/time stamped and returned City, IA; Yankton, SD; Mitchell, SD; to Administration (NARA). For to the commenter. Huron, SD. information on the availability of FAA All communications received before * * * * * Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) the specified closing date for comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28437
will be considered before taking action including 2,700 feet MSL within a 4.2- PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, on the proposed rule. The proposal mile radius of Beech Factory Airport, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR contained in this notice may be changed excluding that airspace within the TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND in light of the comments received. A McConnell AFB, Class D airspace area, REPORTING POINTS report summarizing each substantive and excluding that airspace north of a public contact with FAA personnel line extending from lat. 37°43′07″ N, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 concerned with this rulemaking will be long. 97°17′51″ W to lat. 37°43′47″ N, continues to read as follows: filed in the docket. long. 97°08′21″ W, within the Colonel James Jabara Airport, Wichita, KS. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, Availability of NPRMs 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, Controlled airspace is necessary for 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. An electronic copy of this document the safety and management of Standard may be downloaded through the Instrument Approach Procedures § 71.1 [Amended] internet at http://www.regulations.gov. (SIAPs) for IFR operations at this ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in Recently published rulemaking airport. documents can also be accessed through 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Class D and E airspace designations Airspace Designations and Reporting the FAA’s web page at http:// are published in paragraph 5000 and www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ Points, dated August 3, 2018, and _ 6002, respectively, of FAA Order effective September 15, 2018, is airspace amendments/. 7400.11C, dated August 3, 2018, and You may review the public docket amended as follows: effective September 15, 2018, which is containing the proposal, any comments incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. received, and any final disposition in 71.1. The Class D and E airspace * * * * * person in the Dockets Office (see the designations listed in this document ADDRESSES section for the address and ACE KS D Wichita, Beech Factory Airport, will be published subsequently in the phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and KS [New] Order. 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, Wichita Beech Factory Airport, KS except federal holidays. An informal Regulatory Notices and Analyses (Lat. 37°41′38″ N, long. 097°12′54″ W) docket may also be examined during The FAA has determined that this That airspace extending upward from the normal business hours at the Federal regulation only involves an established surface to and including 2,700 feet MSL Aviation Administration, Air Traffic within a 4.2-mile radius of Beech Factory body of technical regulations for which Organization, Central Service Center, Airport, excluding that airspace within the frequent and routine amendments are Operations Support Group, 10101 McConnell AFB, KS, Class D airspace area, necessary to keep them operationally Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX and excluding that portion of Colonel James current, is non-controversial and 76177. Jabara Airport, Class E airspace area north of unlikely to result in adverse or negative a line from lat. 37°43′07″ N, long. 97°17′51″ Availability and Summary of comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a W to lat. 37°43′47″ N, long. 97°08′21″ W. This Documents for Incorporation by ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Class D airspace area is effective during the Reference Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a specific dates and times established in This document proposes to amend ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 published in the Chart Supplement. Designations and Reporting Points, FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) dated August 3, 2018, and effective does not warrant preparation of a * * * * * regulatory evaluation as the anticipated September 15, 2018. FAA Order Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Area 7400.11C is publicly available as listed impact is so minimal. Since this is a Airspace. routine matter that will only affect air in the ADDRESSES section of this * * * * * document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists traffic procedures and air navigation, it Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, is certified that this rule, when ACE KS E2 Wichita, Beech Factory Airport, air traffic service routes, and reporting promulgated, would not have a KS [NEW] points. significant economic impact on a Wichita Beech Factory Airport, KS substantial number of small entities (Lat. 37°41′38″ N, long. 097°12′54″ W) The Proposal under the criteria of the Regulatory That airspace within a 4.2-mile radius of The FAA is proposing an amendment Flexibility Act. Beech Factory Airport, excluding that to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Environmental Review airspace within the McConnell AFB, KS, (14 CFR) part 71 by: Class D airspace area, and that portion of Establishing Class D airspace at Beech This proposal will be subject to an Colonel James Jabara Airport, Class E Factory Airport, Wichita, KS, extending environmental analysis in accordance airspace area north of a line from lat. with FAA Order 1050.1F, 37°43′07″ N, long. 97°17′51″ W to lat. upward from the surface to and ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ including 2,700 feet MSL within a 4.2- ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 37 43 47 N, long. 97 08 21 W. This Class E mile radius of Beech Factory Airport, Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final airspace area is effective during the specific regulatory action. dates and times established in advance by a excluding that airspace within the Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time McConnell AFB, Class D airspace area, Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 will thereafter be continuously published in and excluding that airspace north of a the Chart Supplement. line extending from lat. 37°43′07″ N, Airspace, Incorporation by reference, long. 97°17′51″ W to lat. 37°43′47″ N, Navigation (air). Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 11, ° ′ ″ 2019. long. 97 08 21 W, within the Colonel The Proposed Amendment James Jabara Airport, Wichita, KS. John Witucki, Establishing Class E airspace area Accordingly, pursuant to the Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, designated as surface area at Beech authority delegated to me, the Federal ATO Central Service Center. Factory Airport, Wichita, KS, extending Aviation Administration proposes to [FR Doc. 2019–12898 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] upward from the surface to and amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28438 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; documents can also be accessed through telephone (206) 231–2245. the FAA’s web page at http:// Federal Aviation Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ airspace_amendments/. 14 CFR Part 71 Authority for This Rulemaking You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments [Docket No. FAA–2019–0390; Airspace The FAA’s authority to issue rules Docket No. 19–ANM–9] regarding aviation safety is found in received, and any final disposition in Title 49 of the United States Code. person in the Dockets Office (see the RIN 2120–AA66 Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the ADDRESSES section for the address and authority of the FAA Administrator. phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and Proposed Establishment of Class E Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, Airspace; Lander, WY describes in more detail the scope of the except federal holidays. An informal AGENCY: Federal Aviation agency’s authority. This rulemaking is docket may also be examined during Administration (FAA), DOT. promulgated under the authority normal business hours at the Northwest ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Mountain Regional Office of the Federal (NPRM). Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that Aviation Administration, Air Traffic section, the FAA is charged with Organization, Western Service Center, SUMMARY: This action proposes to prescribing regulations to assign the use Operations Support Group, 2200 S establish Class E airspace extending of airspace necessary to ensure the 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198. upward from 700 feet above the surface safety of aircraft and the efficient use of Availability and Summary of at Hunt Field, Lander, WY, to airspace. This regulation is within the Documents for Incorporation by accommodate new area navigation scope of that authority as it would Reference (RNAV) procedures at the airport. This establish Class E airspace to support action would ensure the safety and new RNAV procedures at Hunt Field, This document proposes to amend management of instrument flight rules Lander, WY. FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, (IFR) operations within the National Comments Invited Airspace System. dated August 13, 2018, and effective Interested parties are invited to DATES: Comments must be received on September 15, 2018. FAA Order participate in this proposed rulemaking or before August 5, 2019. 7400.11C is publicly available as listed by submitting such written data, views, in the ADDRESSES section of this ADDRESSES: Send comments on this or arguments, as they may desire. document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists proposal to the U.S. Department of Comments that provide the factual basis Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 supporting the views and suggestions air traffic service routes, and reporting New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building presented are particularly helpful in points. Ground Floor, Room W12–140, developing reasoned regulatory Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1– decisions on the proposal. Comments The Proposal 800–647–5527, or (202) 366–9826. You are specifically invited on the overall The FAA is proposing an amendment must identify FAA Docket No. FAA– regulatory, aeronautical, economic, to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations 2019–0390; Airspace Docket No. 19– environmental, and energy-related (14 CFR) part 71 by establishing Class E ANM–9, at the beginning of your aspects of the proposal. airspace extending upward from 700 comments. You may also submit Communications should identify both feet above the surface of the earth comments through the internet at http:// docket numbers and be submitted in within a 7-mile radius of Hunt Field, www.regulations.gov. triplicate to the address listed above. Lander, WY, from the point that the FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Persons wishing the FAA to 309° radial intersects the 7-mile radius Designations and Reporting Points, and acknowledge receipt of their comments clockwise to the point that the 140° subsequent amendments can be viewed _ on this notice must submit with those radial intersects the 7-mile radius and online at http://www.faa.gov/air traffic/ comments a self-addressed, stamped that airspace 2 miles each side of the 50° publications/. For further information, postcard on which the following radial from the 7-mile radius to 8.2 you can contact the Airspace Policy statement is made: ‘‘Comments to miles from the airport. Group, Federal Aviation Docket No. FAA–2019–0390; Airspace Class E airspace designations are Administration, 800 Independence Docket No. 19–ANM–09’’. The postcard published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; will be date/time stamped and returned Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is to the commenter. and effective September 15, 2018, which also available for inspection at the All communications received before is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR National Archives and Records the specified closing date for comments 71.1. The Class E airspace designations Administration (NARA). For will be considered before taking action listed in this document will be information on the availability of FAA on the proposed rule. The proposal published subsequently in the Order. Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) contained in this notice may be changed Regulatory Notices and Analyses 741–6030, or go to https:// in light of the comments received. A www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ report summarizing each substantive The FAA has determined that this ibr-locations.html. public contact with FAA personnel regulation only involves an established FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace concerned with this rulemaking will be body of technical regulations for which Designations and Reporting Points, is filed in the docket. frequent and routine amendments are published yearly and effective on necessary to keep them operationally September 15. Availability of NPRMs current, is non-controversial and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick An electronic copy of this document unlikely to result in adverse or negative Roberts, Federal Aviation may be downloaded through the comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a Administration, Western Service Center, internet at http://www.regulations.gov. ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Operations Support Group, 2200 S Recently published rulemaking Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28439
‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 12, Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 2019. telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) Shawn M. Kozica, also available for inspection at the does not warrant preparation of a Group Manager, Operations Support Group, National Archives and Records regulatory evaluation as the anticipated Western Service Center. Administration (NARA). For impact is so minimal. Since this is a [FR Doc. 2019–12893 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] information on the availability of FAA routine matter that will only affect air BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) traffic procedures and air navigation, it 741–6030, or go to http:// is certified that this rule, when www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ promulgated, would not have a DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ibr-locations.html. significant economic impact on a FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace substantial number of small entities Federal Aviation Administration Designations and Reporting Points, is under the criteria of the Regulatory published yearly and effective on Flexibility Act. 14 CFR Part 71 September 15. Environmental Review [Docket No. FAA–2019–0450; Airspace FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Docket No. 19–ASO–12] Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation This proposal will be subject to an RIN 2120–AA66 Administration, Operations Support environmental analysis in accordance Group, Central Service Center, 10101 with FAA Order 1050.1F, Proposed Amendment of the Class E Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and Airspace; Ashland, KY 76177; telephone (817) 222–5711. Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: regulatory action. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. Authority for This Rulemaking List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking The FAA’s authority to issue rules Airspace, Incorporation by reference, (NPRM). regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Navigation (air). SUMMARY: This action proposes to Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the amend the Class E airspace extending The Proposed Amendment authority of the FAA Administrator. upward from 700 feet above the surface Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, Accordingly, pursuant to the at Ashland Regional Airport, Ashland, describes in more detail the scope of the authority delegated to me, the Federal KY. The FAA is proposing this action as agency’s authority. This rulemaking is Aviation Administration proposes to the result of the revision to the promulgated under the authority amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: instrument procedures at the airport, described in Subtitle VII, Part A, which require additional airspace. The Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, name of the airport would also be section, the FAA is charged with B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR updated to coincide with the FAA’s prescribing regulations to assign the use TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND aeronautical database. Airspace redesign of airspace necessary to ensure the REPORTING POINTS is necessary for the safety and safety of aircraft and the efficient use of management of instrument flight rules airspace. This regulation is within the ■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR (IFR) operations at this airport. part 71 continues to read as follows: scope of that authority as it would DATES: Comments must be received on amend the Class E airspace extending Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, or before August 5, 2019. upward from 700 feet above the surface 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR ADDRESSES: Send comments on this Ashland Regional Airport, Ashland, KY, 1959–1963, Comp., p. 389. proposal to the U.S. Department of to support IFR operations at this airport. § 71.1 [Amended] Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room Comments Invited ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Interested parties are invited to 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) participate in this proposed rulemaking Airspace Designations and Reporting 366–9826, or (800) 647–5527. You must by submitting such written data, views, Points, dated August 13, 2018, and identify FAA Docket No. FAA–2019– or arguments, as they may desire. effective September 15, 2018, is 0450; Airspace Docket No. 19–ASO–12, Comments that provide the factual basis amended as follows: at the beginning of your comments. You supporting the views and suggestions Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas may also submit comments through the presented are particularly helpful in Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More internet at http://www.regulations.gov. developing reasoned regulatory Above the Surface of the Earth. You may review the public docket decisions on the proposal. Comments * * * * * containing the proposal, any comments are specifically invited on the overall received, and any final disposition in regulatory, aeronautical, economic, ANM WY E5 Lander, WY [New] person in the Dockets Office between environmental, and energy-related Hunt Field, WY 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday aspects of the proposal. ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ (Lat. 42 48 55 N, long. 108 43 43 W) through Friday, except federal holidays. Communications should identify both That airspace extending upward from 700 FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace docket numbers and be submitted in feet above the surface of the earth within a Designations and Reporting Points, and triplicate to the address listed above. 7-mile radius of Hunt Field, from the point ° subsequent amendments can be viewed Commenters wishing the FAA to that the 309 radial intersects the 7-mile _ radius clockwise to the point that the 140° online at http://www.faa.gov/air traffic/ acknowledge receipt of their comments radial intersects the 7-mile radius and that publications/. For further information, on this notice must submit with those airspace 2 miles each side of the 50° radial you can contact the Airspace Policy comments a self-addressed, stamped from the 7-mile radius to 8.2 miles from the Group, Federal Aviation postcard on which the following airport. Administration, 800 Independence statement is made: ‘‘Comments to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28440 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Docket No. FAA–2019–0450/Airspace the airport; removing the exclusionary PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, Docket No. 19–ASO–12.’’ The postcard language, as it is no longer required; and B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR will be date/time stamped and returned would update the name of the Ashland TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND to the commenter. Regional Airport (formerly Ashland- REPORTING POINTS All communications received before Boyd County Airport) to coincide with the specified closing date for comments the FAA’s aeronautical database. ■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR will be considered before taking action part 71 continues to read as follows: on the proposed rule. The proposal This action is the result of an airspace review caused by the amendment of the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, contained in this notice may be changed 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, in light of the comments received. A instrument procedures at the airport, 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. report summarizing each substantive which require additional airspace to public contact with FAA personnel comply with FAA Order, 7400.2M, § 71.1 [Amended] concerned with this rulemaking will be Procedures for Handling Airspace. ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in filed in the docket. Class E airspace designations are 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting Availability of NPRMs published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, Points, dated August 13, 2018, and An electronic copy of this document and effective September 15, 2018, which effective September 15, 2018, is may be downloaded through the is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR amended as follows: internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Recently published rulemaking 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More documents can also be accessed through Above the Surface of the Earth. the FAA’s web page at http:// published subsequently in the Order. * * * * * www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ Regulatory Notices and Analyses airspace_amendments/. ASO KY E5 Ashland, KY [Amended] You may review the public docket The FAA has determined that this Ashland Regional Airport, KY containing the proposal, any comments regulation only involves an established (Lat. 38°33′16″ N, long. 82°44′17″ W) received, and any final disposition in body of technical regulations for which That airspace extending upward from 700 person in the Dockets Office (see the frequent and routine amendments are feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile ADDRESSES section for the address and necessary to keep them operationally radius of the Ashland Regional Airport; and ° phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and current, is non-controversial and extending 2 miles either side of the 098 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, unlikely to result in adverse or negative bearing from the airport extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 10.4 miles east of the except federal holidays. An informal comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a docket may also be examined during airport; and extending 2 miles either side of ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the 278° bearing from the airport extending normal business hours at the Federal Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a from the 6.5-mile radius to 10.5 miles west Aviation Administration, Air Traffic ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT of the airport. Organization, Central Service Center, Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Operations Support Group, 10101 Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 12, FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 2019. Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX does not warrant preparation of a 76177. John Witucki, regulatory evaluation as the anticipated Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Availability and Summary of impact is so minimal. Since this is a ATO Central Service Center. Documents for Incorporation by routine matter that will only affect air [FR Doc. 2019–12901 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Reference traffic procedures and air navigation, it BILLING CODE 4910–13–P This document proposes to amend is certified that this rule, when FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace promulgated, would not have a Designations and Reporting Points, significant economic impact on a DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION dated August 13, 2018, and effective substantial number of small entities Federal Aviation Administration September 15, 2018. FAA Order under the criteria of the Regulatory 7400.11C is publicly available as listed Flexibility Act. 14 CFR Part 71 in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Environmental Review [Docket No. FAA–2019–0344; Airspace Docket No. 19–ASW–7] Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, This proposal will be subject to an air traffic service routes, and reporting environmental analysis in accordance RIN 2120–AA66 points. with FAA Order 1050.1F, The Proposal ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and Proposed Amendment of the Class D Airspace; New Iberia, LA The FAA is proposing an amendment Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations regulatory action. AGENCY: Federal Aviation (14 CFR) part 71 by amending the Class List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Administration (FAA), DOT. E airspace extending upward from 700 ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking feet above the surface at Ashland Airspace, Incorporation by reference, (NPRM). Regional Airport, Ashland, KY, by Navigation (air). adding an extension 2 miles either side SUMMARY: This action proposes to of the 098° bearing from the airport The Proposed Amendment modify Class D airspace at Acadiana extending from the 6.5-mile radius to Regional Airport, New Iberia, LA. The Accordingly, pursuant to the 10.4 miles east of the airport; adding an FAA is proposing this action as the authority delegated to me, the Federal extension 2 miles either side of the 278° result of the decommissioning of the bearing from the airport extending from Aviation Administration proposes to ACADI non-directional radio beacon, the 6.5-mile radius to 10.5 miles west of amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: (NDB). This would enhance the safety
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28441
and management of standard instrument of airspace necessary to ensure the Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX approach procedure for instrument safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 76177. flight rules (IFR), operations at this airspace. This regulation is within the Availability and Summary of airport. scope of that authority as it would Documents for Incorporation by amend the Class D airspace at Acadiana DATES: Comments must be received on Reference or before August 5, 2019. Regional Airport, New Iberia, LA, to support instrument flight rule This document proposes to amend ADDRESSES: Send comments on this operations at this airport. FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace proposal to the U.S. Department of Designations and Reporting Points, Transportation, Docket Operations, Comments Invited dated August 13, 2018, and effective West Building Ground Floor, Room Interested parties are invited to September 15, 2018. FAA Order W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, participate in this proposed rulemaking 7400.11C is publicly available as listed Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) by submitting such written data, views, in the ADDRESSES section of this 366–9826, or (800) 647–5527. You must or arguments, as they may desire. document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists identify FAA Docket No. FAA–2019– Comments that provide the factual basis Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, 0344; Airspace Docket No. 19–ASW–7, supporting the views and suggestions air traffic service routes, and reporting at the beginning of your comments. You presented are particularly helpful in points. may also submit comments through the developing reasoned regulatory internet at http://www.regulations.gov. decisions on the proposal. Comments The Proposal You may review the public docket are specifically invited on the overall The FAA is proposing an amendment containing the proposal, any comments regulatory, aeronautical, economic, to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations received, and any final disposition in environmental, and energy-related (14 CFR) part 71 by amending the Class person in the Dockets Office between aspects of the proposal. D airspace at Acadiana Regional 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday Communications should identify both Airport, New Iberia, LA, to within a 4.2- through Friday, except federal holidays. docket numbers and be submitted in mile radius (reduced from a 4.4-mile FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace triplicate to the address listed above. radius); adding an extension within Designations and Reporting Points, and Commenters wishing the FAA to 1-mile each side of the 168° bearing subsequent amendments can be viewed acknowledge receipt of their comments from the airport extending from the 4.2- _ online at http://www.faa.gov/air traffic/ on this notice must submit with those mile radius to 4.5-miles south of the publications/. For further information, comments a self-addressed, stamped airport; removing the city associated you can contact the Airspace Policy postcard on which the following with the airport from the legal Group, Federal Aviation statement is made: ‘‘Comments to description to comply with FAA Order Administration, 800 Independence Docket No. FAA–2019–0344/Airspace 7400.2M, Procedures for Handling Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Docket No. 19–ASW–7.’’ The postcard Airspace Matters; and would make an telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is will be date/time stamped and returned editorial change replacing the outdated also available for inspection at the to the commenter. term ‘‘Airport/Facility Directory’’ with National Archives and Records All communications received before ‘‘Chart Supplement’’. Administration (NARA). For the specified closing date for comments This action is the result of an airspace information on the availability of FAA will be considered before taking action review caused by the decommissioning Order 7400.11C at NARA, call (202) on the proposed rule. The proposal of the ACADI NDB, which provided 741–6030, or go to http:// contained in this notice may be changed navigation information for the www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ in light of the comments received. A instrument procedures at this airport. ibr-locations.html. report summarizing each substantive Class D airspace designations are FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace public contact with FAA personnel published in paragraph 5000 of FAA Designations and Reporting Points, is concerned with this rulemaking will be Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, published yearly and effective on filed in the docket. and effective September 15, 2018, which September 15. is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Availability of NPRMs 71.1. The Class D airspace designations Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation An electronic copy of this document listed in this document will be Administration, Operations Support may be downloaded through the published subsequently in the Order. Group, Central Service Center, 10101 internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX Recently published rulemaking Regulatory Notices and Analyses 76177; telephone (817) 222–5857. documents can also be accessed through The FAA has determined that this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the FAA’s web page at http:// regulation only involves an established www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ body of technical regulations for which Authority for This Rulemaking airspace_amendments/. frequent and routine amendments are The FAA’s authority to issue rules You may review the public docket necessary to keep them operationally regarding aviation safety is found in containing the proposal, any comments current, is non-controversial and Title 49 of the United States Code. received, and any final disposition in unlikely to result in adverse or negative Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the person in the Dockets Office (see the comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a authority of the FAA Administrator. ADDRESSES section for the address and ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a describes in more detail the scope of the 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT agency’s authority. This rulemaking is except federal holidays. An informal Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 promulgated under the authority docket may also be examined during FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) described in Subtitle VII, Part A, normal business hours at the Federal does not warrant preparation of a Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that Aviation Administration, Air Traffic regulatory evaluation as the anticipated section, the FAA is charged with Organization, Central Service Center, impact is so minimal. Since this is a prescribing regulations to assign the use Operations Support Group, 10101 routine matter that will only affect air
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28442 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
traffic procedures and air navigation, it Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 12, • Hand delivery/courier in lieu of is certified that this rule, when 2019. mail: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and promulgated, would not have a John Witucki, Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Suite significant economic impact on a Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, 400, Washington, DC 20005. substantial number of small entities ATO Central Service Center. See the Public Participation section of under the criteria of the Regulatory [FR Doc. 2019–12899 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] this notice for specific instructions and Flexibility Act. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P requirements for submitting comments, and for information on how to request Environmental Review a public hearing or view or obtain DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY copies of the petition and supporting This proposal will be subject to an materials. environmental analysis in accordance Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with FAA Order 1050.1F, Bureau Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and ‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final 27 CFR Part 9 Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street regulatory action. [Docket No. TTB–2019–0003; Notice No. NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 181] phone 202–453–1039, ext. 175. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Airspace, Incorporation by reference, RIN: 1513–AC52 Background on Viticultural Areas Navigation (air). Proposed Establishment of the TTB Authority The Proposed Amendment Tualatin Hills and Laurelwood District Viticultural Areas Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Accordingly, pursuant to the Administration Act (FAA Act), 27 authority delegated to me, the Federal AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary Aviation Administration proposes to Trade Bureau, Treasury. of the Treasury to prescribe regulations amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows: ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, and malt beverages. The FAA Act SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, provides that these regulations should, and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR among other things, prohibit consumer establish the approximately 144,000- TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND deception and the use of misleading acre ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ viticultural area in REPORTING POINTS statements on labels and ensure that portions of Multnomah and Washington labels provide the consumer with Counties, in Oregon. TTB is also ■ adequate information as to the identity 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR proposing to establish the and quality of the product. The Alcohol part 71 continues to read as follows: approximately 33,600-acre ‘‘Laurelwood and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau District’’ viticultural area in portions of Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, (TTB) administers the FAA Act Washington and Yamhill Counties, in 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, pursuant to section 1111(d) of the 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. Oregon. TTB is proposing these two Homeland Security Act of 2002, viticultural areas simultaneously codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The § 71.1 [Amended] because, if established, a small portion Secretary has delegated various of their boundaries would be ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in authorities through Treasury contiguous. Both proposed viticultural 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C, Department Order 120–01, dated areas are located entirely within the Airspace Designations and Reporting December 10, 2013, (superseding existing Willamette Valley viticultural Points, dated August 13, 2018, and Treasury Order 120–01, dated January area, and the proposed Laurelwood effective September 15, 2018, is 24, 2003), to the TTB Administrator to District viticultural area is also located amended as follows: perform the functions and duties in the entirely within the existing Chehalem administration and enforcement of these Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. Mountains viticultural area. TTB provisions. * * * * * designates viticultural areas to allow Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR vintners to better describe the origin of ASW LA D New Iberia, LA [Amended] part 4) authorizes TTB to establish their wines and to allow consumers to definitive viticultural areas and regulate Acadiana Regional Airport, LA better identify wines they may the use of their names as appellations of (Lat. 30°02′16″ N, long. 91°53′02″ W) purchase. TTB invites comments on this origin on wine labels and in wine That airspace extending upward from the proposed addition to its regulations. advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB surface to and including 2,500 feet MSL DATES: Comments must be received by regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth within a 4.2-mile radius of Acadiana August 19, 2019. standards for the preparation and Regional Airport, and within 1-mile each ADDRESSES: Please send your comments ° submission of petitions for the side of the 168 bearing from the airport on this notice to one of the following establishment or modification of extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 4.5 addresses: American viticultural areas (AVAs) and miles south of the airport, excluding the • Internet: http://www.regulations.gov lists the approved AVAs. Lafayette Regional Airport, LA, Class C (via the online comment form for this airspace area. This Class D airspace area is notice as posted within Docket No. Definition effective during the specific dates and times TTB–2019–0003 at ‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB established in advance by a Notice to the Federal e-rulemaking portal); regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines Airmen. The effective date and time will • U.S. Mail: Director, Regulations and a viticultural area for American wine as thereafter be continuously published in the Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco a delimited grape-growing region having Chart Supplement. Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street distinguishing features, as described in NW, Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; or part 9 of the regulations, and a name
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28443
and a delineated boundary, as The proposed Tualatin Hills AVA is contains higher elevations and a greater established in part 9 of the regulations. located west of the city of Portland and concentration of sedimentary, alluvial, These designations allow vintners and lies entirely within the established and volcanic soils than the proposed consumers to attribute a given quality, Willamette Valley AVA (27 CFR 9.90). AVA. The southeastern boundary also reputation, or other characteristic of a If established, the proposed Tualatin separates the proposed Tualatin Hills wine made from grapes grown in an area Hills AVA would also share a small AVA from the proposed Laurelwood to the wine’s geographic origin. The portion of its southeastern boundary District AVA. The eastern boundary establishment of AVAs allows vintners with a small portion of the northwestern separates the proposed Tualatin Hills to describe more accurately the origin of boundary of the proposed Laurelwood AVA from the heavily urbanized regions their wines to consumers and helps District AVA. The proposed AVA covers of metro Portland. Additionally, the consumers to identify wines they may approximately 144,000 acres and region east of the proposed AVA has purchase. Establishment of an AVA is contains 21 wineries and 33 generally lower elevations and flatter neither an approval nor an endorsement commercially-producing vineyards that topography, as well as deep alluvial by TTB of the wine produced in that cover a total of approximately 860.5 soils that are different from the soils of area. acres. the proposed AVA. The distinguishing features of the Requirements proposed Tualatin Hills AVA are its Distinguishing Features Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB soils, elevation, and climate. Unless The distinguishing features of the regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines otherwise noted, all information and proposed Tualatin Hills AVA are its the procedure for proposing an AVA data pertaining to the proposed AVA soils, elevation, and climate. and provides that any interested party contained in this document are from the Soils may petition TTB to establish a grape- petition for the proposed Tualatin Hills The petition states that the soils of the growing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 AVA and its supporting exhibits. proposed Tualatin Hills AVA are of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) Name Evidence primarily Laurelwood soils and similar prescribes the standards for petitions for associated types, with almost no the establishment or modification of The proposed Tualatin Hills AVA is a region of upland hills within the exposed volcanic or marine sedimentary AVAs. Petitions to establish an AVA Tualatin River watershed in soil types.1 The Laurelwood and must include the following: northwestern Oregon. The petition associated soils are unique to the • Evidence that the area within the provided evidence that the region is northwestern portion of the established proposed AVA boundary is nationally commonly referred to as the ‘‘Tualatin Willamette Valley AVA, which includes or locally known by the AVA name Hills.’’ For example, a hiking trail in the the proposed Tualatin Hills AVA. specified in the petition; According to the petition, the only place • region is called the Tualatin Hills An explanation of the basis for Nature Park Loop. The petition also outside the proposed AVA where defining the boundary of the proposed states that the Tualatin Hills Nature Laurelwood soils occur is on the AVA; Park, the Tualatin Hills Parks and northeast-facing slopes of the • A narrative description of the Recreation District, and Tualatin Hills established Chehalem Mountains AVA, features of the proposed AVA affecting Christian Church serve the proposed within the proposed Laurelwood viticulture, such as climate, geology, AVA. Finally, several sporting District AVA. However, the petition soils, physical features, and elevation, organizations serving the region use the notes that the Laurelwood soils within that make the proposed AVA distinctive name ‘‘Tualatin Hills,’’ including the the Chehalem Mountains AVA are and distinguish it from adjacent areas Tualatin Hills Junior Soccer League, the frequently mixed with volcanic, outside the proposed AVA; Tualatin Hills Barracudas adult swim sedimentary, and alluvial soils. • The appropriate United States team, the Tualatin Hills Water Polo Laurelwood soils are formed from Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) Club, the former Tualatin Hills Tennis weathered basalt combined with showing the location of the proposed Center, and the Tualatin Hills Dive windblown silt known as loess. The AVA, with the boundary of the Club. soils are fine, silty soils with no rocks proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; and generally have low levels of organic • An explanation of the proposed Boundary Evidence material and a high clay content. The AVA is sufficiently distinct from an The proposed Tualatin Hills AVA is soils are considered to be moderately existing AVA so as to warrant separate a roughly C-shaped region of hills west fertile and, therefore, do not promote recognition, if the proposed AVA is to of Portland, Oregon, in the hills of the overly vigorous vine growth. The soils be established within, or overlapping, Tualatin River watershed. According to reach depths of up to 100 feet. The an existing AVA; and the petition, the proposed AVA’s depth of the soils, combined with the • A detailed narrative description of boundaries are drawn to separate the high clay content, reduces the need for the proposed AVA boundary based on proposed AVA from regions with irrigation in most vineyards within the USGS map markings. different soils, elevations, and climate. proposed AVA. The proposed northern and western Laurelwood soils also contain small, Tualatin Hills Petition boundaries follow the 1,000-foot round iron manganese structures called TTB received a petition from Rudolf elevation contour and separate the ‘‘pisolites,’’ which range in size from a Marchesi, president of Montinore Estate, proposed AVA from the higher grain of sand to a pea. These pisolites Alfredo Apolloni, owner and elevations within the Coast Range. The are found only in Laurelwood soils and, winemaker of Apolloni Vineyards, and proposed northern and western according to the petition, affect the taste Mike Kuenz, general manager of David boundaries also coincide with the and smell of wines. For example, the Hill Vineyard and Winery, on behalf of boundary of the established Willamette themselves and other local grape Valley AVA. The southern and 1 See Petition to create the Laurelwood District American Viticultural Area, Appendices 2–3 and growers and vintners, proposing the southeastern boundaries are drawn to Figure 2, available for review in the docket for this establishment of the ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ exclude the established Chehalem rulemaking at ‘‘Regulations.gov’’ (These materials AVA. Mountains AVA (27 CFR 9.205), which contain analyses of Laurelwood soil).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28444 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
petition asserts that the pisolites higher elevations. Cold air can drain McMinnville, which is approximately contribute to the rose-petal aroma of from the hillsides, reducing the risk of 20 miles south of the proposed AVA, Pinot Noir wines made from grapes frost in hillside vineyards, but the cold has an average annual rainfall amount of grown in the Laurelwood soils of the air will pool in the lower, flatter regions 42.15 inches. The petition states that proposed AVA. and increase the risk of frost there. without the sheltering effect of the Coast To the north of the proposed Tualatin Additionally, air moving down the Range, rainfall amounts in the proposed Hills AVA, the soils formed primarily hillsides can also prevent the growth of AVA would be similar to those of the from volcanic material from eruptions mold and mildew on hillside vineyards regions to the west and north. near the Oregon-Washington-Idaho by drying excess moisture from the Excessively high rainfall amounts can border between 6 and 17 million years vines. promote the growth of mold and ago and contain very little loess and no The proposed AVA is surrounded to mildew, which can seriously damage Laurelwood series soils. West of the the north and west by the higher grape vines. proposed AVA, the soils are primarily elevations of the Coastal Range. The petition also discussed the Coastal sediment soils originating from Elevations typically exceed 1,000 feet in diurnal temperature variations that volcanic soils and marine uplifted soils these regions. To the east of the occur within the proposed AVA and the that formed 50 million years ago. To the proposed AVA is the broad, flat plain of surrounding regions. Diurnal south of the proposed AVA within the the Tualatin River Valley, where temperature variation is the difference established Chehalem Mountains AVA, elevations are generally below 200 feet. between the daytime high temperature the soils are also formed primarily from The petition notes that there is a small and the nighttime low temperature. The marine sediments, although the soils are region between the northeast corner and proposed Tualatin Hills AVA has an sometimes striated with older the southeast corner of the proposed average growing season diurnal decomposing basalt and volcanic AVA that has similar elevations to the variation of 23.75 degrees Fahrenheit materials. To the east of the proposed proposed AVA. However, this region (F). The regions to the north, east, and AVA, the soils are primarily formed was not included in the proposed AVA west of the proposed AVA have lower from Columbia River basalt and because it is within the urban diurnal temperature variations, sedimentary materials. development zone of metro Portland averaging 20.79, 20.13, and 19.13 degrees F, respectively. The region to Elevation and is currently used for commercial and residential buildings and public the south has a higher average diurnal The proposed Tualatin Hills AVA is parks; there is no commercial viticulture variation, with 25.63 degrees F. located in the upland hills of the in this area. To the south and southeast According to the petition, diurnal Tualatin River watershed and of the proposed AVA are the Chehalem temperature variations during the encompasses elevations between 200 Mountains, which includes elevations growing season have an effect on and 1,000 feet. According to the viticulture. Sugar levels increase and of over 1,000 feet and, according to the petition, 1,000 feet is generally acid levels decrease in grapes as petition, is considered to be a separate, considered the upper limit for growing daytime temperatures increase. If distinct landform from the uplands commercial wine grapes in this region ripening progresses too quickly due to within the proposed Tualatin Hills of Oregon, and there are very few high daytime temperatures, the desired AVA. commercial vineyards above that sugar and acid levels could be reached elevation. At higher elevations, there is Climate 2 before the flavor and aroma compounds a danger of late spring frosts, which can The proposed Tualatin Hills AVA is in the grapes have fully developed. If delay bud break and damage new located in the rain shadow of the nighttime temperatures remain high, the growth, as well as a danger of early fall process of sugar development and acid Oregon Coast Range (Coast Range). frosts, which can damage fruit that has loss will continue at night. However, a According to the petition, the higher not been harvested. The petition notes drop in nighttime temperatures will elevations of the Coast Range create a that the 1,000-foot elevation contour stop or slow the process of sugar buffer to the maritime influences of the also corresponds to the boundary of the development and acid loss, allowing the Pacific Ocean, which is approximately established Willamette Valley AVA, grapes more time to develop the flavor 45 miles west of the proposed AVA. As which shares a portion of its boundary and aroma compounds. The greater the a result, the proposed AVA receives less with the proposed AVA. drop in temperatures, the more the rainfall annually than the regions to the The boundaries of the proposed AVA sugar development and acid loss will north and west, which are more exposed were drawn to exclude elevations below slow. The petition states that the diurnal to the moisture-laden marine air. Forest 200 feet because, according to the temperature differences in the proposed Grove, Oregon, which is located roughly petition, the lower elevations have AVA are well suited for growing Pinot in the center of the proposed AVA, characteristics that are significantly Noir, which is the most commonly receives an average of 43.67 inches of different from those of the proposed grown grape varietal in the proposed rainfall annually, while St. Helens to the AVA. For instance, soils in the AVA and requires a long ripening north of the proposed AVA receives 50 surrounding regions with elevations period in order to fully develop its inches, and Tillamook State Forest to below 200 feet are alluvial, rather than flavor and aroma compounds. loess. As a result, the soils below 200 the west of the proposed AVA receives feet are generally higher in fertility and 87.99 inches. Portland, which is Summary of Distinguishing Features less well-drained than the soils within approximately 30 miles east of the In summary, the soils, elevation, and the proposed AVA. Highly fertile soils proposed AVA and farther within the climate of the proposed Tualatin Hills can cause overly vigorous vine growth, rain shadow of the Coast Range, receives AVA distinguish it from the and poorly drained soils can promote slightly less rainfall than the proposed surrounding regions. The proposed the growth of mold and mildew on the AVA, averaging 41.96 inches. AVA is characterized by Laurelwood vines. Furthermore, the petition states soils and similar associated types and a 2 Climate data gathered from 1981–2010 climate that elevations below 200 feet are normals, which were the most recent climate lack of exposed volcanic or marine relatively flat and thus experience less normals available at the time the petition was sedimentary soils. Although air movement than the surrounding submitted. Laurelwood soils are present outside of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28445
the proposed AVA, within the than the average amount for the proposed AVA is served by the Chehalem Mountain range, they are Willamette Valley AVA in general. Laurelwood Academy Water typically mixed with volcanic and Cooperative,4 and Laurelwood Road is Laurelwood District Petition sedimentary soils. The elevations of the located within the proposed AVA. A proposed AVA are between 200 and TTB received a petition from Luisa real estate listing included with the 1,000 feet, while the regions to the west, Ponzi, president of Ponzi Vineyards, petition advertises houses ‘‘in peaceful north, southeast, and south are higher Maria Ponzi, winemaker of Ponzi Laurelwood valley,’’ 5 and a separate and the region to the east is lower. Vineyards, and Kevin Johnson, real estate listing makes reference to Finally, the climate of the proposed winemaker of Dion Vineyards, on behalf ‘‘the peaceful community of AVA is distinguishable from that of the of themselves and other local grape Laurelwood.’’ 6 Finally, one of the surrounding regions. The proposed growers and vintners, proposing the U.S.G.S. quadrangle maps used to create AVA receives less annual rainfall than establishment of the ‘‘Laurelwood’’ the boundary of the proposed AVA is the regions to the north and west, and AVA. However, at the request of TTB, titled ‘‘Laurelwood.’’ more rainfall than the regions to the east the petitioners agreed to add the word The petition notes that the and south. The average growing season ‘‘District’’ to the proposed name, in community of Laurelwood also gives its diurnal temperature variations within order to avoid a potential impact on name to the primary soil series within the proposed AVA are higher than those current label holders who are using the proposed AVA, the Laurelwood soil of each of the surrounding regions ‘‘Laurelwood’’ as a brand name or series. The petition includes an excerpt except the region to the south. fanciful name on their wine labels. from a soil survey of Washington The proposed Laurelwood District County, Oregon, which notes that a Comparison of the Proposed Tualatin AVA is located west of the city of ‘‘[r]epresentative profile of Laurelwood Hills AVA to the Existing Willamette Portland and lies entirely within the silt loam’’ is ‘‘located at the top of Iowa Valley AVA established Willamette Valley AVA and Hill.’’ Iowa Hill is located within the T.D. ATF–162, which published in the established Chehalem Mountains northern portion of the proposed the Federal Register on December 1, AVA. If established, the proposed Laurelwood District AVA. The petition 1983 (48 FR 232, as amended by T.D. Laurelwood District AVA would also goes on to say that the pervasiveness of TTB–134, 81 FR 11112, March 3, 2016), share a small portion of its northwestern Laurelwood soils within the proposed established the Willamette Valley AVA boundary with a portion of the AVA is the primary reason the region is in northwestern Oregon (27 CFR 9.90). southeastern boundary of the proposed known to those in the wine industry as The Willamette Valley AVA is described Tualatin Hills AVA. The proposed ‘‘Laurelwood.’’ As evidence, the petition in T.D. ATF–162 as a large basin Laurelwood District AVA covers included a 2016 pamphlet from a trade surrounded by mountains to the east, approximately 33,600 acres and tasting featuring wines from the south, and west, and by the Columbia contains 25 wineries and approximately Chehalem Mountains AVA, which River to the north. Within the 70 commercially-producing vineyards contains a map that divides the AVA Willamette Valley AVA, elevations that cover a total of approximately 975 into several sub-regions—including a generally do not exceed 1,000 feet. acres. region called ‘‘Laurelwood’’ that Temperatures are mild, with annual The proposed Laurelwood District encompasses the proposed AVA. The summer temperatures averaging 68 AVA has a roughly oblong shape and is petition also included excerpts from degrees F and winter temperatures oriented along a northwest-to-southeast several articles describing the averaging 40 degrees F. Annual rainfall axis. The distinguishing feature of the importance of Laurelwood soil to amounts within the Willamette Valley proposed AVA is its soils. Unless vineyard owners within the proposed AVA average 40 inches. Soils within the otherwise noted, all information and AVA and the effects of the soil on the AVA are silty loams and clay loams. data pertaining to the proposed AVA resulting wines. Finally, the petition The proposed Tualatin Hills AVA is contained in this document are from the included wine labels and wine trade located in the northwestern portion of petition for the proposed Laurelwood notes from several wineries within the the Willamette Valley AVA and shares District AVA and its supporting proposed AVA, including Ponzi some broad characteristics with the 7 8 exhibits. Vineyards, Anne Amie Vineyards, established AVA. For example, Raptor Ridge Winery,9 Alloro elevations within the proposed AVA are Name Evidence generally below 1,000 feet. Average The unincorporated town of 4 See Laurelwood Academy Water Cooperative, annual high and low temperatures are Laurelwood is adjacent to the western (Site last accessed February 15, 2019), also within the ranges found in the www.lawatercoop.org. boundary of the proposed Laurelwood 5 See Redfin listing for 13200 SW Noblitt Place, Willamette Valley AVA. Finally, the District AVA. Although the town of Gaston, Oregon 97119, (Site last accessed February soils of the proposed AVA contain silt Laurelwood is not within the proposed 15, 2019), https://www.redfin.com/OR/Gaston/ and clay. AVA, the name Laurelwood has become 13200-SW-Noblitt-Pl-97119/home/26692046. 6 See Redfin listing for 13875 SW 405 Place, However, the proposed AVA also has associated with a larger region, characteristics that are distinct from the Gaston, Oregon 97119, (Site last accessed February including the region of the proposed 15, 2019), https://www.redfin.com/OR/Gaston/ Willamette Valley AVA. For example, AVA. For example, the ‘‘Ananda Center 13875-SW-405th-Pl-97119/home/108521174. the Laurelwood soils and associated soil at Laurelwood’’ retreat, which is located 7 See Ponzi Vineyards, Notes from Luisa, (Site last series are the predominant soils of the accessed February 15, 2019), https:// in the community of Laurelwood, www.ponzivineyards.com/assets/images/products/ proposed AVA and are not found in describes its location as ‘‘[w]ithin significant amounts elsewhere in the media/14-Abetina-PN-Notes.pdf. minutes of Laurelwood Valley,’’ 3 8 See Announcement for 2013 Anne Amie Willamette Valley AVA. Additionally, suggesting that the region known as Vineyards Twelve Oaks Estate Chehalem Mountains the proposed AVA is comprised mainly ‘‘Laurelwood’’ encompasses more than AVA, (Site last accessed February 15, 2019), of rolling hills and lacks the large valley Anneamiewine.s3.amazonaws.com/demo1/wp- just the town. Furthermore, the floors that are a major feature of the content/uploads/13-TOE-PN.pdf. 9 See Announcement for Raptor Ridge Winery— Willamette Valley AVA. Finally, annual 3 See Ananda Center—Laurelwood, (Site last 2014 Pinot Noir, Estate Vineyard, (Site last accessed rainfall amounts within the proposed accessed February 15, 2019), February 15, 2019), www.raptorridgewinery.com/ Tualatin Hills AVA are slightly higher www.anandalaurelwood.org/about/area. Continued
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28446 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Vineyard,10 and Erath Winery,11 which dispersed throughout, separated by result, both share similar annual rainfall all mention the presence of Laurelwood smaller regions without Laurelwood amounts of between 40 and 50 inches. soils in their vineyards. soils. By contrast, within the proposed The average growing season Laurelwood District AVA, Laurelwood temperatures within the proposed AVA Boundary Evidence soil covers the entirety of the proposed are also similar to those of the The proposed Laurelwood District AVA. Additionally, within the proposed established Willamette Valley AVA, as AVA is located in the Chehalem Tualatin Hills AVA, Laurelwood soil is demonstrated by the number of growing Mountains west of the cities Portland often mixed with related soil series, degree days (GDDs) in both regions. and Sherwood and south of the cities of particularly Kinton and Cornelius soils. According to a climate map included in Forest Grove, Cornelius, Hillsboro, and Within the proposed Laurelwood the petition, both regions average Scholls. According to the petition, the District AVA, Kinton and Cornelius between 1,500 and 2,000 GDDs. boundaries are drawn to separate the soils exist only in small, isolated However, the proposed Laurelwood proposed AVA from regions where the pockets along the eastern edge. District AVA also has characteristics Laurelwood soil is nonexistent or not as As previously mentioned, Laurelwood that are distinct from the Willamette pervasive as it is within the proposed soil is desirable for vineyards because Valley AVA. For example, the AVA. The northern and eastern its moderate fertility does not cause Laurelwood soils are the predominant boundaries of the proposed AVA are overly vigorous growth and the depth to soils of the proposed AVA and are not concurrent with the boundary of the bedrock is sufficient to allow the vine’s found in significant amounts elsewhere established Chehalem Mountains AVA roots to penetrate deeply into the soil. in the Willamette Valley AVA, with the and separate the proposed AVA from Because the proposed Laurelwood exception of the proposed Tualatin Hills both the Tualatin Valley and the District AVA has such a large AVA. The petition states that the proposed Tualatin Hills AVA. The concentration of Laurelwood soils, there primary soils for grape growing in the southern and western boundaries of the are more potential locations for majority of the Willamette Valley AVA proposed Laurelwood District AVA vineyards with this soil than there are are Willakenzie, which is derived from follow the crest of the Chehalem within the proposed Tualatin Hills marine sediments, and Jory, which is Mountains, and separate the AVA. comprised of residuum derived from northeasterly-oriented slopes of the To the east and northeast of the basalt. Additionally, the proposed proposed AVA from the southwesterly- proposed Laurelwood District AVA, the Laurelwood District AVA does not facing slopes of the western portion of soils are a variety of soils derived from contain broad valleys, which are found the Chehalem Mountains. the sediments of the Missoula Floods. throughout the established Willamette To the southwest of the proposed AVA, Distinguishing Feature Valley AVA. within the Chehalem Mountains AVA, According to the petition, the the soils are primarily Jory and Comparison of the Proposed distinguishing feature of the proposed Willakenzie soils. To the southeast of Laurelwood District AVA to the Existing AVA is the predominance of the the proposed AVA, on Parrett Mountain, Chehalem Mountains AVA Laurelwood soil series. Although the soils are primarily of the Jory and T.D. TTB–56, which published in the Laurelwood soil exists outside the Saum series. Federal Register on November 27, 2006 proposed Laurelwood District AVA, (71 FR 68458), established the specifically within the proposed Comparison of the Proposed Chehalem Mountains AVA (27 CFR Tualatin Hills AVA to the northwest, Laurelwood District AVA to the Existing 9.205) in northwestern Oregon, in the the petition states that there are Willamette Valley AVA northern region of the Willamette Valley differences between the Laurelwood soil T.D. ATF–162, which published in AVA. The Chehalem Mountains AVA is of the proposed Laurelwood District the Federal Register on December 1, described in T.D. TTB–56 as a single, AVA and the Laurelwood soil of the 1983, (48 FR 232, as amended by T.D. continuous landmass lifted from the proposed Tualatin Hills AVA. For TTB–134, 81 FR 11112, March 3, 2016), floor of the Willamette Valley. The instance, the Laurelwood soil of the established the Willamette Valley AVA Chehalem Mountains AVA are bordered proposed Laurelwood District AVA in northwestern Oregon (27 CFR 9.90). by the valley of the Tualatin River to the consist of loess combined with basalt The Willamette Valley AVA is described west and north, the wetlands of Rock that is older than the basalt found in the in T.D. ATF–162 as a large basin Creek and Seely Ditch to the east, the Laurelwood soil of the proposed surrounded by mountains to the east, floodplain of the Willamette River to the Tualatin Hills AVA. However, the south, and west, and by the Columbia southeast, and the Chehalem Valley to petition states that the primary River to the north. Within the the southwest. The topography of the distinction between the soils of the two Willamette Valley AVA, elevations AVA is characterized by mountainous proposed AVAs is the contiguity of generally do not exceed 1,000 feet. and hillside terrain, with elevations Laurelwood soil within the proposed Temperatures are mild, with annual between 200 and 1,600 feet. Most of the Laurelwood District AVA. Within the summer temperatures averaging 68 vineyards within the AVA are planted at proposed Tualatin Hills AVA, large degrees F and winter temperatures elevations between 200 and 1,000 feet. concentrations of Laurelwood soil are averaging 40 degrees F. Annual rainfall The proposed Laurelwood District amounts within the Willamette Valley AVA shares some of the same assets/client/File/2014%20PN%20Estate%20 AVA average 40 inches. Soils within the characteristics of the larger Chehalem Vineyard%20Media%20Sheet.pdf. AVA are silty loams and clay loams. Mountains AVA. For example, the 10 See Announcement for Alloro Vineyard—2014 The proposed Laurelwood District proposed AVA consists of hilly-to- Estate ‘Justina’ Pinot Noir, (Site last accessed February 15, 2019), https://www. AVA is located in the northwestern mountainous terrain, and vineyards allorovineyard.com/assets/client/File/AlloroJus portion of the Willamette Valley AVA within the proposed AVA are planted at PN14%20TechSheet.pdf. and shares several characteristics with elevations between 200 and 1,000 feet. 11 See Announcement for Erath Winery—2014 the larger established AVA. For However, the Chehalem Mountains Dion Vineyard Pinot Noir, (Site last accessed February 15, 2019), https://www.erath.com/files/ example, both the proposed AVA and AVA contains a wide diversity of soils. FileResource/22244/ERAFS2014DionVineyard the established AVA are within the rain The proposed Laurelwood District AVA, PinotN.pdf. shadow of the Cascade Mountains. As a by contrast, is dominated by
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28447
Laurelwood soil, which is not found in established, in order to avoid a potential eligibility requirements for the the remainder of the Chehalem conflict with a current label holder. appellation. Mountains AVA. Accordingly, the proposed part 9 Public Participation regulatory text set forth in this TTB Determination document specifies only the full name Comments Invited TTB concludes that the petitions to ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ as a term of viticultural TTB invites comments from interested establish the approximately 144,000- significance for purposes of part 4 of the members of the public on whether it acre Tualatin Hills AVA and the TTB regulations. should establish the proposed AVAs. approximately 33,600-acre Laurelwood The approval of the proposed TTB is also interested in receiving District AVA merit consideration and Tualatin Hills AVA would not affect any comments on the sufficiency and public comment, as invited in this existing AVA, and any bottlers using accuracy of the name, boundary, notice of proposed rulemaking. ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ as an appellation of climate, soils, and other required Boundary Description origin or in a brand name for wines information submitted in support of the made from grapes grown within the petitions. With regards to the proposed See the narrative description of the Tualatin Hills AVA would not be boundary of the petitioned-for AVAs in Tualatin Hills AVA, TTB is interested in affected by the establishment of this comments on whether the evidence the proposed regulatory text published new AVA. The establishment of the at the end of this proposed rule. submitted in the petition regarding the proposed Tualatin Hills AVA would distinguishing features of the proposed Maps allow vintners to use ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ AVA sufficiently differentiates it from The petitioners provided the required and ‘‘Willamette Valley’’ as appellations the existing Willamette Valley AVA, maps, and they are listed below in the of origin for wines made from grapes which the proposed AVA is located proposed regulatory text. grown within the proposed Tualatin within, and from the proposed Hills AVA, if the wines meet the neighboring Laurelwood District AVA. Impact on Current Wine Labels eligibility requirements for the TTB is also interested in comments on Part 4 of the TTB regulations prohibits appellation. whether the geographic features of the any label reference on a wine that If TTB establishes the proposed proposed Tualatin Hills AVA are so indicates or implies an origin other than Laurelwood District AVA, only its entire distinguishable from the surrounding the wine’s true place of origin. For a name, ‘‘Laurelwood District,’’ will be Willamette Valley AVA that the wine to be labeled with an AVA name, recognized as a name of viticultural proposed AVA should no longer be part at least 85 percent of the wine must be significance under § 4.39(i)(3) of the of the established AVA. Please provide derived from grapes grown within the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The any available specific information in area represented by that name, and the text of the proposed regulation clarifies support of your comments. wine must meet the other conditions this point. Consequently, wine bottlers With regards to the proposed listed in § 4.25(e)(3) of the TTB using the name ‘‘Laurelwood District’’ Laurelwood District AVA, TTB is regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(3)). If the in a brand name, including a trademark, interested in comments on whether the wine is not eligible for labeling with an or in another label reference as to the evidence submitted in the petition AVA name and that name appears in the origin of the wine, would have to ensure regarding the distinguishing features of brand name, then the label is not in that the product is eligible to use the the proposed AVA sufficiently compliance and the bottler must change AVA name as an appellation of origin if differentiates it from both the existing the brand name and obtain approval of this proposed rule is adopted as a final Willamette Valley and Chehalem a new label. Similarly, if the AVA name rule. TTB is not proposing Mountains AVAs, both of which contain appears in another reference on the ‘‘Laurelwood,’’ standing alone, as a term the proposed AVA, and from the label in a misleading manner, the bottler of viticultural significance if the proposed neighboring Tualatin Hills would have to obtain approval of a new proposed AVA is established, in order AVA. TTB is also interested in label. Different rules apply if a wine has to avoid a potential conflict with current comments on whether the geographic a brand name containing an AVA name label holders. Accordingly, the features of the proposed Laurelwood that was used as a brand name on a proposed part 9 regulatory text set forth District AVA are so distinguishable from label approved before July 7, 1986. See in this document specifies only the full the surrounding Willamette Valley and § 4.39(i)(2) of the TTB regulations (27 name ‘‘Laurelwood District’’ as a term of Chehalem Mountains AVAs that the CFR 4.39(i)(2)) for details. viticultural significance for purposes of proposed AVA should no longer be part If TTB establishes the proposed part 4 of the TTB regulations. of one or both of the existing AVAs. Tualatin Hills AVA, its name, ‘‘Tualatin The approval of the proposed Please provide any available specific Hills,’’ will be recognized as a name of Laurelwood District AVA would not information in support of your viticultural significance under affect any existing AVA, and any comments. § 4.39(i)(3) of the TTB regulations (27 bottlers using ‘‘Laurelwood District’’ as Because of the potential impact of the CFR 4.39(i)(3)). The text of the proposed an appellation of origin or in a brand establishment of the proposed Tualatin regulation clarifies this point. name for wines made from grapes grown Hills AVA on wine labels that include Consequently, wine bottlers using the within the Laurelwood District AVA the term ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ and the name ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ in a brand name, would not be affected by the proposed Laurelwood District AVA on including a trademark, or in another establishment of this new AVA. The wine labels that include the term label reference as to the origin of the establishment of the proposed ‘‘Laurelwood District,’’ as discussed wine, would have to ensure that the Laurelwood District AVA would allow above under Impact on Current Wine product is eligible to use the AVA name vintners to use ‘‘Laurelwood District,’’ Labels, TTB is particularly interested in as an appellation of origin if this ‘‘Chehalem Mountains,’’ and comments regarding whether there will proposed rule is adopted as a final rule. ‘‘Willamette Valley’’ as appellations of be a conflict between the proposed AVA TTB is not proposing ‘‘Tualatin,’’ origin for wines made from grapes names and currently used brand names. standing alone, as a term of viticultural grown within the proposed Laurelwood If a commenter believes that a conflict significance if the proposed AVA is District AVA, if the wines meet the will arise, the comment should describe
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28448 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
the nature of that conflict, including any The Administrator reserves the right to area name would be the result of a anticipated negative economic impact determine whether to hold a public proprietor’s efforts and consumer that approval of the proposed AVA will hearing. acceptance of wines from that area. have on an existing viticultural Therefore, no regulatory flexibility Confidentiality enterprise. TTB is also interested in analysis is required. receiving suggestions for ways to avoid All submitted comments and Executive Order 12866 conflicts, for example, by adopting a attachments are part of the public record modified or different name for the AVA. and subject to disclosure. Do not It has been determined that this enclose any material in your comments proposed rule is not a significant Submitting Comments that you consider to be confidential or regulatory action as defined by You may submit comments on this inappropriate for public disclosure. Executive Order 12866 of September 30, notice by using one of the following Public Disclosure 1993. Therefore, no regulatory three methods: assessment is required. • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: You TTB will post, and you may view, may send comments via the online copies of this notice, selected Drafting Information comment form posted with this notice supporting materials, and any online or Karen A. Thornton of the Regulations within Docket No. TTB–2019–0003 on mailed comments received about this and Rulings Division drafted this notice ‘‘Regulations.gov,’’ the Federal e- proposal within Docket No. TTB–2019– of proposed rulemaking. rulemaking portal, at http:// 0003 on the Federal e-rulemaking www.regulations.gov. A direct link to portal, Regulations.gov, at http:// List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 9 that docket is available under Notice www.regulations.gov. A direct link to Wine. No. 181 on the TTB website at https:// that docket is available on the TTB Proposed Regulatory Amendment www.ttb.gov/wine/wine- website at https://www.ttb.gov/wine/ rulemaking.shtml. Supplemental files wine_rulemaking.shtml under Notice For the reasons discussed in the may be attached to comments submitted No. 181. You may also reach the preamble, TTB proposes to amend title via Regulations.gov. For complete relevant docket through the 27, chapter I, part 9, Code of Federal instructions on how to use Regulations.gov search page at http:// Regulations, as follows: Regulations.gov, visit the site and click www.regulations.gov. For information on the ‘‘Help’’ tab. on how to use Regulations.gov, click on PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL • U.S. Mail: You may send comments the site’s ‘‘Help’’ tab. AREAS via postal mail to the Director, All posted comments will display the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 9 Regulations and Rulings Division, commenter’s name, organization (if continues to read as follows: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade any), city, and State, and, in the case of Bureau, 1310 G Street NW, Box 12, mailed comments, all address Authority: 27 U.S.C. 205. Washington, DC 20005. information, including email addresses. • Hand Delivery/Courier: You may TTB may omit voluminous attachments Subpart C—Approved American hand-carry your comments or have them or material that the Bureau considers Viticultural Areas hand-carried to the Alcohol and unsuitable for posting. ■ 2. Subpart C is amended by adding Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G You may also view copies of this §9.____to read as follows: Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC notice, all related petitions, maps and 20005. other supporting materials, and any §9.____ Tualatin Hills. Please submit your comments by the electronic or mailed comments that TTB (a) Name. The name of the viticultural closing date shown above in this notice. receives about this proposal by area described in this section is Your comments must reference Notice appointment at the TTB Information ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’. For purposes of part 4 No. 181 and include your name and Resource Center, 1310 G Street NW, of this chapter, ‘‘Tualatin Hills’’ is a mailing address. Your comments also Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005. You term of viticultural significance. must be made in English, be legible, and may also obtain copies at 20 cents per (b) Approved maps. The 6 United be written in language acceptable for 8.5- x 11-inch page. Please note that States Geological Survey (USGS) public disclosure. TTB does not TTB is unable to provide copies of 1:24,000 scale topographic maps and the acknowledge receipt of comments, and USGS maps or other similarly-sized single 1:250,000 scale topographic map TTB considers all comments as documents that may be included as part used to determine the boundary of the originals. of the AVA petition. Contact TTB’s Tualatin Hills viticultural area are titled: In your comment, please clearly state Regulations and Rulings Division at the (1) Vancouver, 1974 (1:250,000); if you are commenting for yourself or on above address, by email at https:// (2) Dixie Mountain, OR, 2014; behalf of an association, business, or www.ttb.gov/webforms/contact_ (3) Gaston, OR, 2014; other entity. If you are commenting on RRD.shtm, or by telephone at 202–453– (4) Laurelwood, OR, 2014; behalf of an entity, your comment must 1039, ext. 175, to schedule an (5) Forest Grove, OR, 2014; include the entity’s name, as well as appointment or to request copies of (6) Hillsboro, OR, 2014; and your name and position title. If you comments or other materials. (7) Linnton, OR, 2014. comment via Regulations.gov, please (c) Boundary. The Tualatin Hills enter the entity’s name in the Regulatory Flexibility Act viticultural area is located in Clackamas, ‘‘Organization’’ blank of the online TTB certifies that this proposed Multnomah and Washington Counties, comment form. If you comment via regulation, if adopted, would not have in Oregon. The boundary of the Tualatin postal mail or hand delivery/courier, a significant economic impact on a Hills viticultural area is as described please submit your entity’s comment on substantial number of small entities. below: letterhead. The proposed regulation imposes no (1) The beginning point is on the You may also write to the new reporting, recordkeeping, or other Dixie Mountain map at the intersection Administrator before the comment administrative requirement. Any benefit of North West Skyline Boulevard and closing date to ask for a public hearing. derived from the use of a viticultural North West Moreland Road. From the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28449
beginning point, proceed southwesterly for approximately 2.5 miles to its intersection with the 200-foot elevation along North West Moreland Road for intersection with Sunset Highway; then contour; then approximately 1.3 miles to road’s (15) Proceed southeast along Sunset (2) Proceed north then northeasterly intersection with the Multnomah– Highway for approximately 2.3 miles to along the 200-foot elevation contour for Washington County line; then its intersection with the railroad tracks; 1.5 miles to its intersection with SW La (2) Proceed south along the then Follette Road; then Multnomah–Washington County for (16) Proceed east along the railroad (3) Proceed south along SW La approximately 1.2 miles to the county tracks, crossing onto the Hillsboro map, Follette Road for 0.25 mile to its line’s intersection with the 1,000-foot to the intersection of the railroad tracks intersection with the 240-foot elevation elevation contour; then and an unnamed road known locally as contour, north of Blooming Fern Hill (3) Proceed northwesterly along the NW Dick Road; then Road; then 1,000-foot elevation contour, crossing (17) Proceed south along NW Dick (4) Proceed easterly then southerly onto the Vancouver map and continuing Road for approximately 0.3 mile to its along the 240-foot elevation contour, generally southwesterly along the intersection with NW Phillips Road; crossing onto the Scholls map and back meandering 1,000-foot elevation contour then onto the Laurelwood map, for a total of to its intersection with the Washington– (18) Proceed east along NW Phillips 17 miles to the intersection of the Yamhill County line; then Road for approximately 1.2 miles, elevation contour with SW Laurel Road; (4) Proceed east along the crossing onto the Linnton map, to the then Washington–Yamhill County line, road’s intersection with an unnamed (5) Proceed east along SW Laurel crossing onto the Gaston map, to the road known locally as NW Old Road for 0.15 mile to its intersection intersection of the county line with NW Cornelius Pass Road; then with the 200-foot elevation contour; South Road; then (19) Proceed northeast along NW Old then (5) Proceed northeast along NW South Cornelius Pass Road to its intersection (6) Proceed easterly along the 200-foot Road to its intersection with SW South with NW Skyline Boulevard Road; then elevation contour, crossing over the Road; then (20) Proceed north and west along Scholls map and onto the Newberg map, (6) Proceed northeasterly along SW NW Skyline Boulevard for then crossing Heaton Creek and back South Road to its intersection with the approximately 10.5 miles, crossing over onto the Scholls map for a total of 17.5 200-foot elevation contour; then the northeast corner of the Hillsboro miles to the intersection of the elevation (7) Proceed easterly along the 200-foot map and onto the Dixie Mountain map contour with Mountain Home Road east elevation contour for approximately 1.9 and then returning to the beginning of Heaton Creek; then miles to its intersection with East Main point. (7) Proceed easterly then southerly ■ 3. Subpart C is amended by adding Street/SW Gaston Road in the village of ____ along the 200-foot elevation contour, Gaston; then §9. to read as follows: crossing over the Beaverton and (8) Proceed south, then east along SW §9.____ Laurelwood District. Sherwood maps and back onto the Gaston Road for approximately 0.9 mile, (a) Name. The name of the viticultural Scholls map for a total of 8.9 miles to crossing onto the Laurelwood map, to area described in this section is the intersection of the elevation contour the road’s intersection with the 240-foot ‘‘Laurelwood District’’. For purposes of with the middle tributary of an contour line just south of an unnamed part 4 of this chapter, ‘‘Laurelwood unnamed stream along the western road known locally as SW Dixon Mill District’’ is a term of viticultural boundary of section 24, T2S/R2W; then Road; then significance. (8) Proceed southeast along the 200- (9) Proceed north along the (b) Approved maps. The six United foot elevation contour, crossing over the meandering 240-foot elevation contour States Geological Survey (USGS) northeast corner of the Newberg map for approximately 5 miles to its 1:24,000 scale topographic maps used to and onto the Sherwood map, to the intersection with SW Sandstrom Road; determine the boundary of the intersection of the elevation contour then Laurelwood District viticultural area are with Edy Road in section 25, T2S/R2W; (10) Proceed west along SW titled: then Sandstrom Road for approximately 0.15 (1) Laurelwood, OR, 2014; (9) Proceed southwest along the 200- mile to its third crossing of the 200-foot (2) Scholls, Oreg., 1961; photorevised foot elevation contour, crossing onto the elevation contour; then 1985; Newberg map and back onto the (11) Proceed northwesterly and then (3) Newberg, OR, 2014; Sherwood map, to the intersection of northeasterly along the meandering 200- (4) Beaverton, Oreg., 1961; the elevation contour with Elwert Road foot contour line for approximately 2.9 photorevised 1984; along the eastern boundary of section miles to its intersection with an (5) Sherwood, Oreg., 1961; 25, T2S/R2W; then unnamed road known locally as SW photorevised 1985; and (10) Proceed south along Elwert Road Fern Hill Road, north of an unnamed (6) Dundee, Oreg., 1956; revised 1993. for 0.85 mile to its intersection with an road known locally as SW Blooming (c) Boundary. The Laurelwood unnamed highway known locally as Fern Hill Road; then District viticultural area is located in Oregon Highway 99W, along the eastern (12) Proceed north along SW Fern Hill Washington and Yamhill Counties, in boundary of section 36, T2S/R2W; then Road for approximately 1.2 miles, Oregon. The boundary of the (11) Proceed southwesterly along crossing onto the Forest Grove map, to Laurelwood District viticultural area is Oregon Highway 99W for 0.45 mile to the road’s intersection with Oregon as described below: its intersection with the 250-foot Highway 47; then (1) The beginning point is on the elevation contour immediately south of (13) Proceed northerly along Oregon Laurelwood map at the intersection of an unnamed tributary of Cedar Creek in Highway 47 for approximately 7.6 miles Winters Road and Blooming Fern Hill section 36, T2S/R2W; then to its intersection with Oregon Highway Road in section 17, T1S/R3W. From the (12) Proceed southerly along the 250- 6/NW Wilson River Highway; then beginning point, proceed west then foot elevation contour for 1 mile to its (14) Proceed east along Oregon northwest along Blooming Fern Hill intersection with Middleton Road in Highway 6/NW Wilson River Highway Road for approximately 0.4 mile to its section 1, T2S/R2W; then
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28450 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
(13) Proceed southwesterly along intersection with an unnamed road ACTION: Proposed rule. Middleton Road, which becomes Rein known locally as Bell Road; then Road, for 0.5 mile to the intersection of (27) Proceed east along Bell Road for SUMMARY: This rule proposes a new the road with the 200-foot elevation 0.5 mile, making a sharp northwesterly transaction standard for the Medicare contour immediately south of Cedar turn, then continuing along the road for Prescription Drug Benefit program’s Creek; then 0.2 mile to its intersection with (Part D) e-prescribing program as (14) Proceed easterly along the 200- Mountain Top Road; then required by the ‘‘Substance Use- foot elevation contour for 1.6 miles to its (28) Proceed northwesterly along Disorder Prevention that Promotes intersection with an unnamed light-duty Mountain Top Road for 1.9 miles to its Opioid Recovery and Treatment for east-west road known locally as intersection with SW Hillsboro Patients and Communities Act’’ or the Brookman Road in the village of Highway, also known as Highway 219; ‘‘SUPPORT for Patients and Middleton, section 6, T3S/R1W; then then Communities Act.’’ Under the (15) Proceed east on Brookman Road (29) Proceed north along SW SUPPORT for Patients and Communities for 0.4 mile to its intersection with the Hillsboro Highway for 0.1 mile to its Act, the Secretary is required to adopt shared Washington–Clackamas County intersection with Mountain Top Road at standards for Part D e-prescribing line at the western corner of section 5, the Washington–Yamhill County line; program to ensure secure electronic T3S/R1W; then then prior authorization request and response (16) Proceed south along the (30) Proceed northwest along transmissions. If finalized, the proposals Washington–Clackamas County line for Mountain Top Road for 3.1 miles, in this rule would amend the Part D e- 1 mile to its intersection with Parrett crossing onto the Dundee map, to the prescribing regulations to require Part D Mountain Road along the eastern intersection of the road with Bald Peak plan sponsors’ support of version boundary of section 7, T3S/R1W; then Road in section 26, T2S/R3W; then 2017071 of the National Council for (17) Proceed southwesterly along (31) Proceed northwest, then Prescription Drug Programs (NCPDP) Parrett Mountain Road, crossing onto northeast, then north along Bald Peak SCRIPT standard for use in electronic the Newberg map, for a total of 2.6 Road, crossing onto the Laurelwood Prior Authorization (ePA) transactions miles, to the intersection with an map, for a total of 4.8 miles, to the with prescribers regarding Part D unnamed local road known locally as intersection of the road with SW covered drugs to Part D-eligible NE Old Parrett Mountain Road; then Laurelwood Road; then individuals. (18) Proceed west along NE Old (32) Proceed southwest, then DATES: To be assured consideration, Parrett Mountain Road for 1.7 mile to its northwest, along SW Laurelwood Road comments must be received at one of intersection with NE Schaad Road; then for 0.8 mile to its intersection with the the addresses provided, no later than 5 (19) Proceed west along NE Schaad 700-foot elevation contour; then p.m. on August 16, 2019. Road for 0.5 mile to its intersection with (33) Proceed northeast, then an unnamed local road known locally as ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer northwest, then north along the 700-foot to file code CMS–4189–P. Because of NE Corral Creek Road; then elevation contour for 5 miles, passing (20) Proceed north along NE Corral staff and resource limitations, we cannot west of Iowa Hill and Spring Hill, to the accept comments by facsimile (FAX) Creek Road for 0.9 mile to its intersection of the elevation contour and westernmost intersection with an transmission. SW Winters Road; then Comments, including mass comment unnamed local road known locally as (34) Proceed north on SW Winters NE Veritas Lane, south of Oregon submissions, must be submitted in one Road for 2 miles, returning to the of the following three ways (please Highway 99W; then beginning point. (21) Proceed north westerly in a choose only one of the ways listed): straight line for approximately 0.05 mile Dated: March 25, 2019. 1. Electronically. You may submit to the intersection of Oregon Highway John J. Manfreda, electronic comments on this regulation 99W and the 250-foot elevation contour; Administrator. to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the ‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions. then Approved: April 30, 2019. (22) Proceed northwesterly along the 2. By regular mail. You may mail Timothy E. Skud, written comments to the following 250-foot elevation contour for 1 mile to Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and its intersection with the second, address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & Tariff Policy). Medicaid Services, Department of westernmost intermittent stream that is [FR Doc. 2019–12872 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] an unnamed tributary of Spring Brook; Health and Human Services, Attention: BILLING CODE 4810–31–P then CMS–4189–P, P.O. Box 8013, Baltimore, (23) Proceed northerly along the MD 21244–8013. unnamed stream, crossing the single- Please allow sufficient time for mailed gauge railroad track, for 0.5 mile to the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND comments to be received before the intersection of the stream with the 430- HUMAN SERVICES close of the comment period. 3. By express or overnight mail. You foot elevation contour; then Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (24) Proceed west along the 430-foot may send written comments to the Services elevation contour for 0.25 mile, crossing following address ONLY: Centers for an unnamed road known locally as Medicare & Medicaid Services, 42 CFR Part 423 Owls Lane, to the intersection of the Department of Health and Human elevation contour with NE Kincaid [CMS–4189–P] Services, Attention: CMS–4189–P, Mail Road; then Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security RIN 0938–AT94 (25) Proceed northwesterly along NE Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. For information on viewing public Kincaid Road for 0.25 mile to its Medicare Program; Secure Electronic comments, see the beginning of the intersection with NE Springbrook Road; Prior Authorization for Medicare Part D then SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. (26) Proceed northwesterly along NE AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Springbrook Road for 0.22 mile to its Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. Joella Roland (410) 786–7638.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28451
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submit the information required to required to support the Part D e- Inspection of Public Comments: All fulfill the terms of the PA in real time. prescribing program transaction comments received before the close of standards, and providers and A. Legislative Background the comment period are available for pharmacies that conduct electronic viewing by the public, including any 1. Health Insurance Portability and transactions for which a program personally identifiable or confidential Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) standard has been adopted must do so business information that is included in The Health Insurance Portability and using the adopted standard. See the a comment. We post all comments Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) February 4, 2005 proposed rule titled received before the close of the (Pub. L. 104–191) was enacted on ‘‘Medicare Program, E-Prescribing and comment period on the following the Prescription Drug Program’’ (70 FR August 21, 1996. Title II, Subtitle F of website as soon as possible after they 6256) for additional information about HIPAA requires covered entities— have been received: http:// the MMA program authority. health plans, health care providers that www.regulations.gov. Follow the search instructions on that website to view conduct covered transactions, and 3. Substance Use-Disorder Prevention public comments. health care clearinghouses—to use the That Promotes Opioid Recovery and standards HHS adopts for certain Treatment for Patients and Communities I. Background electronic transactions. The standards Act (SUPPORT for Patients and The purpose of this rule is to propose adopted by HHS for purposes of HIPAA Communities Act) a new transaction standard for the Part are in regulations at 45 CFR part 162. The Substance Use-Disorder D e-prescribing program. Under this 2. Medicare Prescription Drug, Prevention that Promotes Opioid proposal, Part D plan sponsors would be Improvement, and Modernization Act of Recovery and Treatment for Patients required to support version 2017071 of 2003 (MMA) and Communities Act (Pub. L 115–271), the National Council for Prescription hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘SUPPORT Drug Programs (NCPDP) SCRIPT The Medicare Prescription Drug, for Patients and Communities Act,’’ was standard for four electronic Prior Improvement, and Modernization Act of enacted on October 24, 2018. Section Authorization (ePA) transactions, and 2003 (MMA) (Pub. L. 108–173) was 6062 of the SUPPORT for Patients and prescribers would be required to use enacted on December 8, 2003. It Communities Act amended section that standard when performing ePA amended Title XVIII of the Social 1860D–4(e)(2) of the Social Security Act transactions for Part D-covered drugs Security Act (the Act) by redesignating to require the adoption of transaction they wish to prescribe to Part D-eligible Part D as Part E and inserting a new Part standards for the Part D e-prescribing individuals. Part D plans, as defined in D to establish a voluntary prescription program to ensure secure ePA request 42 CFR 423.4, include Prescription Drug drug benefit program. As part of that and response transactions between Plans (PDPs) and Medicare Advantage program, section 1860D–4(e) of Act as prescribers and part D plan sponsors no Prescription Drug Plans (MA–PDs); Part added by the MMA required the later than January 1, 2021. Such D sponsor, as defined in 42 CFR 423.4, adoption of Part D e-prescribing transactions are to include an ePA means the entity sponsoring a Part D standards for electronic prescriptions request transaction standard for plan, MA organization offering a MA– and prescription-related transactions prescribers seeking an ePA from a Part PD plan, a PACE organization between Part D plan sponsors, D plan sponsor for a Part D covered drug sponsoring a PACE plan offering providers, and pharmacies. The for a Part D-eligible individual, as well qualified prescription drug coverage, Secretary’s selection of standards is as an ePA response transaction standard and a cost plan offering qualified informed by the National Committee on for the Part D plan sponsor’s response prescription drug coverage. The Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS). to the prescriber. A facsimile, a proposed ePA transaction standard Under section 1860D–4(e)(4)(B) of the proprietary payer portal that does not would provide for the electronic Act, NCVHS develops recommendations meet standards specified by the transmission of information between the for Part D e-prescribing standards, in Secretary or an electronic form are not prescribing health care professional and consultation with specified groups of treated as electronic transmissions for Part D plan sponsor to inform the organizations and entities. These the purposes of ePA requests. Such sponsor’s determination as to whether recommendations are then taken into standards are to be adopted in or not a prior authorization (PA) should consideration when developing, consultation with the NCPDP or other be granted. The NCPDP SCRIPT version adopting, recognizing, or modifying Part standard setting organizations the 2017071 was approved in CMS 4182–F D e-prescribing standards. The statute Secretary finds appropriate, as well as published on April 16, 2018 (83 FR further requires that the selection of other stakeholders. Finally, the 16440) effective June 15, 2018 and standards designed, to the extent SUPPORT for Patients and Communities materials are incorporated by reference practicable, not impose an undue Act also authorized the adoption of ePA of certain publications listed in the rule administrative burden on prescribers or transaction standards for part D covered as approved by the Director of the dispensers, are compatible with drugs for part D eligible individuals Federal Register as of June 15, 2018. standards established under Part C of ‘‘notwithstanding’’ any other provision An ePA transaction standard would title XI of the Act (the HIPAA of law. allow a prescriber using an electronic standards), and with general health prescribing (eRx) system or an information technology standards and B. Regulatory History electronic health record (EHR) with eRx permit electronic exchange of drug In 2000, the Secretary adopted HIPAA capability to determine whether the labeling and drug listing information transaction standards for the ‘‘referral beneficiary’s plan requires a PA for a maintained by the Food and Drug certification and authorization given medication. If the prescriber Administration and the Library of transaction’’. The term ‘‘referral enters such a prescription into an eRx Medicine. certification and authorization system, a message will be returned to The standards adopted by CMS for transaction’’ is defined at 45 CFR the provider indicating that a PA is purposes of the Part D e-prescribing 162.1301 as the transmission of any of required. Use of the ePA transactions program are in regulations at 42 CFR the following: (1) A request from a would then enable the prescriber to 423.160. Part D plan sponsors are health care provider to a health plan for
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28452 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
the review of health care to obtain an support ePA, due to the inability to Codes (NDCs) and dosage information authorization for the health care; (2) a exchange transactions in real-time. field, which are integral when request from a health care provider to a On January 16, 2009, the Secretary evaluating medication requests. Since health plan to obtain authorization for adopted later versions of the HIPAA the X12 278 standard does not have a referring an individual to another health transaction standards, requiring NCPDP standard method to process ePA care provider; and (3) a response from Telecommunications D.0 instead of transactions, prescribers would have to a health plan to a health care provider NCPDP 5.1 and version 5010 instead of find a place to insert NDCs and look up to a request described in (1) or (2). The version 4010 of the X12 278 to be used the codes using another source. In first HIPAA standard adopted for this for referral certification and contrast, NCPDP SCRIPT ePA Version transaction was version 4010 of the X12 authorization transactions (74 FR 3326) 2013101 and 2017 transactions are 278 (65 FR 50371, August 17, 2000). In because it was determined that the X12 prepopulated with all NDCs and dosage 2003, the Secretary adopted another 278 standard served the needs for non- information so the prescriber can choose standard, the NCPDP version 5.1, for pharmacy claims. These standards are among appropriate options. retail pharmacy drug referral specified at 45 CFR 162.1302(b)(2). Another standard that we are aware of certification and authorization However, these revised standards still is the NCPDP Telecommunications D.0 transactions and specified that version have the same impediments for ePA as standard. However, this standard, does 4010 of the X12 278 was to be used only they still require information such as not have the ability to look up and for dental, professional, and the patient diagnosis code which is not convey NDCs and dosages. The NCPDP institutional referral certification and available on prescription processing and Telecommunications D.0 standard was authorization transactions (see the omits other information needed for ePA designed to be a standard for insurance February 20, 2003 Federal Register (68 such as directions and dose. Further, it companies to approve claims, so it does FR 8398)). Still, as of 2003, the Secretary remains a batch standard which does not include content fields that are had not adopted a standard for ePA for not accommodate the real time nature of relevant to ePA, such as clinical fields medications specifically. prescription claims. and beneficiary-specific information nor In the meantime, interest was once In 2004, NCPDP formed a multi- does it have the ability to transmit again building in the industry to industry, multi-Standards Development information in real time. As such it is develop and test alternative ePA Organization (SDO) ePA Task Group to not frequently used by prescribers transaction standards. NCPDP took into because it cannot collect information evaluate existing PA standards and account its experience with previous promote standardized ePA, with a focus needed for satisfying a medication PA. transaction standards as it began to In our review of the standard, CMS on the medication context. The Task frame what would ultimately become its found that the X12 278 standard is by Group considered the X12 278 standard, NCPDP SCRIPT ePA standard, version nature a batch standard which cannot but determined that there were certain 2013101, which included the ability to support real-time consideration of gaps in the X12 278 standard that made send attachments in a standardized prescriptions. For example if a PA were the standard difficult to use for ePA, format. In a May 15, 2014 letter to the to be submitted using the X12 278 including that the standard was unable HHS Secretary, NCVHS stated that they standard, the PA would not be to support attachments for PA had received a letter from the NCPDP submitted to the plan until the determinations, incorporate free text in recommending its SCRIPT Standard following day, the plan would review it certain fields, and allow functionality Version 2013101 standard for carrying in the second day and, if all the for real-time messaging. As a result of out medication ePA transactions. (For information were correct, the approval these findings, the Task Group wrote a more information see, https:// would be conveyed back to the letter to the HHS Secretary stating that ncvhs.hhs.gov/wp-content/uploads/ physician 3 days after the prescription the X12 278 standard offered limited 2014/05/140515lt2.pdf.) NCVHS was captured in the batching process. support for ePA and urged HHS to test reported hearing from NCPDP The reason for this is because the X12 new versions of the standard. stakeholders that NCPDP investigators 278 is designed to batch the In 2006, CMS made awards to tasked with reviewing the X12 278 transactions, since this is what is grantees as part of a pilot to test e- standard for use as an ePA transaction optimal in the DME context. However, prescribing standards. The participants found that the HIPAA transaction this is not optimal in the ePA context, in the pilot identified further gaps in the standards for PA transactions (the 278 since it would result in ePA transactions X12 278 standard that made it v4010 or v5010) were not adequate to taking days to process. Resolution of the inadequate for use with medication PAs. support medication PA. The standard ePA would be further delayed if the These gaps included no mechanism for was designed for PA of procedures/ plan needed additional information on providers to request and explain reasons services or durable medical equipment the PA request. for deviating from standard medication (DME), so did not adequately This is in contrast to the SCRIPT ePA dosing instructions, requiring certain accommodate the information necessary standard, which conveys information to fields that are not applicable to drugs, to facilitate medication PA. NCPDP also the plan in real time that allows the and no limit on diagnosis codes, which noted that X12 278 is not widely used patient to access a medication subject to required clinicians to select from for ePA of prescription medications as PA the same day that the prescription hundreds of options to find the evidence of its inadequacy for this and ePA are submitted. appropriate code. purpose. In addition, X12 278 collects a After the pilot, stakeholders In response to NCVHS’ May 2014 standard set of information. However, continued to try to improve the X12 278 letter, we reviewed the X12 278, and PA criteria vary by medication being standard by starting the process of found that the X12 278 standard is authorized: For some medications the adding new fields to the X12 278 designed to conduct batch transactions plan may need to determine whether the standard to try to make it better able to which could not be used to support real patient had been on the same support ePA. However, after testing the time prescribing. For example, if a PA medication previously, or on another modified X12 278 standard in 2006, were to be submitted using the X12 278 comparable medication or what the NCPDP determined that the improved standard, the PA would not mediation is being used for, while for X12 278 standard was still inadequate to accommodate a field for National Drug other medications this may not be
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28453
necessary. In contrast, the SCRIPT ePA Patients and Communities Act. We visit. These four transactions include: transaction requires that plans develop believe that this provision explicitly The PA initiation request/response, PA specific sets of questions for each drug authorizes us to require the use of a PA request/response, PA appeal request/ that requires PA so that they can be standard in the Part D context that is response, and PA cancel request/ answered when the ePA is submitted. different from the HIPAA standard, as response. As noted previously, Finally, there is an inconsistency long as it is for a Part D-covered drug historically we were unable to name the between the types of information that prescribed to a Part D-eligible ePA transactions within the 2017071 are required to be submitted on a DME individual. standard as Part D e-prescribing claim, which is what the X12 278 As previously described, Part D plan program standards because the Part D transaction was designed to support, sponsors are required to establish program was previously required to and the type of information that is electronic prescription drug programs adopt standards that were compatible required to be submitted for that comply with the e-prescribing with the HIPAA standards, and HIPAA medications. For example, the X12 278 standards that are adopted under e- covered entities are currently required standard requires the diagnosis to be prescribing program’s authorizing to use the X12 278 to conduct referral submitted, which is not required on statute. There is no requirement that certification and authorization prescription claims, but it does not prescribers or dispensers implement transactions between health plans and accommodate a field for National Drug eRx. However, prescribers and health care providers. Codes (NDCs) and dosage information dispensers who electronically transmit fields that are integral when evaluating and receive prescription and certain II. Proposed Adoption of the NCPDP medication requests. Because the X12 other information regarding covered SCRIPT Standard Version 2017071 as 278 transaction is not specifically drugs prescribed for Medicare Part D- the Part D ePA Transaction for the Part created to process medications, eligible beneficiaries, directly or D Program prescribers would have to find a place through an intermediary, are required to A. PA in the Part D Context to insert NDCs and look up the codes comply with any applicable standards using another source. In contrast, the that are in effect. All Part D plans, as defined under SCRIPT ePA standard is prepopulated The Part D e-prescribing program § 423.4, including PDPs, MA–PDs, with all NDCs and dosage information currently requires providers and PACE Plans offering qualified so the prescriber can chose among dispensers to utilize the NCPDP SCRIPT prescription drug coverage, or Cost appropriate options. standard, Implementation Guide Plans offering qualified prescription Despite these findings and NCPDP Version 10.6, which was approved drug coverage, can use approved PA recommendation to NCVHS, we did not November 12, 2008, for the processes to ensure appropriate pursue proposing the NCPDP SCRIPT communication of a prescription or prescribing and coverage of Part D- Standard Version 2013101 as a Part D prescription-related information for covered drugs prescribed to Part D- eRx standard for medication PA certain named transactions. However, as eligible individuals. We review all transactions because it was contrary to of January 1, 2020, we established proposed PA criteria as part of the the HIPAA requirements, which require through rulemaking that prescribers and formulary review process. In framing use of the X12 278 standard. Similarly, dispensers will be required to use the our PA policies, we encourage PDP and when NCPDP wrote on May 24, 2017 to NCPDP SCRIPT standard, MA–PD sponsors to consistently utilize CMS to recommend the adoption of its Implementation Guide Version 2017071, PA for drugs prescribed for non-Part D NCPDP SCRIPT Standard Version which was approved by the NCPDP on covered uses and to ensure that Part D 2017071, we were unable to consider it July 28, 2017 to provide for the drugs are only prescribed when for the Part D e-prescribing program communication of prescription or medically appropriate. Non-Part D unless the HIPAA transaction standards prescription-related information covered uses may be indicated when the for referral certifications and between prescribers and dispensers for drug is frequently covered under Parts authorizations were modified. the transactions for which prior versions A or B as prescribed and dispensed or The Part D e-prescribing program’s of the NCPDP SCRIPT standard were administered, is otherwise excluded authorizing statute requires selection of adopted with old named transactions, from Part D coverage, or is used for a Part D standards that are compatible and a handful of new transactions non-medically accepted indication. (See with the HIPAA standards (see section named at § 423.160(b)(2)(iv). (For more Medicare Prescription Drug Manual, 1860D–4(e)(4) of the Act), so we have information, see the April 16, 2018 final chapter 6, section 30.2.2.3.) Part D historically ensured that our Part D e- rule titled ‘‘Medicare Program; Contract sponsors must submit to CMS prescribing program standards are Year 2019 Policy and Technical utilization management requirements compatible with the HIPAA transaction Changes to the Medicare Advantage, applied at point of sale, including PA. standards. (For additional information, Medicare Cost Plan, Medicare Fee-for- see the February 4, 2005 proposed rule Service, the Medicare Prescription Drug We may also approve PA for a drug (70 FR 6256).) Benefit Programs, and the PACE when the Part D plan desires to manage However, given the new authority Program’’ (83 FR 16635 through 16638) drug utilization, such as when step under the SUPPORT for Patients and and for a detailed discussion of the therapy is required, or when it needs to Communities Act, we believe we now regulatory history of e-prescribing establish whether the utilization is a have authority to adopt Part D eRx ePA standards see the November 28, 2017 continuation of existing treatment that transaction standards proposed rule (82 FR 56437 and should not be subject to the step therapy ‘‘notwithstanding’’ any other provision 56438).) requirements, or to ensure that a drug is of law if such proposals are framed in While not currently adopted as part of being used safely or in a cost-effective consultation with stakeholders and the the Part D eRx standard, the NCPDP manner. Formulary management NCPDP or other standard setting SCRIPT standard version 2017071 decisions must be based on scientific organizations the Secretary finds includes 4 transactions that would evidence and may also be based on appropriate. See section 1860D– enable the prescribers to initiate pharmacoeconomic considerations that 4(e)(2)(E)(ii)(III) of the Act, as amended medication ePA requests with Part D achieve appropriate, safe, and cost- by section 6062 of the SUPPORT for plan sponsors at the time of the patient’s effective drug therapy.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28454 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
The PA process has historically been ability to transmit information in real use, mandatory questions, transaction handled via facsimile exchange of time. We then considered the X12 278. messaging, and standardized ePA data information or telephone call, and only Based on review of NCPDP’s elements and vocabulary words for recently via payer-specific web portals. testimony and the letters received from exchanging the PA questions and However, there is an overall consensus NCVHS, we found that the NCPDP and answers between prescribers and among stakeholders testifying to NCVHS its participant organizations have payers, while also allowing the payers that there is a need for real time PA at concluded and presented to NCVHS via to customize the wording of the the prescriber level for electronic testimony at hearings that the X12 278 questions using free form fields. prescribing. Minutes from NCVHS standard is not adequate to enable ePA Although the X12 278 standard has meetings can be accessed at https:// in the e-prescribing context because it standard information fields, mandatory ncvhs.hhs.gov/meetings-meeting/all- does not support ‘‘real-time’’ medication questions, transaction messaging and past-meetings/. We believe this would e-prescribing, meaning a prescriber standardized data element and values, improve patient access to required seeking ePA during the patient we believe those fields are relevant only medications. encounter. This is due to the content for DME use—and would not be logic of the standard, which does not conducive to medication ePA. Since the B. PA for Part D E-Prescribing have the technical capabilities to allow X12 278 does not allow payers to In order to meet the SUPPORT for for next question logic, which allows customize the wording of questions, it is Patients and Communities Act’s the prescriber to determine medication difficult for parties to decide how to fill mandate to adopt an ePA transaction alternatives and determine within out the fields. The NCPDP SCRIPT standard for the Part D-covered drugs minutes if the medication will be Standard was designed to support prescribed to Part D-eligible individuals, authorized or if a coverage medication ePA, the standard also CMS identified ePA transaction determination is required. In addition, supports features that minimize what standards currently in use by the fields, transaction messaging, the prescriber is asked, creating a pharmacies and prescribers. These software functioning are not customized experience based on earlier included the X12 278 and NCPDP standardized to include information answers or data pulled using automated Telecommunications D.0 standards, the relevant to ePA and contain mandatory functions from their EHR system, which NCPDP SCRIPT standard version questions that are unnecessary for would reduce the amount of time a 2017071, and earlier versions of the medication PA. Unfortunately, prescriber or their staff spend reviewing NCPDP SCRIPT standard. We quickly prescribers are unable to customize and responding to the PA questions We ruled out the use of older NCPDP these fields as needed for medication understand that this functionality works SCRIPT standards based on our PA. with most EHR systems, and can be These findings are outlined in assessment of the enhanced customized based on what information NCPDP’s 2016 written testimony to functionality available in the NCPDP is requested by the plans. It additionally NCVHS, which is available via this web SCRIPT version 2017071. supports software functions that allow link: https://www.ncvhs.hhs.gov/wp- We then considered the needs of the for automation of the collection of data content/uploads/2016/01/Part-2- required for ePA consideration from Part D program; the functionalities Attachments-NCPDP-WrittenOnly.pdf, data available within most EHR systems offered by the remaining two standards; urging the exemption of medication or other PA transaction fields. NCVHS recommendations, stakeholder transactions from the X12 278 Furthermore, unlike the X12 278, the recommendations based on their transaction standard, and its May 24, NCPDP SCRIPT version 2017071 experience developing, vetting, 2017 recommendation to adopt the standard supports solicited and evaluating, revising, and using the NCPDP SCRIPT Standard Version unsolicited models. A solicited model standards constructed by the respective 2017071 for ePA transactions in the occurs when the prescriber notifies the Standards Development Organizations HIPAA context, with a 24 month payer that they wish to start the PA (SDOs) including NCPDP, the burden on implementation time period, due to the process to determine if an authorization stakeholders to use the standard, the extensive coding required by Electronic is needed for the patient and their security offered by the standard; and the Health Records (EHRs) and Part D plans desired medication. The prescriber current EHR capabilities of the industry to implement the change. requests guidance as to what in order to estimate the potential burden Although NCPDP’s recommendation information will be required for an ePA each standard would impose if it were was to adopt this standard for all HIPAA request for a particular patient and to be adopted in the Part D context. transactions, the Department has not medication. The payer then responds SDOs work to formulate health and promulgated rulemaking on this point. either with a description of the safety standards based on guidelines, Based on conversations with the information required, or an indication best practices, specifications, test industry, our own assessment of the that a PA is not required for that patient methods, and/or designs. standard, and under the authority and medication. An unsolicited model The X12 278 and NCPDP provided by Congress to require the use can be used when the information Telecommunications D.0 are already of a standard for Part D ePA generated in this first interchange of the used as the HIPAA standards for referral notwithstanding any other provision of solicited model is not required, where certification and PA for dental, law, we have concluded that the the prescriber presumes or knows that professional and institutional potential benefits of adopting user- an authorization will be required based transactions, and retail pharmacy drugs friendly ePA for the Part D program on past experience or other knowledge transactions, respectively. However, the outweigh any difficulties that may arise and they will submit the information NCPDP Telecommunications D.0 by virtue of Part D using a different they anticipate the payer needs. standard was designed to be a standard standard than the rest of the industry. We found that while X12 278 uses for insurance companies to approve More specifically the NCPDP SCRIPT Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) claims and is only used in ‘‘pharmacy standard will support an electronic syntax, the NCPDP SCRIPT standard to plan’’ transactions, so it does not version of today’s PA process by version 2017071 uses XML syntax. XML include all of the content fields that are providing standardized information helps ensure security of transactions relevant to ePA nor does it have the fields that are relevant for medication through the encryption of personal
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28455
health information and through use of usual manner if/when the prescription the adoption of an ePA standard for Part XML transaction processing. XML is a is filled. Thus, we believe our proposal D-covered drugs to Part D-eligible newer syntax that provides for an easier would not be overly burdensome for the individuals notwithstanding any other interaction between different formats prescriber, even if beneficiaries seek to provision of law. We believe that our and is more easily readable when use their non-Part D coverage. proposal to adopt the NCPDP SCRIPT system issues arise. By contrast, EDI is While the prescriber can use the standard version 2017071 for ePA of an older syntax more commonly used SCRIPT ePA for all covered Part D- Part D covered drugs prescribed to Part when there are few companies that covered drugs for Part D-eligible D eligible individuals is consistent with conduct more standard interactions individuals, it should refrain from using the statutory requirement to adopt between each other. the transaction if the patient were to technical standards for ePA transactions Based on this evaluation of the specifically request that the Part D under the Act, which allows the candidate standards, coupled with the benefits not be accessed. Secretary to require use of standards in recommendations from NCPDP, CMS As a result of these observations and lieu of any other applicable standards concluded that the NCPDP SCRIPT our understanding that most of the for an electronic transmission of an ePA standard version 2017071 is the most industry is able to support NCPDP nothwithstanding any other provision of appropriate standard to propose for the SCRIPT standards for ePA using their law. Part D e-prescribing program. current EHRs, we believe that requiring Therefore, we propose to add We recognize that this proposed rule plans to support and prescribers to use § 423.160(b)(7) which would require would not change the ePA transaction the NCPDP SCRIPT 2017071 ePA that Part D plans be able to support the standards that may be used outside of transactions when prescribing Part D NCPDP SCRIPT ePA standard the Part D context. We do not believe covered drugs when they are prescribed transactions included within version that it will be problematic for plans to to Part D eligible individuals would not 2017071 beginning on January 1, 2021, use one standard for Part D and another impose an undue administrative burden and that prescribers use that standard standard outside of Part D, if that is the on prescribers or dispensers. Therefore, when conducting ePA by the same date. case for the plan, because we believe based on its real time capabilities and The proposed ePA standard applies to that the industry is equipped to use its inherent features designed to the following list of ePA transactions: different standards for different health accommodate prescriptions, we believe • PAInitiationRequest and plans and programs. We understand that that the NCPDP SCRIPT standard PAInitiationResponse based on our conversations with the version 2017071, which includes the • PARequest and PAResponse industry, most EHRs are capable of following ePA transaction capabilities, • PAAppealRequest and generating transactions using more than would be the best available option to PAAppealResponse one standard for a given transaction, support ePA between prescribers and • PACancelRequest and and that they are programmed in a payers for Part D covered drugs PACancelResponse manner that would guide a prescriber to prescribed to Part D-eligible individuals: select the correct standard for a given We welcome comments on the • PAInitiationRequest and transaction. proposed adoption of the NCPDP PAInitiationResponse Finally, we considered whether • SCRIPT standard version 2017071 eRx adopting the NCPDP SCRIPT Standard PARequest and PAResponse for these ePA transactions for Part D- • PAAppealRequest and version 2017071 for ePA would create covered drugs prescribed to Part D any difficulties if an individual had PAAppealResponse eligible individuals. We are also • PACancelRequest and multiple forms of drug coverage or soliciting comments regarding the PACancelResponse. wished to pay cash for their impact of these proposed transactions prescription. The SUPPORT for Patients If these ePA transaction proposals are and the proposed effective date on and Communities Act specifies that the finalized, they would enable the industry and other interested adopted standard shall be applicable for electronic presentation of ePA questions stakeholders, including whether the ePA of covered Part D drugs being and responses using secure transactions. implementation of a NCPDP SCRIPT prescribed to Part D-eligible individuals. The SUPPORT for Patients and standard version 2017071 ePA The Act requires that the drug be a Part Communities Act states that the transaction standard for use by D-covered drug, and that the patient is Secretary must adopt, and a Part D prescribers and plans in the Part D Part D-eligible, but it stops short of sponsor’s electronic prescription program would impose an additional requiring that the prescribed drug be program must implement the adopted burden on the industry as a whole. We paid for by the Part D plan. Thus, even ePA by January 1, 2021. As of January would also be interested in hearing if if a prescriber were to use the SCRIPT 1, 2020, plans will already be required implementation of the proposed ePA to seek part D PA, the beneficiary’s to use the NCPDP SCRIPT 2017071 transactions is a significant change for right to pay for the drug him or herself, standard for certain Part D specified Part D sponsors which would make a or to use non-Part D coverage to pay for transactions, so we believe that giving January 1, 2021 implementation date as the drug would be unaffected. However, plans an additional year to add ePA to required by statute not be feasible. We we note, that the prescriber would not that list of other NCPDP SCRIPT also seek comment on strategies to use the SCRIPT ePA to seek ePA with 2017071 transactions would not be mitigate burden in order to support non-Part D plans. We expect that their overly burdensome and help ensure that successful adoption of this policy. EHR’s eRx function would be capable of the SUPPORT for Patients and Finally, we seek comment on any using the appropriate HIPAA standard Communities Act is implemented. additional ways CMS can support plans to seek ePA outside of the Part D We acknowledge that covered entities as they transition to the ePA standard by context. Furthermore, where a patient are required to use the X12 278 standard the 2021 deadline. has both a Part D plan and a for ePA under HIPAA, which is supplementary payer the SCRIPT ePA different than the standard we are III. Collection of Information can be used to process the SCRIPT ePA proposing. (See 45 CFR 162.1301.) Requirements transaction in real time, with the claims However, the SUPPORT for Patients and Under the Paperwork Reduction Act processing transactions made in the Communities Act, allows us to propose of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28456 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
we are required to provide 60-day notice within the NCPDP SCRIPT standard. As they spend an average of $10.00/fax PA in the Federal Register and solicit ePA is implemented the current system for 448,344 authorizations (560,430 public comment before a collection of of manual processing (fax and phone authorizations × 0.80) at a cost of information requirement is submitted to calls) will be eliminated, since plans $4,483,440 (448,344 PAs × $10.00/PA). the Office of Management and Budget will be able to use this more appropriate The remaining 198 plans that rely on (OMB) for review and approval. In order standard. phone or fax and individual ePA review to fairly evaluate whether an We estimate a one-time cost for plans spend an average of $25.00/manual PA information collection should be to implement the necessary changes to for 112,086 authorizations (560,430 approved by OMB, section 3506(c)(2)(A) support the ePA transactions within authorizations × 0.20) at a cost of of the PRA requires that we solicit NCPDP SCRIPT standard version $2,802,150 (112,086 PAs × $25.00/PA). comment on the following issues: 2017071. After consulting with industry In this regard the transaction cost for the • The need for the information stakeholders, we have concluded that current practice is approximately collection and its usefulness in carrying implementing or building the type of $7,285,590 ($4,483,440 + $2,802,150). out the proper functions of our agency. logic which will allow systems Outside of the one-time • The accuracy of our estimate of the engineers to produce the interactive implementation cost, the proposed information collection burden. logic which the SCRIPT standard • changes to § 423.160(b)(7) would result The quality, utility, and clarity of requires can vary based on how the PA in an annual savings of $5,010,244 to the information to be collected. criteria are currently documented, but • Part D plans ($7,285,590 current process Recommendations to minimize the $100,000 is the approximate average ¥ $2,275,346 proposed standard) for information collection burden on the cost. The cost varies based on the size the ongoing PA requirements. When affected public, including automated and expertise of the plan. This figure considering the one-time cost, we collection techniques. includes only the plan’s internal costs project an annual increase of $8,875,346 In this proposed rule we are soliciting including labor, initial development and ($7,285,590 current process ¥ public comment on each of these issues programming, and systems support to $5,010,244 proposed standard savings + for the following sections of the rule transform each of its CMS-approved PA $6,600,000 one-time cost) for the first 3 that contain proposed ‘‘collection of criteria from a free flowing document years of OMB’s approval period. information’’ requirements as defined suitable for implementation by a clinical under 5 CFR 1320.3(c) of the PRA’s professional into a step-by-step B. Submission of PRA-Related implementing regulations. document that can be adapted for use by Comments A. Proposed Information Collection programmers. Based on our internal We have submitted a copy of this rule Requirements (ICRs) data, we estimate that there are 990 to OMB for its review of the rule’s plans. We estimate that only 20 percent proposed information collection The following requirements and (or 198) of the plans (990 plans × 0.20) burden will be submitted to OMB for requirements and burden. The do not have the internal ePA process requirements are not effective until they approval under control number 0938– that would be required to build the logic 0763 (CMS–R–262). Subject to renewal, have been approved by OMB. into the NCPDP SCRIPT standard’s ePA To obtain copies of the supporting the control number is currently set to transactions. In that regard we estimate expire on February 28, 2019. It was last statement and any related forms for the a one-time implementation cost of proposed collections previously approved on February 27, 2018, and $19,800,000 (198 plans × $100,000/plan) remains active. discussed, please visit CMS’s website at: or $6,600,000 annually when factoring https://www.cms.gov/Regulations- This rule proposes to implement in OMB’s 3-year approval period ($19.8 section 6062 of the SUPPORT for andGuidance/Legislation/Paperwork million/3 years). We are annualizing the ReductionActof1995/PRAListing.html, Patients and Communities Act, which one-time estimate since we do not require the adoption of technical or call the Reports Clearance Office at anticipate any additional burden after (410) 786–1326. standards for the Part D e-prescribing the 3-year approval period expires. program that will help ensure secure We invite public comments on the Based on our informal conversations proposed information collection ePA requests and response transactions with the industry, we believe that the Specifically, the proposed rule would requirements and burden. If you wish to ongoing cost that plans would incur to comment, please submit your comments amend the Prescription Drug Benefit process ePA transactions range from electronically as specified in the DATES program (Part D) regulations to require $1.20 to $2.85 per transaction, which and ADDRESSES sections of this under § 423.160(b)(7) that Part D plan varies based on vendor and volume. proposed rule and identify the rule sponsors (hereinafter, ‘‘plans’’) have the Based on internal CMS data, for the 990 (CMS–4189–P) and where applicable technical capability to support the plans we estimate that 560,430 PAs are the ICR’s CFR citation, CMS ID number National Council for Prescription Drug performed every year and that each (CMS–R–262), and OMB control number Programs (NCPDP) SCRIPT standard authorization requires two individual (OMB 0938–0763). version 2017071 when performing transactions, one for receiving and one electronic ePA for Part D-covered drugs for responding. Using $2.03 as the IV. Regulatory Impact Statement prescribed to Part D-eligible individuals. average cost per transaction ([$1.20 + A. Statement of Need While this proposed rule will not $2.85]/2) we estimate $4.06 per impact the PA criteria which Part D authorization ($2.03/transaction × 2 This rule proposes to implement plans have in place, the electronic transactions/authorization). In aggregate provisions of the SUPPORT for Patients process will make the PA process less we project an ongoing cost of $2,275,346 and Communities Act, which require burdensome for plans and prescribers. annually ($4.06/authorization × 560,430 the adoption of transaction standards for Prescribers who are currently using an authorizations) for all plans. the Part D program that will help ensure electronic prescribing software already With regard to current practice, the secure electronic PA request and have access to the ePA transactions and remaining 80 percent (or 792) of the response transactions. Specifically, the may generally access the proposed plans (990 plans × 0.80) already have an proposed rule would amend the transactions without cost, since the eRx automated PA process in place. Our Prescription Drug Benefit program (Part software includes all transactions review of their cost data indicates that D) regulations to require that Part D
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28457
plans sponsors have the technical located outside of a Metropolitan instead of contracts will reduce the capability to support the National Statistical Area for Medicare payment number of reviewers to approximately Council for Prescription Drug Programs regulations and has fewer than 100 500 (assuming approximately 250 (NCPDP) SCRIPT standard version beds. We are not preparing an analysis parent organizations), and this will cut 2017071 when performing electronic for section 1102(b) of the Act because the total cost of reviewing in half. Prior Authorization (ePA) for Part D- we have determined, and the Secretary However, we believe it is likely that covered drugs prescribed to Part D- certifies, that this rule would not have reviewing will be performed by eligible individuals. a significant impact on the operations of contract. The argument for this is that a a substantial number of small rural parent organization might have local B. Overall Impact hospitals. reviewers; even if that parent We have examined the impact of this Section 202 of the Unfunded organization has several contracts that rule as required by Executive Order Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also might have a reader for each distinct 12866 on Regulatory Planning and requires that agencies assess anticipated geographic region, to be on the lookout Review (September 30, 1993), Executive costs and benefits before issuing any for effects of provisions specific to that Order 13563 on Improving Regulation rule whose mandates require spending region. and Regulatory Review (January 18, in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995 Executive Order 13771, titled 2011), the Regulatory Flexibility Act dollars, updated annually for inflation. Reducing Regulation and Controlling (RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96– In 2019, that threshold is approximately Regulatory Costs, was issued on January 354), section 1102(b) of the Act, section $154 million. This rule would have no 30, 2017 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017). 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform consequential effect on state, local, or It has been determined that this rule Act of 1995 (March 22, 1995; Pub. L. tribal governments or on the private does not impose more than a de 104–4), Executive Order 13132 on sector. minimis costs; and thus, is not a Federalism (August 4, 1999), the Executive Order 13132 establishes regulatory action for purposes of E.O. Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. certain requirements that an agency 13771. 804(2)), and Executive Order 13771 on must meet when it promulgates a Reducing Regulation and Controlling proposed rule (and subsequent final C. Anticipated Effects Regulatory Costs (January 30, 2017). rule) that imposes substantial direct As stated in the previously, section Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 requirement costs on state and local 6062 of the SUPPORT for Patients and direct agencies to assess all costs and governments, preempts state law, or Communities Act requires the adoption benefits of available regulatory otherwise has Federalism implications. of technical standards for the Part D alternatives and, if regulation is Since this rule does not impose any program that will ensure secure ePA necessary, to select regulatory costs on state or local governments, the request and response transactions no approaches that maximize net benefits requirements of Executive Order 13132 later than January 1, 2021. We propose (including potential economic, are not applicable. to codify requirements at § 423.160, environmental, public health and safety If regulations impose administrative which would require plans to support effects, distributive impacts, and costs on reviewers, such as the time the National Council for Prescription equity). A RIA must be prepared for needed to read and interpret this final Drug Programs (NCPDP) SCRIPT major rules with economically rule, then we should estimate the cost standard version 2017071 by January 1, significant effects ($100 million or more associated with regulatory review. There 2021 when performing electronic ePA in any 1 year). This rule does not reach are currently 750 MA contracts (which for Part D-covered drugs prescribed to the economic threshold and thus is not also includes PDPs), 50 State Medicaid Part D-eligible individuals. The considered a major rule. Agencies, and 200 Medicaid Managed proposed rule has the following The RFA requires agencies to analyze Care Organizations (1,000 reviewers impacts. options for regulatory relief of small total). We assume each entity will have Entities affected by the PA processes entities. For purposes of the RFA, small one designated staff member who will include pharmacies receiving ePAs from entities include small businesses, review the entire rule. Other providers and filling the prescription, nonprofit organizations, and small assumptions are possible and will be prescribers who use ePA, the Medicare governmental jurisdictions. Most reviewed after the calculations. Part D Program, Part D plans, EHR hospitals and most other providers and Using the wage information from the vendors who need to modify their suppliers are small entities, either by Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for products, and the Promoting nonprofit status or by having revenues medical and health service managers Interoperability Programs, for any Part D of less than $7.5 million to $38.5 (code 11–9111), we estimate that the prescribers in these programs. million annually. Individuals and states cost of reviewing this final rule is Information about what programs are are not included in the definition of a $107.38 per hour, including fringe included in the Medicare Promoting small entity. We are not preparing an benefits and overhead costs (http:// Interoperability Programs is available analysis for the RFA because we have www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm). via this web link: https://www.cms.gov/ determined, and the Secretary certifies, Assuming an average reading speed, we Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/ that this proposed rule would not have estimate that it will take approximately EHRIncentivePrograms/index.html? a significant economic impact on a 12.5 hours for each person to review redirect=/EHRincentiveprograms. substantial number of small entities. this final rule. For each entity that There are three primary aspects of the In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act reviews the rule, the estimated cost is provision that could affect its cost and requires us to prepare an RIA if a rule therefore, $1,342 (12.5 hours × $107.38). the amount saved. The most immediate may have a significant impact on the Therefore, we estimate that the total cost cost comes from the one-time operations of a substantial number of of reviewing this final rule is $1,342,000 implementation cost for the few EHR small rural hospitals. This analysis must ($1,342 × 1,000 reviewers). vendors who need to need to change conform to the provisions of section 603 Note that this analysis assumed one their programming to use two standards; of the RFA. For purposes of section reader per contract. Some alternatives the NCPDP SCRIPT standard version 1102(b) of the Act, we define a small include assuming one reader per parent 2017071 for Part D ePA and the HIPAA rural hospital as a hospital that is entity. Using parent organizations standard for other contexts. Based on
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28458 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules
our conversations with EHR vendors, vary, but $100,000 is the approximate estimate that 560,430 PAs are performed we believe that it would take the EHR amount. We estimate that only 20 every year. If we estimate the average vendors approximately 200 developing percent of the 750 plans would have to cost per transaction to be $2.03 and each hours and 800 programming hours to make changes to implement their ePA PA requires two transactions, the enable the EHRs to utilize two process to implement the SCRIPT ePA ongoing cost of ePA would be standards. process standard, which gives us an approximately $2.27 million annually We also estimated what it would cost approximate one time implementation ($2.03 * 560,430 * 2). plan sponsors to implement this cost of $15 million (0.2 * 750 * proposed standard. After consulting $100,000). The anticipated costs and how they with industry stakeholders, we have The ongoing cost for plans range from compare to current costs are as follows: concluded that implementing or $1.20 to $2.85 per transaction, and vary building to the SCRIPT standard can based on vendor and volume. We
Plans without Plans with automated PA automated PA Total logic processing logic
Annual Maintenance Costs, Paper Process ...... $2,302,150.00 $3,683,440.00 $5,985,590.00 Annual Maintenance Costs, ePA Process ...... (2,275,345.80) Projected Annual Savings ...... 3,710,244.20
It should be noted that the $3,710,244 List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 423 Prescription Drug Programs SCRIPT in cumulative plan savings would be Administrative practice and standard, Implementation Guide reduced by $100,000 in the first year as procedure, Emergency medical services, Version 2017071 approved July 28, 2017 plans that have not automated their PA Health facilities, Health maintenance (incorporated by reference in paragraph logic move to do so. organizations (HMO), Health (c)(1)(vii) of this section), to provide for We believe that the savings from this professionals, Medicare, Penalties, the communication of a prescription or rule would be primarily derived from Privacy, and Reporting and related prescription-related information the reduction in time it takes to process recordkeeping requirements. between prescribers and dispensers for a prior-authorization as discussed the following transactions: previously. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Centers for Medicare & (i) PAInitiationRequest and E. Alternatives Considered Medicaid Services proposes to amend PAInitiationResponse The SUPPORT for Patients and 42 CFR part 423 as set forth below: (ii) PARequest and PAResponse Communities Act requires the adoption PART 423—VOLUNTARY MEDICARE (iii) PAAppealRequest and of technical standards by January 1, PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT PAAppealResponse 2021. We had considered requiring the (iv) PACancelRequest and adoption of the standard by January 1, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 423 PACancelResponse 2020. However, we want to help ensure is revised to read as follows: that plans have as much time to comply * * * * * with the statutory mandate as possible. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302, 1306, 1395w– 101 through 1395w–152, and 1395hh. Dated: June 11, 2019. V. Response to Comments ■ 2. Section 423.160 is amended by Seema Verma, Because of the large number of public adding paragraph (b)(7) to read as Administrator, Centers for Medicare & comments we normally receive on follows: Medicaid Services. Federal Register documents, we are not Dated: June 14, 2019. able to acknowledge or respond to them § 423.160 Standards for electronic prescribing. Alex M. Azar II, individually. We will consider all * * * * * Secretary, Department of Health and Human comments we receive by the date and Services. time specified in the DATES section of (b) * * * [FR Doc. 2019–13028 Filed 6–17–19; 11:15 am] this preamble, and, when we proceed (7) Electronic prior authorization. with a subsequent document, we will Beginning January 1, 2021, Part D BILLING CODE 4120–01–P respond to the comments in the sponsors and prescribers must comply preamble to that document. with the National Council for
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM 19JNP1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 28459
Notices Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 118
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER potential persons who are to respond to withholding of a recipient institution’s contains documents other than rules or the collection of information that such formula funds and redistribution of its proposed rules that are applicable to the persons are not required to respond to share of formula funds to other eligible public. Notices of hearings and investigations, the collection of information unless it institutions. committee meetings, agency decisions and displays a currently valid OMB control rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Description of Respondents: Not-for- number. petitions and applications and agency profit institutions; State, Local or Tribal statements of organization and functions are National Institute of Food and Government. examples of documents appearing in this Agriculture section. Number of Respondents: 152. Title: Reporting Requirements for Frequency of Responses: Reporting: State Plans of Work for Agricultural Annually. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Research and Extension Formula Funds. OMB Control Number: 0524–0036. Total Burden Hours: 49,248. Summary of Collection: Section 202 Submission for OMB Review; Ruth Brown, Comment Request and 225 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of Departmental Information Collection June 13, 2019. 1998 (AREERA) which requires that a Clearance Officer. The Department of Agriculture has plan of work must be submitted by each [FR Doc. 2019–12904 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] submitted the following information institution and approved by the BILLING CODE 3410–09–P collection requirement(s) to OMB for National Institute of Food and review and clearance under the Agriculture (NIFA) before formula funds Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, may be provided to the 1862 and 1890 Public Law 104–13. Comments are land-grant institutions. The plan of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE requested regarding: Whether the work must address critical agricultural collection of information is necessary issues in the State and describe the Foreign-Trade Zones Board for the proper performance of the programs and project targeted to address functions of the agency, including these issues using the NIFA formula [B–05–2019] whether the information will have funds. The plan of work also must practical utility; the accuracy of the describe the institution’s multistate Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 93—Raleigh/ agency’s estimate of burden including activities as well as their integrated Durham, North Carolina; Authorization the validity of the methodology and research and extension activities. NIFA of Production Activity; assumptions used; ways to enhance the is requesting to continue to collect an GlaxoSmithKline, PLC (Pharmaceutical quality, utility and clarity of the update to the 5-Year Plan of Work Products), Zebulon, North Carolina information to be collected; and ways to which began with the Fiscal Year 2007, minimize the burden of the collection of and as a result no longer needs to collect On February 13, 2019, information on those who are to the initial 5-Year Plan. Also, as required GlaxoSmithKline, PLC, submitted a respond, including through the use of by the Food Conservation and Energy notification of proposed production appropriate automated, electronic, Act of 2008 (FCEA) (Pub. L. 110–246, activity to the FTZ Board for its facility mechanical, or other technological Sec. 7505), NIFA is working with the within FTZ 93, in Zebulon, North collection techniques or other forms of university partners in extension and Carolina. information technology. research to review and identify Comments regarding this information measures to streamline the submission, The notification was processed in collection received by July 18, 2019 will reporting under, and implementation of accordance with the regulations of the be considered. Written comments plan of work requirements. FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Need and Use of the Information: notice in the Federal Register inviting Agriculture, Office of Information and Institutions are required to annually public comment (84 FR 6128, February Regulatory Affairs, Office of report to NIFA the following: (1) The 26, 2019). On June 13, 2019, the Management and Budget (OMB), New actions taken to seek stakeholder input applicant was notified of the FTZ Executive Office Building, 725 17th to encourage their participation; (2) a Board’s decision that no further review Street NW, Washington, DC 20502. brief statement of the process used by of the activity is warranted at this time. Commenters are encouraged to submit the recipient institution to identify The production activity described in the their comments to OMB via email to: individuals or groups who are _ notification was authorized, subject to OIRA [email protected] or stakeholders and to collect input from the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board’s fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental them; and (3) a statement of how regulations, including Section 400.14. Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail collected input was considered. NIFA Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– uses the information to provide Dated: June 13, 2019. 7602. Copies of the submission(s) may feedback to the institutions on their Andrew McGilvray, be obtained by calling (202) 720–8958. Plans of Work and Annual Reports of Executive Secretary. An agency may not conduct or Accomplishments and Results in order [FR Doc. 2019–12990 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] sponsor a collection of information for institutions to improve the conduct BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P unless the collection of information and the delivery of their programs. displays a currently valid OMB control Failure to comply with the number and the agency informs requirements may result in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28460 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE unambiguously within the scope of the body and a steel pin outside the scope Orders based upon the plain meaning of of the Orders.12 International Trade Administration the Orders and the description of the The CIT remanded the Final Scope [A–552–818, C–552–819] zinc and nylon anchors contained in Ruling to Commerce for further Midwest Fastener’s scope ruling request consideration consistent with the CIT’s Certain Steel Nails From the Socialist and supplemental questionnaire opinion.13 The CIT also directed Republic of Vietnam: Notice of Court responses.4 Commerce also found that Commerce to issue appropriate Decision Not in Harmony With Final several factors under 19 CFR instructions to CBP regarding the Scope Ruling and Notice of Amended 351.225(k)(1)—particularly the petition, suspension of liquidation of Midwest Final Scope Ruling Pursuant to Court the final determination of the Fastener’s zinc and nylon anchors.14 Decision International Trade Commission (ITC) Pursuant to the CIT’s instructions, on issued in connection with the remand, under protest, Commerce found AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, underlying investigation, and prior that Midwest Fastener’s zinc and nylon International Trade Administration, scope rulings—further supported anchors do not fall within the scope of Department of Commerce. Commerce’s determination that the Orders.15 On June 3, 2019, the CIT SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Midwest Fastener’s zinc and nylon sustained Commerce’s Final Remand (Commerce) is notifying the public that anchors fall within the scope of the Results.16 5 the Court of International Trade’s (CIT) Orders. As a result of the Final Scope Timken Notice final judgment in this case is not in Ruling, Commerce instructed U.S. 17 harmony with Commerce’s final scope Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to In its decision in Timken, as 18 ruling. Commerce, therefore, is continue suspension of liquidation of clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the amending its final scope ruling and now entries of Midwest Fastener’s zinc and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit finds that certain zinc and nylon nylon anchors.6 (CAFC) held that, pursuant to sections anchors imported by Midwest Fastener Midwest Fastener challenged the 516A(c) and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, Corp. (Midwest Fastener) are not within Final Scope Ruling before the CIT, and as amended (the Act), Commerce must the scope of the antidumping and on October 1, 2018, the CIT remanded publish a notice of court decision that countervailing duty orders on certain Commerce’s scope ruling.7 In its is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with Commerce’s determination and must suspend steel nails from the Socialist Republic of Remand Order, the CIT held that liquidation of entries pending a Vietnam (Vietnam). Midwest Fastener’s zinc and nylon anchors, as unitary articles of ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s DATES: Applicable June 13, 2019. commerce, are not a ‘‘nail’’ within the June 3, 2019 judgment in this case, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: plain meaning of the word and are, sustaining Commerce’s decision in the Yasmin Bordas at (202) 482–3813, AD/ therefore, outside the scope of the Final Remand Results that Midwest CVD Operations, Enforcement and Orders.8 The CIT relied on dictionary Fastener’s zinc and nylon anchors fall Compliance, International Trade definitions to determine the definition outside the scope of the Orders, Administration, U.S. Department of of ‘‘nail’’ and concluded that, because constitutes a final decision of that court Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue Midwest Fastener’s zinc and nylon that is not in harmony with the Final NW, Washington, DC 20230. anchors are a unitary article of Scope Ruling. This notice is published SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: commerce, the entire product, not just a in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, Background component part, must fit the definition of a nail to fall within the scope of the Commerce will continue the suspension On November 9, 2016, Midwest Orders.9 The CIT held that the entire of liquidation of Midwest Fastener’s Fastener, an importer of zinc and nylon zinc or nylon anchor is not a nail zinc and nylon anchors pending anchors, filed a request with Commerce ‘‘constructed of two or more pieces’’ expiration of the period of appeal or, if for a scope ruling that its zinc and nylon pursuant to the Orders.10 Additionally, appealed, pending a final and anchors should be excluded from the the CIT held that, because the relevant conclusive court decision. scope of the antidumping and industry classifies anchors with a steel Amended Final Scope Ruling countervailing duty Orders 1 on certain pin as anchors, not nails, trade usage 2 Because there is now a final court steel nails from Vietnam. Midwest further supports the conclusion that decision with respect to this case, Fastener described the zinc and nylon Midwest Fastener’s zinc and nylon Commerce is amending its Final Scope anchors as a unitary article of commerce anchors are not nails.11 In support of its Ruling and finds that the scope of the consisting of two parts: (1) A zinc alloy conclusion, the CIT cited its decision in Orders does not cover the zinc and or nylon body; and (2) a zinc plated OMG, Inc. v. United States, in which it 3 nylon anchors specified in Midwest steel pin. found a product with a zinc anchor On May 17, 2017, Commerce issued 12 Id. at 13, citing OMG, Inc. v. United States, its Final Scope Ruling, in which it 4 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Court No. 17–00036, Slip Op. 18–63 (CIT 2018) at determined that Midwest Fastener’s Orders on Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist 10–11. zinc and nylon anchors are Republic of Vietnam: Final Scope Ruling on 13 See Remand Order, Slip Op. 18–132 at 14. Midwest Fastener Corp.’s Zinc and Nylon Anchors 14 Id. (Final Scope Ruling), dated May 17, 2017 at 11–13. 1 See Certain Steel Nails from the Republic of 15 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 5 Id. at 13. Korea, Malaysia, the Sultanate of Oman, Taiwan, to Court Remand, Midwest Fastener Corp. v. United 6 and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: See Message Number 7153303, dated June 2, States, Court No. 17–00131, Slip Op. 18–132 (CIT Antidumping Duty Orders, 80 FR 39994 (July 13, 2017; Message Number 7153302, dated June 2, October 1, 2018), dated December 21, 2018 (Final 2015); Certain Steel Nails from the Socialist 2017. Remand Results). 7 Republic of Vietnam: Countervailing Duty Order, 80 See Midwest Fastener Corp. v. United States, 16 See Midwest Fastener Corp. v. United States, FR 41006 (July 14, 2015) (collectively, the Orders). Court No. 17–00131, Slip Op. 18–132 (CIT 2018) Court No. 17–00131, Slip Op. 19–66 (CIT 2019). 2 See Midwest Fastener’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Steel (Remand Order). 17 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, Nails from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 8 See Remand Order, Slip Op. 18–132 at 14. 341 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). Midwest Fastener Scope Request,’’ dated November 9 Id. at 11. 18 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. 9, 2016. 10 Id. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) 3 Id. at 2, 3. 11 Id. at 12–13. (Diamond Sawblades).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28461
Fastener’s Scope Ruling Request. December 18, 2018, Commerce Memorandum is a public document and Commerce will instruct CBP that the postponed the final results of review by is on file electronically via Enforcement cash deposit rate will be zero percent for 58 days until May 3, 2019.2 Commerce and Compliance’s Antidumping and the zinc and nylon anchors subject to exercised its discretion to toll all Countervailing Duty Centralized Midwest Fastener’s scope ruling deadlines affected by the partial federal Electronic Service System (ACCESS). request. In the event that the CIT’s government closure from December 22, ACCESS is available to registered users ruling is not appealed, or if appealed, 2018 through the resumption of at https://access.trade.gov and is upheld by the CAFC, Commerce will operations on January 29, 2019.3 available to all parties in the Central instruct CBP to liquidate entries of Accordingly, the revised deadline for Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Midwest Fastener’s zinc and nylon these final results is June 12, 2019. Commerce building. In addition, a anchors without regard to antidumping On March 4, 2019, Nucor Corporation complete version of the Issues and and/or countervailing duties, and to lift (Nucor) submitted pre-verification Decision Memorandum can be accessed suspension of liquidation of such comments on the record of this directly on the internet at http:// entries. administrative review.4 Between March enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. 7, 2019 and March 12, 2019, we The signed and electronic versions of Notification to Interested Parties conducted verifications of the the Issues and Decision Memorandum This notice is issued and published in questionnaire responses submitted by are identical in content. accordance with section 516A(e)(1) of Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd. (Hyundai Steel) the Act. and POSCO. We released verification Changes Since the Preliminary Results reports on April 9, 2019.5 Dated: June 10, 2019. Based on the comments received from On April 19, 2019, Nucor, POSCO, the interested parties and information Jeffrey I. Kessler, and Hyundai Steel submitted timely received from Hyundai Steel after the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and case briefs.6 Each also submitted timely Preliminary Results, we made changes Compliance. rebuttal briefs on April 24, 2019.7 to the net subsidy rates calculated for [FR Doc. 2019–12992 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Commerce conducted this review in the mandatory respondents. For a BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P accordance with section 751 of the discussion of these issues, see the Issues Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). and Decision Memorandum. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Scope of the Order Companies Not Selected for Individual The merchandise covered by the order Review International Trade Administration is certain hot-rolled steel flat products. For the companies not selected for [C–580–884] For a complete description of the scope individual review, because the rates of the order, see attachment to the Issues calculated for Hyundai Steel and Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products and Decision Memorandum. POSCO were above de minimis and not From the Republic of Korea: Final Analysis of Comments Received based entirely on facts available, we Results of Countervailing Duty applied a subsidy rate based on a Administrative Review, 2016 All issues raised in interested parties’ case briefs are addressed in the Issues weighted-average of the subsidy rates AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, and Decision Memorandum. The issues calculated for Hyundai Steel and International Trade Administration, are identified in the Appendix to this POSCO using publicly ranged sales data Department of Commerce. notice. The Issues and Decision submitted by the respondents. This is consistent with the methodology that SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 83 FR 55517 (November 6, 2018) (Preliminary we would use in an investigation to (Commerce) determines that Hyundai establish the all-others rate, pursuant to Steel Co., Ltd. (Hyundai Steel) and Results), and accompanying Decision Memorandum (Preliminary Decision Memorandum). section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act. POSCO, producers and/or exporters of 2 See Memorandum, ‘‘Extension of Deadline for certain hot-rolled steel flat products Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Final Results of Administrative Review (hot-rolled steel) from the Republic of Review,’’ dated December 18, 2018. We determine that, for the period of Korea (Korea), received countervailable 3 See Memorandum to the Record from Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for August 12, 2016 through December 31, subsidies during the period of review Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 2016, the following total estimated net (POR), August 12, 2016 through performing the non-exclusive duties of the countervailable subsidy rates exist: December 31, 2016. Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and DATES: Applicable June 19, 2019. Compliance, ‘‘Deadlines Affected by the Partial Subsidy rate Shutdown of the Federal Government,’’ dated Company (percent ad FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this segment of valorem) Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD Operations, the proceeding have been extended by 40 days. 4 Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, See Nucor’s Letter, ‘‘Pre-Verification POSCO ...... 0.55 Comments,’’ dated March 4, 2019. Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd ...... 0.58 International Trade Administration, 5 See Memoranda, ‘‘Verification of the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Questionnaire Reponses of Hyundai Steel DCE Inc ...... 0.56 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, Company’’ (April 9, 2019) (Hyundai Steel VR); Dong Chuel America Inc ...... 0.56 DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2593. ‘‘Verification of Questionnaire Responses of Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd ...... 0.56 POSCO, POSCO Daewoo Corporation, POSCO Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd 0.56 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chemtech, and POSCO M-Tech’’ (April 9, 2019). Hyewon Sni Corporation 6 Background See Nucor’s Case Brief, ‘‘Case Brief,’’ dated (H.S.I.) ...... 0.56 April 19, 2019; see also POSCO’s Case Brief, Soon Hong Trading Co., Ltd 0.56 On November 6, 2018, Commerce ‘‘POSCO’s Letter,’’ dated April 19, 2019; Hyundai Sung-A Steel Co., Ltd ...... 0.56 Steel’s Case Brief, ‘‘Hyundai Steel Case Brief,’’ published the Preliminary Results of dated April 19, 2019. 1 this administrative review. On 7 See Nucor’s Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Rebuttal Brief,’’ Disclosure dated April 24, 2019; POSCO’s Rebuttal Brief, Commerce intends to disclose the 1 See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from ‘‘POSCO’s Letter,’’ dated April 24, 2019; Hyundai the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Steel’s Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Hyundai Steel Rebuttal calculations performed for these final Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2016, Brief,’’ dated April 24, 2019. results of review within five days of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28462 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
date of publication of this notice in the Dated: June 11, 2019. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Federal Register, in accordance with 19 Jeffrey I. Kessler, Commerce. CFR 351.224(b). Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental Compliance. harassment authorization. Assessment Rate Appendix SUMMARY: In accordance with the Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and regulations implementing the Marine Commerce intends to issue appropriate Decision Memorandum Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as instructions to U.S. Customs and Border I. Summary amended, notification is hereby given Protection (CBP) 15 days after II. Background that NMFS has issued an incidental publication of the final results of this III. Scope of the Order harassment authorization (IHA) to the review. We will instruct CBP to IV. Period of Review U.S. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass, liquidate shipments of subject V. Subsidies Valuation Information by Level B harassment only, marine merchandise produced and/or exported VI. Use of Facts Otherwise Available mammals during target and missile by the companies listed above, entered, VII. Analysis of Programs launch activities on San Nicolas Island or withdrawn from warehouse for VIII. Discussion of Comments Comment 1: Whether Commerce Should (SNI), California for the Naval Air consumption, from August 12, 2016 Apply Adverse Facts Available (AFA) for Warfare Center Weapons Division through December 31, 2016, at the ad POSCO and Hyundai Steel’s Failure to (NAWCWD), Point Mugu Sea Range valorem rates listed above. Retain AUL Records for Acquired (PMSR). The Navy’s activity is Companies considered a military readiness activity Cash Deposit Requirements Comment 2: Whether POSCO Energy is pursuant to MMPA, as amended by the POSCO’s Cross-Owned Input Supplier The following cash deposit National Defense Authorization Act Comment 3: Whether to Treat POSCO (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2004. requirements will be effective upon Chemtech’s Deferred Tax Liabilities publication of the notice of final results Under Restriction of Special Taxation DATES: This Authorization is effective of this administrative review for all Act (RSTA) Article 9 as an Interest-Free from June 12, 2019 through June 11, shipments of the subject merchandise Contingent Liability Loan 2020. entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, Comment 4: Which of POSCO’s Reported FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benchmark Loans to Use as Benchmarks Stephanie Egger, Office of Protected for consumption on or after the date of for POSCO’s KEXIM Loans publication, as provided by section Comment 5: Whether POSCO’s Equipment Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash Loans from the KDB are Covered by the Electronic copies of the application and deposit rate for the companies listed in Previously Countervailed Program supporting documents, as well as a list these final results will be equal to the ‘‘Korea Development Bank (KDB) and of the references cited in this document, subsidy rates established in the final Other Policy Banks’ Short-Term may be obtained online at: https:// results of this review; (2) for all non- Discounted Loans for Export www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ Receivables’’ reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to incidental-take-authorizations-under- Comment 6: Whether to Use the GOK marine-mammal-protection-act. In case continue to collect cash deposits at the Short-Term Bond Interest Rate or IMF of problems accessing these documents, most-recent company-specific or all- Statistic as a Short-Term Interest Rate please call the contact listed above. others rate applicable to the company, Benchmark for POSCO’s Short-Term SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: as appropriate. These cash deposit KDB Loans requirements, when imposed, shall Comment 7: Various Alleged Errors in the Background Preliminary Calculations for POSCO remain in effect until further notice. Comment 8: Whether Hyundai Green The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of Notification Regarding Administrative Power is Hyundai Steel’s Cross-Owned marine mammals, with certain Protective Order Input Supplier exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and Comment 9: Whether Commerce Should (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et This notice also serves as a reminder Countervail Benefits Received by SPP seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce Yulchon Energy (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon to parties subject to administrative Comment 10: Whether Suncheon Harbor protective order (APO) of their Usage Fee Exemptions Under the Harbor request, the incidental, but not responsibility concerning the Act are Countervailable intentional, taking of small numbers of disposition of proprietary information IX. Recommendation marine mammals by U.S. citizens who disclosed under APO in accordance [FR Doc. 2019–12991 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P continues to govern business geographical region if certain findings proprietary information in this segment are made and either regulations are of the proceeding. Timely written DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE issued or, if the taking is limited to notification of the return or destruction harassment, a notice of a proposed of APO materials, or conversion to National Oceanic and Atmospheric incidental take authorization may be provided to the public for review. judicial protective order is hereby Administration Authorization for incidental takings requested. Failure to comply with the RIN 0648–XG818 shall be granted if NMFS finds that the regulations and the terms of an APO is taking will have a negligible impact on a sanctionable violation. Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental To Specified Activities; Taking Marine the species or stock(s) and will not have Notification to Interested Parties Mammals Incidental to U.S. Navy an unmitigable adverse impact on the Target and Missile Launch Activities availability of the species or stock(s) for These final results are issued and on San Nicolas Island, California taking for subsistence uses (where published in accordance with sections relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries the permissible methods of taking and CFR 351.221(b)(5). Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and other ‘‘means of effecting the least
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28463
practicable adverse impact’’ on the several fixed and mobile launchers, at Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 affected species or stocks and their the western end of SNI at approximately FR 18809; May 2, 2019). habitat, paying particular attention to 11 m above sea level. The Point Mugu Comments and Responses rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of airfield on the mainland, the airfield on similar significance, and on the SNI, and the target sites in the PMSR A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue availability of such species or stocks for will be a routine part of launch an IHA to the Navy was published in taking for certain subsistence uses operations. the Federal Register on May 2, 2019 (84 (referred to in shorthand as Many of the beaches and rocky FR 18809). That notice described, in ‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements outcroppings around the perimeter of detail, the Navy’s activity, the marine pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring SNI are pinniped resting, molting, or mammal species that may be affected by and reporting of such takings are set breeding sites. The Alpha Launch the activity, and the anticipated effects forth. Complex is approximately 2 km from on marine mammals. During the 30-day The NDAA for FY 2004 (Pub. L. 108– the nearest beach where pinnipeds are public comment period, NMFS received 136) removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and known to routinely haul out. The comments from the Marine Mammal ‘‘specified geographical region’’ Building 807 Launch Complex is 30 m Commission (Commission). For full limitations indicated above and from the nearest pinniped haulout. details of the Commission’s comments, amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’ Missiles vary from tactical and please see their letter, which is available as it applies to a ‘‘military readiness developmental weapons to target online at: https:// activity.’’ The activity for which missiles used to test defensive strategies www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ incidental take of marine mammals is and other weapons systems. Some marine-mammal-protection/incidental- being requested addressed here qualifies launch events involve a single missile, take-authorizations-construction- as a military readiness activity. The while others involve the launch of activities. Summaries of the definitions of all applicable MMPA multiple missiles in quick succession. Commission’s comments, and our statutory terms cited above are included The Navy could conduct up to 40 responses, are provided below. missile launch events from SNI, but the in the relevant sections below. In-Air Thresholds total may be less than 40 depending on Summary of Request operational requirements. Launch Comment: The Commission On December 13, 2018, NMFS timing will be determined by comments on many aspects of this IHA received a request from the Navy for an operational, meteorological, and related to in-air thresholds. The IHA to take marine mammals incidental logistical factors. Up to 10 of the 40 Commission claimed that the thresholds to target and missile launch activities on launches may occur at night, but this is for TTS/PTS stipulated in the Navy’s SNI. The application was deemed also dependent on operational Criteria and Thresholds for U.S. Navy adequate and complete on April 10, requirements and only conducted when Acoustic and Explosive Effects Analysis 2019. The Navy’s requested take of required by test objectives. Airborne (Phase III) Technical Report (U.S. California sea lions (Zalophus sound from these launch events may Department of the Navy, 2017) were californianus), harbor seals (Phoca result in take of pinnipeds that are incorrect and that revised thresholds vitulina), and northern elephant seals hauled out on SNI, by Level B presented in Southall et al., 2019 should (Mirounga angustirostris) by Level B harassment only. All flights over SNI be used. The Commission comments harassment only. Neither the Navy nor would be subsonic; therefore, there that the historical behavioral thresholds NMFS expects serious injury or would be no sonic booms that could of 90 dB SPL for harbor seals/100 dB mortality to result from this activity affect pinnipeds hauled out at sites on SPL for all other pinnipeds are what and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. SNI. should be used for this IHA rather than NMFS has previously issued Missiles are rocket-propelled weapons the proposed 100 dB SEL value for all incidental take authorizations to the designed to deliver an explosive pinnipeds. Navy for similar launch activities since warhead with accuracy at high speed. Response: Upon review of the 2001 with the current authorization in Missiles vary from small tactical Commission’s comments and the two effect until June 3, 2019 (79 FR 32678; weapons that are effective out to only a sets of thresholds, as well as additional June 6, 2014 and 79 FR 32919; June 9, few hundred feet to much larger communication with the authors of 2014). strategic weapons that have ranges of Southall et al., 2019, we have several thousand miles. Almost all determined that the Navy’s thresholds Description of the Specified Activity missiles contain some form of guidance in the Criteria and Thresholds for U.S. The Navy plans to continue a target and control mechanism and are Navy Acoustic and Explosive Effects and missile launch program from two therefore often referred to as guided Analysis (Phase III) Technical Report launch sites on SNI for testing and missiles. Guided missiles have four (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2017) for training activities associated with system components: Targeting or TTS/PTS are correct and, in fact, errors operations on the NAWCWD PMSR. SNI missile guidance, flight system, engine, have been found in Southall et al., 2019. is one of the eight Channel Islands in and warhead. A guided missile powered (The authors plan to address these the Southern California Bight, located along a low, level flight path by an air- errors in the publication). In addition, about 105 kilometers (km) southwest of breathing jet engine is called a cruise the issues the Commission points out Point Mugu. The missiles are launched missile. An unguided military missile, regarding in-air behavioral thresholds from one of several fixed locations on as well as any launch vehicle, is usually are not applicable, as the estimated the western end of SNI. Missiles referred to as a rocket. Tactical guided takes are based on the last three years launched from SNI fly generally west, missiles are generally categorized of pinniped observation from Navy’s southwest, and northwest through the according to the location of the launch monitoring reports and not directly PMSR. The primary launch locations are platform and target and include: Air-to- based on specific in-air thresholds. The the Alpha Launch Complex, located 190 air, air-to-surface, surface-to-air, anti- beaches that the Navy surveys are meters (m) above sea level on the west- ship, and anti-tank (or assault). largely based on where sound received central part of SNI and the Building 807 Further details of the Navy’s launch is expected to reach 100 dB SEL or Launch Complex, which accommodates activities are provided in the Federal greater and where animals are reacting
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28464 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
to launch noises. In the case of harbor disruption of natural behavioral monitoring results in its calculations, seals, the Navy is already monitoring patterns, including, but not limited to, then we would have also considered beaches where sound levels are less migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, these animals as taken even though they than 100 dB SEL and often under 90 dB feeding, or sheltering, to a point where were not in the view of the camera. SPL (site O—Phoca Reef and Pirates such behavioral patterns are abandoned NMFS did not use this year in its take Cove). The Navy is monitoring at site O or significantly altered (Level B calculations because harbor seals have because oftentimes the harbor seals are harassment). The Navy has developed a not been observed in this area during not hauled out on the western end of slightly different version of the criteria launch events over the last three years. SNI on the typically monitored beaches for determining when behavioral Comment: The Commission during launch events. The Navy is response of a hauled pinniped rises to commented that NMFS did not cognizant of the fact that some harbor the level of harassment, as is authorize enough take for pinnipeds seals are reacting to sound levels lower appropriate for use with the definition based on a variety of factors including than 90 dB SPL. Accordingly, the Navy of Level B harassment associated with the following: (1) The Commission is monitoring those pinnipeds and military readiness activities. NMFS has assumes a 100-percent response rate (for requesting additional take by Level B determined that this version, which has harbor seals); (2) the Commission states harassment to account for this potential been used in prior incidental take that additional animals outside the (see Estimated Take section). authorizations associated with launch regularly monitored areas should be In addition, the Navy has previously activities on SNI (79 FR 32678; June 6, assumed to be taken (harbor seals); and surveyed other parts of SNI to determine 2014), is appropriate for evaluating (3) the Commission’s recommendation if pinnipeds are reacting in response to Level B harassment in association with to use NMFS’s non-military readiness launch events. The Navy conducted this specified activity. NMFS may re- pinniped disturbance criteria rather surveys of the eastern end of SNI and evaluate these criteria with the Navy for than the military readiness disturbance did not find pinnipeds reacting to any subsequent applications we receive criteria developed by the Navy. The launch events. The Navy has also from for these activities. Commission recommends that NMFS conducted surveys on adjacent beaches Comment: The Commission authorize additional Level B harassment to those that are typically monitored comments that previous Navy takes for all species. and did not find pinnipeds that reacted monitoring reports from 2014–17 have Response: For harbor seals, NMFS to launch events (e.g., Coast Guard indicated that for all but one launch 100 believes the amount of Level B Beach in the Navy’s 2015 monitoring percent of the hauled out harbor seals harassment takes suggested as report). within the view of the monitoring appropriate by the Commission would In summary, upon review of new camera responded to the launch and, be an overestimate based on previous information suggested by the because of this, NMFS’s presumption observations during Navy’s launch Commission, the TTS/PTS thresholds that only 2.39 harbor seals are taken per events. Before the launch events, the originally proposed for use remain the launch is an underestimate. Navy monitors several sites around the best available scientific information. We Response: In general, in recent years, western end of SNI to determine where also believe that the behavioral few harbor seals have been observed pinnipeds are hauled out and what threshold proposed for use in this during launch events. NMFS’ take species are on the beaches. During this context is appropriate; however, the estimate of 3 (rounded from 2.39) harbor pre-launch monitoring, harbor seals are specific threshold discussed is of less seals per launch is an average of animals frequently not present. That said, NMFS importance here because the actual taken during the 2015–2017 monitoring understands the Commission’s amount of authorized takes by Level B seasons. The average was calculated concerns, but taking a peak count in harassment are based on actual field from the Navy’s total of taken harbor July and applying it over the entire year monitoring conducted by the Navy of seals during each launch. Using for every launch is not reasonable. To the pinniped haulout areas that could observations to determine a take account for the possibility of some potentially be affected by noise form estimate, especially in cases where so harbor seals hauling out and then launch events. few numbers of harbor seals were reacting to a launch in a way equivalent present, is an appropriate use of to a take, NMFS has adjusted the take Level B Harassment Takes available data. This average take estimate from 120 to 480 harbor seals. Comment: The Commission estimate per launch is not the Instead of taking an average per launch, recommends that NMFS use its standard authorized value for a single launch the revised take estimate is developed tiered scale for determining when event. The number of authorized launch by taking the total number of takes (12) disturbance of hauled pinnipeds equates events (40) is multiplied by 3 harbor and multiplying that by 40 launch to Level B harassment for all activities, seals (2.39 harbor seals conservatively events for a total of 480 instances of take i.e., based on animals moving at least rounded up) to obtain a take estimate of by Level B harassment for harbor seals. two body lengths rather than animals 120 instances of take for harbor seals by NMFS believes that the number of moving at least 10 m, as was proposed Level B harassment which can be authorized take is adequate and for the Navy’s launch activities at SNI. distributed in varying ways across the sufficient for California sea lions and Response: The Navy’s activities are total number of launch events. elephant seals. These are based on considered military readiness activities, There have been cases where the animals taken by Level B harassment for which a different definition of Level Navy observed harbor seals outside of per the Navy’s monitoring reports from B harassment is applied. For military the field of view in the camera and 2015–2017. readiness activities, the MMPA defines assumed they were taken by the launch. ‘‘harassment’’ as: (i) Any act that injures In the 2014 monitoring report, the Navy Mitigation and Monitoring Measures or has the significant potential to injure considered all 40 harbor seals observed Comment: The Commission a marine mammal or marine mammal as taken during a launch event even commented on a mitigation measure stock in the wild (Level A harassment); though they were not in the view of the that was in the Navy’s application, but or (ii) Any act that disturbs or is likely camera during the launch, but observed not included in the proposed IHA. The to disturb a marine mammal or marine during the visual count before the mitigation measure required that the mammal stock in the wild by causing launch. Had NMFS used these 2014 Navy avoid launching multiple missiles
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28465
in quick succession over haulout sites, for Public Comments section of the Response: NMFS thanks the especially when young pups are initial proposed IHA and thus Commission for its concerns regarding present. The Commission recommends encourages submission of comments on the IHA process. NMFS had sufficient that NMFS require the Navy to avoid the potential of a 1-year renewal as well time and we thoroughly reviewed the launching multiple missiles in quick as the initial IHA during the 30-day comments received. We made all succession over haulout sites, especially comment period. In addition, when we appropriate revisions to the final IHA. when young pups are present as this receive an application for a Renewal Description of Marine Mammals in the mitigation measure was previously IHA, we publish a notice of the Area of Specified Activities required in prior incidental take proposed IHA Renewal in the Federal authorizations for this activity. Register and provide an additional 15 Sections 3 and 4 of the Navy’s Response: Before the proposed IHA days for public comment, for a total of application summarize available was published, the Navy indicated that 45 days of public comment. We will information regarding status and trends, it could not fulfill the mitigation also directly contact all commenters on distribution and habitat preferences, measure and had mistakenly included the initial IHA by email, phone, or, if and behavior and life history, of the the measure its application. The Navy the commenter did not provide email or potentially affected species. Additional indicated that it is already limiting or phone information, by postal service to information regarding population trends avoiding launches during much of the provide them the opportunity to submit and threats may be found in NMFS’s year during the pupping season for any additional comments on the Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; pinnipeds and could not be limited proposed Renewal IHA. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ further due to practicability and mission NMFS also strives to ensure the national/marine-mammal-protection/ objectives. Therefore, the mitigation public has access to key information marine-mammal-stock-assessments) measure was not included in the needed to submit comments on a and more general information about proposed IHA. proposed IHA, whether an initial IHA or these species (e.g., physical and Comment: The Commission a Renewal IHA. The agency’s website behavioral descriptions) may be found commented that NMFS (1) enlist its includes information for all projects on NMFS’ website (https:// technical experts to review the proposed under consideration, including the www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species). acoustic monitoring plan, including the application, references, and other Table 1 below lists all species with relevant metrics and thresholds to supporting documents. Each Federal expected potential for occurrence in the report, (2) require the Navy to revise the Register notice also includes contact project area and summarizes plan as necessary based on that review, information in the event a commenter information related to the population or and (3) require the Navy, in the final has questions or cannot find the stock, including regulatory status under authorization, to collect and report its information they seek. the MMPA and ESA and potential acoustic measurements consistent with biological removal (PBR), where known. any revisions. Regarding the Commission’s comment Response: NMFS reviewed the that Renewal IHAs should be limited to For taxonomy, we follow Committee on acoustic monitoring plan and clarified a certain types of projects, NMFS has Taxonomy (2018). PBR is defined by the few items in the Navy’s application. In explained on its website and in MMPA as the maximum number of the final IHA, the Navy is required to individual Federal Register notices that animals, not including natural conduct acoustic monitoring according Renewal IHAs are appropriate where the mortalities, that may be removed from a to this slightly modified. continuing activities are identical, marine mammal stock while allowing nearly identical, or a subset of the that stock to reach or maintain its NMFS IHA Renewal Process activities for which the initial 30-day optimum sustainable population (as Comment: The Commission comment period applied. Where the described in NMFS’ SARs). While no questioned whether the public notice commenter has likely already reviewed mortality is anticipated or authorized provisions for IHA Renewals fully and commented on the initial proposed here, PBR and annual serious injury and satisfy the public notice and comment IHA for these activities, the abbreviated mortality from anthropogenic sources provision in the MMPA and discussed additional comment period is sufficient are included here as gross indicators of the potential burden on reviewers of for consideration of the results of the the status of the species and other reviewing key documents and preliminary monitoring report and new threats. developing comments quickly. information (if any) from the past year. Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent Additionally, the Commission Adequate Opportunity To Consider the total number of individuals that recommended that NMFS use the IHA Public Comments Renewal process sparingly and make up a given stock or the total selectively for activities expected to Comment: The Commission claims number estimated within a particular have the lowest levels of impacts to that NMFS did not have sufficient time study or survey area. NMFS’ stock marine mammals and that require less to review public comments or to revise abundance estimates for most species complex analysis. the proposed IHA accordingly. The represent the total estimate of Response: NMFS has taken a number Commission recommended that NMFS individuals within the geographic area, of steps to ensure the public has (1) delay issuance of the Final IHA until if known, that comprises that stock. For adequate notice, time, and information it has thoroughly reviewed and assessed some species, this geographic area may to be able to comment effectively on the Commission’s recommendations and extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed IHA Renewals within the limitations of any comments from the public and stocks in this region are assessed in processing IHA applications efficiently. revised the authorization accordingly NMFS’ U.S. Pacific and Alaska SARs The Federal Register notice for the and (2) take all steps necessary in the (Carretta et al., 2018). All values initial proposed IHA (84 FR 18809; May future to ensure that it publishes and presented in Table 1 are the most recent 2, 2019) previously identified the finalizes IHAs far enough in advance of available at the time of publication conditions under which a one-year the planned start date of the proposed (draft SARs available online at: https:// Renewal IHA might be appropriate. This activities to ensure full consideration is www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ information is presented in the Request given to comments received. marine-mammal-protection/draft-
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28466 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
marine-mammal-stock-assessment- through review of NMFS SARs, species- occur or there is casual occurrence reports). specific literature research, and SNI history, and ‘‘likely’’ means there is a Marine mammal species likelihood of monitoring reports (Table 1). ‘‘Unlikely’’ strong possibility of or regular occurrence (designated as ‘‘unlikely,’’ means occurrence is not expected, occurrence in the project area. ‘‘potential’’ or ‘‘likely’’) was determined ‘‘potential’’ means the species may TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMALS OCCURRENCE IN THE PROJECT AREA
ESA/ MMPA Stock abundance (CV, Nmin, Annual Common name Scientific name Stock status; most recent abundance PBR Occurrence M/SI 3 strategic survey) 2 (Y/N) 1
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions): California sea lion ...... Zalophus californianus ...... U.S...... -, -, N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 2014) 14, 011 ≥319 Likely. Northern Fur Seal ...... Callorhinus ursinus ...... CA ...... -, D, N 14,050 (N/A, 7,524, 2013) ...... 451 1.8 Potential. Steller Sea Lion ...... Eumetopias jubatus ...... Eastern ...... T, D, Y 41,638 (see SAR, 41,638, 2,498 108 Unlikely. 2015). Guadalupe Fur Seal ...... Arctocephalus philippii Mexico ...... T, D, Y 20,000 (N/A, 15,830, 2010) ..... 542 ≥3.2 Potential. townsendi. Family Phocidae (earless seals): Harbor Seal ...... Phoca vitulina ...... CA ...... -, -, N 30,968 (N/A, 27,348, 2012) ..... 1,641 43 Likely. Northern Elephant Seal ..... Mirounga angustirostris ...... CA Breeding -, -, N 179,000 (N/A, 81,368, 2010) ... 4,882 8.8 Likely. 1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assess- ment-reports. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. 3 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fish- eries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. Note: Italicized species are not expected to be taken or are authorized.
A detailed description of the species website (https:// been born to monitor population trends likely to be affected by the Navy’s www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for and abundance of the U.S. population project, including brief introductions to generalized species accounts. and to collect summer residence count- the species and relevant stocks as well Distribution of California sea lions, data for northern elephant seals and as available information regarding harbor seals, and harbor seals on SNI, as harbor seals (Lowry et al., 20187b). The population trends and threats, and well as on the other Channel Islands, perimeter of SNI was divided into small information regarding local occurrence, was conducted during the NMFS’ area-coded units to describe intra-island were provided in the Federal Register Southwest Fisheries Science Center distribution of pinnipeds as shown in notice for the proposed IHA (84 FR (SWFSC) July 2011–2015 survey. In Figure 1 below. We include Figure 1 18809; May 2, 2019); since that time, we 1987, the SWFSC began using aerial here as a reference when describing are not aware of any changes in the photography at the Channel Islands to some of the census data by Lowry et al. status of these species and stocks; census pinnipeds. Years later, the (2017b) in the Estimated Take section, therefore, detailed descriptions are not survey expanded to include all the to describe what areas may be impacted provided here. Please refer to that Channel Islands in aerial surveys). July by launch events and where the Navy is Federal Register notice for these surveys are intended to census monitoring pinnipeds. descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS’ California sea lions after all pups have BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28467
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C any temporary or permanent effects on Estimated Take Potential Effects of Specified Activities the habitats used by the marine This section provides an estimate of on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat mammals on SNI, including the food the number of incidental takes for Acoustic effects on marine mammals sources they use (i.e., fish and authorization through this IHA, which during the specified activity can occur invertebrates). While it is anticipated will inform NMFS’ negligible impact from target and missile launch that the activity may result in marine determination. activities. The effects of airborne noise mammals avoiding certain areas due to Harassment is the only type of take from the Navy’s planned activities have temporary ensonification, this impact to expected to result from these activities. the potential to result in Level B habitat is temporary and reversible and For this military readiness activity, the harassment of pinnipeds hauled out on was considered in further detail earlier MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as (i) Any SNI, which could cause a disruption of in this document, as behavioral act that injures or has the significant natural behavioral patterns such as modification. The main impact potential to injure a marine mammal or flushing into the water. The Federal associated with the activity will be marine mammal stock in the wild (Level Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 temporarily elevated noise levels and A harassment); or (ii) Any act that FR 18809; May 2, 2019) included a the associated direct effects on marine disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine discussion of the effects of mammals. Overall, the launch activities mammal or marine mammal stock in the anthropogenic noise on marine are not expected to cause significant wild by causing disruption of natural mammals; therefore, that information is impacts or have permanent, adverse behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, not repeated here. effects on pinniped habitats or on their Impacts on marine mammal habitat breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a foraging habitats and prey. These are part of the consideration in making point where such behavioral patterns potential effects are discussed in detail a finding of negligible impact on the are abandoned or significantly altered species and stocks of marine mammals. in the Federal Register notice for the (Level B harassment). Habitat includes, but is not necessarily proposed IHA (84 FR 18809; May 2, Authorized takes would be by Level B limited to, rookeries, mating grounds, 2019), therefore that information is not harassment only, in the form of feeding areas, and areas of similar repeated here. disruption of behavioral patterns (and/ significance. We do not anticipate that or TTS, although only some missile the planned operations would result in launches have exceeded the level at
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES EN19JN19.005 28468 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
which TTS onset might occur, monitoring results or average group harassed, and other pinnipeds will be particularly for phocids) for individual size). Below, we describe the factors harassed when exposed above 100 dB re marine mammals resulting from considered here in more detail and 20 mPa (rms). However, more recent data exposure to airborne sounds from rocket present the authorized take estimate. suggest that pinnipeds will be harassed and missile launch. Based on the nature Acoustic Thresholds when exposure is above 100 dB SEL of the activity, Level A harassment is (unweighted) (Criteria and Thresholds Though significantly driven by neither anticipated nor authorized. for U.S. Navy Acoustic and Explosive received level, the onset of behavioral As described previously, no mortality Effects Analysis (Phase III) Technical is anticipated or authorized for this disturbance from anthropogenic noise Report (U.S. Department of the Navy, activity. Below we describe how the exposure is also informed to varying 2017). NMFS previously helped develop take is estimated. degrees by other factors related to the Generally speaking, we estimate take source (e.g., frequency, predictability, the Phase III criteria and has determined by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds duty cycle), the environment (e.g., that the criteria and thresholds shown above which NMFS believes the best bathymetry), and the receiving animals in Table 2 are appropriate to determine available science indicates marine (hearing, motivation, experience, when Level B harassment by behavioral mammals will be behaviorally harassed demography, behavioral context) and disturbance may occur as a result of or incur some degree of permanent can be difficult to predict (Southall et exposure to airborne sound on SNI. This hearing impairment; (2) the area that al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on behavioral disturbance criterion was will be ensonified above these levels in what the available science indicates and used to determine the areas that the a day; (3) the density or occurrence of the practical need to use a threshold Navy should monitor based on the marine mammals within these based on a factor that is both predictable sound levels recorded at the pinniped ensonified areas; and, (4) and the and measurable for most activities, haulouts during launch events. This number of days of activities. We note NMFS uses a generalized acoustic criterion is not being used to directly that while these basic factors can threshold based on received level to estimate the take, rather to assume areas contribute to a basic calculation to estimate the onset of behavioral within which pinnipeds hauled out on provide an initial prediction of takes, harassment. Generally, for in-air sounds, particular beaches may be harassed additional information that can NMFS predicts that harbor seals (based on the previous acoustic qualitatively inform take estimates is exposed above received levels of 90 dB monitoring). also sometimes available (e.g., previous re 20 mPa (rms) will be behaviorally
TABLE 2—BEHAVIORAL THRESHOLD FOR IMPULSIVE SOUND FOR PINNIPEDS
Species Level B harassment by behavior disturbance threshold
All pinniped species (in-air) ...... 100 dB re 20 μPa2s SEL (unweighted).
Thresholds have also been developed anticipated to occur) for pinnipeds and The TTS/PTS threshold for pinnipeds identifying the received level of in-air discussed previously in this document (in-air) are repeated here (see Table 3 sound for the onset of TTS (no PTS is (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2017). below).
TABLE 3—TTS/PTS THRESHOLDS FOR PINNIPEDS [In-air]
Non-impulsive Impulsive Group TTS threshold PTS threshold TTS threshold TTS threshold PTS threshold PTS threshold SEL a SEL a SEL a Peak SPL b SEL b Peak SPL b (weighted) (weighted) (weighted) (unweighted) (weighted) (unweighted)
OA c ...... 157 177 146 170 161 176 PA d ...... 134 154 123 155 138 161 a SEL thresholds are in dB re(20μPa) 2·s. b SPL thresholds in dB 20μPa in air. c OA-Otariid in air (California sea lion). d PA-Phocid in air (harbor seal, northern elephant seal).
Ensonified Area below). The range of sound levels during Coyote launches (most recorded on SNI during Coyote launches frequently launched missile on SNI). In-air sound propagation from missile m For additional information on sound launch sources at SNI had not been well were 128 dB re 20 Pa2·s SEL– (115 dB studied prior to monitoring work during SEL–A, 123 dB SEL–Mpa) closest to the levels please refer to the application. 2001–2007. During the 2001–2017 launcher and ranged from 87 to 119 dB Coyotes are launched from the inland period, the strongest sounds originating re 20 mPa2·s SEL-f (46 to 107 dB SEL– Alpha Launch Complex so there would from a missile in flight over the beaches A, 60 to 114 dB SEL-Mpa weighted) at be no pinnipeds near the launcher. The at SNI were produced by Vandal (no nearshore locations. These values pinnipeds closest to the Coyote longer launched from SNI) and Coyote demonstrate that the sound levels are launches are on the beaches (areas L and launches, with the exception of one high enough to cause disturbance based M) directly below the flight trajectory, SM–2 launched in 2015 (see Table 6–3 on the behavioral thresholds (Table 2), for which the CPA distance is about 0.9 of the application, but also Table 4 but below the TTS thresholds (Table 3) km. Stronger sounds were also recorded
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28469
at the launcher, but sound levels were and not as frequently in areas K, L, and were found on SNI (20.5 percent of dependent on the size of the missile M. Refer to Figure 1 for a map of these total). Northern elephant seals were not launched. Launches of smaller missiles areas. uniformly distributed around the typically occur from the Building 807 perimeter of SNI. Area K at SNI had the California Sea Lions Complex near the beach where the most elephant seals on island (Lowry et closest pinniped haulouts (area L and During the July 2011–2015 census, al., 2017b). From the 2015–2017 portions of K) are located about 0.3 km California sea lion counts on SNI monitoring seasons, a total of 11 from the CPA. Harbor seal haulouts averaged 52,634.8 individuals per year instances of take of elephant seals by (areas L and J) are located at least 1 km (SD = 9,899.0) (Lowry et al., 2017b). Level B harassment occurred (0 in 2017, from the CPA from the Building 807 Between 2001 and 2017, a maximum of 1 in 2016, 10 in 2015) of the 100 Complex. It is important to note that in 2,807 instances of take of California sea animals that were observed. Overall, recent years, harbor seals are not always lions by Level B harassment were from the 2015–2017 monitoring seasons, present when Navy conducts their estimated to have been potentially 11 instances of take of northern monitoring during launch events, and harassed in a single monitoring year elephant seals by Level B harassment there have not been many places to incidental to missile launches at SNI occurred over 18 launch events for an observe harbor seals during the (Burke 2017; Holst et al. 2010; Holst et average of 0.61 per launch event. launches. There is not a constant al. 2008; Holst et al. 2011; Ugoretz 2016; Take Calculation and Estimation occupation of harbor seals on haulouts Ugoretz and Greene Jr. 2012). From the and occupation is dependent on tides. 2015–2017 monitoring seasons, there The NDAA (Pub. L. 103–136) Harbor seals tend to be more sensitive was a total of 4,940 instances of take of removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and to visual cues as well and do not prefer California sea lions by Level B ‘‘specified geographical region’’ beaches with California sea lions. Most harassment (702 sea lions in 2017, 1431 limitations indicated above and of the beaches where harbor seals are sea lions in 2016, and 2,807 sea lions in amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’ hauled out, and which Navy has been 2015) over 18 launches. Of these results, as it applies to a ‘‘military readiness able to monitor, occur in area O which an average of 274.44 instances of take of activity’’ to read as follows (section is north of both the Alpha Launch sea lions by Level B harassment per 3(18)(B) of the MMPA): (i) Any act that Complex and Building 307 Complex launch occurred. injures or has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine and not in the trajectory of launches that Harbor Seals occur from these sites. mammal stock in the wild (Level A The Navy will continue to conduct During the July 2011–2015 census, in Harassment); or (ii) Any act that marine mammal and acoustic July 2015 when all the Channel Islands disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine measurements during every launch were surveyed for harbor seals, 259 mammal or marine mammal stock in the event at three pinniped sites per launch seals were counted at SNI (18.9 percent) wild by causing disruption of natural event within areas K, L, M or O. As an (Lowry et al., 2017b). Harbor seals are behavioral patterns, including, but not example in 2017, the Navy conducted not uniformly distributed around the limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, acoustic and marine mammal perimeter of SNI. During the July 2011– breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a monitoring during their launch events at 2015 census most harbor seals were point where such behavioral patterns beaches with hauled out pinnipeds (see mostly found in areas L, N, and Q on are abandoned or significantly altered Navy’s Table 2.2 from the 2017 SNI (see Figure 1 for a map of these (Level B Harassment). monitoring report) in areas M and L areas). However, in recent years, the It is difficult to derive unequivocal (beaches of Dos Cove and Redeye Beach) Navy has indicated that harbor seals are criteria to identify situations in which and in area O (beaches of Pirates Cove mostly found and monitored in area O, launch sounds are expected to cause and Phoca Reef). just north of the launch azimuths on the significant disturbance responses to northern side of the island so that is pinnipeds hauled out on SNI. One or Marine Mammal Occurrence where they conduct their acoustic and more pinnipeds blinking its eyes, lifting In this section we provide the marine mammal monitoring for harbor or turning its head, or moving a few feet information about the presence, density, seals. Between 2001 and 2017, a along the beach as a result of a human or group dynamics of marine mammals maximum of 31 instances of take of activity is not considered a ‘‘take’’ under that will inform the take calculations. harbor seals by Level B harassment were the MMPA definition of harassment. Some pinnipeds that haul out on the estimated in a single monitoring year Therefore, the criteria used by the Navy western end of SNI are expected to be incidental to missile launches at SNI to determine if an animal is affected by within the area where noise from (Burke 2017; Holst et al. 2010; Holst et a launch event and is taken by Level B launches exceeds 100 dB SEL. However, al. 2008; Holst et al. 2011; Ugoretz 2016; harassment is as follows: it is likely that far fewer pinnipeds Ugoretz and Greene Jr. 2012). From the 1. Pinnipeds that are exposed to occur within the area where sounds 2015–2017 monitoring seasons, a total launch sounds strong enough to cause from smaller launch missiles, such as of 43 instances of take of harbor seals (8 TTS; or the BQM missiles, reach above 100 dB in 2017, 4 in 2016, and 31 in 2015) by 2. Pinnipeds that leave the haulout SEL and none of the recorded SELs Level B harassment occurred over 18 site, or exhibit prolonged movement appear to be sufficiently strong to total launches. Of these results, an (>10 m) or prolonged behavioral induce TTS. Previous monitoring during average of 2.39 instances of take of changes (such as pups separated from 2001–2017 showed that SELs above 100 harbor seals by Level B harassment per mothers) relative to their behavior dB re 20 mPa2·s were measured in launch occurred. These harbor seals immediately prior to the launch. pinniped areas K, L, and M (Cormorant were mostly observed in area O (Phoca Here we describe how the information Rock to Red Eye Beach); therefore, these Reef and Pirates Cove). provided above is brought together to are the areas that the Navy focuses their produce a quantitative take estimate. marine mammal monitoring on. In more Northern Elephant Seals Previously, take estimates were recent years, Navy started monitoring During the July 2011–2015 census, in calculated based on areas ensonified area O (Phoca Reef and Pirates Cove) as 2015, when all islands were surveyed above the behavioral disturbance harbor seals are hauling out here now for elephant seals, 932 elephant seals criterion and the estimated numbers of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28470 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
pinnipeds exposed to at or above that the Navy has not conducted more than take of northern elephant seals by Level level. However, for this IHA we rely on 25 launch events (although authorized B harassment occurred per launch the past three seasons of monitoring of for more) in a given year since 2001. event. Therefore, one northern elephant pinnipeds to determine the take For harbor seals, this take estimate is seal was then multiplied by 40 launch estimate. a change from the proposed IHA (84 FR events for a conservative take estimate 18809; May 2, 2019). The take estimate of 40 instances of take of northern For California sea lions, take estimates was revised from 120 to 480 harbor seal were derived from three monitoring elephant seals by Level B harassment instances of take by Level B harassment. (Table 4). Generally, northern elephant seasons (2015 to 2017) where an average A total of 12 takes were derived from seals do not react to launch events other of 274.44 instances of take of sea lions the 2016 and 2017 monitoring seasons than simple alerting responses such as by Level B harassment occurred per and multiplied by 40 launch events for launch event. Therefore, 275 sea lions a total of 480 instances of take by Level raising their heads or temporarily going was then multiplied by 40 launch B harassment (Table 4). from sleeping to being awake; however, events, for a conservative take estimate For northern elephant seals, take to account for the rare instances where of 11,000 instances of take for California estimates were derived from three they have reacted, the Navy considered sea lions by Level B harassment (Table monitoring seasons (2015 to 2017) that some northern elephant seals that 4). This estimate is conservative because where an average of 0.61 instances of could be taken during launch events.
TABLE 4—AUTHORIZED LEVEL B HARASSMENT TAKE ESTIMATES FOR PINNIPEDS ON SNI
Authorized Species Level B Stock abundance harassment (percent taken by Level B harassment)
California sea lion ...... 11,000 257,606 (4.27 percent). Harbor seal ...... 480 30,968 (less than 2 percent). Northern elephant seal ...... 40 179,000 (less than 1 percent).
Mitigation (1) The manner in which, and the Launches will be limited during the In order to issue an IHA under degree to which, the successful pupping season for northern elephant Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, implementation of the measure(s) is seal (January through February) and NMFS must set forth the permissible expected to reduce impacts to marine California sea lion (June through July) methods of taking pursuant to such mammals, marine mammal species or unless constrained by mission activity, and other means of effecting stocks, and their habitat. This considers objectives or certain other factors. It is the nature of the potential adverse vital that the Navy effectively executes the least practicable impact on such impact being mitigated (likelihood, readiness activities to ensure naval species or stock and its habitat, paying scope, range). It further considers the forces can effectively execute military particular attention to rookeries, mating likelihood that the measure will be operations. The ability to schedule and grounds, and areas of similar effective if implemented (probability of locate training and testing without significance, and on the availability of accomplishing the mitigating result if excessively burdensome restrictions such species or stock for taking for implemented as planned), the within the Study Area is crucial to certain subsistence uses (latter not likelihood of effective implementation ensure those activities are practical, applicable for this action). NMFS (probability implemented as planned), effective, and safe to execute. To meet regulations require applicants for and; its military readiness requirements incidental take authorizations to include (2) the practicability of the measures (mission objectives), the Navy requires information about the availability and for applicant implementation, which consistent access to a variety of realistic, feasibility (economic and technological) may consider such things as cost, tactically-relevant oceanographic and of equipment, methods, and manner of impact on operations, and, in the case environmental conditions (e.g., conducting such activity or other means of a military readiness activity, bathymetry, topography, surface fronts, of effecting the least practicable adverse personnel safety, practicality of and variations in sea surface impact upon the affected species or implementation, and impact on the temperature), and sea space and stocks and their habitat (50 CFR effectiveness of the military readiness airspace that is large enough or situated 216.104(a)(11)). The NDAA for FY 2004 activity. in a way that allows activities to be (Pub. L. 108–136) amended the MMPA completed without physical or logistical Personnel Mitigation as it relates to military readiness obstructions, in order to achieve the activities and the incidental take Personnel will not enter pinniped highest skill proficiency and most authorization process such that ‘‘least haulouts. Personnel will be adjacent to accurate testing results possible in areas practicable impact’’ shall include pinniped haulouts below the predicted analogous to where the military consideration of personnel safety, missile path for two hours prior to a operates. practicality of implementation, and launch only for monitoring purposes. impact on the effectiveness of the Aircraft Operation Mitigation military readiness activity. Launch Mitigation All aircraft and helicopter flight paths In evaluating how mitigation may or Missiles will not cross over pinniped must maintain a minimum distance of may not be appropriate to ensure the haulouts at elevations less than 305 m 1,000 ft (305 m) from recognized seal least practicable adverse impact on (1,000 ft). Launches at night will be haulouts and rookeries), except in species or stocks and their habitat, as limited. Launches will be avoided emergencies. well as subsistence uses where during harbor seal pupping season Based on our evaluation of the Navy’s applicable, we carefully consider two (February through April) unless mitigation measures, as well as other primary factors: constrained by mission objectives. measures considered by NMFS, NMFS
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28471
has determined that the mitigation • Effects on marine mammal habitat ‘‘dose-response’’ relationship for launch measures provide the means effecting (e.g., marine mammal prey species, sounds under different launch the least practicable impact on the acoustic habitat, or other important conditions if possible; affected species or stocks and their physical components of marine D Ascertain periods or launch habitat, paying particular attention to mammal habitat); and conditions when pinnipeds are most rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of • Mitigation and monitoring and least responsive to launch activities, similar significance. effectiveness. and The Navy will conduct suite of D Document take by harassment. Non-Authorized Take Prohibited monitoring measures on SNI to The launch monitoring program will If a species for which authorization document impacts of the launch events include remote video recordings before, has not been granted, or a species for on marine mammals. These monitoring during, and after launches when which authorization has been granted measures are described below. pinnipeds are present in the area of but the authorized takes are met, the potential impact, as well as visual Visual and Video Camera Monitoring Navy must consult with NMFS before assessment by trained observers before the next launch event. The Navy proposes to conduct marine and after the launch. Remote cameras mammal monitoring during launches are essential during launches because Monitoring and Reporting from SNI, using visual monitoring as safety rules prevent personnel from In order to issue an IHA for an well as simultaneous autonomous audio being present in most of the areas of activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the recording of launch sounds and video interest. In addition, video techniques MMPA states that NMFS must set forth recording of pinniped behavior. The will allow simultaneous ‘‘observations’’ requirements pertaining to the monitoring (all land-based) will provide at up to three different locations, and monitoring and reporting of such taking. data required to characterize the extent will provide a permanent record that The MMPA implementing regulations at and nature of ‘‘taking.’’ In particular, it can be reviewed in detail. During some 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that will provide the information needed to launches, the use of video methods may requests for authorizations must include document the nature, frequency, allow observations of up to three the suggested means of accomplishing occurrence, and duration of any changes pinniped species during the same the necessary monitoring and reporting in pinniped behavior that might result launch, though in general one or two that will result in increased knowledge from the missile launches, including the species will be recorded. of the species and of the level of taking occurrence of stampedes. The Navy will seek to obtain video or impacts on populations of marine Visual monitoring, before and after and audio records from up to three mammals that are expected to be launches, is a scan of the haulout locations at different distances from the present in the action area. Effective beaches to count pinnipeds over a wider flight path of each missile launched reporting is critical both to compliance FOV than can be captured by a from SNI. The Navy will try and reduce as well as ensuring that the most value stationary video camera. This is factors that limit recordings. On is obtained from the required typically done over a 15–30 minute occasion, paired video and audio data monitoring. period. Visual monitoring is conducted were obtained from less than three sites Monitoring and reporting while the equipment is being set up and during some launches, due to various requirements prescribed by NMFS broken down for video and acoustic potential problems with video and should contribute to improved monitoring which is described in greater acoustic recorders, timing of remote understanding of one or more of the detail below. Prior to a launch event, recordings when launches are delayed, following: Navy personnel will make observations absence of pinnipeds from some • Occurrence of marine mammal of the monitored haulout and record the locations at some times, etc. species or stocks in the area in which numbers and types of pinnipeds Corresponding data is available from the take is anticipated (e.g., presence, observed, noting the information on previous monitoring periods (2001– abundance, distribution, density); field data sheets. After a launch event, 2018). • Nature, scope, or context of likely Navy personnel will return to the Two different types of cameras will be marine mammal exposure to potential monitored haulout as soon as it is safe, available for use in obtaining video data stressors/impacts (individual or and record the numbers and types of simultaneously from three sites: cumulative, acute or chronic), through pinnipeds that remain on the haulout (1) Small handheld high-definition better understanding of: (1) Action or sites and any notable changes. video cameras on photographic tripods environment (e.g., source Video monitoring is conducted by will be set up by Navy personnel at characterization, propagation, ambient recording continuously from a various locations on the day of a launch, noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life minimum of 2 hours before the event to with the video data being accessible history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence approximately 1 hour after the event. following the launch. Recording of marine mammal species with the These video and audio records will be duration varies between 300 and 600 action; or (4) biological or behavioral used to document pinniped responses to minutes following initiation of record context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or the launches. This will include the mode on these cameras, depending feeding areas); following components: upon battery life, external memory card • Individual marine mammal D Identify and document any change availability and other factors. The responses (behavioral or physiological) in behavior or movements that may digital data is later copied to DVD– to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or occur at the time of the launch; ROMs for subsequent viewing and cumulative), other stressors, or D Compare received levels of launch analysis; and cumulative impacts from multiple sound with pinniped responses, based (2) Portable Forward-Looking Infrared stressors; on acoustic and behavioral data from up Radiometer (FLIR) video cameras will • How anticipated responses to to three monitoring sites at different be set up by the Navy for nighttime stressors impact either: (1) Long-term distances from the launch site and launches. These cameras have a fitness and survival of individual missile path during each launch; from recording duration of approximately 300 marine mammals; or (2) populations, the data accumulated across a series of minutes from initiation of the record species, or stocks; launches, to attempt to establish the mode. The FLIR video data will be
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28472 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
accessible following the launch. The Æ Tide state (Exact times for local The technical report containing the digital data will later be copied to DVD– high and low tides will be determined following information: Species present, ROMs for subsequent viewing and by consulting relevant tide tables for the number(s), general behavior, presence of analysis. day of the launch). pups, age class, gender, numbers of Before each launch, Navy personnel pinnipeds present on the haulout prior Acoustic Monitoring will set up or activate up to three of the to commencement of the launch, available video cameras such that they Acoustical recordings will be numbers of pinnipeds that responded at overlook chosen haulout sites. obtained during each monitored launch. a level that would be considered Placement will be such that disturbance These recordings will be suitable for harassment length of time(s) pinnipeds to the pinnipeds is minimized, and each quantitative analysis of the levels and remained off the haulout (for pinnipeds camera will be set to record a focal characteristics of the received launch that flushed), and any behavioral subgroup of sea lions or harbor seals sounds. In addition to providing responses by pinnipeds that were likely within the haulout aggregation for the information on the magnitude, in response to the specified activities. maximum recording time permitted by characteristics, and duration of sounds Launch reports would also include the videotape capacity. The entire to which pinnipeds are exposed during date(s) and time(s) of each launch; haulout aggregation on a given beach each launch, these acoustic data will be date(s) and location(s) of marine will not be recorded during some combined with the pinniped behavioral mammal monitoring, and environmental launches, as the wide-angle view data to determine if there is a ‘‘dose- conditions including: Visibility, air necessary to encompass an entire beach response’’ relationship between temperature, clouds, wind speed and would not allow detailed behavioral received sound levels and pinniped direction, tides, and swell height and analyses (Holst et al., 2005a; Holst et al., behavioral reactions. The Navy will use direction. If a dead or seriously injured 2008). It will be more effective to obtain up to four autonomous audio recorders pinniped is found during post-launch a higher-magnification view of a sample to make acoustical measurements. monitoring, the incident must be of the animals on the beach. Prior to During each launch, these will be reported to the NMFS Office of selecting a focal animal group, a pan of located as close as practical to Protected Resources and the NMFS’ the entire haulout beach and monitored pinniped haulout sites and West Coast Regional Stranding surrounding area will be made in order near the launch pad itself. The Coordinator immediately. Results of to document the total number of monitored haulout sites will typically acoustic monitoring, including the animals in the area. include one site as close as possible to recorded sound levels associated with Following each launch, video the missile’s planned flight path and the launch and/or sonic boom (if recordings will continue for at least 15 one or two locations farther from the applicable) would also be included in minutes and up to several hours. Greater flight path within the area of potential the report. In the unanticipated event that any post-launch time intervals are not impact with pinnipeds present. cases of pinniped mortality are judged advisable as storms and other events Autonomous Terrestrial Acoustic to result from launch activities at any may alter the composition of pinniped Recorders (ATARs) will be deployed at time during the period covered by this haulout groups independent of launch the recording locations on the launch IHA, this will be reported to NMFS events. day well before the launch time, and immediately. Video data will be transferred to will be retrieved later the same day. DVD–ROMs. A trained biologist will During each launch, data on the type Negligible Impact Analysis and review and code the data from the video and trajectory of the missile will be Determination data as they are played back to a documented. From these records, the NMFS has defined negligible impact monitor (Holst et al., 2005a; Holst et al., CPA of the missile to the microphone as an impact resulting from the 2008). The variables transcribed from will be determined, along with its specified activity that cannot be the videos, or recorded directly at the altitude above the shoreline. These data reasonably expected to, and is not beach sites, will include: will be important in comparing acoustic reasonably likely to, adversely affect the D Composition of the focal subgroup data with those from other launches. species or stock through effects on of pinnipeds (approximate numbers and Other factors to be considered will annual rates of recruitment or survival sexes of each age class); include wind speed and direction and (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact D Description and timing of launch characteristics (e.g., low- vs. finding is based on the lack of likely disruptive event (launch); this will high-angle launch). These analyses will adverse effects on annual rates of include documenting the occurrence of include data from previous and ongoing recruitment or survival (i.e., population- launch, whether launch noise is evident monitoring work (Burke 2017; Holst et level effects). An estimate of the number on audio channel, and duration of al., 2010; Holst et al., 2005a; Holst et al., of takes alone is not enough information audibility; and 2008; Holst et al., 2011; Ugoretz 2016; on which to base an impact D Movements of pinnipeds, including Ugoretz and Greene Jr. 2012), as well as determination. In addition to number and proportion moving, measurements to be obtained during considering estimates of the number of direction and distance moved, pace of launches under this IHA. marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ movement (slow or vigorous). In through harassment, NMFS considers Reporting addition, the following variables other factors, such as the likely nature concerning the circumstances of the A technical report will be submitted of any responses (e.g., intensity, observations will also be recorded from to the NMFS’ Office of Protected duration), the context of any responses the videotape or from direct Resources within 90 days from the date (e.g., critical reproductive time or observations at the site: the IHA expires. This report will location, migration), as well as effects Æ Study location; provide full documentation of methods, on habitat, and the likely effectiveness Æ Local time; results, and interpretation pertaining to of the mitigation. We also assess the Æ Weather (including an estimate of all monitoring tasks for launches number, intensity, and context of wind strength and direction, and activities at SNI that are covered under estimated takes by evaluating this presence of precipitation); and this IHA. information relative to population
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28473
status. Consistent with the 1989 locomotion direction/speed), the stocks would not have an unmitigable preamble for NMFS’s implementing response may or may not constitute adverse impact on the availability of regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, taking at the individual level, and is such species or stocks for taking for 1989), the impacts from other past and unlikely to affect the stock or the subsistence purposes. ongoing anthropogenic activities are species as a whole. However, if a sound incorporated into this analysis via their source displaces marine mammals from National Environmental Policy Act impacts on the environmental baseline an important feeding or breeding area To comply with the National (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status for a prolonged period, impacts on Environmental Policy Act of 1969 of the species, population size and animals or on the stock or species could growth rate where known, ongoing potentially be significant (e.g., Lusseau (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and sources of human-caused mortality, or and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007). NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) ambient noise levels). Flushing of pinnipeds into the water has 216–6A, NMFS must review our To avoid repetition, the discussion of the potential to result in mother-pup proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an our analyses applies to all the species separation, or could result in a incidental harassment authorization) listed in Table 4, given that the stampede, either of which could with respect to potential impacts on the anticipated effects of this activity on potentially result in serious injury or human environment. This action is these different marine mammal species mortality. However, based on the best consistent with categories of activities are expected to be similar. Activities available information, including reports identified in Categorical Exclusion B4 associated with the proposed activities, from almost 20 years of marine mammal (incidental harassment authorizations as outlined previously, have the monitoring during launch events, no with no anticipated serious injury or potential to disturb or displace marine serious injury or mortality of marine mortality) of the Companion Manual for mammals. Specifically, the specified mammals is anticipated as a result of NOAA Administrative Order 216–6A, activities may result in take, in the form the proposed activities. which do not individually or of Level B harassment only, from In summary and as described above, cumulatively have the potential for airborne sounds of target and missile the following factors primarily support significant impacts on the quality of the launch events. Based on the best our determination that the impacts human environment and for which we available information, including resulting from this activity are not have not identified any extraordinary monitoring reports from similar expected to adversely affect the species circumstances that would preclude this activities that have been authorized by or stock through effects on annual rates categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS, behavioral responses will likely of recruitment or survival: be limited behavioral reactions such as • No injury, serious injury, or NMFS has determined that the issuance alerting to the noise, with some animals mortality are anticipated or authorized; of the IHA qualifies to be categorically possibly moving toward or entering the • The anticipated incidences of Level excluded from further NEPA review. water, depending on the species and the B harassment are expected to consist of Endangered Species Act (ESA) intensity of the launch noise. Repeated temporary modifications in behavior exposures of individuals to levels of (i.e., movements of more than 10 m and Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered sound that may cause Level B occasional flushing into the water with Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. harassment are unlikely to result in return to haulouts), which are not 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal hearing impairment or to significantly expected to adversely affect the fitness agency insure that any action it disrupt foraging behavior. Given the of any individuals; authorizes, funds, or carries out is not • launch acceleration and flight speed of The proposed activities are likely to jeopardize the continued the missiles, most launch events are of expected to result in no long-term existence of any endangered or extremely short duration. Strong launch changes in the use by pinnipeds of threatened species or result in the sounds are typically detectable near the rookeries and haulouts in the project destruction or adverse modification of beaches at western SNI for no more than area, based on nearly 20 years of designated critical habitat. No a few seconds per launch (Holst et al., monitoring data; and 2010; Holst et al., 2005a; Holst et al., • The presumed efficacy of planned incidental take of ESA-listed species is 2008; Holst et al., 2005b). Pinnipids mitigation measures in reducing the authorized or expected to result from hauled out on beaches where missiles effects of the specified activity to the this activity. Therefore, formal fly over launched from the Alpha level of least practicable adverse impact. consultation under section 7 of the ESA Launch Complex routinely haul out and Based on the analysis contained was not required for this action. continue to use these beaches in large herein of the likely effects of the Authorization numbers. At the Building 807 Launch specified activity on marine mammals Complex few pinnipeds are known to and their habitat, and taking into As a result of these determinations, haul out on the shoreline immediately consideration the implementation of the NMFS has issued an IHA to the Navy for adjacent to this launch site. Thus, even proposed monitoring and mitigation conducting rocket and missile launch repeated instances of Level B measures, NMFS finds that the total events on SNI provided the previously harassment of some small subset of an marine mammal take from the proposed mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and overall stock is unlikely to result in any activity will have a negligible impact on reporting requirements are incorporated. significant realized decrease in fitness to all affected marine mammal species or those individuals, and thus would not stocks. Dated: June 14, 2019. result in any adverse impact to the stock Donna S. Wieting, as a whole. Level B harassment would Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination Director, Office of Protected Resources, be reduced to the level of least National Marine Fisheries Service. practicable adverse impact through use There are no relevant subsistence uses [FR Doc. 2019–12989 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] of mitigation measures described above. of the affected marine mammal stocks or BILLING CODE 3510–22–P If a marine mammal responds to a species implicated by this action. stimulus by changing its behavior (e.g., Therefore, NMFS has determined that through relatively minor changes in the total taking of affected species or
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28474 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE taking will have a negligible impact on Description of Activity the species or stock(s) and will not have Chevron’s Richmond Refinery Long National Oceanic and Atmospheric an unmitigable adverse impact on the Wharf (Long Wharf) located in San Administration availability of the species or stock(s) for Francisco Bay, is the largest marine oil RIN 0648–XG876 taking for subsistence uses (where terminal in California. Impact pile relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe driving and vibratory pile driving and Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to the permissible methods of taking and removal will be employed during the Specified Activities; Taking Marine other ‘‘means of effecting the least planned construction project. These Mammals Incidental to the Chevron practicable adverse impact’’ on the actions could produce underwater Richmond Refinery Long Wharf affected species or stocks and their sound at levels that could result in the Maintenance and Efficiency Project in habitat, paying particular attention to injury or behavioral harassment of San Francisco Bay, California rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of marine mammal species. Pile driving AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries similar significance, and on the activities would be timed to occur Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and availability of such species or stocks for within the standard NMFS work Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), taking for certain subsistence uses windows for Endangered Species Act Commerce. (referred to in shorthand as (ESA)-listed fish species (June 1 through ‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements November 30) over multiple years. An ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental estimated 67 days of pile driving harassment authorization. pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set activity within the designated work SUMMARY: In accordance with the forth. window are planned for 2019. regulations implementing the Marine Additional work in the future will Summary of Request Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as require subsequent IHAs. The IHA is amended, notification is hereby given On January 17, 2019, NMFS received effective from June 1, 2019 through May that we have issued an incidental a request from Chevron for an IHA to 31, 2020. A detailed description of the planned harassment authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals incidental to pile activities is provided in the Federal Chevron to take small numbers of driving and removal associated with the Register notice of the proposed IHA (84 marine mammals, by harassment, LWMEP in San Francisco Bay, FR 17788; April 26, 2019) for the issued incidental to the Long Wharf California. The application was deemed IHA, Federal Register notice of the Maintenance and Efficiency Project adequate and complete on April 8, 2019. issuance of the 2018 IHA for Chevron’s (LWMEP) in San Francisco Bay, Chevron’s request is for take of a small California. LWMEP project (83 FR 27578; June 13, number of seven species of marine 2018), the Federal Register notice of the DATES: This authorization is effective mammals, by Level B harassment and proposed IHA (83 FR 18802; April 30, from June 1, 2019, through May 31, Level A harassment. Neither Chevron 2018), as well as Chevron’s current IHA 2020. nor NMFS expects serious injury or application for the 2019 work season. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob mortality to result from this activity Therefore, a detailed description is not Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. provided here. Please refer to that NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Electronic NMFS previously issued an IHA to Federal Register notices and application copies of the application and supporting Chevron for similar work (82 FR 27240; for the description of the specific documents, as well as the issued IHA, June 17, 2017). However, the activity. may be obtained online at: https:// construction schedule and scope was Comments and Responses www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ revised and no work was conducted incidental-take-authorizations-under- under that IHA. NMFS issued a second A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue marine-mammal-protection-act. In case IHA on May 31, 2018 to Chevron for an IHA was published in the Federal of problems accessing these documents, work not conducted in 2017 (83 FR Register on March 26, 2019 (84 FR please call the contact listed above. 27578; June 13, 2018). This IHA covers 177880). During the 30-day public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: one year of this larger project for which comment period, NMFS received a comment letter from the Marine Background Chevron obtained the prior IHA, and Chevron also intends to request take Mammal Commission (Commission). The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of authorizations for subsequent facets of Specific comments and responses are marine mammals, with certain the project. The larger multi-year project provided below. The Commission’s exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and involves various construction activities recommendations and our responses are (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et that would allow Chevron to comply provided here, and the comments have seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce with Marine Oil Terminal Engineering been posted online at: https:// (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon and Maintenance Standards (MOTEMS) www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ marine-mammal-protection/incidental- request, the incidental, but not and to improve safety and efficiency at take-authorizations-construction- intentional, taking of small numbers of the Long Wharf. Chevron complied with marine mammals by U.S. citizens who activities. The Commission all the requirements (e.g., mitigation, engage in a specified activity (other than recommended that NMFS issue the IHA, monitoring, and reporting) of the commercial fishing) within a specified subject to inclusion of the proposed previous IHA and information regarding geographical region if certain findings mitigation, monitoring, and reporting their monitoring results may be found in are made and either regulations are measures. the Estimated Take section. issued or, if the taking is limited to Comment 1: The Commission harassment, a notice of a proposed Because of the similarity of the work recommended that NMFS consult with incidental take authorization may be and marine mammal impacts to that external scientists and acousticians to provided to the public for review. covered in previous IHAs, we have often determine the appropriate accumulation Authorization for incidental takings cited back to previous documents for time that action proponents should use shall be granted if NMFS finds that the more detailed descriptions. to determine the extent of the Level A
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28475
harassment zones based on the by the sediment and reflection at the or a subset of the activities for which the associated SELcum thresholds for the sediment/water interface. initial 30-day comment period applied. various types of sound sources, NMFS will evaluate the If Chevron seeks to obtain a Renewal including stationary sound sources. appropriateness of using a certain IHA in the future, NMFS will determine Response: NMFS considers this a source level reduction factor for sound at that time whether the request meets priority and has formed a Working attenuation device implementation the necessary conditions under which a Group to focus on the issue of during impact pile driving for all Renewal IHA could be considered. accumulation time. Once the NMFS relevant incidental take authorizations NMFS has taken a number of steps to internal Working Group develops a when more data become available. ensure the public has adequate notice, proposal, it will be shared with Federal Comment 3: The Commission time, and information to be able to partners and other stakeholders. recommended that NMFS should direct comment effectively on Renewal IHAs Comment 2: The Commission Chevron to use its PSOs to monitor within the limitations of processing IHA recommended that, for all relevant more sufficiently both the Level A and applications efficiently. Federal incidental take authorizations, NMFS B harassment zones, including the shut- Register notices for the proposed initial refrain from using a source level down zones. The Commission further IHAs identified the conditions under reduction factor for sound attenuation recommended that one PSO should be which a one-year Renewal IHA might be device implementation during impact located in the near-field to ensure an appropriate. This information is pile driving, including the 60-inch steel unobstructed view of the shut-down presented in the Request for Public piles proposed for use by Chevron. zones and one PSO should be located on Comments section and thus encourages the north end of the wharf to monitor Response: While it is true that noise submission of comments on the harbor seals in the far field, focusing on level reduction measured at different potential of a one-year renewal as well the area between the wharf and Castro received ranges does vary, given that as the initial IHA during the 30-day Rocks. both Level A and Level B harassment comment period. In addition, when we Response: NMFS believes that the receive an application for a Renewal estimation using geometric modeling is monitoring plan provided by the IHA, we will publish notice of the based on noise levels measured at near- applicant is adequate to sufficiently proposed IHA Renewal in the Federal source distances (∼10 meters), NMFS monitor Level A and B harassment Register and provide an additional 15 believes it reasonable to use a source zones, including shut-down zones. days for public comment, making a total level reduction factor for sound Chevron opted to place one PSO on the of 45 days of public comment. We also attenuation device implementation east side of the wharf to monitor any directly contact all commenters on the during impact pile driving. In the case marine mammals that occur between the initial IHA by email, phone, or, if the of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay wharf and the shoreline. The wharf is commenter did not provide email or Bridge impact driving isopleth estimates covered with building and large phone information, by postal service to using an air bubble curtain for source equipment resulting in obstructed provide them the opportunity to submit level reduction, NMFS reviewed views. Therefore, it is impossible for a any additional comments on the Caltrans’ bubble curtain ‘‘on and off’’ single PSO on the east side of the wharf proposed Renewal IHA. Where the studies conducted in San Francisco Bay to also monitor the near or far fields on commenter has already had the in 2003 and 2004. The equipment used the west side of the wharf. However, opportunity to review and comment on for bubble curtains has likely improved NMFS will recommend that the PSO the potential for a Renewal in the initial since 2004 but due to concerns for fish stationed on the north end of the wharf proposed IHA for these activities, the species, Caltrans has not been able to will monitor the entire visible area, with abbreviated additional comment period conduct ‘‘on and off’’ tests recently. extra focus on the section between is sufficient for consideration of the Based on 74 measurements (37 with the Castro Rocks and the wharf. results of the preliminary monitoring bubble curtain on and 37 with the Comment 4: The Commission report and new information (if any) bubble curtain off) at both near (<100 recommended that NMFS refrain from from the past year. meters) and far (>100 meters) distances, implementing its proposed renewal Comment 5: The Commission the linear averaged received level process for Chevron’s subsequent recommended that, NMFS (1) request reduction is 6 decibels (dB). If limiting authorizations. The Commission that Chevron submit any future the data points (a total of 28 believes that the renewal process should authorizations at least 6 months prior to measurements, with 14 during bubble be used sparingly and selectively, by the planned start date for incidental curtain on and 14 during bubble curtain limiting its use only to those proposed harassment authorizations and 9 months off) to only near distance measurements, incidental harassment authorizations prior for rulemakings and (2) take all the linear averaged noise level reduction that are expected to have the lowest steps necessary to ensure that it is 7 dB. Since impact zone analysis levels of impacts to marine mammals publishes and finalizes proposed using geometric spreading model is and that require the least complex incidental harassment authorizations far typically based on measurements at analyses. Also, the Commission enough in advance of the planned start near-source distance, we consider it recommended that NMFS provide the date of the proposed activities to ensure appropriate to use a reduction of 7 dB Commission and other reviewers the full consideration is given to any and all as a noise level reduction factor for full 30-day comment opportunity set comments received impact pile driving using an air bubble forth in section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the Response: NMFS encourages all curtain system. MMPA. applicants to submit applications for Bubble curtains are effective at Response: Regarding the IHA’s 5–8 months in advance of the attenuating sound originating within the Commission’s comment that Renewal intended project start date and for water column. Pile driving does IHAs should be limited to certain types rulemakings/LOA at least 9 months, and generate sound within the seafloor as of projects NMFS has explained on its preferably 15 months, in advance of the well. This sound travels within the website and in individual Federal intended project start date. NMFS seafloor and emerges back to the water Register notices that Renewal IHAs are provided the required 30-day notice for column, but its intensity is reduced appropriate where the continuing public comment, and has adequately within the sediment due to absorption activities are identical, nearly identical, considered all public comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28476 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
received in making the necessary general information about these species from the initial IHA, recent draft Stock findings. (e.g., physical and behavioral Assessment Reports, information on descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s relevant Unusual Mortality Events, and Description of Marine Mammals in the website (https:// other scientific literature, and Area of Specified Activities www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species). determined that neither this nor any Sections 3 and 4 of the application Table 1 lists species that may occur in other new information affects which summarize available information the vicinity of the project area. A species or stocks have the potential to regarding status and trends, distribution description of the marine mammals in be affected or the pertinent information and habitat preferences, and behavior the area of the activities is found in the in the Description of the Marine and life history, of the potentially Federal Register notice of the issuance Mammals in the Area of Specified affected species. Additional information of the 2018 IHA for Chevron’s LWMEP Activities contained in the supporting regarding population trends and threats project (83 FR 27578; June 13, 2018), the documents for the initial IHA. may be found in NMFS’s Stock Federal Register notice of the proposed Specifically, the only change from the Assessment Reports (SAR; https:// IHA (83 FR 18802; April 30, 2018), as 2018 IHA is an increase in numbers of www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ well as Chevron’s current IHA the eastern north Pacific stock of gray marine-mammal-protection/marine- application for the 2019 work season. whale which have increased from mammal-stock-assessments) and more NMFS has reviewed the monitoring data 20,990 to 26,960. TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT AREA
ESA/ MMPA Stock abundance Annual Common name Scientific name Stock status; (CV, N , most recent PBR min M/SI 3 strategic abundance survey) 2 (Y/N) 1
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Eschrichtiidae: Gray whale ...... Eschrichtius robustus ...... Eastern North Pacific ...... -/-; (N) 26,960 (0.05, 25,849, 801 138 2016). Family Delphinidae: Bottlenose dolphin ...... Tursiops truncatus ...... California Coastal ...... -/-;(N) 453 (0.06, 346, 2011) ..... 2.7 ≥2.0 Family Phocoenidae (por- poises): Harbor porpoise ...... Phocoena Phocoena ...... San Francisco-Russian River -/-;(N) 9,886 (0.51, 6,625, 2011) 66 0 Stock.
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions): California sea lion ...... Zalophus californianus ...... Eastern U.S. stock ...... -/-;(N) 296,750 (-, 153,337, 9,200 389 2011). Northern fur seal ...... Callorhinus ursinus ...... California stock ...... -/-;(N) 14,050 (-, 7,524, 2013) .. 451 1.8 Family Phocidae (earless seals): Pacific harbor seal ...... Phoca vitulina ...... California stock ...... -/-;(N) 30,968 (-, 27,348, 2012) 1,641 43 Northern elephant seal ...... Mirounga angustirostris ...... California Breeding stock ...... -/-;(N) 179,000 (-, 81,368, 2010) 4,882 8.8 1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assess- ments. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. 3 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fish- eries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities analysis of impacts on marine mammals stock in the wild (Level A harassment); on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat and their habitat. or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal Estimated Take A description of the potential effects stock in the wild by causing disruption of the specified activities on marine This section provides an estimate of of behavioral patterns, including, but mammals and their habitat may be the number of incidental takes not limited to, migration, breathing, found in the Federal Register notice of authorized through this IHA, which will nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering the issuance of the 2018 IHA for inform both NMFS’ consideration of (Level B harassment). Chevron’s LWMEP project (83 FR ‘‘small numbers’’ and the negligible Authorized takes would primarily be 27578; June 13, 2018) and the Federal impact determination. by Level B harassment, as use of the Register notice of the proposed IHA (83 Harassment is the only type of take acoustic source (i.e., pile driving) has FR 18802; April 30, 2018). This expected to result from these activities. the potential to result in disruption of information remains applicable to the Except with respect to certain activities behavioral patterns for individual issuance of the 2019 IHA. NMFS has not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the marine mammals. There is also some reviewed the monitoring data from the MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act potential for limited auditory injury initial IHA and other scientific of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, (Level A harassment) to result, primarily literature, and found no new which (i) has the potential to injure a for high frequency species (harbor information that would affect our initial marine mammal or marine mammal porpoises) because predicted auditory
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28477
injury zones are larger than for other Acoustic Thresholds (rms) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile- functional hearing groups and for Using the best available science, driving), and above 160 dB re 1 mPa phocids (harbor seals) as there is a NMFS has developed acoustic (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., sizable harbor seal haulout (Castro thresholds that identify the received seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., Rocks) located in close proximity to the level of underwater sound above which scientific sonar) sources. project area. The required mitigation exposed marine mammals would be Chevron’s planned includes the use of and monitoring measures are expected reasonably expected to be behaviorally continuous (vibratory pile driving and to minimize the severity of such taking harassed (equated to Level B removal) and intermittent (impact pile to the extent practicable. harassment) or to incur PTS of some driving) sources and, therefore, the 120 As described previously, no mortality degree (equated to Level A harassment). and 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) thresholds are is anticipated or authorized for this Level B Harassment for non-explosive applicable. activity. Below we describe how the sources—Though significantly driven by Level A harassment for non-explosive take is estimated. received level, the onset of behavioral sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance Generally speaking, we estimate take disturbance from anthropogenic noise for Assessing the Effects of by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds exposure is also informed to varying Anthropogenic Sound on Marine above which NMFS believes the best degrees by other factors related to the Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (NMFS, available science indicates marine source (e.g., frequency, predictability, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess mammals will be behaviorally harassed duty cycle), the environment (e.g., auditory injury (Level A harassment) to or incur some degree of permanent bathymetry), and the receiving animals five different marine mammal groups hearing impairment; (2) the area or (hearing, motivation, experience, (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result volume of water that will be ensonified demography, behavioral context) and of exposure to noise from two different above these levels in a day; (3) the can be difficult to predict (Southall et types of sources (impulsive or non- density or occurrence of marine al., 2007). Based on what the available impulsive). Chevron’s planned activity mammals within these ensonified areas; science indicates and the practical need includes the use of impulsive (impact and, (4) and the number of days of to use a threshold based on a factor that pile driving) and non-impulsive activities. We note that while these is both predictable and measurable for (vibratory pile driving and removal) basic factors can contribute to a basic most activities, NMFS uses a sources. calculation to provide an initial generalized acoustic threshold based on These thresholds are provided in prediction of takes, additional received level to estimate the onset of Table 2 below. The references, analysis, information that can qualitatively behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts and methodology used in the inform take estimates is also sometimes that marine mammals are likely to be development of the thresholds are available (e.g., previous monitoring behaviorally harassed in a manner we described in NMFS 2018 Technical results or average group size). Below, we consider Level B harassment when Guidance, which may be accessed at describe the factors considered here in exposed to underwater anthropogenic https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national more detail and present the authorized noise above received levels of 120 dB re /marine-mammal-protection/marine- take estimate. 1 microPascal, root mean square (mPa mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
TABLE 2—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * Hearing group (Received level) Impulsive Non-impulsive
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 1: Lpk,flat 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ...... Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB. Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 3: Lpk,flat 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ...... Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB. High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 5: Lpk,flat 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ...... Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) ...... Cell 7: Lpk,flat 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ...... Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: (Underwater) ...... 201 dB. Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) ...... Cell 9: Lpk,flat 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ...... Cell 10: (Underwater) ...... LE,OW,24h: 219 dB. * Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impul- sive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered. 2 Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
Ensonified Area that will feed into identifying the area thresholds, which include source levels ensonified above the acoustic and transmission loss coefficient. Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the activity
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:43 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28478 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
The project includes impact pile of 28 measurements, with 14 during From these measurements, a peak noise driving, vibratory pile driving and bubble curtain on and 14 during bubble value of 178 dB and an average RMS vibratory pile removal. Source levels of curtain off), the linear averaged noise value of 168 dB normalized to a 10 some pile driving activities are based on level reduction is 7 dB. As a meter (33 feet) distance was used to hydroacoustic testing performed in 2018 conservative approach, NMFS will use a estimate the extent of underwater noise at the LWMEP location as well as standard reduction of 7 dB of the source from installation of the 12-inch reviews of measurements of the same or level for impact zone estimates. composite piles. During installation of similar types and dimensions of piles Installation of 24-inch diameter the 12-inch composite barrier piles for available in the literature. Based on this square concrete piles is planned for the the planned Project, up to 50 minutes of information, the source levels described modifications at the four berths. vibratory driving could occur per day. below are assumed for the underwater Approximately one to two of these piles For the Berth 4 Loading Platform noise produced by construction would be installed in one work day, seismic retrofit, eight (8) 36-inch activities. using impact driving methods and a diameter temporary steel piles would be Eight batter steel pipe piles, 60-inch bubble curtain attenuation system. installed using a vibratory pile driver diameter would be installed using an Based on measured blow counts for 24- (APE 400B King Kong or similar impact hammer as it is difficult to inch concrete piles driven at the Long vibratory driver) will be needed to vibrate in batter piles. These piles also Wharf Berth 4 in 2011, installation for support the guide template for the have very high axial design loads that each pile could require up to driving of the permanent 60-inch steel can only be achieved by impact driving approximately 300 blows from a DelMag pipe piles. Each 36-inch temporary pile methods. Other projects conducted D62 22 or similar diesel hammer, has an estimated drive time of under similar circumstances were producing approximately 165,000 ft lbs approximately 10 minutes per pile. Up reviewed in order to estimate the maximum energy (may not need full to four (4) of these piles could be approximate noise effects of the 60-inch energy) and 1.5 second per blow average installed in any single work day. steel piles. The best match found for over a duration of approximately 20 Projects conducted under similar sound source levels is from summary minutes per pile, with 40 minutes of circumstances with similar piles were values provided by Caltrans in their pile driving time per day if two (2) piles reviewed in order to approximate the hydroacoustic guidance document are installed. noise effects of the 36-inch steel pipe. (Caltrans 2015). Summary values for the To estimate the noise effects of the 24- The best match for estimated noise impact pile driving of 60-inch steel pipe inch square concrete piles, the levels is from the Explosive Handling piles indicates that noise levels of up to underwater noise measurements Wharf-2 (EHW–2) project located at the 210 peak, 185 dB SEL (single strike), recorded for this pile type at the Long Naval Base Kitsap in Bangor, and 195 RMS would be produced at 10 Wharf during the 2018 construction Washington (Illingworth and Rodkin meters during pile driving using no season are utilized. These measured 2013). During vibratory pile driving sound attenuation such as a bubble values were: 191 dB peak, 161 dB SEL associated with this Project, which curtain. The use of properly functioning (single strike), and 173 dB RMS during occurred under similar circumstances, bubble curtains is expected to reduce attenuated impact driving (AECOM average peak noise levels were the peak and RMS noise levels by about 2018). approximately 180 dB, and the RMS 7 dB. As a result, noise levels of 203 dB As part of the Berth 4 Loading was approximately 170 dB at a 10 meter peak, 178 dB SEL (single strike), and Platform seismic retrofit, four (4) (33 feet) distance (Caltrans 2015a). 188 dB are utilized to assess potential clusters of 13 composite piles (52 piles Installation of the 36-inch steel pipe acoustic impacts. total) will be installed to provide piles is expected to be require 40 It is expected that just one 60-inch protection to the infrastructure. These minutes per day. pile would be driven over one (1) hour plastic encased concrete piles would be In total, two of the eight 36-inch of active driving in a given day and that installed with a vibratory pile driver temporary piles will require proofing only one (1) pile would be installed in (APE 400B King Kong or similar using an impact hammer. Each pile will a given week. Installation could require vibratory driver), with a drive time of require up to 30 strikes from an impact up to 2,400 blows from an impact approximately 10 minutes per pile. Up hammer during proofing which will hammer, such as a HHK–16 or similar to five (5) of these piles could be take place during the last foot of pile diesel hammer, producing installed in any single work day. driving. Up to two (2) piles would be approximately 173,000 to 217,000 ft. Projects conducted under similar proofed in one day, with each pile lbs. maximum energy per blow and 1.5 circumstances with similar piles were requiring up to 30 strikes from an to 2 sec/blow average. As noted above, reviewed in order to approximate the impact hammer, for a total of 60 strikes bubble curtains will be used during the noise effects of the 12-inch composite in one day. The best match found for installation of the 60-inch steel pipe barrier piles. Since these piles will be sound source levels is from summary piles in order to reduce underwater composed of concrete encased in values provided by Caltrans in their noise levels, with an assumed plastic, vibratory installation of hydroacoustic guidance document attenuation of 7 dB. NMFS similarly sized concrete piles would (Caltrans 2015). Summary values for the acknowledges that noise level provide a good surrogate. However, impact pile driving of 36-inch steel pipe reductions measured at different project concrete piles are rarely installed with piles in water less than 5m deep locations as well as different received a vibratory driver, and no suitable data indicates that noise levels of up to 208 ranges can vary widely. However, could be located. In the absence of this peak, 180 dB SEL (single strike), and NMFS believes it reasonable to use a data, we are conservatively using data 193 RMS would be produced at 10 source level reduction factor for sound from the Anacortes Ferry Terminal in meters during pile driving. Since impact attenuation device implementation Washington State, where 13-inch plastic hammers are often operated at reduced during impact pile driving. NMFS coated steel piles were installed with a power output during proofing, the reviewed Caltrans’ bubble curtain ‘‘on vibratory hammer. RMS noise levels source levels are likely to be lower than and off’’ studies conducted in San produced during this installation varied the values for impact driving used here. Francisco Bay in 2003 and 2004. Based from 138 to 158 dB RMS at 43 meters Due to very limited time that pile on near distance measurements (a total (141 feet) from the pile (Laughlin 2012). proofing would occur (60 strikes total,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28479
over a few minutes of active (approximately seven (7) minutes) from monitoring are provided in Appendix A hammering) no sound attenuation an APE 400B King Kong or similar of the application. would be used. driver. The most applicable noise values When the NMFS Technical Guidance The Berth 4 Loading Platform seismic for wooden pile removal from which to (2016) was published, in recognition of retrofit will require vibratory base estimates for the LWMEP are the fact that ensonified area/volume installation of, eight (8) 20-inch derived from measurements taken at the could be more technically challenging diameter temporary steel piles (APE Pier 62/63 pile removal in Seattle, to predict because of the duration 400B King Kong or similar vibratory Washington. During vibratory pile component in the new thresholds, we driver) to support the guide template extraction associated with this Project, developed a User Spreadsheet that needed for the driving the permanent which occurred under similar includes tools to help predict a simple 60-inch steel pipe piles. Each 20-inch circumstances, the RMS was temporary pile has a drive time per pile isopleth that can be used in conjunction approximately 152 dB (WSDOT 2011). with marine mammal density or of approximately 10 minutes. Up to four Applicable sound values for the removal (4) of these piles could be installed in occurrence to help predict takes. We of concrete piles could not be located, note that because of some of the any single work day. The best match for but they are expected to be similar to estimated noise levels is from vibratory assumptions included in the methods the levels produced by wooden piles used for these tools, we anticipate that driving of 24-inch piles at the Explosive described above, as they are similarly Handling Wharf-2 (EHW–2) project isopleths produced are typically going sized, non-metallic, and will be to be overestimates of some degree, located at the Naval Base Kitsap in removed using the same methods. Bangor, Washington (Illingworth and which may result in some degree of Rodkin 2013). During vibratory pile For pile driving that does not have overestimate of Level A harassment driving associated with this Project, project specific hydroacoustic data take. However, these tools offer the best which occurred under similar available, the practical spreading model way to predict appropriate isopleths circumstances, measured peak noise with a transmission loss coefficient of when more sophisticated 3D modeling levels were approximately 180 dB, and 15 (4.5 dB per doubling of distance) is methods are not available, and NMFS the RMS was approximately 163 dB at used. However, project-specific continues to develop ways to a 10 meter (33 feet) distance (Illingworth transmission loss values have been quantitatively refine these tools, and and Rodkin 2013). During installation of measured for the impact driving of will qualitatively address the output the 20-inch steel pipe piles will require concrete piles and resulted in a where appropriate. For stationary approximately 40 minutes per day. measured transmission loss factor of 20 sources (such as impact and vibratory The project includes the removal of (∼8 dB per doubling of distance) which pile driving), NMFS User Spreadsheet 106 16-inch timber piles, and five (5) 18 has been applied to calculate distances predicts the closest distance at which, if to 24-inch square concrete piles using a to harassment isopleths for those a marine mammal remained at that vibratory pile driver. Up to 12 of these specific piles. This value is calculated distance the whole duration of the piles could be extracted in one (1) work from hydroacoustic monitoring of activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs day. Extraction time needed for each attenuated impact driving of concrete used in the User Spreadsheet, and the pile may vary greatly, but could require piles conducted as part of the LWMEP. resulting isopleths are reported below in approximately 400 seconds The results of the 2018 hydroacoustic Table 3.
TABLE 3—INPUTS FOR USER SPREADSHEET
Spreadsheet tab used E.1–2: E.1–2: E.1–2: A.1: A.1: A.1: A.1: Impact pile Impact pile Impact pile Vibratory Vibratory Vibratory Vibratory driving driving driving driving driving driving driving Pile type 60-in 24-inch 36-in 12-inch 36-in 20-in Wood/ steel concrete steel composite steel steel concrete
Source Level ...... 178 SEL ...... 161 SEL ...... 180 SEL ...... 168 RMS ..... 170 RMS ..... 163 RMS ..... 152 RMS. Weighting Factor Adjustment 2 ...... 2 ...... 2 ...... 2.5 ...... 2.5 ...... 2.5 ...... 2.5. (kHz). Number of strikes in 1 h OR num- 2,400 ...... 300 ...... 30 ...... NA ...... NA ...... NA ...... NA. ber of strikes per pile. Number of piles per day ...... 1 ...... 2 ...... 2 ...... 5 ...... 4 ...... 4 ...... 12. Propagation (xLogR) ...... 15 ...... 20 ...... 15 ...... 15 ...... 15 ...... 15 ...... 15. Duration to drive single pile (min- NA ...... NA ...... NA ...... 10 ...... 10 ...... 10 ...... 7. utes). Distance of source level measure- 10 ...... 10 ...... 10 ...... 10 ...... 10 ...... 10 ...... 10. ment (meters) +.
Table 4 shows the Level A harassment are larger than SPLpk, therefore, vibratory driving and extraction are isopleths as determined utilizing inputs distances calculated using SELss are shown in Table 5. from Table 3. Note that for all used to calculate the area. Level B calculations, the results based on SELss Harassment isopleths for impact and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28480 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
TABLE 4—RADIAL DISTANCES TO LEVEL A HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS DURING IMPACT AND VIBRATORY DRIVING
Source levels at 10 meters Distance to Level A threshold 1 meters (dB) (feet) Project element requiring pile installation Low- Mid- High- Phocid Otariid Peak 2 RMS/SEL frequency frequency frequency cetaceans cetaceans cetaceans pinnipeds pinnipeds
Attenuated Impact Driv- ing (with bubble cur- tain): 60-inch steel pipe (1 203 178 SEL ...... 831 (2,726) 30 (97) 990 (3,247) 445 (1,459) 32 (106) per day). 24-inch square con- 191 161 SEL ...... 19 (64) 2 (5) 22 (73) 12 (40) 2 (6) crete (1–2 per day). Impact Pile Proofing (no bubble curtain): 36-inch steel pipe 208 180 SEL ...... 97 (317) 3 (11) 115 (377) 52 (170) 4 (12) pile (2 total). Vibratory Driving/Extrac- tion: 12-inch Composite 178 168 RMS ..... 18 (58) 2 (5) 26 (86) 11 (35) 1 (2) Barrier Pile (5 per day). 36-inch steel pipe 195 170 RMS ..... 21 (68) 2 (6) 31 (101) 13 (41) 1 (3) pile (4 per day). 20-inch steel pipe 180 163 RMS ..... 7 (23) 1 (2) 10 (34) 4 (14) 0 (1) pile (4 per day). Wood and concrete No Data 152 RMS ..... 2 (7) 0 (<1) 3 (10) 1 (4) 0 (<1) pile extraction (12 per day). Notes: For calculation worksheets used to develop these numbers is provided in Appendix B. 1 Level A thresholds are based on the NMFS 2016 Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing; cSEL threshold distances are shown. See footnote 3 below. 2 All distances to the peak Level A thresholds are less than 33 feet (10 meters). Distances are rounded to the nearest foot or to ‘‘<1.0 (0)’’ for values less than 1 foot. Peak and cSEL are re: 1 μPa and 1 μPa2-sec, respectively. dB = decibels. SEL = sound exposure level. RMS = Root Mean Square.
TABLE 5—RADIAL DISTANCES TO LEVEL B HARASSMENT ISOPLETHS DURING IMPACT AND VIBRATORY DRIVING
Source levels at 10 meters Distance to (dB) threshold 160/120 Pile type dB RMS (Level B) * meters Peak RMS (feet)
Attenuated Impact Driving (with bubble curtain): 60-inch steel pipe (1 per day) ...... 203 ...... 188 736 (2,413) 24-inch square concrete (1–2 per day) ...... 191 ...... 173 45 (147) Impact Pile Proofing (no bubble curtain): 36-inch steel pipe pile (2 total) ...... 208 ...... 190 1,000 (3,280) Vibratory Driving/Extraction: 12-inch Composite Barrier Piles (5 per day) ...... 178 ...... 168 15,849 (51,984) 36-inch steel pipe pile (4 per day) ...... 180 ...... 170 21,544 (70,665) 20-inch steel pipe pile (4 per day) ...... 180 ...... 163 7,356 (24,129) Wood and concrete pile extraction (12 per day) ...... No Data Avail- 152 1,359 (4,459) able. Notes: dB decibels. RMS root mean square. * For underwater noise, the Level B Harassment threshold is 160 dB for impulsive noise and 120 dB for continuous noise.
Marine Mammal Occurrence For the 2019 IHA application, a Rocks and other individuals that may be combination of nearby haul-out foraging in the more distant part of the In this section we provide the occupancy and at-sea densities were Level B Harassment zone. By using information about the presence, density, used to develop take estimates, in order hydroacoustic data collected in 2018, or group dynamics of marine mammals to account for both local movements of the extent of the harassment zones was that will inform the take calculations. harbor seals that haul out at Castro refined for attenuated impact driving of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28481
concrete piles by using the transmission approximately 25 km south of the bottlenose dolphins is five. Reports loss measured during 2018 project LWMEP location and is considered by show that a group normally comes into (20logr). As the Level B Harassment NMFS to be the best available San Francisco Bay, is near Yerba Buena zones estimated for the 2019 IHA are information. The 2018 Long Wharf draft Island once per week for approximately generally more localized, only the monitoring report did not record any two (2) weeks and then leaves (NMFS, occupancy from the local Castro Rocks observations of sea lions. 2017). haul-out is used. Small numbers of northern elephant Gray whales have been observed Castro Rocks, located approximately seal may haul out or strand on coastline entering the Bay during their northward 1.3 km northwest of the project site, is within the Central Bay. Monitoring of migration period, and are most often the largest harbor seal haul out site in marine mammals in the vicinity of the sighted in the Bay between February the northern part of San Francisco Bay SFOBB has been ongoing for 15 years. and May. Most venture only about 2 to and is the second largest pupping site in From those data, Caltrans has produced 3 km (about 1–2 miles) past the Golden the Bay (Green et al. 2002). Tidal stage an estimated at-sea density for northern Gate. However, gray whales have is a major controlling factor of haul out elephant seal of 0.16 animal per square occasionally been sighted as far north as usage at Castro Rocks with more seals mile (0.06 animal per square kilometer) San Pablo Bay. Pile driving is not present during low tides than high tide (Caltrans, 2015b). Most sightings of expected to occur during the February- periods (Green et al. 2002). northern elephant seal in San Francisco May period, and gray whales are not Additionally, the number of seals Bay occur in spring or early summer, likely to be present at other times of hauled out at Castro Rocks also varies and are less likely to occur during the year. No whales were observed as part with the time of day, with periods of in-water work for this project. of 2018 Long Wharf marine mammal proportionally more animals hauled out As a result, densities during pile driving monitoring activities. during the nighttime hours (Green et al. for the planned action are likely to be Take Calculation and Estimation 2002). Therefore, the number of harbor lower. Additionally, this species was seals in the water around Castro Rocks not observed by the marine mammal Here we describe how the information will vary throughout the work period. observers in the vicinity of the Long provided above is brought together to Pile driving would occur intermittently Wharf during 2018 pile driving produce a quantitative take estimate. during the day with average active monitoring. When density data was available, take driving times typically of a few hours The occurrence of northern fur seal in for the project was calculated by per day, so varying sets of animals may San Francisco Bay depends largely on multiplying the density times the be hauled out or in the water. However, oceanic conditions, with animals more harassment zone (km2) associated with there are no systematic counts available likely to strand during El Nin˜ o events. pile driving activities that are underway for accurately estimating the number of Equatorial sea surface temperatures are times the number of construction days. seals that may be in the water near Long above average across most of the Pacific Since density data was only available Wharf at any given time. The National Ocean this year, and El Nin˜ o is expected for harbor seals, harbor porpoises, and Park Service provided recent data to continue through winter of 2019 and California sea lions, these were the only indicating that up to 176 seals could be into spring (NOAA 2019). There are no species whose take was calculated using present each day at Castro Rocks. This estimated at-sea densities for this this methodology. For species without value was conservatively based on the species in San Francisco Bay and no density information, information on highest mean plus the standard error of seals were recorded during 2018 Long average group size or local observational harbor seals observed at Castro Rocks Wharf marine mammal monitoring. data was used as described below. A small but growing population of per day (Codde, S. and S. Allen 2013, Pacific Harbor Seal 2015, and 2017), a value of 176 seals. harbor porpoises utilizes San Francisco The 2018 draft Long Wharf marine Bay which are typically spotted in the Chevron initially estimated that all mammal monitoring report indicated vicinity of Angel Island and the Golden harbor seals (176) at Castro Rocks would that 24 harbor seals were observed Gate (6 and 12 kilometers (3.7 and 7.5 be exposed to noise that reaches the within the Level B harassment zone and miles) southwest respectively) and the threshold for Level B harassment on zero individuals were observed within vicinity of Treasure Island (Caltrans every day on which there was pile the Level A harassment zone over 10 2018). However, they may occur in driving. The areas of the Level A days of pile driving, which equals less other areas in the Central Bay in low harassment zones in which take by than 1 percent of the authorized number numbers, including the project area. injury could occur were determined by of harbor seals with an average of 2.4 Based on monitoring conducted for the subtracting the shutdown zone areas animals per day. The maximum number SFOBB project in 2017, an in-water from Level A harassment zone areas. observed per day was six. density of 0.17 animals per square Chevron estimated Level A take for Since there are no California sea lion kilometer has been estimated by impact driving of the 60-inch and 36- haul-outs in the vicinity of the project Caltrans for this species (NMFS 2018). inch steel piles by using Level B take area, relatively few animals are expected No members of this species were and multiplying it by the ratio of the to be present. However, monitoring for recorded during 2018 during pile Level A zone area to the Level B zone the RSRB did observe limited numbers driving activities at LWMEP. area. Level A take is not requested for in the north and central portions of the Bottlenose dolphins are typically vibratory driving. This resulted in an Bay during working hours. During found close to the Golden Gate Bridge estimated 11,968 takes by Level B monitoring for the San Francisco- when they are observed in San harassment and 513 takes by Level A Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB) Project in Francisco Bay. There are no estimated harassment. However, based on input the central Bay, 83 California sea lions at-sea densities for this species in San from the Commission as well as the size were observed in the vicinity of the Francisco Bay available for calculating a of the Level B zones extending beyond bridge over a 17-year period from 2000– take estimate. Beginning in 2015, two Castro Rocks, NMFS is authorizing takes 2017, and from these observations, an individuals have been observed for all 176 seals per day multiplied by estimated at-sea density of 0.16 animals frequently in the vicinity of Oyster Point 37 days for all piles but 24-inch per square kilometer is derived (NMFS (GGCR 2018; Perlman, 2017). The concrete. For 24-inch concrete, the max 2018). This bridge is located average reported group size for observed, which was two, has been
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28482 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
multiplied by 30 as resulting in a total The area of the Level A harassment zone was multiplied by 176 seals resulting in of 6,572 Level B takes of harbor seal as for 60-inch piles is 0.62 km2, while the 64 takes per day and a total of 513 shown in Table 9. For Level A area of the Level B harassment zone is authorized Level A harassment takes as harassment the same rationale was used. 1.7 km2. The ratio of these two areas shown in Table 6 and Table 10.
TABLE 6—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ESTIMATE FOR PACIFIC HARBOR SEAL [Per day]
Level A zone, Estimated take per day Exclusion minus Pile type Level B zone zone radius shutdown Level B take Level A take (sq km) (m) zone per day— per day— (sq km) total total
Vibratory Driving
12-inch composite pile ...... 165.62 15 0 176 NA 36-inch steel pipe pile ...... 187.94 15 0 176 NA 20-inch steel pipe pile ...... 87.57 10 0 176 NA Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ...... 5.33 15 0 176 NA
Impact Driving
24-inch concrete pile ...... 0.01 20 0 176 NA 60-inch steel pile ...... 1.70 30 0.62 176 64.06
Impact Proofing
36-inch steel pile ...... 3.14 30 0.01 176 0.14
For impact pile driving of the 60-inch experience Level A harassment, if they to develop a density of 0.16 California steel piles, the shutdown zones (30 reside in that area for a long enough sea lions per square kilometer. This meters) are notably smaller than the duration. However, these animals can be density and the areas of the potential Level A harassment zone and the highly mobile, and remaining within the Level B Harassment zones are used in applicant has accordingly requested small injury zone for an extended Table 7. Level A harassment take of this take by Level A harassment for harbor period is unlikely, though it could species is not requested, due to the seal so that pile driving can be occur. small size of the Level A harassment completed on schedule without frequent zone for otariid pinnipeds, shutdowns. Individuals occurring California Sea Lion within the Level A harassment zone but Monitoring data from the SFOBB outside of the shut-down zone may Project over a 17-year period was used
TABLE 7—LEVEL B HARASSMENT ESTIMATE FOR CALIFORNIA SEA LION [Per day]
Level B take estimate (based on Level B zone Pile type 2 Central Bay (km ) density of 0.16 animals per km2)
Vibratory Driving
12-inch composite pile ...... 165.62 26.50 36-inch steel pipe pile ...... 187.94 30.07 20-inch steel pipe pile ...... 87.57 14.01 Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ...... 5.33 0.85
Impact Driving
24-inch concrete pile ...... 0.01 0.01 60-inch steel pile ...... 1.70 0.27
Impact Proofing
36-inch steel pile ...... 3.14 0.50
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28483
Harbor Porpoise Caltrans for this species (NMFS 2018). could occur were determined by Using this in-water density and the subtracting the shutdown zone areas Based on monitoring conducted for areas of potential Level A and Level B from Level A harassment zone areas. the SFOBB project in 2017, an in-water harassment, take is estimated for harbor Level A take is not requested for density of 0.17 animals per square porpoise as provided in Table 10. Level vibratory driving. kilometer has been estimated by A harassment zone areas in which PTS
TABLE 8—LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ESTIMATE FOR PACIFIC HARBOR PORPOISE [Per day]
Level A zone, Level B Exclusion minus estimate Estimated Level B zone Pile type 2 zone shutdown Central Bay Level A take (km ) (m) zone in-water—0.17 per day (km2) per km2
Vibratory Driving
12-inch composite barrier pile ...... 165.62 50 NA 28.16 NA 36-inch steel pipe pile ...... 187.94 50 NA 31.95 NA 20-inch steel pipe pile ...... 87.57 50 NA 14.89 NA Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ...... 5.33 50 NA 0.91 NA
Impact Driving
24-inch concrete pile ...... 0.01 50 0 0.01 0 60-inch steel pile ...... 0.21 50 0.23 0.29 0.52
Impact Proofing
36-inch steel pile ...... 3.14 80 0 0.53 <0.01
Northern Elephant Seal is a chance that fur seals could occur Level B harassment thresholds may be As noted above, elephant seal near the project area. Since there are no exceeded. Therefore, NMFS has densities are expected to be extremely estimated at-sea densities for this authorized the take of 30 bottlenose low. Therefore, Chevron did not use species in San Francisco Bay, NMFS has dolphins. authorized 10 takes of fur seals by Level density data to calculate take. Gray Whale Additionally, this species was not B harassment. Level A harassment of observed by the marine mammal this species is not anticipated. Gray whales are most often sighted in the Bay between February and May. observers in the vicinity of the LWMEP Bottlenose Dolphin during 2018 pile driving marine However, LWMEP pile driving is not mammal monitoring activities. As noted above, there are no expected to occur during this time, and Therefore, Caltrans will conservatively estimated at-sea densities for this gray whales are unlikely to be present assume that a lone northern elephant species in San Francisco Bay available at other times of year. However, should seal may enter the Level B Harassment for calculating a take estimate although pile driving occur during the northward area once per every three days during they have been observed. Beginning in migration period, Chevron requests and pile driving. As such, NMFS has 2015, two individuals have been NMFS has authorized two (2) Gray authorized a total of 23 takes by Level observed frequently in the vicinity of whale takes by Level B harassment. B harassment. Level A harassment of Oyster Point (GGCR, 2016; GGCR 2017; The Level B Harassment estimates this species is not expected to occur. Perlman, 2017). The average reported shown in Table 9 are based on the group size for bottlenose dolphins is number of individuals assumed to be Northern Fur Seal five. Assuming the dolphins come into exposed per day, the number of piles With weak El Nin˜ o conditions San Francisco Bay once every 10 days, driven per day and the number of days predicted to continue into spring and, 30 takes would be anticipated, if the of pile driving expected based on an perhaps, summer (NOAA 2019). There group enters the areas over which the average installation rate. TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED TAKE BY SPECIES FOR 2019 WORK SEASON [Level B harassment]
Species Number of Number of Pile type Pile driver type piles driving Harbor CA sea Harbor Gray N elephant N fur Bottlenose days seal lion porpoise whale * seal ** seal * dolphin *
60-inch steel pipe .. Impact ...... 8 8 1,408 2.18 2.31 NA 2.66 NA NA 36-inch steel pipe Vibratory ...... 8 4 704 120.28 127.80 NA 1.33 NA NA pile ***. 36-inch steel pipe Impact Proofing ..... 2 1 176 0.50 0.53 NA 0.33 NA NA pile. 20-inch steel pipe Vibratory ...... 8 4 704 56.04 59.56 NA 1.33 NA NA pile. Concrete pile re- Vibratory ...... 5 1 176 0.91 0.97 NA 0.33 NA NA moval.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28484 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED TAKE BY SPECIES FOR 2019 WORK SEASON—Continued [Level B harassment]
Species Number of Number of Pile type Pile driver type piles driving Harbor CA sea Harbor Gray N elephant N fur Bottlenose days seal lion porpoise whale * seal ** seal * dolphin *
24-inch concrete .... Impact ...... 39 30 60 0.3 0.04 NA 10 NA NA 12-inch composite Vibratory ...... 52 11 1,936 291.50 309.72 NA 3.66 NA NA pile installation. Timber pile removal Vibratory ...... 106 9 1,584 7.68 8.16 NA 3 NA NA
Total Take by ...... 6,572 479 509 2 23 10 30 Species (2019). * Take is not calculated by activity type for these species, only a total estimate is given. ** Assumes 1 take every 3 days of driving. *** Level B take for this pile type is based on vibratory driving only, as the method produces the larger Level B zone.
TABLE 10—SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED TAKE LEVEL A HARASSMENT FOR 2019 WORK SEASON
Number of Number of Harbor Pile type Pile driver type piles driving days Harbor seal porpoise
60-inch steel pipe ...... Impact ...... 8 8 512.49 4.18 36-inch steel pipe pile ...... Vibratory ...... 8 4 0 0 36-inch steel pipe pile ...... Impact Proofing ...... 2 1 0.14 <0.01 20-inch steel pipe pile ** ...... Vibratory ...... 8 4 0 0 Concrete pile removal ...... Vibratory ...... 5 1 0 0 24-inch concrete ...... Impact ...... 39 30 0 0 12-inch composite pile installation .... Vibratory ...... 52 11 0 0 Timber pile removal ...... Vibratory ...... 106 9 0 0
Total Take ...... 513 4
TABLE 11—AUTHORIZED TAKE AND PERCENTAGE OF STOCK OR POPULATION
Percent (instances of Species Stock Authorized Authorized take compared Llevel A takes Level B takes to population abundance)
Harbor seal ...... California ...... 513 6,572 22.9 California sea lion ...... Eastern U.S ...... 479 0.16 Harbor porpoise ...... San Francisco—Russian River ...... 4 509 6.1 Northern elephant seal ...... California Breeding ...... 23 <0.01 Gray whale ...... Eastern North Pacific ...... 2 <0.01 Northern fur seal ...... California ...... 10 <0.01 Bottlenose Dolphin ...... California Coastal ...... 30 6.6
Mitigation of effecting the least practicable adverse likelihood that the measure will be impact upon the affected species or effective if implemented (probability of In order to issue an IHA under stocks and their habitat (50 CFR accomplishing the mitigating result if Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 216.104(a)(11)). implemented as planned), the NMFS must set forth the permissible In evaluating how mitigation may or likelihood of effective implementation methods of taking pursuant to such may not be appropriate to ensure the (probability implemented as planned), activity, and other means of effecting least practicable adverse impact on and; the least practicable impact on such species or stocks and their habitat, as species or stock and its habitat, paying well as subsistence uses where (2) the practicability of the measures particular attention to rookeries, mating applicable, we carefully consider two for applicant implementation, which grounds, and areas of similar primary factors: may consider such things as cost, significance, and on the availability of (1) The manner in which, and the impact on operations, and, in the case such species or stock for taking for degree to which, the successful of a military readiness activity, certain subsistence uses (latter not implementation of the measure(s) is personnel safety, practicality of applicable for this action). NMFS expected to reduce impacts to marine implementation, and impact on the regulations require applicants for mammals, marine mammal species or effectiveness of the military readiness incidental take authorizations to include stocks, and their habitat, as well as activity. information about the availability and subsistence uses. This considers the feasibility (economic and technological) nature of the potential adverse impact of equipment, methods, and manner of being mitigated (likelihood, scope, conducting such activity or other means range). It further considers the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28485
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and reduces the area over which the activities, Chevron will establish Their Habitat cumulative SEL threshold for Level A shutdown zones. The purpose of a The following measures will apply to harassment may be exceeded. Bubble shutdown zone is generally to define an Chevron’s LWMEP mitigation curtains would also decrease the size of area within which shutdown of activity requirements: the Level B harassment zone, reducing would occur upon sighting of a marine Noise Attenuation—Bubble curtains the numbers of marine mammals mammal (or in anticipation of an animal will be used during all impact pile affected by potential behavioral impacts. entering the defined area). A shutdown driving of 60-inch steel shell pile and Daylight Construction Period—Work zone will be established which will 24-inch square concrete piles to would occur only during daylight hours include all or a portion of the area interrupt acoustic pressure and reduce (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) when visual where SPLs are expected to reach or impact on marine mammals. The use of marine mammal monitoring can be exceed the cumulative SEL thresholds bubble curtains is expected to reduce conducted. for Level A harassment as provided in underwater noise levels by Establishment of a Shutdown Zone— Table 12. approximately 7 dB, which greatly For all pile driving and removal
TABLE 12—SHUTDOWN ZONES FOR LWMEP
Exclusion zones meters Project element requiring pile installation Low- Mid- High- frequency frequency frequency Phocid Otariid cetaceans cetaceans cetaceans pinnipeds pinnipeds
Attenuated Impact Driving (with bubble curtain): 60-inch steel pipe ...... 840 30 50 30 35 24-inch square concrete ...... 20 10 50 15 10 Impact Pile Proofing (no bubble curtain): 36-inch steel pipe pile ...... 100 10 80 30 10 Vibratory Driving/Extraction: 12-inch Composite Barrier Pile ...... 20 10 50 15 10 36-inch steel pipe pile ...... 20 10 50 15 10 20-inch steel pipe pile ...... 10 10 50 10 10 Wood and concrete pile extraction ...... 10 10 50 10 10
Establishment of Monitoring Zones for (e.g., barge movements), a 10-m If a marine mammal approaches or Level A and Level B—Chevron will shutdown zone for all marine mammals enters the shutdown zone during establish and monitor Level A will be implemented. If a marine activities or pre-activity monitoring, all harassment zones during impact driving mammal comes within 10 m, operations pile driving activities at that location for harbor seal extending to 450 meters shall cease and vessels shall reduce shall be halted or delayed, respectively. and harbor seals and extending to 990 speed to the minimum level required to If pile driving is halted or delayed due for harbor porpoises. These are areas maintain steerage and safe working to the presence of a marine mammal, the beyond the shutdown zone in which conditions. activity may not resume or commence animals could be exposed to sound Soft Start—The use of a soft-start until either the animal has voluntarily levels that could result in Level A procedure are believed to provide left and been visually confirmed beyond harassment in the form of PTS. Chevron additional protection to marine the shutdown zone or 15 minutes have will also establish and monitor Level B mammals by providing warning and/or passed without re-detection of the harassment zones which are areas where giving marine mammals a chance to animal. Pile driving activities include SPLs are equal to or exceed the 160 dB leave the area prior to the hammer the time to install or remove a single rms threshold for impact driving and operating at full capacity. Chevron shall pile or series of piles, as long as the time the 120 dB rms threshold during use soft start techniques when impact elapsed between uses of the pile driving vibratory driving and extraction as pile driving. Soft start requires equipment is no more than thirty shown in Table 5. Monitoring zones contractors to provide an initial set of minutes. provide utility for observing by strikes at reduced energy, followed by a Non-authorized Take Prohibited—If a establishing monitoring protocols for thirty-second waiting period, then two species for which authorization has not areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. subsequent reduced energy strike sets. been granted or a species for which Monitoring zones also enable observers Pre-Activity Monitoring—Pre-activity authorization has been granted but the to be aware of and communicate the monitoring shall take place from 30 authorized takes are met, is observed presence of marine mammals in the minutes prior to initiation of pile approaching or within the monitoring project area outside the shutdown zone driving activity and post-activity zone, pile driving and removal activities and thus prepare for a potential cease of monitoring shall continue through 30 must shut down immediately using activity should the animal enter the minutes post-completion of pile driving delay and shut-down procedures. shutdown zone. Level B harassment activity. Pile driving may commence at Activities must not resume until the exposures will be recorded and the end of the 30-minute pre-activity animal has been confirmed to have left extrapolated based upon the number of monitoring period, provided observers the area or an observation time period observed take and the percentage of the have determined that the shutdown of 15 minutes has elapsed. Level B harassment zone that was not zone is clear of marine mammals, which Based on our evaluation of the visible. includes delaying start of pile driving Chevron’s measures, as well as other 10-Meter Shutdown Zone—During the activities if a marine mammal is sighted measures considered by NMFS, we have in-water operation of heavy machinery in the zone, as described below. determined that the mitigation measures
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28486 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
provide the means effecting the least Visual Monitoring or related field) or training for practicable impact on the affected The following visual monitoring experience; and species or stocks and their habitat, measures are required as part of the (4) Chevron shall submit PSO CVs for paying particular attention to rookeries, approval by NMFS; issued IHA. • mating grounds, and areas of similar • One day of biological monitoring Chevron will ensure that observers significance. would occur within one week before the have the following additional project’s start date to establish baseline qualifications: Monitoring and Reporting (1) Ability to conduct field observations; observations and collect data according In order to issue an IHA for an • Monitoring distances, in accordance to assigned protocols; activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the with the identified shutdown, Level A, (2) Experience or training in the field MMPA states that NMFS must set forth and Level B zones, will be determined identification of marine mammals, requirements pertaining to the by using a range finder, scope, hand- including the identification of monitoring and reporting of such taking. held global positioning system (GPS) behaviors; The MMPA implementing regulations at device or landmarks with known (3) Sufficient training, orientation, or 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that distances from the monitoring positions; experience with the construction requests for authorizations must include • Monitoring locations will be operation to provide for personal safety the suggested means of accomplishing established at locations offering best the necessary monitoring and reporting during observations; views of the monitoring zone; (4) Writing skills sufficient to prepare that will result in increased knowledge • Monitoring would be conducted 30 a report of observations including but of the species and of the level of taking minutes before, during, and 30 minutes not limited to the number and species or impacts on populations of marine after pile driving and removal activities. of marine mammals observed; dates and mammals that are expected to be In addition, observers shall record all times when in-water construction present in the action area. Effective incidents of marine mammal activities were conducted; dates, times, reporting is critical both to compliance occurrence, regardless of distance from and reason for implementation of as well as ensuring that the most value activity, and shall document any mitigation (or why mitigation was not is obtained from the required behavioral reactions in concert with implemented when required); and monitoring. distance from piles being driven or marine mammal behavior; and Monitoring and reporting removed. Pile driving and removal (5) Ability to communicate orally, by requirements prescribed by NMFS activities include the time to install or radio or in person, with project should contribute to improved remove a single pile or series of piles, personnel to provide real-time understanding of one or more of the as long as the time elapsed between uses information on marine mammals following: of the pile driving equipment is no more observed in the area as necessary. • Occurrence of marine mammal than 30 minutes. species or stocks in the area in which • Monitoring will be continuous Hydroacoustic Monitoring take is anticipated (e.g., presence, unless the contractor takes a break Sound Source Verification (SSV) abundance, distribution, density); longer than 2 hours from active pile testing of would be conducted under • Nature, scope, or context of likely driving, in which case, monitoring will this IHA. The purpose of the planned marine mammal exposure to potential be required 30 minutes prior to acoustic monitoring plan is to collect stressors/impacts (individual or restarting pile installation; underwater sound-level information at • cumulative, acute or chronic), through For in-water pile driving, under both near and distant locations during better understanding of: (1) Action or conditions of fog or poor visibility that vibratory pile extraction and installation environment (e.g., source might obscure the presence of a marine and impact pile installation. characterization, propagation, ambient mammal within the shutdown zone, the Hydroacoustic monitoring would be noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life pile in progress will be completed and conducted by a qualified monitor during history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence then pile driving suspended until pile extraction and driving activities as visibility conditions improve; of marine mammal species with the • described in the Hydroacoustic action; or (4) biological or behavioral At least two PSOs will be actively Monitoring plan and will likely include context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or scanning the monitoring zone during all the following during 2019: feeding areas); pile driving activities with one PSO • Acoustic monitoring for at least two stationed at the north end of the wharf • Individual marine mammal (2) timber piles (vibratory); monitoring the entire observable area • responses (behavioral or physiological) Acoustic monitoring for at least four with a special focus on the section to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or (4) 24-inch square concrete piles between Castro Rocks and the wharf; cumulative), other stressors, or (impact); • Monitoring of pile driving shall be • cumulative impacts from multiple Acoustic monitoring for at least two conducted by qualified PSOs (see stressors; (2) 20-inch steel piles (vibratory); below), who shall have no other • Acoustic monitoring for at least two • How anticipated responses to assigned tasks during monitoring (2) 36-inch steel piles (vibratory); stressors impact either: (1) Long-term periods. Chevron shall adhere to the • Acoustic monitoring for at least two fitness and survival of individual following conditions when selecting (2) 60-inch steel piles (impact); and marine mammals; or (2) populations, observers: • Acoustic monitoring of two (2) 12- species, or stocks; (1) Independent PSOs shall be used inch composite piles (vibratory). • Effects on marine mammal habitat (i.e., not construction personnel); (e.g., marine mammal prey species, (2) At least one PSO must have prior Reporting Measures acoustic habitat, or other important experience working as a marine A draft marine mammal monitoring physical components of marine mammal observer during construction report would be submitted to NMFS mammal habitat); and activities; within 90 days after the completion of • Mitigation and monitoring (3) Other PSOs may substitute pile driving and removal activities. It effectiveness. education (degree in biological science will include an overall description of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28487
work completed, a narrative regarding specified activities and report the Negligible Impact Analysis and marine mammal sightings, and incident to the Chief of the Permits and Determination associated PSO data sheets. Specifically, Conservation Division, Office of NMFS has defined negligible impact the report must include: Protected Resources, NMFS, and the • as an impact resulting from the Dates and times (begin and end) of West Coast Regional Stranding specified activity that cannot be all marine mammal monitoring; Coordinator. The report would include • reasonably expected to, and is not Construction activities occurring the following information: reasonably likely to, adversely affect the during each daily observation period, • Description of the incident; species or stock through effects on including how many and what type of • Environmental conditions (e.g., annual rates of recruitment or survival piles were driven or removed and by Beaufort sea state, visibility); (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact what method (i.e., impact or vibratory); • finding is based on the lack of likely • Weather parameters and water Description of all marine mammal adverse effects on annual rates of conditions during each monitoring observations in the 24 hours preceding recruitment or survival (i.e., population- period (e.g., wind speed, percent cover, the incident; • level effects). An estimate of the number visibility, sea state); Species identification or • The number of marine mammals description of the animal(s) involved; of takes alone is not enough information observed, by species, relative to the pile • Fate of the animal(s); and on which to base an impact determination. In addition to location and if pile driving or removal • Photographs or video footage of the considering estimates of the number of was occurring at time of sighting; animal(s) (if equipment is available). • Age and sex class, if possible, of all marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ Activities would not resume until through harassment, NMFS considers marine mammals observed; NMFS is able to review the • PSO locations during marine other factors, such as the likely nature circumstances of the prohibited take. of any responses (e.g., intensity, mammal monitoring; NMFS would work with Chevron to • Distances and bearings of each duration), the context of any responses determine what is necessary to (e.g., critical reproductive time or marine mammal observed to the pile minimize the likelihood of further being driven or removed for each location, migration), as well as effects prohibited take and ensure MMPA on habitat, and the likely effectiveness sighting (if pile driving or removal was compliance. Chevron would not be able occurring at time of sighting); of the mitigation. We also assess the • to resume their activities until notified number, intensity, and context of Description of any marine mammal by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone. behavior patterns during observation, estimated takes by evaluating this In the event that Chevron discovers an including direction of travel; information relative to population • Number of individuals of each injured or dead marine mammal, and status. Consistent with the 1989 species (differentiated by month as the lead PSO determines that the cause preamble for NMFS’s implementing appropriate) detected within the of the injury or death is unknown and regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, monitoring zone, and estimates of the death is relatively recent (e.g., in 1989), the impacts from other past and number of marine mammals taken, by less than a moderate state of ongoing anthropogenic activities are species (a correction factor may be decomposition as described in the next incorporated into this analysis via their applied to total take numbers, as paragraph), Chevron would immediately impacts on the environmental baseline appropriate); report the incident to the Chief of the (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status • Detailed information about any Permits and Conservation Division, of the species, population size and implementation of any mitigation Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, growth rate where known, ongoing triggered (e.g., shutdowns and delays), a and the West Coast Regional Stranding sources of human-caused mortality, or description of specific actions that Coordinator. The report would include ambient noise levels). ensued, and resulting behavior of the the same information identified in the Pile driving and extraction associated animal, if any; paragraph above. Activities would be with Chevron’s LWMEP project as • Description of attempts to able to continue while NMFS reviews outlined previously have the potential distinguish between the number of the circumstances of the incident. to injure, disturb or displace marine individual animals taken and the NMFS would work with Chevron to mammals. Specifically, the planned number of incidences of take, such as determine whether modifications in the activities may result in Level B ability to track groups or individuals; activities are appropriate. harassment (behavioral disturbance) for and In the event that Chevron discovers an seven marine mammal species • Level B harassment exposures injured or dead marine mammal and the authorized for take from underwater recorded by PSOs must be extrapolated lead PSO determines that the injury or sound generated during pile driving and based upon the number of observed death is not associated with or related removal operations. Level A harassment takes and the percentage of the Level B to the activities authorized in the IHA in the form of limited PTS may also harassment zone that was not visible. (e.g., previously wounded animal, occur to animals of two species. No If no comments are received from carcass with moderate to advanced marine mammal stocks for which NMFS within 30 days, the draft final decomposition, or scavenger damage), incidental take authorization are listed report will constitute the final report. If Chevron would report the incident to as threatened or endangered under the comments are received, a final report the Chief of the Permits and ESA or determined to be strategic or addressing NMFS comments must be Conservation Division, Office of depleted under the MMPA. No serious submitted within 30 days after receipt of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the injuries or mortalities are anticipated to comments. West Coast Regional Stranding occur as a result of Chevron’s pile In the unanticipated event that the Coordinator, within 24 hours of the driving activities. specified activity clearly causes the take discovery. Chevron would provide A limited number of animals (513 of a marine mammal in a manner photographs, video footage (if available), harbor seals and 4 harbor porpoises) prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such or other documentation of the stranded could experience Level A harassment in as an injury, serious injury or mortality, animal sighting to NMFS and the the form of PTS if they stay within the Chevron would immediately cease the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. Level A harassment zone during impact
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28488 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
driving of 60-inch steel and 36-inch behavioral harassment. Furthermore, the analysis provided indicates that steel piles. The degree of injury is pile driving activities analyzed here are authorized take would account for no expected to be mild and is not likely to similar to, or less impactful than, more than 23 percent of the populations affect the reproduction or survival of the numerous construction activities of the stocks that could be affected. individual animals. It is expected that, conducted in other similar locations These are small numbers of marine if hearing impairments occurs, most which have taken place with no mammals relative to the sizes of the likely the affected animal would lose a reported injuries or mortality to marine affected stocks. few dB in its hearing sensitivity, which mammals, and no known long-term Based on the analysis contained in most cases is not likely to affect its adverse consequences from behavioral herein of the activity (including the survival and recruitment. harassment. mitigation and monitoring measures) The Level B takes that are anticipated In summary and as described above, and the anticipated take of marine and authorized are expected to be the following factors primarily support mammals, NMFS finds that small limited to short-term behavioral our determination that the impacts numbers of marine mammals will be harassment. Marine mammals present resulting from this activity are not taken relative to the population size of near the action area and taken by Level expected to adversely affect the species the affected species or stocks. B harassment would most likely show or stock through effects on annual rates Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis overt brief disturbance (e.g. startle of recruitment or survival: and Determination reaction) and avoidance of the area from • No mortality is anticipated or elevated noise level during pile driving. authorized; There are no relevant subsistence uses However, this is unlikely to result in • Anticipated incidences of Level A of the affected marine mammal stocks or any significant realized decrease in harassment would be in the form of a species implicated by this action. fitness for the affected individuals or small degree of PTS to a limited number Therefore, NMFS has determined that stocks for which take is authorized. of animals; the total taking of affected species or While harbor seals from Castro Rocks • Anticipated incidents of Level B stocks would not have an unmitigable may experience some temporary low- harassment consist of, at worst, adverse impact on the availability of level behavioral impacts, the number of temporary modifications in behavior; such species or stocks for taking for seals potentially affected is • No biologically important areas subsistence purposes. conservatively estimated at have been identified in the vicinity of approximately 23 percent of the stock. the project area; National Environmental Policy Act This number, however, likely includes • The small percentage of the stock To comply with the National multiple takes of the same individuals. that may be affected by project activities Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Furthermore, Castro Rocks and the (< 23 percent for all stocks); and (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and LWMEP location represent a small • Efficacy of mitigation measures is NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) portion of the range of the California expected to minimize the likelihood and 216–6A, NMFS must review our stock of harbor seal. These two factors severity of the level of harassment. proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an indicate that a much lower percentage Based on the analysis contained incidental harassment authorization) of the stock would potentially be herein of the likely effects of the with respect to potential impacts on the affected and, therefore, no adverse specified activity on marine mammals human environment. impacts to the stock as a whole are and their habitat, and taking into This action is consistent with expected. consideration the implementation of the categories of activities identified in The project is not expected to have monitoring and mitigation measures, Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental significant adverse effects on affected NMFS finds that the total marine harassment authorizations with no marine mammal habitat. The activities mammal take from the activity will have anticipated serious injury or mortality) may cause fish to leave the area a negligible impact on all affected of the Companion Manual for NOAA temporarily. This could impact marine marine mammal species or stocks. Administrative Order 216–6A, which do mammals’ foraging opportunities in a not individually or cumulatively have Small Numbers limited portion of the foraging range; the potential for significant impacts on but, because of the relatively short As noted above, only small numbers the quality of the human environment duration of driving activities and the of incidental take may be authorized and for which we have not identified relatively small area of affected habitat, under Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of any extraordinary circumstances that the impacts to marine mammal habitat the MMPA for specified activities other would preclude this categorical are not expected to cause significant or than military readiness activities. The exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has long-term negative consequences. MMPA does not define small numbers determined that the issuance of the IHA Furthermore, there are no biologically and so, in practice, where estimated qualifies to be categorically excluded important areas identified in the project numbers are available, NMFS compares from further NEPA review. area. the number of individuals taken to the The likelihood that marine mammals most appropriate estimation of Endangered Species Act (ESA) will be detected by trained observers is abundance of the relevant species or Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered high under the environmental stock in our determination of whether Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. conditions described for the project. The an authorization is limited to small 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal employment of the soft-start mitigation numbers of marine mammals. agency insure that any action it measure during impact driving would Additionally, other qualitative factors authorizes, funds, or carries out is not also allow marine mammals in or near may be considered in the analysis, such likely to jeopardize the continued the shutdown and Level A zone zones as the temporal or spatial scale of the existence of any endangered or to move away from the impact driving activities. threatened species or result in the sound source. Therefore, the mitigation Table 13 depicts the number of destruction or adverse modification of and monitoring measures are expected animals that could be exposed to Level designated critical habitat. to reduce the potential for injury and A and Level B harassment from work No incidental take of ESA-listed reduce the amount and intensity of associated with Chevron’s project. The species is expected to occur or
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28489
authorized for this activity. Therefore, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: reports are available on NMFS’ website NMFS has determined that formal (see ADDRESSES). Background consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this action. Section 117 of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. Withdrawal of the West Bay Common 1361 et seq.) requires NMFS and the Bottlenose Dolphin SAR Authorization U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to NMFS is in the process of writing As a result of these determinations, prepare stock assessments for each stock NMFS has issued an IHA to Chevron for separate stock assessment reports for of marine mammals occurring in waters each of the 31 individual stocks conducting pile driving and removal under the jurisdiction of the United activities at Chevron’s Long Wharf from contained in the Northern Gulf of States, including the U.S. Exclusive Mexico Bay, Sound, and Estuary June 1, 2019 through May 31, 2020, Economic Zone (EEZ). These reports provided the previously mentioned common bottlenose dolphin report. For must contain information regarding the the draft 2018 SARs, 2 new individual mitigation, monitoring, and reporting distribution and abundance of the stock, requirements are incorporated. reports were completed separating out population growth rates and trends, the West Bay and Terrebonne-Timbalier Dated: May 30, 2019. estimates of annual human-caused Bay Estuarine System stocks from the Donna S. Wieting, mortality and serious injury (M/SI) from larger report. However, we are not Director, Office of Protected Resources, all sources, descriptions of the fisheries finalizing the new individual report for National Marine Fisheries Service. with which the stock interacts, and the the West Bay common bottlenose [FR Doc. 2019–12922 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] status of the stock. Initial reports were dolphin stock because the abundance completed in 1995. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P estimate for this stock is based on a The MMPA requires NMFS and FWS publication that is still currently in to review the SARs at least annually for review (Litz et al., in review). NMFS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE strategic stocks and stocks for which will include the updated abundance significant new information is available, estimate for the West Bay stock in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric and at least once every three years for Administration draft 2019 report, once the Litz et al. non-strategic stocks. The term ‘‘strategic publication is in press or has been RIN 0648–XG300 stock’’ means a marine mammal stock: published. To date, we have completed (A) For which the level of direct human- 2018 Marine Mammal Stock individual reports for five bottlenose caused mortality exceeds the potential dolphin stocks (Terrebonne-Timbalier Assessment Reports biological removal level or PBR (defined Bay Estuarine System, Barataria Bay by the MMPA as the maximum number AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Estuarine System, Mississippi Sound/ of animals, not including natural Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Lake Borgne/Bay Boudreau, mortalities, that may be removed from a Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Choctawhatchee Bay, and St. Joseph marine mammal stock while allowing Commerce. Bay). The remaining 26 stocks are that stock to reach or maintain its ACTION: Notice; response to comments. included in the Northern Gulf of Mexico optimum sustainable population); (B) Bay, Sound, and Estuary Stocks report. SUMMARY: As required by the Marine which, based on the best available Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS scientific information, is declining and Comments and Responses has considered public comments for is likely to be listed as a threatened revisions of the 2018 marine mammal species under the Endangered Species NMFS received letters containing stock assessment reports (SARs). This Act (ESA) within the foreseeable future; comments on the draft 2018 SARs from notice announces the availability of 46 or (C) which is listed as a threatened the Aleut Community of St. Paul Island final 2018 SARs that were updated and species or endangered species under the Tribal Government; the Makah Tribe; finalized. ESA. NMFS and the FWS are required the Marine Mammal Commission; the ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of SARs to revise a SAR if the status of the stock North Slope Borough; 11 non- are available on the internet as regional has changed or can be more accurately governmental organizations (Alaska Oil compilations at the following address: determined. NMFS, in conjunction with and Gas Association, Center for https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ the Alaska, Atlantic, and Pacific Biological Diversity, Conservation Law national/marine-mammal-protection/ independent Scientific Review Groups Foundation, Defenders of Wildlife, marine-mammal-stock-assessment- (SRG), reviewed the status of marine Friends of the Children’s Pool, Hawaii reports-region. mammal stocks as required and revised Longline Association, The Humane A list of references cited in this notice reports in the Alaska, Atlantic, and Society of the United States, Oceana, is available at www.regulations.gov Pacific regions to incorporate new Point Blue Conservation Science, (search for docket NOAA–NMFS–2018– information. Southern Environmental Law 0086) or upon request. The period covered by the 2018 SARs Foundation, and Whale and Dolphin FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa is 2012–2016. NMFS updated SARs for Conservation); and 3 individuals. Lierheimer, Office of Protected 2018, and the revised draft reports were Responses to substantive comments are Resources, 301–427–8402, made available for public review and below; comments on actions not related [email protected]; Marcia comment for 90 days (83 FR 47137, to the SARs are not included below. Muto, 206–526–4026, Marcia.Muto@ September 18, 2018). NMFS received Comments suggesting editorial or minor noaa.gov, regarding Alaska regional comments on the draft 2018 SARs and clarifying changes were incorporated in stock assessments; Elizabeth Josephson, has revised the reports as necessary. the reports, but they are not included in 508–495–2362, Elizabeth.Josephson@ This notice announces the availability the summary of comments and noaa.gov, regarding Atlantic, Gulf of of 46 final 2018 reports that were responses. In some cases, NMFS’ Mexico, and Caribbean regional stock updated. The new individual draft responses state that comments would be assessments; or Jim Carretta, 858–546– report for the West Bay stock of considered or incorporated in future 7171, [email protected], regarding common bottlenose dolphin stock was revisions of the SARs rather than being Pacific regional stock assessments. not finalized (see below). The final incorporated into the final 2018 SARs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28490 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
Comments on National Issues continues to be an issue for many documented marine mammal species fisheries in most regions. In some cases, and stocks incidentally killed or Minimum Population Estimates fisheries that have the potential to take injured. In light of the high-priority Comment 1: The Marine Mammal marine mammals go unobserved marine mammal interactions in the Commission (Commission) comments entirely. For example, in Hawaii, several Category I Hawaii deep-set longline the requirements of Section 117 of the unobserved, state-managed line fisheries fishery and the Category II Hawaii MMPA require inclusion of a minimum likely interact with endangered main shallow-set longline fishery and population estimate (Nmin), a key factor Hawaiian Islands insular false killer American Samoa longline fishery, and for effective management of marine whales. In Alaska, numerous limited observer budget resources, the mammal stocks using PBR. Without an unobserved, state-managed salmon Hawaii line fisheries cited by the Nmin derived from recent data, PBR gillnet fisheries pose a significant risk of Commission are not prioritized for cannot be calculated and an interactions with harbor porpoises. In coverage at this time. ‘‘undetermined’’ value results, which is other cases, observed fisheries with While we are not operating the Alaska useless for management purposes. known interactions with marine Marine Mammal Observer Program Including the revised 2018 draft SARs, mammals have observer coverage but is (AMMOP) due to lack of available an Nmin estimate is lacking for 91 of the inadequate (e.g., less than 10 percent). resources to fund additional 251 identified stocks (or 36 percent). Observer coverage in the Category I observations of the southeast Alaska The Commission understands that the Mid-Atlantic gillnet fishery, which is salmon driftnet fishery, we are working primary reason for this shortcoming is a known to take significant numbers of to assess the needed resources and lack of resources (mainly access to common bottlenose dolphins, common actively exploring options to identify vessel and plane platforms from which dolphins, and harbor porpoises, additional resources for the AMMOP. surveys are conducted) to collect the averaged less than five percent from Coverage rates for the Category I Mid- necessary information. The Commission 2012 to 2016. On the positive side, Atlantic gillnet fishery are limited both appreciates the efforts NMFS has made annual coverage increased steadily from by funding and practical limitations, to address this shortcoming by setting two to eight percent over that period. although observer coverage has priorities across regions, coordinating Observer coverage in the Category II continued to increase in recent years. requests for vessel time, and Mid-Atlantic bottom trawl fishery Obtaining higher coverage is maximizing the data collected during averaged under eight percent coverage challenging due to the geographically these surveys (e.g., Ballance et al. 2017). over the same period, although once dispersed nature of this fishery. In 2017, The Commission recommends that again annual coverage increased from the observer coverage for this fishery NMFS continue its efforts to prioritize five to ten percent during that period. was 9.36 percent and generally higher in and coordinate requests to secure the The Commission recommends that strata where marine bycatch occurred. necessary survey resources across NMFS continue to increase observer Despite having observer coverage rates regions. In addition to these internal coverage in all fisheries with significant of 5 to 10 percent from 2012–2016, the efforts, the Commission acknowledges marine mammal bycatch that lack Category II Mid-Atlantic bottom trawl and encourages NMFS’ continued adequate coverage to provide reliable fishery generally has observer coverage engagement and collaboration with estimates of incidental take levels, with required to meet the target of a 30 other federal agencies that also require increased efforts to develop percent coefficient of variation (CV) for basic information on marine mammal collaborative observer programs for marine mammal mortality estimates in stocks, through programs like the state-managed fisheries, particularly in that fishery. In light of the fact that the Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Alaska and Hawaii. 30 percent CV target is generally being Protected Species and similar programs Response: NMFS is charged with met with 5 to 10 percent observer in the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific. fulfilling a wide range of requirements coverage, increasing observer coverage Further, the Commission recommends under the Magunson-Stevens Act, for this fishery is not a high priority that these marine assessment programs MMPA, and ESA, and regulations given limited observer budget resources. continue to include appropriate implementing those Acts. These Review of SARs for Strategic Stocks personnel, logistical capability, and mandates include ending overfishing vessel time to allow for photo- and rebuilding fish stocks, protecting Comment 3: The Commission identification, biopsy sampling, satellite and recovering threatened and comments that Section 117 of the tagging and other efforts to augment and endangered species, reducing bycatch, MMPA directs NMFS to review at least increase the value of the core line- enforcing laws and regulations, and annually, all stock assessment reports transect survey data collected. These combating illegal, unreported, and for strategic stocks. How NMFS additional efforts will assist in unregulated fishing internationally. In addresses this requirement varies by delineating stock structure, confirming recent years, we have tried to meet region. For example, the 2018 draft at-sea identification of cryptic species, performance goals ensuring that at least reports for Alaska include proposed and furthering understanding of marine 38 U.S. fisheries continue to maintain revisions, some minor, to the reports for mammal distribution, habitat use, and adequate observer coverage through the all strategic stocks. While the other behavior, all important to the overall deployment of at least 70,000 sea days regions may have reviewed each management goals of NMFS under the observed nationwide. Allocation of strategic stock in 2018, not every MMPA. observer coverage involves a variety of strategic stock was revised and released Response: We acknowledge the trade-offs that prevent each fishery from for public comment. Some strategic Commission’s comment and will being observed each year, or at high stocks have SARs that have not been continue to prioritize our efforts for the levels of coverage. updated in more than five years, collection of data to address outdated In the case of the Hawaii line fisheries presumably because no significant new Nmin estimates. mentioned by the Commission, those information has been published on fisheries are all Category III fisheries in abundance, distribution, human-caused Fisheries Observer Coverage the MMPA List of Fisheries (LOF). serious injury and mortality, stock Comment 2: The Commission points According to the 2018 LOF, only the structure or habitat concerns for those out that adequate observer coverage Hawaii troll fishery has had stocks. To help ensure NMFS is aware
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28491
of new information relevant to all Mammal Stock Assessment Reports (82 Response: The topic of outdated strategic stocks, the Commission FR 60181, December 19, 2017), we are abundance information was discussed at recommends that NMFS include in the currently in the process of reviewing the 2011 workshop on the Guidelines Federal Register notice, published stock structure under the MMPA for all for Assessing Marine Mammal Stocks when revised SARs are released, a humpback whales in U.S. waters, (GAMMS). We proposed revisions to the specific request for new information for following the change in ESA listing for GAMMS in 2012, including an approach strategic stocks that were not updated the species in 2016, to determine to address outdated abundance that year. New relevant information whether we can align the stocks with estimates developed at the 2011 could include peer-reviewed the DPSs under the ESA. Until such workshop. Due to the strenuous information on human-caused serious time that the humpback whale stock objections to the proposed approach injury and mortality, fishery structure under the MMPA with respect received during public comment, we interactions, abundance, distribution, to the ESA listing has been completed, did not implement any changes stock structure and habitat concerns, we are retaining the current stock regarding outdated abundance estimates which could be incorporated into SARs, delineations and any changes in stock at that time. We are currently working and other information that might draw delineation or MMPA section 117 to develop an alternative approach, attention to emerging concerns for a elements (such as PBR or strategic which would be included in the next strategic stock. status) will be reflected in future stock revision of the guidelines. We will Response: We appreciate the assessment reports. Revising the stock solicit public review and comment on Commission’s recommendation and will structure for humpback whales is a high any proposed revisions. include in future Federal Register priority; however, the process of Comments on Alaska Issues notices regarding draft stock assessment reviewing stock structure under the reports a request for new information MMPA has taken longer than Alaska Native Subsistence Takes relevant to all strategic stocks not anticipated because we are evaluating updated in the current year. Comment 6: The Commission the Agency’s process for stock comments that accurate information on Reconciling Humpback Whale Distinct designation. the taking of marine mammals by Population Segments (DPSs) and MMPA Nmin and PBR Alaska Natives for subsistence and Stocks handicraft purposes is becoming Comment 4: The Commission Comment 5: The Alaska Oil and Gas increasingly important in light of the expresses concern that NMFS’ review of Association (AOGA) comments the draft pace of climate changes occurring in the the stock structure of humpback whales assessment for the Bering Sea stock of Arctic and sub-Arctic regions. Over the under the MMPA in light of the 14 DPSs harbor porpoise is an example of long- past several years, the Commission has identified under the Endangered standing inadequacy in the repeatedly recommended that NMFS, in Species Act (81 FR 62259, September 8, development of Nmin and PBR for collaboration with its co-management 2016) has now been underway for two stocks with abundance estimates older partners, improve its monitoring and years with no timetable for its than eight years. As a result of applying reporting of subsistence hunting in completion. They state the lack of the guidelines for preparing the SARs, Alaska. The Commission appreciates the reconciliation between humpback DPSs NMFS does not use abundance efforts made by NMFS in this regard and humpback stocks has had effects on estimates older than eight years to with an increase in the 2018 draft SARs other management decisions undertaken calculate either Nmin or PBR due to a in the number of communities reporting by NMFS, such as those related to the decline in confidence in the reliability hunting levels for bearded and ribbon proposed draft negligible impact of an aged abundance estimate. Both seals (from 12 to 16 villages for the most determination for the California thresher Nmin and PBR are considered recent five years). Nevertheless, this still shark/swordfish drift gillnet fishery ‘‘undetermined’’ or ‘‘unknown’’ which represents only one-quarter of the 64 (<14 inch mesh) and the Washington/ AOGA asserts is a mischaracterization communities that may hunt ice seals. Oregon/California sablefish pot fishery, that makes using SARs for permitting Therefore, the Commission continues to and those related to its response to the and management decisions very recommend that NMFS pursue increased number of humpback whale difficult. They suggest if Nmin can be additional mechanisms to gather entanglements on the west coast since identified, even from a survey that is reliable information on the numbers of 2014. The Commission recommends outdated, it should be used to calculate marine mammals taken for subsistence that NMFS take the necessary steps to PBR using the best available science. and creating handicrafts, including by conclude its review of humpback whale This approach seems analogous to the securing adequate funding for stock structure and revise the humpback practice of under-estimating a PBR comprehensive surveys of subsistence whale SARs accordingly in the draft based on a recent survey which covers use and Native hunting effort. The 2019 reports. only a portion of an animal’s total range. Commission encourages NMFS to The Center for Biological Diversity, AOGA recommends that the guidelines continue to provide updated Humane Society of the United States, for preparing the SARs be revisited and information whenever it becomes and Whale and Dolphin Conservation even if the ‘‘eight-year rule’’ remains the available, even if it pertains only to a (CBD–HSUS–WDC) ask NMFS to threshold for estimating Nmin and limited number of villages or a subset of elaborate on the status of the agency- developing current PBRs, the SAR years. wide moratorium on revising MMPA should identify the most recent data and Response: We agree that it would be stock definitions and Point Blue an estimate of PBR that results from beneficial to have more comprehensive Conservation Science expresses support those data. If necessary, the SAR can information about the harvest numbers for NMFS to clarify how the DPSs will provide caveats regarding the data and of species of Alaska marine mammals be treated under the MMPA as quickly include statements to acknowledge the taken for subsistence purposes and for as possible. potential risks of using such data. They creating handicrafts. We provide co- Response: As described in our comment this is a more reasonable management funding to Alaska Native Federal Register notice requesting approach than stating that ‘‘PBR is organizations under section 119 of the comments on the Draft 2017 Marine considered unknown.’’ MMPA, in part to monitor harvests and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28492 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
report harvest numbers. The best changing environmental conditions on needed because climate change is a available information is more prey distribution and abundance. threat to Steller sea lions and their comprehensive for some species (e.g., The overall trend for most humpback habitat and there have been several bowhead whales, beluga whales, and whale populations found in U.S. waters unusual mortality events in the last northern fur seals) than for others (e.g., is positive and points toward recovery decade documented for marine harbor seals and ice seals). The (81 FR 62259; September 8, 2016), mammals in Alaska. They note that shortcomings reflect the limited indicating that prey availability is not a Steller sea lion pup counts in the central resources available to support harvest major problem. However, a sharp and eastern Gulf of Alaska in 2017 were monitoring and reporting, as well as the decline in observed reproduction and subsequently lower than prior years, large number of communities over a encounter rates of humpback whales indicating that prey availability from the wide geographic area that subsistence from the central North Pacific between warm conditions decreased pup hunt for species such as harbor seals, 2013 and 2018 has been related to production. ice-associated seals, and Steller sea oceanographic anomalies and Response: There have been three lions. Within the constraints of consequent impacts on prey resources Unusual Mortality Events (UMEs) appropriations, we will continue to (Cartwright et al. 2019), suggesting that declared in Alaska since 1991 (large work with our co-management partners humpback whales are vulnerable to whales in 2015; ice seals (ringed, to monitor subsistence harvests and major environmental changes. bearded, and spotted) in 2011; and sea make that information publicly The Western U.S. Steller sea lion SAR otters in 2006). Consistent with our accessible as it becomes available. does summarize representative response to Comment 8, the Pribilof publications describing such potential population of Steller sea lions is within Prey Availability threats in the ‘‘Habitat Concerns’’ the western stock of Steller sea lions, so Comment 7: Oceana points out that in section. It is also noted in the ‘‘Current it is not assessed separately in the addition to estimating direct human- Population Trend’’ section that the current SAR. We will cite published caused mortality, for a strategic stock, decline in pup abundance in the central studies that discuss the potential the SAR must identify ‘‘other factors Gulf of Alaska in 2017 was correlated consequences of climate change and that may be causing a decline or with a dramatic decline in the harmful algal blooms on western Steller impeding recovery of the stock, abundance of Pacific cod in the area sea lions in the ‘‘Habitat Concerns’’ including effects on marine mammal during the winter. There are no section of future SARs if we determine habitat and prey.’’ They note that NMFS available data that definitively tie this that these changes in the Alaska coastal has not assessed the impacts of prey decline to a drop in natality but the environment are of concern for the levels on strategic stocks, such as relationship is implied. As relevant western Steller sea lion stock. Comment 10: Oceana comments that whether, or how, commercial fishing or studies become available they will be while the draft SARs include annual any other factor may be decreasing the cited in future SARs. mortality and serious injury rates from availability of prey and, consequently, A 3-year study to address whether federally-managed commercial fisheries causing declines or impeding recovery prey availability during the breeding monitored and reported by groundfish of strategic stocks and they request that season may be a factor affecting Eastern fisheries observers, these observer data NMFS assess how prey availability may Pacific northern fur seal recovery was are limited and there are only partial be affecting humpback whale, Steller initiated in 2018 by NMFS, in observer data in some of the trawl sea lion, and northern fur seal stocks. collaboration with the University of Washington and with support from the fisheries (e.g., Gulf of Alaska flatfish Response: Overall, the NMFS Lenfest Ocean Program. Study results, trawl, Gulf of Alaska pollock trawl, and Guidelines for Preparing Stock when published, will be cited in future Gulf of Alaska Pacific cod trawl Assessment Reports (NMFS 2016) state SARs if relevant. fisheries). As a result, they point out the if substantial habitat issues are majority of fishing activity, and the important for strategic stocks, then a Steller Sea Lion, Western Distinct possible marine mammal interactions ‘‘Habitat’’ section should be used to Population Segment through that activity, are without summarize the existing data that Comment 8: Oceana suggests the monitoring or accountability. What is indicate a problem. The guidelines also population trend, stock status, and reported in the SARs is a yearly note that the SARs are not intended to habitat concern sections of the Steller estimate, with unreported variance, be a forum in which to present sea lion assessment include a discussion extrapolated from observer data, which significant new data and analysis. on the observations and implications of makes it difficult to evaluate the Instead, analyses are to be conducted localized extirpation of breeding sea accuracy of those marine mammal and published separately, and such an lions from historical habitats. mortality estimates. They recommend it analysis is not part of the SAR process Response: Under the MMPA, stock would benefit marine mammal itself. status is determined relative to the monitoring to have higher rates of There is no comprehensive entirety of a stock. Steller sea lion observer coverage on fisheries that information about how prey availability population trend estimates are shown in potentially interact with endangered may be affecting humpback whale the SAR by subregions to highlight species like the western DPS Steller sea stocks. To address this question would trend differences, but these are not lion. require accurate data on prey abundance management units under the MMPA. Response: Estimates of variance are across the whales’ entire range, prey Implications of declines in various reported as CVs and are consistently consumption rates for individuals and regions within the western stock are available for Alaska commercial populations, energetics of individual discussed in context of population groundfish fisheries that host fisheries whales, and spatial and species overlap recovery under the ESA in the Steller observers. In the current SARs, CVs are with commercial fishery catches. While Sea Lion Recovery Plan. reported for the estimates of mean the latter might be quantifiable, there is Comment 9: Oceana recommends that annual mortality and serious injury currently no way to obtain any an assessment of mitigation measures rates. We will consider including the reasonable data for the other variables for recovery of the Steller sea lion CVs for the yearly estimates of mortality involved, let alone for the impact of population in the Pribilof region is and serious injury in future SARs;
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28493
however, these CVs would only describe period. The SAR states that there is no issued a decision vacating the listing. A the uncertainty in the extrapolated reason to believe that limiting mortality notice of appeal of the District Court estimates of mortality and serious injury and serious injury to the level of the decision was filed on May 3, 2016; and based on observer data from randomly- PBR will reverse the decline. They the listing was reinstated on May 15, selected monitored hauls; it is not suggest the report would benefit from 2018. Because the stock was not listed possible to calculate CVs for mortality adding a brief explanation of the as threatened under the ESA or and serious injury from opportunistic scientific analysis used to justify considered to be strategic under the data (e.g., those collected from non- changes in the fur seal subsistence MMPA when the draft 2018 SARs were randomly selected hauls). The CVs for harvest regulations and any potential prepared, we did not revise the ringed many observed fisheries are low because impacts as described in the recent Final seal SAR in 2018; however, we will the proportion of the fleet that is Environmental Impact Statement revise the SAR in 2019. observed is quite high. It is accurate that published by NMFS (https:// Beluga Whale, Cook Inlet many Alaska fisheries that are known to www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/notice- have mortality and serious injury are availability-final-supplemental- Comment 15: AOGA recommends observed at a low rate or are not environmental-impact-statement). NMFS include information in the beluga observed at all. In general, the annual Response: We agree that the statement whale, Cook Inlet report that due to rates of mortality and serious injury referenced by the commenter is unclear. their continued small population size, reflected in the SARs are considered a The full sentence in the draft SAR the Yakutat Bay beluga whales remain minimum estimate for each stock. In stated: ‘‘However, given that the part of the Cook Inlet stock and are still Alaska, we place observers through an population is declining for unknown provided the same protections as the Annual Deployment Plan, which allows reasons, and this decline is not Cook Inlet stock including the for flexibility as the priorities for explained by the relatively low level of limitations on hunting. observations change. We intend to known direct human-caused mortality Response: We have added this observe state fisheries with at least an and serious injury, there is no reason to information to the final 2018 Cook Inlet occasional level of mortality and serious believe that limiting mortality and beluga whale SAR. injury of marine mammals if resources serious injury to the level of the PBR Comment 16: AOGA notes the draft become available. will reverse the decline.’’ We have Cook Inlet beluga whale SAR does not replaced this sentence with the include the 164 observed dead stranded Northern Fur Seal, Eastern Pacific following sentence in the final 2018 whales between 1998–2013 identified in Comment 11: Oceana recommends the SAR: ‘‘The PBR calculation assumes the December 2016 Cook Inlet beluga northern fur seal assessment include an mortality is evenly distributed across whale ESA Recovery Plan. They suggest estimate of the direct or indirect males, females, and each age class; but the average, unexplained mortality mortality and loss of production that that is not the case with the subsistence during this period of approximately 11 occurs from competition with harvest, which accounts for most of the beluga whales per year may provide commercial fisheries. The Aleut known direct human-caused mortality. important context for the lack of Community of St. Paul Island Tribal The subsistence harvest is almost recovery of this species. Government (ACSPI) requests that entirely sub-adult males and male pups Response: The mortality observed NMFS include an estimation of and, therefore, has a relatively low between 1998 and 2013 (Burek- commercial fisheries’ impacts on the impact on the population due to the Huntington et al. 2015) is described in Eastern Pacific stock’s population, disproportionate importance of females detail in the ‘‘Other Mortality’’ section habitat, and prey through removal of to the population. Thus, non-breeding of the Cook Inlet beluga whale SAR. We prey or provide an explanation as to male-biased mortality up to the will add information about this why it is not included. maximum levels authorized for observed mortality to the Status of Stock Response: See response to Comment subsistence use does not represent a section of the draft 2019 SAR. 7. significant risk to the Eastern Pacific Harbor Porpoise, Southeast and Other Comment 12: ACSPI comments the northern fur seal stock.’’ This issue is Alaska Stocks MMPA requires that NMFS ‘‘describe described in more detail in the recent commercial fisheries that interact with Final Environmental Impact Statement Comment 17: The Commission the stock, including . . . the estimated cited by the commenter. expresses concern there remains level of incidental mortality and serious appreciable uncertainty in the injury of the stock by each such fishery Ringed Seal calculated PBR and estimated M/SI on an annual basis [and] seasonal or Comment 14: AOGA notes that levels for the Southeast Alaska (SEAK) area differences in such incidental information and updates on the Alaska harbor porpoise stock due to: (1) Low mortality or serious injury . . .’’ They stock of the ESA-listed Arctic observer coverage, (2) biased population note that NMFS does not include subspecies of ringed seal are not estimates, and (3) insufficient data on estimates of incidental mortality from provided in the 2018 SAR. Ringed seals stock delineation. In their comments on reduction in prey in the appendices that are the most abundant marine mammal the 2017 draft SARs, the Commission include these descriptions. species in the Arctic throughout the recommended that NMFS address these Response: See response to Comment year, and a species of major concern uncertainties and although NMFS is 7. Also, note that reduction in prey is related to ongoing oil and gas activities working to understand and reduce the not defined as an ‘‘incidental mortality’’ in the U.S. Beaufort Sea and they are uncertainties, no significant changes in the MMPA; incidental mortality is unclear why the report for this were made in the 2018 draft SAR. The defined as mortality incidental to direct ‘‘strategic’’ stock was not reviewed and Commission urges NMFS to continue its human activities. updated. efforts to address these issues. Comment 13: AOGA notes the draft Response: The Alaska stock of ringed Response: The PBR level of 12 for the northern fur seal, Eastern Pacific SAR seals was listed as threatened under the Southeast Alaska harbor porpoise stock refers to the pup harvests on St. George ESA on December 28, 2012 (77 FR was estimated based on a survey that Island from 2014 through 2016, and a 76706). On March 11, 2016, the U.S. covered only a portion of the currently- total of 157 pups were killed over that District Court for the District of Alaska recognized distribution of this stock,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28494 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices
and it includes commercial fishery pelagic false killer whales, and Northern 2018) that are cited in the SAR contain mortalities or serious injuries that and Southern North Carolina Estuarine details about the human-caused occurred far north of the surveyed areas. System bottlenose dolphins). mortality, serious injury, and non- We are concerned about the Southeast Comment 19: The Commission serious injury of humpback whales Alaska harbor porpoise stock and are recommends that NMFS undertake observed in Hawaii fisheries and/or collecting additional information on analyses using harbor porpoise reported to the NMFS Pacific Islands stock structure and abundance to reduce population data and state gillnet Region stranding network. The 2017 uncertainties in the data available to fisheries data from throughout the range U.S. Pacific SARs contain only the manage this stock, and we have of harbor porpoises in Alaska, and reports and appendices that were prioritized the Southeast Alaska drift bycatch-rate data from comparable revised in 2017. An appendix in gillnet fishery for additional observer harbor porpoise populations from the complete versions of the U.S. Pacific coverage should resources become full range of the species, to develop SARs (e.g., Carretta et al. 2017) available. model-based estimates of the likely describes fisheries in U.S. west coast Comment 18: The Commission notes magnitude of harbor porpoise bycatch in and Hawaii waters, while appendices in the MMPA requires NMFS to develop the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea. the NMFS Alaska SARs describe and implement take reduction plans Response: We will investigate the fisheries in Alaska waters. (TRPs) for all strategic stocks (section feasibility of conducting the analyses Comment 22: CBD–HSUS–WDC urge 118(f)(1)) that interact with a Category I recommended by the Commission with NMFS to include more detail about the or II fishery, subject to the availability existing abundance data for these impacts of increasing ambient noise on of funding (section 118(f)(3)). Further, stocks; however, because the abundance humpback whales in the CNP humback the MMPA directs NMFS to give the data were collected between 1997 and whale report. For example, a recent highest priority to developing and 1999, the analyses would be based on study of humpback whales in Glacier implementing TRPs for stocks for which 20-year-old data that may not reflect the Bay National Park found that as ambient M/SI exceeds PBR, the population size current status of the population. sound levels increased, humpback is small, and/or the population is Humpback Whale, Central North Pacific whales responded by increasing the declining rapidly. Although the SEAK source levels of their calls by 0.81 stock of harbor porpoise meets the first Comment 20: CBD–HSUS–WDC decibel (dB) for every 1 dB increase in two criteria, NMFS has not yet chosen request that NMFS include in the ambient sound. In addition, for every 1 to develop a TRP for this stock. Given Central North Pacific (CNP) humpback dB increase in ambient sound, the the small size of the stock and the fact whale report the data presented and probability of a humpback whale calling that it is experiencing an unsustainable discussed at the November 2018 in the survey area decreased by 9 level of take, the Commission workshop that showed a decrease in percent. They suggest these details are recommends that NMFS apply the Hawaii in overall humpback whale especially important to guide criteria under section 118(f)(3) to give songs and a drop of nearly 80 percent management measures to protect whales this stock high priority, establish a take in sightings of mother and calf pairs from increasing ocean noise pollution. reduction team (TRT), and initiate the from 2014 to 2018. Response: Given the lack of development of a TRP. The Commission Response: At the time the draft 2018 conclusive data on negative impacts of recognizes that TRTs require a SARs were made available for public anthropogenic noise on the humpback minimum of information regarding comment, no published information was whale stock, we believe that the existing population size, status, fisheries available on this apparent change in text in the ‘‘Habitat Concerns’’ section of interactions, and mitigation options to winter distribution. NMFS will include the Central North Pacific humpback develop TRP recommendations. In this information from a recently published whale SAR is sufficient. case, based on what is known about this paper (Cartwright et al. 2019) in the and other harbor porpoise stocks, their draft 2019 SAR. Bowhead Whale interactions with gillnet fisheries in the Comment 21: CBD–HSUS–WDC note Comment 23: The North Slope eastern United States and Europe, and that in the CNP humpback whale report, Borough comments the bowhead quota the availability of approaches to reduce one humpback injury was observed in from the International Whaling bycatch numbers (e.g., Bj VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28495 definitions for Alaska killer whales and Atlantic Large Whale TRT regarding and Geographic Range’’ section of the the overlap in range of the AT1 three concurrent large whale UMEs that North Atlantic right whale report, this Transient stock with the Gulf of Alaska, are ongoing. According to this agency section should be revised to condense Aleutian Islands, and Bering Sea presentation, they include one from the historical distribution information Transient stock, they urge NMFS to 2016–2018 affecting humpback whales and include the significant changes in identify all fishery-related serious injury in the Atlantic (Cause: Undetermined; right whale distribution that have and mortality for Alaska transient killer Contributory Human Interaction); occurred since 2010. whales in the stock assessment report another from 2017–2018 affecting North Response: We agree with the for AT1 Transient whales. Further, a Atlantic right whales in the Atlantic Organizations that the ‘‘Stock Definition second killer whale of unknown stock (Cause: Preliminary Human Interaction); and Geographic Range’’ section of this origin was reported entangled in a and one from 2017–2018 affecting report could use substantial updates and California commercial Dungeness crab minke whales in the Atlantic (Cause: will plan to make these updates in the trap and was able to self-release. CBD– Undetermined; Contributory Human 2019 SAR. HSUS–WDC stress the importance that Interaction and Infection). Each of these Comment 27: The Organizations the stock assessment reports identify the three concurrent large whale UMEs span appreciate that NMFS includes a killer whale stocks that are vulnerable to from approximately 2016 to the present statement in the ‘‘Stock Definition and entanglement in Dungeness crab traps. and extend from Atlantic Canada to Range’’ section of the North Atlantic Neither the death in 2015 nor the Florida and involve 155 whales in total. right whale report noting a habitat shift interaction in 2016 is reported in the CBD–HSUS–WDC comment that resulting in an increased use by right killer whale stock assessment report. although NMFS has made public the whales of Cape Cod Bay and decreased Response: Based on genetic analysis, preliminary or contributory findings of use of the Great South Channel. the killer whale that entangled and died human interaction in all three However, they request NMFS also re- in commercial California Dungeness investigations public, there is little evaluate the section which states that crab pot gear in 2015 was identified as mention made of this in a number of the ‘‘visual and acoustic surveys have a transient killer whale with a affected SARs. demonstrated the existence of seven mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplotype Response: The period covered by the areas where western North Atlantic that has been found in transient killer 2018 SARs is 2012–2016. The right whales aggregate seasonally: The whales in the Pribilof Islands and humpback whale UME began in January coastal waters of the southeastern western Aleutian Islands. However, the of 2016 and the 2018 SAR includes United States; the Great South Channel; whale cannot be assigned to a specific language about the UME in the other Jordan Basin; Georges Basin along the stock because mtDNA haplotypes are mortality section. Any 2016 animals northeastern edge of Georges Bank; Cape unique to ecotypes of killer whales (e.g., included in the humback whale UME Cod and Massachusetts Bays; the Bay of resident, transient, offshore) but not to that were determined to be Fundy; and the Roseway Basin on the populations. Therefore, we will assign anthropogenic are included in the Scotian Shelf (Brown et al. 2001; Cole this mortality to both the Gulf of Alaska, mortality table. The recent right whale et al. 2013).’’ The Organizations do not Aleutian Islands, and Bering Sea UME was established in June of 2017. dispute the accuracy of the data from Transient killer whale stock and the Although the time frame of this UME is the sources cited but note that these West Coast Transient killer whale stock outside the focus of the 2018 SAR, sources are between five and 17 years in the next revisions of these SARs and during its review of the SAR at the old. The Organizations assert NMFS itself has acknowledged that sightings in in the NOAA Technical Memorandum Atlantic SRG meeting in February 2018, the Bay of Fundy have declined over the that contains information on human- the SRG suggested it was important to past 10 years, and the Agency has caused mortality and injury of NMFS- mention the UME in the text of the recently shifted significant resources to managed Alaska marine mammal stocks report. Prior to publishing the draft right Canada, leaving many areas of the Gulf in 2013–2017 (Delean et al. in press). whale SAR for public comment, NMFS of Maine, including Georges and Jordan The mortality will not be assigned to the updated the SAR text, added a link to Basins, without meaningful effort to AT1 Transient killer whale stock, the UME web page, and noted that all 2017 events that are determined to be evaluate the current importance of those because none of the whales in this anthropogenic in nature will be locations to right whales. population are missing. The killer whale included in the 2019 SAR. The minke Response: We have added a more that entangled in and self-released from whale UME started in January of 2017 recent reference to this section in the commercial California Dungeness crab and also was outside the time frame of 2018 final SAR (Mayo et al. 2018). We pot gear in 2016 was photographically the the 2018 minke whale SAR. We will re-evaluate and update the section identified as a member of the West have added text to the final 2018 minke if newer sources are available for the Coast Transient stock of killer whales, whale SAR that references the UME and 2019 SAR. and this non-serious injury will also be will include any events that are Comment 28: The Organizations included in Delean et al. (in press). We determined to be anthropogenic in disagree with NMFS’ conclusion that will add a statement to the draft 2019 nature in the mortality table and sightings south of Nantucket and AT1 Transient killer whale SAR noting calcuations in the 2019 SAR. Martha’s Vineyard reflect only a that transient killer whales have ‘‘modest late winter use’’ of this area by entangled in pot gear in other areas and North Atlantic Right Whales the species, suggest that the waters entanglement in this type of gear may be Comment 26: The Center for south of Cape Cod are increasingly a risk for the AT1 Transient stock of Biological Diversity, Conservation Law important, and ask the Agency to review killer whales. Foundation, Defenders of Wildlife, The its own use of Dynamic Area Comments on Atlantic Issues Human Society of the United States, Management (DMA) declarations for Southern Environmental Law these waters as additional confirmation General Large Whale UMEs Foundation, and Whale and Dolphin of their significance. In light of Comment 25: CBD–HSUS–WDC point Conservation (the Organizations) distributional changes in right whale out that NMFS presented information at suggest that while NMFS has included habitat noted since 2010, the the most recent (2018) meeting of the some updates in the ‘‘Stock Definition Organizations comment it is important VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28496 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices for the stock assessment reports to credible limit on the median estimate of whales to a counterpart species in the reflect not only historic, but also recent 451. This is the calculation established Southern Hemisphere. While we do not sightings outside of ‘‘traditional’’ habitat by the GAMMS (NMFS 2016). The discount the information provided, it is use that may indicate shifting habitat ‘‘overall species abundance of about unclear why NOAA did not rely instead use and broader distribution. 400’’ reported in the Hayes et al. 2018 on the more recent information in Response: As the period covered by NOAA Tech Memo was calulated by a Corkeron et al. 2018. We understand the the 2018 SARs is 2012–2016, any different method and took into account paper was not yet published when the sightings made and DMA zones the 2017 mortalities, which are outside draft report was made available to the declared in 2018 are outside of the time the time frame for the 2018 SAR. public but note that it is not frame of this report, but we will reflect Comment 31: The Organizations unprecedented for Stock Assessment any updates in the 2019 SAR. We have suggest the ‘‘Current Population Trend’’ Reports to include manuscripts ‘‘in removed the word ‘‘modest’’ and section in the North Atlantic right whale review,’’ as evidenced by ‘‘Henry et al. changed Stone et al. to Leiter et al. report should be revised and updated to in review,’’ cited in this draft. Comment 29: The Organizations also omit aging literature (e.g., from the Response: We have updated the total ask NMFS to consider omitting older 1990s) that appears less relevant. They number of calves born between 1990 information and updating the references strongly suggest retaining the figures in and 2016 to 442 in the final SAR. The used in the ‘‘Stock Definition and this section, abbreviating historic Henry et al. paper, in review at the time Range’’ section of the North Atlantic information and using language taken we published the draft SAR, is the right whale report. For instance, from the NOAA Tech Memo which Serious Injury and Mortality Report for according to the draft SAR, ‘‘(h)igh- more clearly assesses the current status the same time period as the SAR and is resolution (i.e., using 35 microsatellite including the recent population decline. on a parallel review track. The Henry et loci) genetic profiling has been Response: We discussed this issue al. paper is currently in press and will completed for 66 percent of all North with the Atlantic SRG at their 2018 be available shortly. In the interim, it Atlantic right whales identified through meeting. The consensus was that while will be provided upon request. The 2001,’’ for which a 2007 publication is this SAR should continue to maintain Corkeron et al. 2018 paper does cover cited. However, a 2009 publication by its temporal integrity for abundance more recent information but is more Frasier et al. states that high-resolution analysis and the case by case reporting applicable to later SAR periods and will genetic profiles are available for greater of interactions, language would be be included in the appropriate future than 75 percent of catalogued right added to the text referring to the 2017 SAR. whales. mortalities. Prior to publishing the draft Comment 33: The Organizations Response: We agree with the right whale SAR for public comment, appreciate the inclusion of a statement Organizations and have updated the we added the following text to the reflecting the unprecedented mortality Frasier cititation in the final 2018 SAR. ‘‘Annual Human-Caused Serious Injury of 17 right whales in 2017, the recent As noted above, we will re-evaluate and and Mortality’’ section of the report: poor calving years, and the update this section and include newer ‘‘Although PBR analyses in this SAR acknowledgement of a decline in the sources if available in the 2019 SAR. reflect data collected through 2016, it population but question whether any Comment 30: The Organizations should be noted that an additional 17 value of PBR other than zero is comment it is unclear why Nmin was right whale mortalities were observed in appropriate to use for this species when removed from the ‘‘Population Size’’ 2017 (Daoust et al. 2017). This number NOAA itself has determined the section of the North Atlantic right whale exceeds the largest estimated mortality population is currently declining at 2.33 SAR and why the estimates provided rate during the past 25 years. Further, percent per year as a result of human here appear to differ from those despite the usual extensive survey effort, causes. provided by NMFS in its 2018 only 5 and 0 calves were detected in Response: As directed in the MMPA, Technical Memo. According to the draft 2017 and 2018, respectively. Therefore, each SAR ‘‘shall’’ estimate the PBR level SAR, it appears Nmin was negated and the decline in the right whale for the stock. Further, the statute states changed only to ‘‘N’’ due to population will continue for at least an that PBR is calculated as the product of uncertainties around a probabilistic additional 2 years.’’ We will report the three elements: The minimum model and a median abundance of 451 statistical analysis of population trends population estimate (Nmin); half the individuals is provided. However, the that include the 2017 mortalities in the maximum net productivity rate (0.5 NOAA Tech Memo, also citing Pace et 2019 SAR. Rmax); and a recovery factor (Fr). In this al. 2017, estimates an ‘‘overall species Comment 32: The Organizations case, PBR is calculated as 0.9. abundance of about 400.’’ They suggest comment in the ‘‘Current and Maximum Comment 34: The Organizations this lower number—the minimum Net Productivity Rates’’ section of the request NMFS to consider a estimate of animals likely alive—would North Atlantic right whale report, it is comprehensive update of language in seem more appropriate to provide as an not clear how NMFS arrived at a total the ‘‘Annual Human-Caused Serious Nmin. of 443 calves born between 1990 and Injury and Mortality—Background’’ Response: The ‘‘min’’ was originally 2016. According to NOAA’s 5-Year section of the North Atlantic right whale removed because the author thought Review: Summary and Evaluation for SAR to better reflect a more current using Nmin would cause confusion with North Atlantic right whales, ‘‘(f)rom view of anthropogenic impacts. For the Minimum Number Alive calculation 1990–2014, 411 right whale calves were example, citations referencing analyses used in previous SARs. We have observed born, an average of 16.4 per on entanglements of right whales are corrected this in the final 2018 report year (with a standard deviation of 9.2). from 1999, 2001, and 2009; and, there and added Nmin back to the text However, according to the 2017 Right are more recent information available. because the sentence refers to the 60 Whale Report Card provided by the New Additionally, they note there is no percent lower bound common to most England Aquarium, 17 calves were born mention of sub-lethal impacts resulting SARs but in this case results from the in 2015 and 14 in 2016, which would from entanglements, in spite of available mark recapture estimation procedure. raise the total to 442, not 443. publications indicating this poses a The Nmin of 445 reported in the 2018 This section also includes a significant population-level risk to the SAR is the lower limit of the 60 percent comparison of North Atlantic right species. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28497 Response: We will update the text and Response: The Northeast Fisheries minimum number alive for the Gulf of citations for this section in the 2019 Science Center staff reviewed all these Maine stock of humpback whales based report. Regarding sub-lethal impacts cases and their determinations regarding on the Center for Coastal Studies (CCS) resulting from entanglements, we note serious injury were later reviewed by humpback whale catalog. They note that that the van der Hoop et al. (2017) paper experienced staff at another Fisheries these data are collected by CCS for is cited in the ‘Productivity Rates’ Science Center, the Greater Atlantic and dedicated research purposes and section of the report: ‘‘The available Southeast Regional Offices, and the include opportunistic sightings evidence suggests that at least some of Atlantic SRG, per NMFS Policy and contributed to CCS by others. These the observed variability in the calving Procedure for Distinguishing Serious data represent the most comprehensive rates of North Atlantic right whales is from Non-Serious Injury of Marine catalog of this management stock and related to variability in nutrition and Mammals. NMFS staff looks for are provided to NMFS as a courtesy. possibly increased energy expenditures evidence of significant health decline CBD–HSUS–WDC urge NMFS to related to non-lethal entanglements post event. consider providing dedicated support (Rolland et al. 2016; van der Hoop et al. Regarding whale #3996 and #3610, we for the long-term sustainability of this 2017).’’ We will discuss with the have updated Table 1 in the final report catalog, since NMFS relies on it for Atlantic SRG how best to incorporate to include the ID numbers. Three of the management of this stock. discussion of sub-lethal effects into the cases (#3692, #2810, and #1306) are Response: We agree with the ‘‘Annual Human-Caused Serious Injury ‘‘inconclusive,’’ or have evidence of commenter on the importance of the and Mortality’’ section of the North health decline on par with rest of CCS’ humback whale catalog and Atlantic right whale SAR. population. Regarding the unidentified acknowledge your comment. Comment 35: The Organizations whale located on Roseway Basin on Comment 40: CBD–HSUS–WDC do request NMFS include more recent September 13, 2015, while NMFS agrees not disagree with NMFS’s assessment studies in the ‘‘Fishery-Related that it is a serious injury, our experts that the lack of carcass recovery and post-mortem examination confound Mortality and Serious Injury’’ section of cannot determine the source of the conclusions regarding whether ship the North Atlantic right whale report injury; because there is no agreement on strikes or entanglements are more which can be used to better assess the vessel strike or entanglement, it cannot prevalent and note that NMFS does not impacts of serious injury resulting from be tallied with other human interaction provide in the Gulf of Maine humpback fishery interactions. For example, van events. There are other instances where whale SAR any data on the analysis of der Hoop et al. 2017 concluded that the whales have serious injuries, but we do carcasses recovered in the ongoing duration of an entanglement is critical not know the source. For whale #1142 UME. They suggest it would be useful in determining the survival of the and #4140, we will include the updated to include a more updated review for a impacted individual and that chronic information on the additional sightings UME stock to assess the number of cases entanglement is a costly life history in the 2019 report. in which necropsies have been stage, not a short-term event. Pettis et al. Comment 37: The Organizations agree with NMFS’ conclusion that the species conducted and what, if any, causes of 2017 found that severely entangled death were determined. For example, whales, along with lactating females, should remain listed as endangered and is in decline. However, according to the NMFS has indicated elsewhere that at were more likely to exhibit declining least 23 out of 60 examined carcasses body conditions than any other 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation of the North Atlantic Right were confirmed or suspected vessel population segment. While they strikes and at least four were confirmed acknowledge that NMFS has set criteria Whale (Eubalaena glacialis), the species has been in decline since 2010, not or suspected entanglement cases. Since for which serious injury and mortalities more recent data are available, they are determined, the Organizations stress 2011, as amended in the draft SAR. Response: The 2010 abundance should be used (e.g., data from 2017 are consideration of these kinds of studies estimate was higher than the 2009 used in the North Atlantic right whale can help inform these criteria and better estimate. The 2011 estimate was lower SAR). In addition, CBD–HSUS–WDC evaluate the overall impact of fishery than 2010, so we are considering 2011 request that NMFS consider providing interactions on this declining species. as the first year with evidence of more detail in the ‘‘Other Mortality’’ Response: We are working with decline. section beyond ‘‘causes of these UME partners on ways to quantify chronic events have not been determined.’’ entanglement so it can be incorporated Humpback Whales—Gulf of Maine Response: While we included data into the serious injury determination Stock from 2017 in the body of the right whale process. A challenge that we are trying Comment 38: CBD–HSUS–WDC SAR as recommended by the Atlantic to address is that the status of suggest that the ‘‘Stock Definition and SRG, we did not yet include those data individual whales might change Geographic Range’’ section of the Gulf in the tables or in calculations. Any between resights. We are undertaking a of Maine humpback whale report cases from the humpback whale UME review of the policy distinguishing should be revised to condense the that occurred in 2016 and were serious from non-serious injury and will outdated information and include a determined to be anthropogenic are consider this type of information more thorough examination of recent included in Table 1 of the 2018 SAR. throughout that process. changes in distribution and habitat use. (See response to Comment 25.) For the Comment 36: The Organizations ask Response: We agree that the ‘‘Stock 2019 SARs, we will review the UME NMFS to update the ID # for two North Definition and Geographic Range’’ language used in all reports and strive Atlantic right whales (#3996, #3610) section of this report could use for more consistency. We will also and review its assessment of a number substantial updates and will plan to provide some information on the of individual North Atlantic right make these updates in the 2019 SAR. number of cases necropsied, etc. whales (including #3692, #2810, #1142, Comment 39: CBD–HSUS–WDC Comment 41: CBD–HSUS–WDC #1306, [#unidentified], and #4140) to comment they understand that NMFS request NMFS clarify its conclusion in determine whether they should be cannot rely on an estimate based on data the ‘‘Fishery-Related Serious Injuries added to the list of M/SI cases in Table more than eight years old and and Mortalities’’ section of the Gulf of 1. appreciate NMFS’ development of a Maine humpback whale report that 29 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28498 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices serious injuries were prevented by can result in exposure to different estimate of bycatch being below PBR, disentanglement between 2012 and sources of risk (e.g., encountering they recommend this may be temporary 2016. For example, Spinnaker, an adult fisheries in new areas). and bears watching. Because bycatch is female humpback whale, was known to Response: We acknowledge this so close to PBR and has fluctuated be entangled on at least four separate comment and note that we will provide annually (often exceeding PBR), CBD– occasions and disentangled three times a new abundance estimate for this stock HSUS–WDC recommend that NMFS but ultimately died as a result of what in the 2019 SAR. The new estimate will undertake an annual review of this appears to be her second gear be based on 2016 surveys, and the stock’s SAR rather than every 3 years as interaction. CBD–HSUS–WDC is unclear sighting locations will be added to the indicated under GAMMS for non- as to how NMFS’ evaluation of sighting distribution map in that SAR. strategic stocks. disentanglement success would have As a point of clarification, the GAMMS Response: We recognize CBD–HSUS– been applied in such a case. (NMFS 2016) state that ‘‘unless WDC’s concern about long-finned pilot Response: As noted above in our compelling evidence indicates that a whales and are aware of the fluctuations response to Comments 34 and 35, we do stock has not declined since the last of bycatch around PBR for this stock. not currently have a method to address census, the Nmin estimate of the stock Because of this situation, we have sublethal effects or more subtle/slow should be considered unknown if 8 updated the WNA long-finned pilot health decline for the assessment of years have transpired since the last whale report in 18 of the 20 existing long-term success. Under NMFS’ Policy abundance survey.’’ This is different SARs and will continue to closely and Process for Distinguishing Serious from presuming a ‘‘worst case scenario monitor the bycatch of pilot whales. from Non-Serious Injury of Marine of a decline’’ as stated in the comment. Short-Finned Pilot Whales Mammals (NMFS 2012), we consider disentanglement to be successful unless Minke Whale Comment 47: CBD–HSUS–WDC stress there is additional information available Comment 44: CBD–HSUS–WDC the need to re-assess structure for short- on the condition of the animal such as reiterate their comments on prior SARs, finned pilot whales in both the Atlantic a significant health decline. This was that where current information is and in the Gulf of Mexico. They note at the case with Spinnaker. Her mortality readily available NMFS should the Atlantic SRG’s meeting in 2018, the was attributed to her 2014 entanglement incorporate that information into the SRG recommended that NMFS ‘‘. . . event, based on evidence from her 2015 most recent SAR to assure adequate consider new data, including satellite- necropsy. depiction of the stock status. In the case linked telemetry and photo Comment 42: CBD–HSUS–WDC of minke whales, the draft SAR makes identification, together with molecular comment they understand the factors no mention of a UME declared for this evidence of stock structure, in a new that dictate how NMFS evaluates a stock species in early 2017. In its public analysis. In addition, the SRG as strategic and greatly appreciate information page, NMFS states that recommends that both Centers prioritize NMFS’ clarification of the uncertainties ‘‘[p]reliminary findings in several of the the collection of new information that in the case of Gulf of Maine humpback whales have shown evidence of human could contribute to the question of stock whales, including that entanglements interactions or infectious disease,’’ structure of this species, by deploying are surely biased low and that the though a single definitive cause is not satellite linked transmitters, and uncertainties associated with their identified for all stranded animals. The collecting photo-identification images assessment may lead to an incorrect declaration of an on-going UME should and biopsy samples for genetic analyses determination of the stock’s status. be added to the SAR either in the during upcoming Gulf of Mexico Marine Response: We acknowledge this section on ‘‘Annual Human-Caused Assessment Program for Protected comment. Mortality and Serious Injury’’ or in the Species (GoMMAPPS) and AMAPPS III cruises.’’ CBD–HSUS–WDC understand Fin Whale section on ‘‘Other’’ mortality. Response: See response to Comment that limits on resources result in limits Comment 43: CBD–HSUS–WDC note 25. on updating stock information but assert that abundance estimates and range up-to-date information is key to the definition in the fin whale report are Risso’s Dolphins proper management of fishery based on survey data no more recent Comment 45: CBD–HSUS–WDC point interactions with short-finned pilot than 2011, at least 7 years ago. out that the abundance estimate for whales to assure that fishery-related According to NMFS’ own guidelines, Risso’s dolphins dates to 2011; and, as bycatch is not exceeding the PBR of a abundance data should be more recent noted in a previous comment, according properly-defined stock. They than eight years with a ‘‘worst case’’ to NMFS’ own guidelines, information recommend NMFS prioritize collection scenario of a decline presumed on stock abundance should be more of information to assure the stock is thereafter. At the 2018 meeting of the recent than 8 years. They recommend properly defined and assessed. Atlantic SRG, NMFS informed the group that NMFS update an abundance Response: In planning discussions that though Atlantic Marine Assessment estimate as soon as possible so that it with BOEM and the U.S. Navy regarding Program for Protected Species does not age out under GAMMS GoMMAPPS and AMAPPS, we raised (AMAPPS) surveys have been funded by guidelines. the need for additional data collection multiple agencies, no surveys were Response: We will provide a new to evaluate short-finned and long-finned planned for 2018. In light of well-known abundance estimate for this stock in the pilot whale stock structure and perturbations in ocean temperatures and 2019 SAR. movement patterns. However, this was prey resources, CBD–HSUS–WDC not identified as a priority for these recommends NMFS make every effort to Long-Finned Pilot Whales programs. The GoMMAPPS project field assure that depictions of the species’ Comment 46: CBD–HSUS–WDC are work is complete as of the Fall of 2018, range and survey-derived abundance concerned that the current mortality and the potential for AMAPPS III is estimates do not become outdated since estimate for long-finned pilot whales is currently under discussion. We will there may be shifts in the ranges of large perilously close to the PBR. While they continue to identify pilot whale stock cetaceans who are dependent on agree that the stock is considered ‘‘non- structure as an important information distribution of key forage fish, which strategic’’ based on the most recent need in these discussions. In addition, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28499 the Southeast Fisheries Science Center boundary movements and both a result of depressed gillnet effort due is currently working to revisit short- abundance and risks on both sides of to quota restriction on groundfish and finned pilot whale stock structure using the border for this stock. They note could rise if catch quotas are raised. previously collected samples and next during the 2018 meeting of the Atlantic Response: We will include a new generation genetic sequencing SRG, there was discussion of notable abundance estimate for this stock in the techniques. bycatch of this species in the monkfish 2019 SAR. The new estimates will be Comment 48: CBD–HSUS–WDC note fishery in Canada and that does not based on both U.S. and Canadian with concern that NMFS states in the appear to have been captured in the surveys and will constitute a more short-finned pilot whale SAR that ‘‘The SAR which only provides a ‘‘pers. complete coverage of harbor porpoise total annual human-caused mortality comm’’ reporting a Canadian take in range in the Western North Atlantic. and serious injury for this stock during 2012. The new abundance estimates will 2012–2016 is unknown’’ although it also Response: We will include a new account for availability bias for all states that there were 168 takes abundance estimate for this stock in the species, including harbor porpoises. attributed to the longline fishery. They 2019 SAR, which will include any strongly encourage NMFS to improve its available Canadian data. Unfortunately, Gray and Harbor Seals ability to ‘‘predict the species of origin the Canadian fishery bycatch data are Comment 53: The Commission (long-finned or short-finned pilot whale) currently not available to us, and we are comments that the 2018 draft SARs for each bycaught whale’’ which it only receiving unpublished reports. continue to lack reliable, up-to-date indicates in the SAR is hampering its Rough-Toothed Dolphin information on abundance, distribution, ability to determine total anthropogenic and movements between Canadian and Comment 51: CBD–HSUS–WDC mortality for both species. U.S. waters for the western North Response: The total annual human- appreciate the substantial updates to the rough-toothed dolphin SAR. They note Atlantic stocks of gray and harbor seals. caused mortality and serious injury for They stress the need for such this stock is unknown primarily because that the minimum population estimate of 67 (and a PBR of less than 1) was information is becoming more pressing, there was a self-reported take in the especially for gray seals as their unobserved hook and line fishery in statistically derived from a single sighting during a survey that NMFS numbers and reports of conflicts with 2013, rendering the estimate of fishery- fisheries increase. The Commission caused mortality an underestimate. indicates covered only a portion of the stock’s range, making this estimate remains concerned that the outdated or While there remains some uncertainty incomplete abundance and bycatch in the assignment of some bycatch highly uncertain. Though fishery-related mortality of rough-toothed dolphins estimates currently available hamper interactions to species, this is not a NMFS’ ability to competently manage factor in describing total human-caused during the time period of this SAR was said to be zero, NMFS acknowledges those stocks. Therefore, they mortality and serious injury as recommend NMFS secure the necessary ‘‘unknown.’’ that longline fisheries that are similar to west coast fisheries (e.g., in Hawaii) are resources and strengthen existing White Sided Dolphin known to interact with the species, as collaborations to (1) plan and execute Comment 49: CBD–HSUS–WDC have various purse seine fisheries. CBD– comprehensive aerial surveys, including comment that given the similarities of HSUS–WDC are concerned that observer collecting data necessary to estimate fisheries in Canada to those in the coverage on some of these similar east appropriate haul-out correction factors northeast United States, it is troubling coast fisheries may be insufficient to for both stocks, and (2) increase efforts each year to read that there are no recent capture mortality of animals of this to understand and reduce bycatch for data regarding Canadian bycatch of species whose abundance remains gray seals in particular. Studies on seal white sided dolphin in its fisheries, poorly understood. diet, movement patterns and fisheries though stranded animals are reported to Response: Rough-toothed dolphins interactions will contribute additional evidence entanglements. They suggest it are very rarely seen during NMFS information vital to successful is important to work with the Canadian surveys in the Atlantic, creating a management of these stocks. government to encourage better tracking challenge for estimating abundance with Response: We agree with the of lethal bycatch. confidence. The SAR is transparent Commission and note that we have been Response: We agree with CBD–HSUS– about the estimate being highly attempting to fill the information gaps WDC’s concern and continue to engage uncertain. We acknowledge that as best as possible with the resources we with the Canadian government to observer coverage in the longline fishery have available. The 2018 SARs report a receive data on the bycatch of white is likely insufficient to reliably quantify minimum estimate of gray seal sided dolphin in Canadian fisheries. interactions with rarely encountered abundance during the breeding season species. in U.S. waters, based on an Short Beaked Common Dolphin extrapolation from pup counts obtained Comment 50: CBD–HSUS–WDC point Harbor Porpoise from aerial surveys. The multiplier used out the short beaked common dolphin Comment 52: CBD–HSUS–WDC note to extrapolate pup counts to total abundance estimate is aging and needs the most recent estimate of abundance population size (4.3) is based on age- to be updated, particularly as NMFS has for harbor porpoise was derived from a structured population models used only the U.S. portion of this stock’s 2011 partial range survey. NMFS developed with known life history range, ‘‘and a small portion in Canadian acknowledges that not all the range was information from the same stock in waters.’’ Given the range of this species covered at the appropriate time of year Canadian waters. While use of the well into Canada, and a key uncertainty nor did the extant estimate account for multiplier assumes these same life in population estimates is the number of availability bias as animals along the history parameters pertain to the U.S. animals in Canadian waters, they trackline may be submerged. Though portion of the stock, the 4.3 value does suggest the United States should be this results in a negative bias and fall within the range of other adult to working more closely with the Canadian bycatch is well below PBR, they urge pup ratios suggested for pinniped government to facilitate cross-border NMFS to update abundance range-wide populations, and uncertainties are noted collaboration in understanding trans- since the low bycatch rate appears to be in the SAR chapter. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28500 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices We recognize that this approach does Definition and Range They recommend Chesapeake Bay during the winter. They not take into account changes in the ‘‘historic’’ data (often 20 or more also note that, though cited in the abundance throughout the year as years old) should be abbreviated and harbor seal SAR, the gray seal SAR lacks animals move between the United States replaced with more recent information a citation to published work by Johnston and Canada. We have submitted several on regular habitat use well outside of et al., 2015, which contains useful proposals to partners to tag gray seals the area outlined in the section on information regarding strandings and but to date none have been accepted. distribution, and the legend that bycatch of this species. Given limited resources and competing explains the map shading, that the areas Response: We acknowledge this priorities, it has been difficult to secure from New Jersey south represent only comment and have reviewed the gray these kinds of resources internally. Due ‘‘stranding records’’ is outdated and seal range map. At this time we have not to the high cost of studying seal incorrect. CBD–HSUS–WDC also note made any changes, as we do not have movements via satellite tags, we have that internet posts by NOAA show the new peer-reviewed literature to include also explored studying movements via agency is tracking harbor seals regularly in the text which would support the acoustic tags. We began a pilot study in ranging well into the mid-Atlantic. The extension of the range map. However, 2017 under our previous research New Jersey Wildlife Foundation we will be discussing improvements to permit, but then were denied use of documents a major haul out in Great the SAR range maps in general at the continuing the research when our Bay, NJ, with over 120 harbor seals SRG meetings and will revisit this issue permit was renewed, due to MMC typically hauled out in the winter. The at the time. As to Johnston et al. 2015, concern about the impact of acoustic Virginian-Pilot reports dozens hauled we do not feel that the paper adds new tags on the animals. out at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay information that is not already stated or Despite the difficulty we are having in each winter. Seals, including harbor reported in the SARs; and, while much securing the necessary resources to fully seals, regularly strand in New Jersey and of the discussion points in that paper investigate the abundance, distribution, other parts of the mid-Atlantic, often as are interesting, they are speculations to and movements between Canadian and very small pups, indicating the explain patterns in the data. U.S. waters for the western North possibility of pupping well south of Hooded Seal Atlantic stocks of gray and harbor seals, New England. Thus, this SAR should be we are making some progress. In May revised to more accurately reflect Comment 57: CBD–HSUS–WDC point 2018, we conducted an aerial survey of current distribution. out that the hooded seal SAR lacks a harbor seals which will be used to Response: We have updated the range range map. While they acknowledge update the previous estimate reported in map in the final 2018 harbor seal SAR that much of the distribution and the SARs. We also conducted aerial to change the ‘‘stranding records only’’ greatest habitat use is outside of the surveys after the 2018 UME. We portion to indicate ‘‘seasonal United States, they suggest there is collaborated with a non-profit designation.’’ The period covered by the increasing documentation of hooded organization to study the movements of 2018 SARs is 2012–2016 so we will seals’ perhaps extra-limital use of U.S. gray seal pups and successfully include the tagging work performed in waters in the winter that may be helpful deployed 11 satellite tags in 2019. We 2018 in the appropriate future reports. to include in a range map. also surveyed the gray seal pupping We will update the text and references Response: A range map has not been colonies in 2019. The results from this in the next SAR to reflect the seasonal included in this chapter due to the and other recent seal research will be presence of harbor seals in the mid- extra-limital presence of hooded seals in incorporated into the SAR once the data Atlantic. U.S. waters. However, we can revisit the have been reviewed and published. Comment 55: CBD–HSUS–WDC possibility of adding in reported bycatch With respect to bycatch reduction, we recommend both the harbor seal and or sightings information when we collaborated with our research partners gray seal SARs be updated to include discuss general improvements to the to study pinniped depredation in the information about a long-closed UME range maps at the upcoming SRG gillnet fishery in 2018 and have recently for these stocks that ended in 2013, and meetings. begun communications with another an ongoing UME affecting these stocks Common Bottlenose Dolphin group to develop a proposal to study the which began prior to July 2018. This effectiveness of pingers in reducing current UME has cost the lives of over Comment 58: The Commission bycatch. We are investigating diet via 1,300 harbor and gray seals in the comments the 2018 draft SARs for Bay, hard parts in the stomachs of bycaught northeastern United States. Sound, and Estuary bottlenose dolphin animals, and via fatty acids in blubber. Response: We believe this comment stocks include two new reports for the In summary, we believe the pertains to the 2011 UME (see https:// Terrebonne-Timbalier and West Bay Commision’s comment encapsulates the www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ stocks. Although the Commission is goals of our seal ecology and assessment marine-life-distress/active-and-closed- encouraged to see NMFS incorporating group. We continue to try and secure unusual-mortality-events), and we have new data, it also is concerned about the resources to achieve these goals but get referenced this UME in the harbor seal references made to publications ‘‘in pushback in the face of competing and gray seal chapters. The period prep.’’ or ‘‘in review’’ to support some conservation needs. Despite this, we covered by the 2018 SARs is 2012–2016 of the key information in the new SARs. continue to make small headway in so we will include the 2018 UME in the The Commission supports the use of the studying the abundance, distribution, appropriate future reports. best available science and does not wish movements, diet, and bycatch of gray to delay publication of new or updated Gray Seal and harbor seals. SARs unnecessarily, but the information Comment 56: CBD–HSUS–WDC on which a draft SAR is based needs to Harbor Seals recommend NMFS update the text and be available to the public to enable Comment 54: CBD–HSUS–WDC range map for gray seals and point out informed review. Labelling a report as strongly urge NMFS to update pinniped the map shows movement south of New ‘‘in review’’ suggests that the underlying SARs to better reflect current knowledge Jersey as ‘‘stranding records only,’’ but analysis has been completed and of the range of the species. In the harbor there are popular press reports and submitted for publication, while ‘‘in seal SAR, the section on Stock photographs of animals hauled out near prep.’’ suggests that the analyses are still VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28501 ongoing and could be changed prior to marine-mammal-protection/draft- notable levels and recommends NMFS publication. As such, reliance on such marine-mammal-stock-assessment- treat this stock as a ‘‘strategic stock’’ due information might be premature and reports. to the high likelihood that their PBR is generally should not be considered the Comment 60: CBD–HSUS–WDC being exceeded. They further stress that best available science. Therefore, the express disappointment that NMFS did NMFS must work expeditiously to Commission recommends that, unless not include any text in the bottlenose stratify data in a way that allows for an exceptional circumstances warrant dolphin stock assessments for a number understanding of the magnitude of otherwise, NMFS refrain from of stocks currently affected by the impact to this stock, and should be publishing draft SARs for public ongoing UME declared by the agency. updating the SAR annually until data comment that rely on reports or The elevated death toll, which began in can clearly show that it is not strategic. analyses that are still ‘‘in prep.’’ The 2017, has resulted in the mortality of Response: We acknowledge CBD– Commission further recommends that over 100 dolphins in southwest Florida HSUS–WDC’s concern and note this NMFS carefully consider whether it as a result of a red tide bloom topic was discussed at length at the should base draft revisions to the SARs (brevetoxin). Several resident stocks 2018 Atlantic SRG meeting. We being considered for public comment on could have been affected, given the size requested the Atlantic SRG’s advice on analyses that are still ‘‘in review.’’ At a of the area involved in the event since how to handle possible mortality from minimum, NMFS should make every documented mortalities began and the the shrimp trawl fishery given the attempt to make the underlying reports/ affected has changed and/or grown. limitations of available observer publications available to the public Since the information was public during program data and the resulting text during the comment period. the period of time in which SARs were follows from the recommendation of the Response: We agree with the being revised, the SARs for these stocks Atlantic SRG. Therefore, we revised the Commission that further standardization should have been revised on the basis SAR based on the Atlantic SRG’s is needed with respect to finding a of the availability of new information recommendation. We believe it is balance between providing new documenting adverse impacts on the unlikely all of the extrapolated bycatch information for SARs and publication stocks. CBD–HSUS–WDC also from the state of Louisiana would occur requirements. We strive to cite only peer recommend the report be revised to within the boundaries of Terrebonne- reviewed literature in SARs, to the include that the origins of the red tide Timbalier Bay. We are working to extent possible; occasionally we will are primarily human-related. improve the analyses so that an include papers that are ‘‘in review’’ or Response: Elevated dolphin extrapolated estimate specific to each ‘‘in press’’ in draft SARs with the mortalities did not begin until July bay/sound/estuary will be available in expectation that the manuscripts will be 2018, which is outside the scope of the the future. published by the time the SAR is final. 2018 reports. We will include future Regarding stock status, this stock does To that point, we have updated the updates on the UME event in the not meet the statutory definition of Terrebonne-Timbalier Bay Estuarine appropriate bottlenose dolphin SARs. strategic (i.e., ESA-listed, declining and likely to be listed as threatened in the System SAR with the final citation, and Common Bottlenose Dolphin: we have retracted the West Bay SAR in forseeable future, or serious injury/ Terrebonne-Timbalier Bay Estuarine its entirety because one key document mortality exceeds PBR). Thus, the stock System Stock remains in peer-review and is not yet is determined to be ‘‘not strategic.’’ published. Comment 61: CBD–HSUS–WDC note However, we have indicated concern for Comment 59: CBD–HSUS–WDC note in the common bottlenose dolphin the stock in the SAR. that NMFS provided redlining to Terrebonne-Timbalier Bay Estuarine Common Bottlenose Dolphin: West Bay illustrate changes made to most of the System stock SAR that a cited reference Stock revised SARs, but the three stocks of ‘‘capture-recapture photo-ID surveys bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops conducted during June 2016 (Litz and Comment 63: CBD–HSUS–WDC truncatus) in the Gulf of Mexico (i.e., Garrison in prep)’’ is still not available comment the common bottlenose Terrebonne-Timbalier Bay Estuarine and listed as ‘‘in prep’’ over two years dolphin West Bay stock is another small System stock, the West Bay stock and later. They stress these data should have stock (less than 50 members) in the Gulf the Norther Gulf of Mexico Bay, Sound been analyzed with at least a NOAA of Mexico, occupying a small defined and Estuary stocks) lacked redlining to Tech Memo, since this stock is one of area within the Galveston Bay estuary note changes from prior versions. They those affected by the Deepwater Horizon and with a PBR of less than 1.0. Fishery- request for future iterations of all stocks, oil spill, and tracking its abundance and related mortality is stated to average 0.2 NMFS use redlining for all draft revised vital rates should be a priority, as would per year, or 20 percent of the PBR. SARs as a courtesy for reviewers. providing the public with that However, NMFS acknowledges that all Response: We provide track changes information. potentially interacting net and trawl for all revised draft SARs to make it Response: The Terrebonne-Timbalier fisheries are not observed by the federal easier for reviewers. The Terrebonne- Bay Estuarine System Stock SAR was observer program and stranding data Timbalier Bay Estuarine System SAR drafted specifically because this stock is indicating fishery-related interactions and the West Bay SAR were newly a priority, and NMFS does not want to were not considered since, among other drafted with no prior versions. For the delay making the most up-to-date reasons, they cannot be attributed to a Northern Gulf of Mexico Bay, Sound information available to the public. The specific fishery. This stock is also and Estuary Stocks SAR, we did submit publication describing the survey and within the operating range of the shrimp the revised SAR with changes tracked abundance estimate is now published, trawl fishery. Because the observer (i.e., red-line version), and the version and we have updated the final 2018 program does not extend into the Bay, appears with changes tracked within the SAR with the citation. Sound and Estuarine waters, and the pdf draft that was posted online (U.S. Comment 62: CBD–HSUS–WDC are inappropriate spatial resolution of data Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Draft concerned that the common bottlenose relative to this stock’s distribution, Marine Mammal Stock Assessment dolphin Terrebonne-Timbalier Bay NMFS could not provide an estimate of (PDF, 257 pages)) at: https:// Estuarine System Stock stock may be interactions and therefore legitimately www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ interacting with the shrimp fishery at provide a ‘‘zero’’ estimate. They believe VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28502 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices that this small stock, with risk-prone event. For the Mississippi River Delta While NMFS should be applauded for fisheries operating in its range, should stock it was listed as 52 years and for developing a technique for classifying be considered strategic—with annual the Mobile Bay/Bonsecour Bay stock as unknown species of entangled whales updates of its stock assessment—until 31 years. However, according to Dr. that assists in quantifying serious such time as data show that it is not in Randy Wells (pers. comm.), there may injuries and mortalities, the Makah fact sustaining mortality in excess of its also be additional estimates of ‘‘years to Tribe is concerned that accepting every PBR. recovery’’ estimates for other stocks entanglement report of an unknown Response: The West Bay SAR has affected by the Deepwater Horizon spill, whale without scrutiny risks been retracted from the 2018 SARs including the hard-hit Barataria Bay introducing bias into the use of this new because one document remains in peer- stock. If so, CBD–HSUS–WDC tool. They recommend that NMFS be review (see response to Comment 58). recommend these estimates for all careful in deciding when to include We agree the West Bay Stock is a small stocks should be provided in the SAR. reports of unknown whales in the injury stock, and this issue was discussed at Response: The information on the and mortality report and when to apply the 2018 Atlantic SRG meeting. We ‘‘years to recover’’ from the Deepwater the model. Specifically, NMFS should must follow the statutory criteria for Horizon event was included in the apply a stricter quality control determining strategic status, and this overarching Bay, Sound, and Estuary methodology for reports where the stock does not meet the criteria to be SAR for the Mississippi River Delta and species is unknown to ensure that they designated as strategic. A lack of Mobile Bay/Bonsecour Bay stocks represent unique events and are not information on human-caused mortality because they currently do not have their is an insufficient basis for designation as duplicative of other documented cases own independent SARs. However, the of serious injury and mortality. strategic. Barataria Bay Estuarine System Stock Response: We review all Common Bottlenose Dolphin: Northern has its own independent SAR, and entanglement records for reliability, Gulf of Mexico Bay, Sound and Estuary extensive information regarding impacts taking into consideration factors as Stocks of the DWH spill are included therein. observers’ distance from the whale, the Comment 64: CBD–HSUS–WDC Comments on Pacific Issues experience of the reporting party, and reiterate their comment from previous Large Whales the narrative associated with the years that NMFS must make a better entanglement report. Some Comment 66: The Commission effort to provide individual SARs for the entanglement reports are not necessarily recognizes NMFS’ responsiveness in common bottlenose dolphin Northern verified if the evidence is equivocal. For addressing the recommendations it Gulf of Mexico Bay, Sound and Estuary example, there have been reports of made on the 2017 draft SARs. In individual stocks. While they applaud whales described as possibly entangled particular the Commission progress made over the past few years, or playing in nearshore kelp. Gray acknowledges the inclusion of 2018 they stress more needs to be done to whales in particular will occur provide updated population and draft SARs for blue and humpback whales, including up-to-date estimates nearshore in kelp beds and a record mortality estimates as well as assuring involving that species with such an that the range of each stock is properly of M/SI and commends the SAR author(s) for making those revisions in equivocal narrative may not be counted defined. as an entanglement. We note that the CBD–HSUS–WDC note that the St. such a timely manner. species proration as applied to Joseph Bay stock remains lumped with Response: We appreciate the unidentified whale entanglements is others in this region (identified as stock Commission’s comment. The revision B–11). Moreover, there is a confusing/ schedule for SARs is sometimes delayed conservative. This is because cryptic footnote for this stock in Table by unforeseen circumstances, and we unidentified whale entanglement 1 in the SAR to ‘‘[p]lease see the strive to keep the SARs up-to-date with reports are opportunistic in nature and individual stock assessment report for the most relevant information. there is a large degree of negative-bias this stock.’’ Yet we see none for this Comment 67: The Makah Tribe (underreporting) in accounting for all stock on the NMFS site listing all comments the draft 2018 SARs for large entanglement cases. Additionally, there marine mammal SARs that were not whales introduce a concept to NMFS’ are many cases of multiple documented necessarily updated. They comment the stock assessment process in which whales being entangled in fairly close reference should be corrected; or, if entanglements of unidentified large proximity, so the fact that an there is an individual SAR for this whales are assigned to a specific species unidentified entanglement and known- stock, it should be listed on the NMFS utilizing a modeling exercise. As the species entanglement co-occur in the website at which the final SARs can be SARs note, each year approximately 15 same time period and region does not accessed. percent of large whale entanglement alone support the notion that they are Response: There is an independent reports cannot be assigned to a species probably the same animal. Further, we SAR for the St. Joseph Bay Stock, which due to limitations such as the observer’s evaluate available information including was first included in the 2011 SARs. knowledge of whale identification, descriptions and photographs (if The report is available on our website sighting distance, weather conditions, available) in an effort to identify re- at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ and other factors. Carretta (2018) sighted animals. While it is true that an national/marine-mammal-protection/ describes a machine learning approach occasional unidentified whale marine-mammal-stock-assessment- that assigns entangled whales of entanglement may match an identified reports-species-stock. unknown species to a species based on entanglement case, this is likely only a Comment 65: CBD–HSUS–WDC the location, timing, and other factors. small minority of cases. Many comments that the overarching common However, NMFS appears to be taking entanglement cases are followed up bottlenose dolphin SAR for Bay, Sound the information from the entanglement with vessels actively searching on the and Estuarine stock was updated to reports at face value, without verifying water to relocate whales to attempt gear provide estimates of ‘‘years to recover’’ that an entanglement was actually removal operations. Many of these (absent additional non-natural observed or that there are not multiple whales are never relocated, which mortality) from the Deepwater Horizon reports for the same entangled whale. highlights the low probability of VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28503 observing an entangled whale in the However, PBCS notes the analysis was ships that elevate their collision risk first place. based on: (1) A lower number of strikes (i.e., the equivalent to negative than likely occurs, and (2) a faulty avoidance). PBCS thinks the description Humpback, Blue and Fin Whales historical distribution of strike of our 40 death/6-month estimate as a Comment 68: Point Blue Conservation mortality. First, since the authors are ‘‘worst-case estimate’’ is inaccurate. Science (PBCS) appreciates the modeling the entire population, it is Response: We acknowledge the inclusion and discussion of the important that their ship strike comment and have revised the text in humpback, blue, and fin whale ship estimates represent total strike numbers, the final SAR as suggested. strike results from their 2017 paper. not just those that occur in U.S. waters. They note this is an important step Humpback Whale—California/Oregon/ PBCS’ estimates for July–November in Washington (CA/OR/WA) towards realistic treatment of ship U.S. waters only were 18–40 deaths. To strikes and their potential impact on approximate total population mortality, Comment 73: CBD–HSUS–WDC west coast whale populations as these would need to be extrapolated to comment that the increase in PBR level compared to relying solely on confirmed include mortality in December–June for the putative CA/OR/WA humpback strandings. PBCS also applauds the and in areas outside the EEZ. The SAR whale stock is difficult to understand inclusion of methods and results that states that Eastern North Pacific blue given that the California-Oregon feeding estimate the proportions of unidentified whales spend ‘‘approximately three group as defined in this SAR includes whale entanglements that likely belong quarters of their time outside the U.S. nearly all of the Central American to the various whale species. While both EEZ,’’ suggesting population-level ship distinct population segment, which was of these sources of information involve strikes could be much higher than our estimated to include 411 whales. The modeling with inherent uncertainties, EEZ estimates. MMPA defines the term ‘‘population the resulting mortality estimates are Response: We appreciate the attention stock’’ or ‘‘stock’’ as a ‘‘group of marine certainly more accurate than minimums to this point (see response to Comment mammals of the same species . . . that derived from confirmed strike and 69) and have included text in the final interbreed when mature.’’ Because the entanglement events. Clearly, these SAR that better considers the risk, given Central American DPS does not better estimates will result in more the available data and estimates. interbreed, they assert it should be appropriate management decisions for Comment 71: PBCS notes that considered a separate stock. The PBR these species. Monnahan et al. 2015 assume that blue level should be calculated using a Response: We acknowledge the whale ship strike deaths are directly minimum abundance estimate for the comment and are working to make the proportional to historical global vessel Central American DPS, not a coast-wide data in the SARs more representative of counts. However, they point out that: (1) abundance estimate, and a recovery the anthropogenic risks to populations. U.S. west coast vessel numbers were not factor for an endangered species with Comment 69: PBCS notes in all three linearly related to the global fleet size less than 500 animals. SARs (humpback, blue and fin whale), through time, (2) vessel numbers are not Response: As noted in our response to the text states that ‘‘strike mortality was directly proportional to distances Comment 4, we are currently in the recently estimated . . . in the California traveled, (3) vessel sizes have changed process of reviewing stock structure Current,’’ and clarify their models significantly over their analysis period, under the MMPA for all humpback covered the west coast’s U.S. EEZ. This and (4) vessel speeds, increased through whales in U.S. waters, following the is an important distinction because all time. These factors mean that strike change in ESA listing for the species in three species spend significant time mortality was likely distributed more 2016, to determine whether we can outside this region, meaning that any recently in time than predicted by the align the stocks with the DPSs under the strike deaths that occur outside the EEZ Monnahan et al. 2015 ship model. ESA. Thus, we have not yet designated are not included in our estimates. PBCS Population-level mortality significantly new stocks of humpback whales along points out this is particularly important higher than 35 deaths/yr (used as a high the U.S. west coast, despite new when considering the implications for limit by Monnahan et al. 2015) and information on DPSs that the blue whales in the context of the distributed differently in time may or commenter notes. Once we have Monnahan et al. 2015 conclusion that may not change the results of their completed our review, any changes in the Eastern North Pacific blue whale population model. PBCS suggests that stock delineation or MMPA section 117 population is near carrying capacity and given the significance of the analysis to elements (such as PBR) will be reflected likely experiences little population-level Eastern North Pacific blue whale in future stock assessment reports. The effects from ship strikes. management, an improved and updated noted increase in the PBR for the CA/ Response: We appreciate this assessment would be very valuable. OR/WA humpback whale stock resulted clarification and inadvertently equated Response: In response to this from a higher estimate of abundance the California Current with the U.S. EEZ comment we have included text in the compared with a previous version of the in the humpback, blue, and fin whale final SAR that better considers the risk, SAR and the continued aggregation of SAR text. We have updated the text in given the available data and estimates. multiple DPSs into one recognized the relevant SARs that the estimated Comment 72: PBCS suggests that in stock. vessel strikes do not include undetected the blue whale report, there should be Comment 74: CBD–HSUS–WDC events outside of the U.S. EEZ, where clearer distinction between where suggest NMFS provided insignificant these stocks spend a considerable discussion of EEZ mortality is relevant justification in the CA/OR/WA portion of the year. versus population mortality. They think humpback whale SAR in switching from Comment 70: PBCS notes Monnahan that the comparison made between their using the Darroch model, which was et al. 2015 is important research in higher 40 deaths/6-month estimate and used to estimate abundance in prior which the authors conclude that Eastern the Monnahan et al. 2015 use of 35 stock assessment reports, to the Chao North Pacific blue whales are nearing deaths/year suggests a false equivalency model. In the report, NMFS states that carrying capacity. In the blue whale and should either be clarified or the Chao ‘‘estimate is considered the SAR, Monnahan et al. 2015 plays a key removed. In addition, they note there is best of those reported by Calambokidis role in explaining the observed some evidence that blue whales may et al. (2017a) because it accounts for population trend of blue whales. actually have behavioral responses to individual capture heterogeneity,’’ but VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28504 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices that does not explain why NMFS chose As an example from elsewhere in the entangled. It is not clear why there is a it this year and not others when it has SARs, in the case of the Central North discrepancy. been available over the same time Pacific stock, the stock assessment Response: We note that the draft period of the Darroch model. The Chao report says ‘‘Just for information humpback whale SAR was prepared model accounted for individual capture purposes, PBR calculations are months before the release of the cited heterogeneity in prior years too, when completed here for the feeding report, and we have updated the final NMFS instead chose the Darroch model aggregations.’’ It then continues by SAR with the estimates in the cited as the best estimate of abundance. saying ‘‘If we calculated a PBR for the report. Figure 2 in the SARs indicates that data Southeast Alaska/northern British Comment 78: CBD–HSUS–WDC used in both the Darroch and Chao Columbia feeding aggregation, it would recommend the CA/OR/WA humpback models are from approximately the be . . .’’ CBD–HSUS–WDC note these whale report should address the same time period. CBD–HSUS–WDC hypotheticals are important for determination that NMFS made as to request NMFS explain why it was not stakeholders, including managers, to whether or not to convene a take until this year that it used the model understand the status and population reduction team for fisheries that are that gives higher abundance estimates, abundances of humpbacks when known to entangle humpback whales per Calambokidis et al. (2017a). This is appropriate DPSs are used. NMFS has along the west coast. The draft report especially important in order to justify declined to consider public comment on proposes to insert a sentence that the increase by half in the minimum potential management actions that discusses stakeholder processes in population estimate (a change from contain calculations of PBR that are not California, Oregon, and Washington. 1,876 animals to 2,784 animals). in the stock assessment reports. They This does not indicate whether NMFS Response: The Chao estimate from maintain this makes it pressing for the has evaluated the CA/OR/WA stock of Calambokidis et al. (2017a) as stated, stock assessment reports to give as humpback whales since 2015, when it accounts for capture heterogeneity and much information as possible prior to a was a lower priority compared to other results in an estimate of approximately future stock revision. marine mammal stocks and fisheries for 2,400 whales with a CV of 0.03. This is Response: See response to Comments establishing take reduction teams. the most precise Chao estimate reported 4 and 73. NMFS should identify in the report from Calambokidis et al. (2017a) and it Comment 76: CBD–HSUS–WDC when it most recently evaluated has a CV closest to the most recent request that NMFS clarify and correct whether CA/OR/WA humpback whales Darroch estimate (Table 3 of the calculations of humpback whale were the highest priority for a take Calambokidis et al. 2017a). While the serious injury and mortality in the reduction team. This would address the Darroch estimates generally have better sablefish fishery. They suggest the stock Pacific SRG’s recommendation that precision, they do not account for assessment report should apportion NMFS convene a TRT. Relying on an capture heterogeneity, and this was some humpback whale serious injuries evaluation in 2015 ignores both the considered in the most recent SAR. and mortality in unidentified gear to the listing of the DPSs and the impact of Given the nearly-equal CVs for the latest sablefish fishery, as required by the most of the recent entanglements. Chao and Darroch estimates (0.03 versus biological opinion for the fishery. Response: SARs by definition include 0.01 respectively), the model with the Specifically, the biological opinion the best available science for assessing best ability to account for capture requires that ‘‘a portion of unidentified marine mammal stocks. Deciding heterogeneity was chosen for the 2018 whale and gear entanglements would be whether to convene a TRT is a revision. In the previous SAR, the counted against these take limits . . . in management determination that is model with the lowest CV was chosen, addition to known humpback whale outside the scope of a stock assessment while capture heterogeneity was largely entanglements in gear of the proposed and is therefore not included in a SAR. ignored. In retrospect, we acknowledge fishery.’’ It also says that data ‘‘used to Comment 79: The Makah Tribe more consideration of the strength of the pro-rate unidentified whale and gear comments that CA/OR/WA humpback competing models, especially regarding entanglements will be updated each whale stock does not represent a stock capture heterogeneity, was warranted. year.’’ CBD–HSUS–WDC urge NMFS to of humpback whales under the When sufficient data are available from include these data and calculations in definition of a stock under the MMPA; mark-recapture estimates, it is advisable the stock assessment report. the listing of humpback whales together to use models that account for capture Response: There is currently no from CA/OR/WA is for management heterogeneity and we reevaluated this in model available for assigning purposes and is best characterized as a the 2018 SAR. We also note that unidentified fishery interactions to mixed-stock assemblage. The SAR estimates from the Chao model are more specific fisheries. There are ongoing should provide PBR estimates for each similar to independently-derived line analyses in progress to see if this will be stock (Mexico DPS, Central America transect estimates of approximately possible; but, thus far, the results have DPS, and Hawaii DPS) that occur in the 3,000 humpback whales reported by not been promising due to lack of management area. The SAR could also Barlow (2016). The commenter may also sufficient sample sizes of known-gear report a separate PBR for the two note that a Chao model mark-recapture cases used for model construction. feeding groups within the management abundance estimate has been used in Comment 77: CBD–HSUS–WDC area (Washington-Southern British the SAR for the Eastern North Pacific points out that the stock assessment Columbia and Oregon-California) in blue whale since 2013. The use of Chao report’s serious injury and mortality for order to better inform management estimates for both humpback and blue humpback whales in the sablefish decisions and assess localized impacts. whale stocks is now more logically- fishery are lower than the five-year The Makah Tribe notes these changes consistent. average in the NMFS report ‘‘Marine would allow a more thorough Comment 75: CBD–HSUS–WDC Mammal Mortality in U.S. West Coast evaluation of how human impacts affect suggest that the CA/OR/WA humpback Groundfish Fisheries (2002–2016).’’ humpback whale stocks. If photo- whale report should at a minimum This report says that 4 humpback identification allows separation of a discuss what the PBR level might be if whales were entangled in sablefish whale to one or another stock, then that the stock were appropriately defined to fishery from 2012–2016, but the stock data should be used. If photo- be consistent with the DPS identified. assessment report says that 2.5 were identification is not available, then the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28505 mortality or serious injury should be The Makah Tribe thinks the estimate split into two DPSs, it is imperative that proportionally assigned to the stocks should be increased for two reasons. the SARs assign serious injuries and based on the occurrence of those stocks First, many of the whales of the CA/OR/ mortalities to each DPS, and establish within the feeding area. WA stock winter in Hawaii and thus PBR levels accordingly. Oceana is Response: See response to Comments only leave U.S. waters during the short concerned that aggregating the much 4 and 73. period of the year when they are more critically endangered Central Comment 80: The Makah Tribe migrating between wintering and American DPS along with a much more recommends the calculation for PBR feeding grounds. Second, in numerous Mexico DPS into a single PBR needs to be changed for the CA/OR/WA Washington, humpback whales feed may obscure and underestimate impacts stock of humpback whales. The PBR from late April through December, to the Central American DPS. calculation used has 8 percent for Rmax. roughly 8 months. Some of the whales Response: See response to Comments NMFS scientists published a paper in even appear to spend the entire winter 4 and 73. 2010 using life history tables to evaluate in Washington rather than migrating to Comment 84: Oceana expresses what the maximum rate of increase is wintering grounds. They suggest the concern that NMFS is not taking for humpback whales. They concluded, proportion of time spent in U.S. waters sufficient action for the CA/OR/WA ‘‘It is proposed that the upper 99 would be easiest to address using the humpback whale stock to reduce whale percent quantile of the resulting assumption above of reporting separate entanglement levels to below PBR and distribution of the rate of increase (ROI) PBRs for each of the stocks within the ultimately to levels approaching zero. for Approach B (11.8 percent/year) be mixed-stock management area. While they understand NMFS’ approach established as the maximum plausible Response: The comment incorrectly has been to rely on state working groups ROI for humpback whales and be used implies that many of the humpback to develop programs like California’s in population assessment of the whales that feed off of the U.S. west Risk Assessment and Mitigation species.’’ (Zerbini et al. 2010). It is coast winter in Hawaii. The 2018 SAR Program, to date, NMFS has not unclear why NMFS has chosen to use 8 states: ‘‘Along the U.S. west coast, indicated to the state of California or the percent, which is rate that population NMFS currently recognizes one Dungeness Crab Fishing Gear Working has increased at, rather than using the humpback whale stock that includes Group what actions and outcomes are Rmax for the population as is required two separate feeding groups: (1) A necessary to permit the fishery to in the PBR calculation. The observed California and Oregon feeding group of operate under the MMPA or ESA. rate of increase of 8 percent may be less whales that belong to the Central Response: The States of California, than the true Rmax of the population American and Mexican distinct Oregon, and Washington have indicated because the population size was greater population segments (DPSs) defined an intention to apply for an ESA section than abundance at which Rmax occurs. under the ESA (NOAA 2016a), and (2) 10(a)(1)(B) Incidental Take Permit (ITP) Response: We agree with the a northern Washington and southern for their fisheries that entangle comment that the observed ROI may be British Columbia feeding group that protected species. We will be working lower than the theoretical Rmax for this primarily includes whales from the closely with those states on the population. However, Zerbini et al. Mexican DPS but also includes a small development of their applications and (2010) note that ‘‘we emphasize that number of whales from the Hawaii and associated Conservation Plans for that such a high figure can be observed only Central American DPSs (Calambokidis permitting process. A successful with extreme and very optimistic et al. 2008, Barlow et al. 2011, Wade et application for an ESA ITP requires that lifehistory parameters.’’ The estimated al. 2016).’’ NMFS agrees that further the applicant minimize the impact of Rmax reported by Zerbini et al. (2010) work is needed to refine estimates of their incidental take to the maximum also includes life history data from other time spent in U.S. waters by the various extent practicable (among other ocean basins where reported rates of DPSs that utilize the California Current. requirements) and NMFS must make increase were much higher, for example both a ‘‘not likely to jeopardize’’ finding southern hemisphere populations that Humpback Whales—Mexican DPS and under the ESA and a ‘‘negligible were recovering from intense whaling. Central American DPS impact’’ finding under the MMPA in The GAMMS (NMFS 2016) also states Comment 82: Oceana notes the best order to issue such permits. As a result, that ‘‘Default values should be used for available information on entanglement, we expect that the development process Rmax in the absence of stock-specific injury, and mortality of humpbacks off for both permits would include measured values.’’ There is a stock- the U.S. west coast indicates that risks discussions of the actions and outcomes specific estimate of Rmax based on to the stock from entanglement in necessary to permit the incidental take mark-recapture abundance estimates fishing gear have significantly increased from the actions under the ESA and from a recovering population of and comment that recent information MMPA. humpback whales in the California was not considered in the stock Comment 85: Oceana also notes that Current and that estimate is 8 percent as assessment report. humpback whale entanglement data outlined in the SAR. While we Response: The CA/OR/WA humpback from NMFS indicates higher levels of acknowledge that this area likely whale SAR states in the Fishery entanglements in 2017 (31 confirmed) includes multiple stocks of humpback Information section that ‘‘Pot and trap and 2018 (27 confirmed) than in 2012 whales, 8 percent is currently the best fisheries fishery entanglements are the and 2013, and suggest the 5-year average estimate of humpback whale Rmax for most commonly documented source of level of M/SI would be higher if the this ocean region. serious injury and mortality of SAR used the most recent 5-year period. Comment 81: The Makah Tribe humpback whales in U.S. west coast In addition, the estimates of human- recommends NMFS reconsider the waters (Carretta et al. 2013, 2015, 2016a, caused M/SI for all whales do not assumption about what proportion of 2018a), and entanglement reports have account for unreported entanglements, time the CA/OR/WA humpback whale increased considerably since 2014.’’ which could result in a serious stock spends in U.S. waters. NMFS has Comment 83: Oceana suggests that as underestimation of total M/SI and the assumed that whales of the CA/OR/WA humpback whales in the U.S. west coast associated determination whether M/SI stock only spend 50 percent of the year stock, a strategic stock under the MMPA is above or below PBR. NMFS has in U.S. waters without any justification. due to its ESA listing, were recently scientifically reliable means of VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28506 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices estimating potential total entanglement in U.S. waters (see our web page at (e.g., Bradford 2018). Updating the numbers. According to NMFS Tech https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/insight/ fishery description appendices Memo (Saez et al. 2013), the authors understanding-vessel-strikes on the sometimes takes a lower priority in the applied a 10 percent reporting rate for subject). SAR preparation process due to the all whale species on the U.S. west coast increasing workload involved in SAR Fin Whale—CA/OR/WA to produce an estimate that ‘‘an average preparation. We will strive to produce of 103 whale entanglements per year Comment 88: CBD–HSUS–WDC more timely updates to these fishery may be occurring, with 93 unobserved suggest the report for CA/OR/WA fin description sections in future SARs. and undocumented with their ultimate whales should be updated to reflect the fates unknown.’’ This is based on a 2015 interaction with the Hawaii Risso’s Dolphin—CA/OR/WA study where ‘‘The number of reported shallow-set longline in the northeastern Comment 90: CBD–HSUS–WDC entangled whales was estimated to be fishing area (namely, closer to the west encourage NMFS to investigate Risso’s only 10 percent of the actual number of coast EEZ) and specify whether this dolphin interactions in the California whales entangled (Robbins and Mattila, vessel was Hawaii or California-based. market squid fishery via electronic 2004).’’ However, in the SAR, the Response: There are no estimates of monitoring (video). They reference a estimates of total fishing-induced M/SI fin whale abundance on the high seas video of a purse seine encircling marine only include reported entanglements for outside of the Hawaii or U.S. west coast mammals in Monterey Bay was which M/SI was determined. EEZs; thus, PBR and human-caused published on YouTube on April 25, Response: We note the SARs utilize mortality is assessed for those records 2018, and suggest this type of the most recent 5-years of data that have that occur within the U.S. EEZ. The interaction, which may not occur with been analyzed and vetted when GAMMS (NMFS 2016) note that ‘‘If observers on board and may not be self- preparing the draft reports. We will estimates of mortality or abundance reported, could be captured via from outside the U.S. EEZ cannot be include newer data in the appropriate electronic monitoring. CBD–HSUS– determined, PBR calculations should be future reports. Values for entanglement WDC suggest NMFS acknowledge in the based on abundance within the EEZ and reporting rates cited (Saez et al. 2013) stock assessment reports that compared to mortality within the EEZ.’’ are taken from U.S. east coast studies interactions in this fishery do currently The 2015 entanglement was determined and are not representative of U.S. west occur. coast data. There currently are no to be a non-serious injury (Bradford 2018) and because it occurred outside Response: This particular SAR was estimates of the total number of not revised in 2018, and we take note undetected entanglements in this the U.S. EEZ, it is not included in the that interactions with this purse seine region. stock assessment report for the CA/OR/ fishery should be updated the next time Comment 86: Oceana comments the WA stock of fin whales. The stock of fin SAR estimates of whale entanglement whales for which this entanglement the SAR is revised. Past interactions are based on an incorrect assumption should be assigned to is unknown; but, with the squid purse seine fishery are that zero M/SI events occur from based on the location, we have updated detailed in the last revision of this SAR. entanglements that are not reported. the text in the final 2018 CA/OR/WA fin Killer Whale—Eastern North Pacific They note NMFS acknowledges that the whale SAR to better inform the reader Southern Resident number of unreported entanglement of potential fishery risks to this events—and thus the number of M/SI particular stock. Comment 91: CBD–HSUS–WDC events—is well above zero and has Comment 89: CBD–HSUS–WDC comment that although some updates estimated that the actual number of comment that the Pacific SARs do not were included on basic information entanglements is ten times the observed regularly include appendices with about killer whale populations in the number. Oceana stresses the importance relevant and timely fisheries Eastern North Pacific, additional of incorporating some estimate of information. They note updated changes should be made to update unobserved M/SI numbers for information on interactions in longline terminology, distribution, and stock understanding the true level of risk to fisheries is important especially as the differentiation information in the each stock. They request that NMFS number of longline vessels has southern resident killer whale (SRKW) provide an estimate of the reporting rate increased drastically since 2008 in report. They note that the tracked for whale entanglements, particularly California. Eighteen Hawaii-permitted changes made in the introduction to the for humpback, blue, fin, and gray vessels landed swordfish and tuna in Eastern North Pacific Offshore killer whales and use the estimate to provide California in 2016. Stakeholders, whale SAR align with their requested a total annual fishing mortality for these including federal fisheries managers, changes for the SRKW SAR whales to reflect the best available need the stock assessment reports to introduction, particularly the science. accurately represent marine mammal clarification of different types of killer Response: See response to Comment interactions occurring in the Hawaii whales as ‘‘ecotypes’’ instead of ‘‘pods’’ 85. longline fisheries in order to assess the and updated genetic differentiation. For Comment 87: Oceana requests NMFS risk to marine mammals in the more recent background information take appropriate actions to reduce whale California Current. Further, it is not easy and consistency among SARs, CBD– entanglements and ship strikes, as each to find information on interactions with HSUS–WDC suggest that NMFS apply of these human-threats is individually the California-based shallow-set the same updates to the SRKW SAR. In exceeding PBR, and the cumulative longline fishery in the Pacific or Alaska addition, they suggest that NMFS mortality is over double PBR. SARs and suggest the interaction rates update terminology referring to the Response: See response to Comment of the California-based shallow-set three pods in the SRKW population 84. We acknowledge the comment and longline fishery should be included in from J1, K1, and L1 to J, K, and L, as note it is outside the scope of the SARs, the appendices, if not directly in the the alphanumeric designations refer to but we are actively working on this SARs. individuals, not pods. topic with our partners, such as state Response: We produce summaries of Response: We acknowledge the agencies and marine shipping marine mammal interactions in the comment and have made the suggested companies to reduce the ship strike risk longline fisheries in the Pacific region changes in the final 2018 SRKW report. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28507 Comment 92: CBD–HSUS–WDC three pods may not exist for most or all also update the estimate of ‘‘1 animal comment while NMFS includes some of the fall months. For the sake of every 7 years’’ to ‘‘1 animal every 8 updated information on the distribution consistency, we will continue to use the years.’’ of SRKWs outside the inland waters of census data from July 1st. We do Response: We will evaluate other Washington state and southern British provide an update to the SRG at their maximum rates of increase for killer Columbia (the Salish Sea), they disagree annual meeting of any changes (births/ whale populations and consult with the with the SAR’s statement that the deaths) since the SAR was filed. Pacific SRG regarding potential changes coastal habitat of SRKWs is still Comment 94: CBD–HSUS–WDC to the SAR moving forward. We will uncertain, when more recent recovery recommend NMFS add a description in retain the currently-used Rmax value documents and status updates the SRKW report of the ‘‘current from the published study of Matkin et thoroughly describe how this population trend, including a al. (2014) in the final 2018 SAR. The population uses coastal habitat. They description of the information upon retention of the current Rmax value suggest NMFS use updated research which [it is] based,’’ as required by the results in no appreciable difference in from multiple tagging studies, passive MMPA. The SAR describes the past the calculated PBR compared with the acoustic recording, and monitoring from trends and provides the 2017 number of Rmax value proposed by the vessel cruises to update the the use of animals (77) but does not specify the commenter. coastal habitat in the SRKW SAR. In current trend. The population of SRKW Comment 96: CBD–HSUS–WDC addition, they comment that recent has now dropped to 74 animals, its comment in the ‘‘Human-caused research published by Canada’s lowest point in 34 years, and it is mortality and serious injury’’ secion of Department of Fisheries and Oceans continuing to decline. In 2014, a the SRKW SAR, NMFS notes a lack of establishes SRKW presence off southern population viability study estimated fishery-related stranding information for Vancouver Island, which resulted in that under status quo conditions, the killer whales in Canadian waters. expanded critical habitat in Canadian SRKW growth rate was a 0.91 percent However, a 2014 report of a juvenile waters. They suggest this information annual decline, meaning it would reach Northern Resident killer whale (I103) should also be included in the SAR and an expected population size of 75 in one being entangled in a gillnet is used to update the information about generation (or by 2036). This abundance documented and included in Canada’s coastal habitat use in Canada by the was reached in mid-2018. Its current updated Recovery Strategy for killer SRKWs. growth rate is just half of the previous whales. Although the whale was quickly Response: The SAR states ‘‘The estimate described by a 2012 released from the net, he/she died the complete winter range of this stock is international panel review. following winter. Given the biological uncertain.’’ While there has been Response: The SAR states: ‘‘Following similarities between Northern Resident substantial new information acquired in the peak census count of 99 animals in killer whales and SRKWs, including a recent years on the occurrence of this 1995, the population size has declined preference for Chinook salmon, a population in coastal waters, the and currently stands at 77 animals as of similar risk of interaction exists and complete winter range of the population the 2017 census.’’ This is the lowest CBD–HSUS–WDC recommends this is still unknown. The SAR describes number since 1995 and is based on data example of a potential occurrence what is known of the range in the Stock from the annual census, and is should be noted in the SAR. Definition and Geographic Range considered a declining trend. The Response: We have added this section and the range map provides inclusion of the 2018 census data, 74, information to the final 2018 SAR. readers with information on the known does not change this trend. The SAR Comment 97: CBD–HSUS–WDC range of the stock. language as stated is sufficient to disagree with NMFS that the total non- Comment 93: CBD–HSUS–WDC describe the current trend. fishery human-caused mortality for the comment that the Center for Whale Comment 95: CBD–HSUS–WDC SRKW stock for the past five years Research conducts the annual census for comment that growth rates and (2012–2016 or 2013–2017) is zero. the SRKWs and typically provides productivity in different Resident killer NMFS notes in this SAR the death of a updates on July 1st and December 31st whale populations may be affected by young adult male, L95, from a fungal of each year. They suggest this allows variability in diet, environmental infection introduced by a satellite tag. enough time for NMFS to reflect a more conditions, and habitat range. These While the infection was determined to recent census report in the SRKW report different environmental conditions, be the cause of death for L95, they argue using numbers reported on July 1st in including prey availability, pollution, that human activity exacerbated this the same year as the SAR. Using census and disturbance levels may impact their infection and contributed to the numbers from July 1, 2017, reflects resulting annual growth rate. To better introduction of the fungus into L95’s population abundance more than a year reflect the habitat conditions of SRKWs bloodstream, hastening his death. and a half out of date, which is and the resulting maximum net Additionally, CBD–HSUS–WDC unnecessary for a population as small productivity, CBD–HSUS–WDC suggest recommend the death of J34, from blunt and as closely monitored as the SRKWs. that NMFS use the same growth rates force trauma, should be included as As of July 1, 2018, the SRKW and estimated net productivity rates as another human-caused mortality and population consisted of 75 individuals. are used for Northern Resident killer attributed as vessel strike mortality. For Response: The Center for Whale whales. They suggest this population is a population in a highly vulnerable Research is under contract to NMFS and closer to SRKWs in prey availability and state, deaths with a high likelihood of provides a population estimate on July environmental conditions, and shares a being caused by human activity should 1st of each year. Since the beginning of similar history in exploitation for be noted as such. the Center for Whale Research’s study in captive display. If NMFS does not make Response: We acknowledge the 1976, July 1st was used as the date for the change to maximum net uncertainty of such cases in the ‘‘Other the population estimate. Although productivity rate, we request that NMFS Mortality’’ section of the SAR and additional effort in the fall months in update the estimate for PBR to reflect include past documentation of a vessel recent years has occasionally allowed the update to population size. With a strike death of a southern resident killer for a population estimate of December population of 77 individuals and a whale from 2006. We have added 31st, for some years sighting data of all calculated PBR of 0.13, NMFS should language to the SAR that acknowledges VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28508 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices that undetected or unclassified human- knowledge on contaminants published mortality and serious injury are related mortality and injury may occur by Krahn et al. (2007, 2009) which is unbiased and where the stock structure in the population. currently cited in the SAR. is unequivocal. ’’ (NMFS 2016). This Comment 98: CBD–HSUS–WDC notes PCFG is small in size and the estimated Gray Whale—Eastern North Pacific that the ‘‘Habitat Issues’’ section in the M/SI is based on minimum counts of SARs is intended by the MMPA to cover Comment 100: The Makah Tribe observed cases. Thus, the M/SI is not ‘‘other factors that may be causing a comments that the ‘‘Stock Definition unbiased, it is negatively-biased. This, decline or impeding recovery of the and Geographic Range’’ section of the in combination with the small size of stock, including effects on marine Eastern North Pacific (ENP) gray whale the feeding group, warrants a smaller mammal habitat and prey.’’ Thus, they SAR should be updated to improve recovery factor until that time the request that NMFS reflect the level of accuracy and clarity and to reflect population dynamics of the PCFG can research that has established the current, best available science, unequivocably be determined. A goal of preference for Chinook salmon of particularly in the discussion about the the MMPA is to maintain populations as SRKWs and remove the phrase ‘‘appears Pacific Coast Feeding Group (PCFG). functioning elements of their ecosystem, to be’’ in noting that SRKWs are They recommend the SAR be changed thus use of a more conservative recovery Chinook salmon specialists. They also to reflect the PCFG abundance estimate factor is consistent with a small feeding disagree with the inclusion of pink is ‘‘approximately 240,’’ as indicated in group that has a restricted geographic salmon in the list of other species in the Population Size and Minimum range. their diet, as the paper cited (Ford et al. Population Estimate sections, rather Comment 102: The Makah Tribe 2016) finds that pink salmon are present than the outdated estimate from suggests that the ‘‘Human-Caused in proportions of less than 0.01 in fecal Calambokidis et al. (2014). Mortalities and Serious Injury’’ section samples from SRKWs. Additionally, Response: We have updated the of the ENP gray whale report, the PCFG CBD–HSUS–WDC recommend that ‘‘Stock Definition and Geographic mortalities and serious injuries should NMFS elaborate on its note that Range’’ section in the final SAR to omit be added to the total for mortalities and ‘‘changes in Chinook abundance have the reference to the number of whales in serious injuries of the ENP stock to affected this population,’’ to include the PCFG. Abundance estimates are accurately report the total number of updated information on the impact of addressed in the ‘‘Population Size’’ human-caused mortalities of the ENP human activity (e.g., harvest, vessel section and are limited to those animals gray whale stock. Currently, mortalities disturbance, and habitat modification) within the IWC-defined region detailed and serious injuries are treated as on the availability of SRKW prey as well in the SAR. mortality to two separate stocks, as the significant impact prey Comment 101: The Makah Tribe although the SAR states that NMFS does abundance has on SRKW body comments NMFS should not use a lower not consider the PCFG a stock, but is condition, nutritional stress, fecundity, recovery factor for PCFG gray whales included as a part of the ENP. and survival. but should use the same recovery factor Response: We have revised the Response: We have elaborated on the of 1.0 as used for ENP whales. They ‘‘Human-Caused Mortalities and Serious published links between lower Chinook state the best available science, as Injury’’ section of the ENP gray whale salmon availability and lower developed by the IWC’s range-wide report to clarify that such estimates of population fecundity of southern review over an intensive five-year anthropogenic impacts for PCFG whales resident killer whales in the final SAR. evaluation of stock structure hypotheses are a component of the estimates for the Comment 99: CBD–HSUS–WDC for all north Pacific gray whales, overall ENP stock. comment that with respect to harvest indicates that the PCFG is not separate Comment 103: The Makah Tribe impacts, NMFS has acknowledged from the ENP stock, and the recovery suggests that the section on elsewhere that the harvest of salmon (in factor for PCFG whales should be 1.0 ‘‘Subsistence/Native Harvest particular Chinook) can result in harm because they are ENP gray whales. Even Information’’ be updated to reflect the to SRKWs by ‘‘reducing prey if NMFS disagrees that PBR for the IWC’s approval of a new gray whale availability, which may cause animals PCFG should be calculated based on a catch limit covering the period 2019 to forage for longer periods, travel to recovery factor of 1.0, the Makah Tribe through 2025 at the 2018 biennial alternate locations, or abandon foraging suggests the recovery factor should at meeting. The new catch limit of up to efforts.’’ Ocean and inland fisheries least be increased to 0.75 to reflect the 140 strikes annually is an overall harvest fish from priority stocks of continuing population growth of the increase; and, while it does not affect Chinook salmon that the orcas target. PCFG as reflected in the most recent the number of whales potentially Scientists have estimated that ocean abundance estimate through 2015 available to the Makah Tribe if its fisheries alone reduce Chinook (Calambokidis et al. 2017b). The Makah waiver request is approved, the abundance by 18–25 percent. This is Tribe reiterates their comments on the important changes in the gray whale significant to the Southern Residents, as 2014 draft SAR for ENP gray whales for catch limit should be included in the shown by Lacy et al. (2017), which increasing the recovery factor of the new SAR. The Makah Tribe has projected that a ‘‘50 percent noise PCFG above the default value for stocks concerns about the last sentence of this reduction plus a 15 percent increase in of unknown status due to a stable section, which reports on the total Chinook would allow the population to abundance trend and the already number of gray whales harvested in reach the 2.3 percent growth target’’ conservative effect of calculating PBR aboriginal subsistence hunts over a 32- needed for recovery. They suggest that for a feeding aggregation. year period from 1985 to 2016. They NMFS include updated information on Response: We have the flexibility to point out the SAR already includes toxic contamination and potential set recovery factors that reflect values from aboriginal harvests for the impacts in this section. considerations other than population relevant five-year period 2012–2016 and Response: See response to Comment trends. The GAMMS state that does not need the value reported from 98 regarding Chinook prey availability. ‘‘Recovery factors of 1.0 for stocks of the longer period. The sentence should With regard to contaminants, we are unknown status should be reserved for be removed because it serves no analyzing data collected via biopsy cases where there is assurance that function in the SAR. If NMFS decides samples, which will add to the body of Nmin, Rmax, and the estimates of to retain the sentence, they suggest VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28509 appropriate context should be added, 2015). The current SAR notes that wintering grounds in North America including the abundance trend of ENP whales seen near Sakhalin may include without fidelity to wintering grounds in gray whales over the same time, the a mixture of ENP animals feeding in this either North America or Asia. The current abundance estimate for the region, in addition to WNP whales. Makah Tribe suggests adding a detailed stock, and representative PBR values There is no evidence to indicate that the discussion and analysis of the IWC over the period, which demonstrate that WNP stock of gray whales is extinct, as range-wide workshop’s stock structure the average annual removals are a implied by the commenter (see hypotheses. fraction of the calculated PBR and are Comment 105). Evidence continues to Response: We have added text to the thus sustainable. support an extant WNP population as final SAR to reflect the two most Response: We have updated the reported in Bru¨ niche-Olsen et al. 2018. plausible hypotheses put forward by the aboriginal subsistence quota in the final Comment 105: The Makah Tribe IWC. It is important to note that these SAR based on the 2018 IWC meeting. comments the WNP gray whale SAR represent hypotheses, which do not We disagree that historical subsistence should include a description of Cooke equate to best available science used in takes of gray whales reported in the SAR (2015), which provided a quantitative a SAR. Genetic studies of gray whales in are unnecessary to report. They serve to estimate of the percentage of whales that the North Pacific provide the best inform the public of the history of takes feed off Sakhalin Island and migrate to available science for the conclusion that in recent decades, and the values wintering grounds off North America. the Western North Pacific population of implicitly support the assertion that The results of Cooke’s analysis—that gray whales is extant, though likely very aboriginal takes have been sustainable, whales representing 37 to 100 percent of small. in light of the population trend data Sakhalin feeding whales could be Comment 107: The Makah Tribe shared in the SAR. We have added a migrating to North America—is recommends the WNP gray whale SAR sentence to this section noting that the essential to the context for this SAR. should more accurately reflect the size of the ENP population has grown That a high percentage of—and possibly conclusion of Cooke et al. (2017) during this same period. all—Sakhalin whales may in fact regarding whether the combined migrate to North America rather than Gray Whale—Western North Pacific Sakhalin-Kamchatka feeding aggregation solely along the Asian coast raises is a closed population. Comment 104: The Makah Tribe significant questions about the identity Response: We have updated the final comments the title for the Western of those whales migrating east rather SAR with text taken directly from Cooke North Pacific (WNP) gray whale SAR than south, the potential that the et al. (2017) that better addresses the should be changed. The term ‘‘Western historic ‘‘Western North Pacific’’ stock uncertainty and conclusions: ‘‘We North Pacific’’ gray whale was is extinct, and the stock status and ESA- conclude that the Sakhalin feeding previously used by NMFS for the listing status of the Sakhalin whales that aggregation is probably not genetically continued listing under the ESA of an do migrate to North America as separate closed but that the Sakhalin and isolated gray whale population that both from the historic ‘‘Western North Kamchatka feeding aggregations, taken feeds and winters off the coast of Asia. Pacific’’ stock. Citation to Cooke (2015) together, may be genetically closed. The fact that a substantial percentage of is also appropriate because the SAR However, genetic data from Kamchatka the whales described in the ‘‘Western identifies the proportion of the stock would be required to confirm this.’’ North Pacific’’ SAR migrate through that uses U.S. EEZ waters in the U.S. waters, and not along the coast of Potential Biological Removal section. Harbor Seal—California Asia to wintering grounds off of Asia, Cooke (2015) is clearly relevant to that Comment 108: One commenter shows that the whales represented in determination and should be discussed. pointed out that the California harbor the SAR are a different group of whales Response: The Cooke (2015) paper is seal SAR was not updated in 2018 than the isolated population previously discussed in this context in the ‘‘Stock though well overdue. considered to be ‘‘Western North Definition and Geographic Range’’ Response: This comment deals with a Pacific’’ gray whales. The SAR makes it section of the SAR. SAR that was not revised in 2018. The clear that the Sakhalin Island feeding Comment 106: The Makah Tribe most recent abundance estimate for this area is made up of a mixed stock comments the IWC’s range-wide review stock is based on data collected in 2012, aggregation of whales that migrate to represents the most recent and best and the SAR was revised in 2014. No wintering grounds off Asia and whales available scientific information on new information on the population size that migrate through U.S. waters to questions of gray whale stock structure. of this stock is currently available that wintering grounds off North America. While the SAR mentions the five-year warrants a revision of the report. The Makah tribe suggests that because review process, it would be much more only the former population represents informative if it were to discuss the False Killer Whale—Hawaiian Stocks the historic ‘‘Western North Pacific’’ stock structure hypotheses currently Comment 109: The Hawaii Longline stock, the title of the SAR should be considered by the IWC to be most Association notes that NMFS has changed to ‘‘Western Feeding Group plausible for gray whales. It is notable proposed no revisions to the 2018 SAR Gray Whales’’ to reflect that the latter that in the two hypotheses considered for the Hawaii false killer whale stocks group of whales analyzed, i.e., those most plausible by the IWC (3a and 5a), and asks NMFS to provide an that migrate to U.S. waters and thus the whales migrating to North American explanation in its responses to must be evaluated in a SAR under the wintering grounds from feeding grounds comments. MMPA, are members of a feeding group in the Okhotsk Sea are considered the Response: We reviewed available data of eastern breeding animals but are Western Feeding Group of the ENP gray for all three Hawaii false killer whale unlikely to be the whales that whale stock. In only one hypothesis stocks, and there was no new historically existed only in Asian waters (6b), which was considered to have information that would change the and which remain listed as endangered lower plausibility by the IWC, would status of any of the three stocks under the ESA. whales from the Sakhalin Island feeding discussed within the SAR. Therefore, Response: We responded to a similar area include Western Breeding Stock we did not update the False killer whale comment on the 2014 version of this (i.e., the historic ‘‘Western North Hawaiian Islands Stock Complex SAR report (see 80 FR 20502, August 20, Pacific’’ stock) animals that utilize in 2018. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28510 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Dated: June 13, 2019. Commission to consider information swaps (including daily trading records) Donna S. Wieting, that you believe is exempt from and to maintain specified business Director, Office of Protected Resources, disclosure under the Freedom of records (including records related to the National Marine Fisheries Service. Information Act, a petition for governance and financial status of the [FR Doc. 2019–12909 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] confidential treatment of the exempt swap dealer or major swap participant, BILLING CODE 3510–22–P information may be submitted according complaints received by such SD or MSP to the procedures established in § 145.9 and such SD or MSP’s marketing and 1 of the Commission’s regulations. The sales materials). They also require SDs COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING Commission reserves the right, but shall and MSPs to report certain swap have no obligation, to review, pre- COMMISSION transaction data to swap data screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove repositories, to satisfy certain real time Agency Information Collection any or all of your submission from http://www.cftc.gov that it may deem to public reporting requirements, and to Activities: Notice of Intent To Revise maintain records of information Collection Numbers 3038–0087, be inappropriate for publication, such as reported to swap data depositories and Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Daily obscene language. All submissions that for real time reporting purposes.8 The Trading Records Requirements for have been redacted or removed that Swap Dealers and Major Swap contain comments on the merits of the Commission believes that the Participants ICR will be retained in the public information collection obligations comment file and will be considered as imposed by Commission regulations AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading required under the Administrative 23.201 through 23.205 are necessary to Commission. Procedure Act and other applicable implement sections 4s(f) and 4s(g) of the ACTION: Notice. laws, and may be accessible under the CEA, including ensuring that each SD Freedom of Information Act. and MSP maintains the required records SUMMARY: In compliance with the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of their business activities and an audit Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Gregory Scopino, Special Counsel, trail sufficient to conduct (PRA), this notice announces that the Division of Swap Dealer and Information Collection Request (ICR) comprehensive and accurate trade Intermediary Oversight, Commodity abstracted below has been forwarded to reconstruction. On April 12, 2019, the Futures Trading Commission, (202) the Office of Management and Budget Commission published in the Federal 418–5175; email: [email protected]. (OMB) for review and comment. The Register notice of the proposed ICR describes the nature of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This extension of this information collection information collection and its expected notice solicits comments on the and provided 60 days for public costs and burden. collections of information mandated by comment on the proposed extension, 84 Commission regulations 23.201 through DATES: FR 14921 (‘‘60-Day Notice’’). The Comments must be submitted on 23.205 (Reporting, Recordkeeping, and or before July 19, 2019. Commission did not receive any Daily Trading Records Requirements comments on the 60-Day Notice. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, For Swap Dealers and Major Swap identified by ‘‘Reporting, Participants). Burden Statement: The Commission Recordkeeping, and Daily Trading Title: Reporting, Recordkeeping, and is revising its estimate of the burden for Records Requirements for Swap Dealers Daily Trading Records Requirements for this collection to reflect the current and Major Swap Participants,’’ and Swap Dealers and Major Swap number of respondents and estimated Collection Number 3038–0087 by any of Participants (OMB Control Nos. 3038– burden hours. The respondent burden the following methods: 0087). This is a request for an extension for this collection is estimated to be as • The Agency’s website, at http:// of currently approved information follows: comments.cftc.gov/. Follow the collection. Number of Registrants: 103. instructions for submitting comments Abstract: On April 3, 2012, the through the website. Commission adopted Commission Estimated Average Burden Hours per • Mail: Christopher Kirkpatrick, regulations 23.201 through 23.205 Registrant: 2,096. Secretary of the Commission, (Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Daily Estimated Aggregate Burden Hours: Commodity Futures Trading Trading Records Requirements For 215,888. Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, Swap Dealers and Major Swap 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC Participants) 2 pursuant to sections Frequency of Recordkeeping: As 20581. 4s(f) 3 and 4s(g) 4 of the Commodity applicable. • Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as Exchange Act (‘‘CEA’’).5 Commission There are no capital costs or operating Mail above. regulations 23.201 through 23.205 and maintenance costs associated with Please submit your comments using require, among other things, swap this collection. only one method. 6 dealers (‘‘SD’’) and major swap (Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) All comments must be submitted in participants (‘‘MSP’’) 7 to maintain English, or if not, accompanied by an transaction and position records of their Dated: June 13, 2019. English translation. A copy of the Robert Sidman, supporting statement for the collection 1 17 CFR 145.9. Deputy Secretary of the Commission. of information discussed herein may be 2 17 CFR 23.201–23.205. [FR Doc. 2019–12941 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] obtained by visiting http://RegInfo.gov. 3 7 U.S.C. 6s(f). All comments must be submitted in 4 7 U.S.C. 6s(g). BILLING CODE 6351–01–P English, or if not, accompanied by an 5 77 FR 20128. English translation. Comments will be 6 For the definition of SD, see section 1a(49) of posted as received to http:// the CEA and Commission regulation 1.3. 7 U.S.C. 1a(49) and 17 CFR 1.3. www.cftc.gov. You should submit only 7 For the definitions of MSP, see section 1a(33) of information that you wish to make the CEA and Commission regulation 1.3. 7 U.S.C. available publicly. If you wish the 1a(33) and 17 CFR 1.3. 8 See 17 CFR 23.201–23.205. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28511 COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING available publicly. If you wish the swap data reporting rules (‘‘transition COMMISSION Commission to consider information swaps’’). On June 12, 2012, the CFTC that you believe is exempt from adopted regulation 46, which imposes Agency Information Collection disclosure under the Freedom of recordkeeping and reporting Activities: Notice of Intent To Revise Information Act, a petition for requirements relating to pre-enactment Collection 3038–0089, Swap Data confidential treatment of the exempt and historical swaps. Recordkeeping and Reporting information may be submitted according Burden Statement: Provisions of Requirements: Pre-Enactment and to the procedures established in § 145.9 CFTC Regulations 46.2, 46.3, 46.4, 46.8, Transition Swaps of the Commission’s regulations.1 The 46.10, and 46.11 result in information collection requirements within the AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission reserves the right, but shall meaning of the PRA. With respect to the Commission. have no obligation, to review, pre- screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove ongoing reporting and recordkeeping ACTION: Notice. any or all of your submission from burdens associated with pre-enactment SUMMARY: In compliance with the http://www.cftc.gov that it may deem to and transition swaps, the CFTC believes Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 be inappropriate for publication, such as that SDs, MSPs, and non-SD/MSP (PRA), this notice announces that the obscene language. All submissions that counterparties incur an annual time- Information Collection Request (ICR) have been redacted or removed that burden of 17,328 hours. This time- abstracted below has been forwarded to contain comments on the merits of the burden represents a proportion of the the Office of Management and Budget ICR will be retained in the public burden responents incur to operate and (OMB) for review and comment. The comment file and will be considered as maintain their swap data recordkeeping ICR describes the nature of the required under the Administrative and reporting systems. 17 CFR 45 imposes swap information collection and its expected Procedure Act and other applicable recordkeeping and reporting costs and burden. laws, and may be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act. requirements on respondents related to DATES: Comments must be submitted on swaps that are not pre-enactment or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: or before July 19, 2019. transition swaps. The CFTC believes ADDRESSES: Comments regarding the Meghan Tente, Division of Market that respondents use the same burden estimated or any other aspect of Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading recordkeeping and reporting systems to the information collection, including Commission, 1155 21st Street NW, (202) compy with both parts 45 and 46. The suggestions for reducing the burden, 418–5785, email: [email protected], and CFTC has computed the estimated may be submitted directly to the Office refer to OMB Control No. 3038–0089. burden for 17 CFR 46 by estimating the of Information and Regulatory Affairs in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An agency burden incurred by respondents to OMB, within 30 days of publication of may not conduct or sponsor, and a operate and maintain their swap data the notice, by email at person is not required to respond to, a recordkeeping and reporting systems [email protected]. Please collection of information unless it and then estimating the percentage of identify the comments by OMB Control displays a currently valid OMB control that burden associated with pre- No. 3038–0089. Please provide the number. The Federal Register notice enactment and transition swaps. Since Commission with a copy of all with a 60-day comment period soliciting the enactment of 17 CFR 45, the vast submitted comments at the address comments on this collection of majority of pre-enactment and transition listed below. Please refer to OMB information was published on April 12, swaps have been terminated by the Reference No. 3038–0089, found on 2019 (84 FR 14922). parties to the swaps or are otherwise no http://reginfo.gov. Comments may also Title: Swap Data Recordkeeping and longer in existence. As 17 CFR 46 only be mailed to the Office of Information Reporting Requirements: Pre-Enactment requires respondents to make ongoing and Regulatory Affairs, Office of and Transition Swaps (OMB Control No. reports regarding pre-enactment and Management and Budget, Attention: 3038–0089). This is a request for transition swaps that continue to be in Desk Officer for the Commodity Futures extension of a currently approved existence, the number of reports being Trading Commission, 725 17th Street information collection. made pursuant to 17 CFR 46 has NW, Washington, DC 20503, and to the Abstract: The collection of declined significantly over time. As the Commission through its website at information is needed to ensure that the volume of reports made pursuant to 17 http://comments.cftc.gov. Follow the CFTC and other regulators have access CFR 46 is estimated to be very small instructions for submitting comments to data regarding pre-enactment and releative to the estimated volume of through the website. transition swaps, as required by the reports made pursuant to 17 CFR 45, the Comments may also be mailed to: Commodity Exchange Act as amended Commission’s burden estimate has Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform allocated the vast majority of the Commission, Commodity Futures and Consumer Protection Act (‘‘Dodd- estimated burden to operate and Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Frank Act’’). The Dodd-Frank Act maintain respondents’ swap data Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, directed the CFTC to adopt rules recordkeeping and reporting systems to Washington, DC 20581, or by Hand providing for the reporting of data the burden estimate associated with 17 Delivery/Courier at the same address. relating to swaps entered into before the CFR 45. A copy of the supporting statements date of enactment of the Dodd-Frank Respondents/Affected Entities: Swap for the collection of information Act, the terms of which had not expired Dealers, Major Swap Participants, and discussed above may be obtained by as of the date of enactment of the Dodd- other counterparties to a swap visiting http://regInfo.gov. All Frank Act (‘‘pre-enactment swaps’’) and transaction (i.e., end-user, non-SD/non- comments must be submitted in data relating to swaps entered into on or MSP counterparties). English, or if not, accompanied by an after the date of enactment of the Dodd- Estimated Number of Respondents: English translation. Comments will be Frank Act and prior to the compliance 30,125. posted as received to http:// date specified in the the CFTC’s final Estimated Total Annual Burden on www.cftc.gov. You should submit only Respondents: 17,328 hours. information that you wish to make 1 17 CFR 145.9. Frequency of Collection: Ongoing. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28512 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices There are no capital costs or operating for the proper performance of the Dated: June 5, 2019. and maintenance costs associated with functions of CNCS, including whether Sarah Yue, this collection. the information will have practical Senior Program and Project Specialist, (Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) utility; AmeriCorps State and National. • Evaluate the accuracy of the [FR Doc. 2019–12963 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Dated: June 13, 2019. agency’s estimate of the burden of the BILLING CODE 6050–28–P Robert Sidman, proposed collection of information, Deputy Secretary of the Commission. including the validity of the [FR Doc. 2019–12923 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] methodology and assumptions; DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BILLING CODE 6351–01–P • Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the Department of the Army information to be collected; and CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND • Propose ways to minimize the U.S. Army Science Board; Notice of COMMUNITY SERVICE burden of the collection of information Federal Advisory Committee Meeting on those who are to respond, including AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. Agency Information Collection through the use of appropriate ACTION: Activities; Submission to the Office of automated, electronic, mechanical, or Notice of Federal Advisory Management and Budget for Review other technological collection Committee meeting. and Approval; Comment Request; techniques or other forms of information SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is Application Package for the Grantee technology. Progress Report (GPR) Data publishing this notice to announce that Collection.; Proposed Information Comments the following Federal Advisory Collection; Comment Request Committee meeting of the U.S. Army A 60-day Notice requesting public Science Board (ASB) will take place. AGENCY: comment was published in the Federal Corporation for National and DATES: Register on 2/26/2019 at Vol. 84, No. 38, Thursday, July 17, 2019. Time: Community Service. 7:30 a.m.–5:00 p.m. ACTION: Notice. p. 6136–6137. This comment period ended 4/29/2019. Two (2) public ADDRESSES: The Arnold and Mabel SUMMARY: The Corporation for National comments were received from this Beckman Center of the National and Community Service (CNCS) has Notice. In response to the first comment, Academies of Sciences and Engineering, submitted a public information CNCS changed ‘‘100%’’ to ‘‘the level 100 Academy Way, Irvine, CA 92617. collection request (ICR) entitled Grantee required by policy’’ per the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Progress Report (GPR) Data Collection commentor’s suggestion. In response to Heather J. Gerard, (703) 545–8652 for review and approval in accordance the second comment, CNCS will explore (Voice), 571–256–3383 (Facsimile), with the Paperwork Reduction Act. potential future revisions to the member [email protected] (Email). DATES: Comments may be submitted, exit form or exit survey to accommodate Mailing address is Army Science Board, identified by the title of the information additional member-focused indicators. 2530 Crystal Drive, Suite 7098, collection activity, by July 19, 2019. Title of Collection: Grantee Progress Arlington, VA 22202. Website: https:// ADDRESSES: Comments may be Report (GPR) Data Collection. asb.army.mil/. submitted, identified by the title of the OMB Control Number: 3045–0175. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This information collection activity, to the Type of Review: Renewal. meeting is being held under the Office of Information and Regulatory Respondents/Affected Public: provisions of the Federal Advisory Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Businesses and Organizations; State, Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 Desk Officer for the Corporation for Local or Tribal Governments. U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the National and Community Service, by Total Estimated Number of Annual Government in the Sunshine Act of any of the following two methods Responses: 300 total respondents for 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and within 30 days from the date of AmeriCorps State and National. 52 41 CFR 102–3.140 and 102–3.150. publication in the Federal Register: respondents each for Commission Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose (1) By fax to: 202–395–6974, Support Grants and Commission of the meeting is for ASB members to Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Investment Funds. 20 respondents for review, deliberate, and vote on the Officer for the Corporation for National Volunteer Generation Fund. findings and recommendations and Community Service; or Total Estimated Number of Annual presented for five Fiscal Year 2019 (2) By email to: [email protected]. Burden Hours: 4,540. (FY19) ASB studies. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Abstract: CNCS uses information Agenda: The ASB will present Copies of this ICR, with applicable collected via the Grantee Progress findings and recommendations for supporting documentation, may be Reports to assess grantee progress deliberation on the following FY19 obtained by calling the Corporation for toward meeting approved objectives; to studies: ‘‘Reforming Talent Management National and Community Service, Sarah identify areas of challenge and in the Army’’, ‘‘Battlefield Uses of Yue, at 202–606–6894 or by email to opportunity; to guide the allocation of Artificial Intelligence’’, ‘‘Army Futures [email protected]. Individuals who use a training and technical assistance Command’’, and ‘‘An Independent telecommunications device for the deaf resources; and to compile portfolio-wide Assessment of the U.S. Army Corps of (TTY–TDD) may use our web chat for data to report to external stakeholders. Engineers’ (USACE) Effectiveness in alternative communication CNCS seeks to continue using the Delivering the Nation’s Civil Works www.NationalService.gov/contact-us. currently approved information Program’’. The open portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB collection until the revised information meeting is scheduled for July 17, 2019 is particularly interested in comments collection is approved by OMB. The from 7:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and will be which: currently approved information accessible to the public and press. The • Evaluate whether the proposed collection is due to expire on April 30, study ‘‘An Independent Assessment of collection of information is necessary 2020. the Next Generation Anti-Armor VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28513 Strategy’’ is classified and will be USTRANSCOM, Military Surface for the Military Surface Deployment and presented in a closed meeting at 3:30 Deployment and Distribution Command Distribution Command (SDDC). The HR p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (SDDC) announces a proposed public account is linked to the supplier module Meeting Accessibility: Pursuant to 5 information collection and seeks public for payment of entitlements (Defense U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR comment on the provisions thereof. Travel System (DTS)). The information 102–3.155, the Department of the Army Comments are invited on: Whether the is also linked to the Defense Civilian has determined that the 3:30 p.m. to proposed collection of information is Pay system (DCPS) for payment of 5:00 p.m. portion of the meeting shall be necessary for the proper performance of civilian personnel for entitlements. The closed to the public. Specifically, the functions of the agency, including information is also used to establish and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1), the whether the information shall have control user accounts in TFMS. Administrative Assistant to the practical utility; the accuracy of the Affected Public: Individuals or Secretary of the Army, in consultation agency’s estimate of the burden of the Households. with the Office of the Army General proposed information collection; ways Annual Burden Hours: 164. Counsel, has determined in writing that to enhance the quality, utility, and Number of Respondents: 984. the public interest requires that the 3:30 clarity of the information to be Responses per Respondent: 1. p.m. to 5:00 p.m. portion of the collected; and ways to minimize the Annual Responses: 984. Average Burden per Response: 10 committee’s meeting will be closed to burden of the information collection on minutes. the public because the meeting is likely respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or Frequency: As required. to disclose matters that are (A) Respondents are new employees that other forms of information technology. specifically authorized under criteria will be paid through DCPS, travelers established by an Executive order to be DATES: Consideration will be given to all that will be reimbursed using the SDDC kept secret in the interest of national comments received by August 19, 2019. line of accounting, or anyone requiring defense or foreign policy and (B) in fact ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, access to the accounting system to enter properly classified pursuant to such identified by docket number and title, data or query exiting data. They are Executive order. by any of the following methods: responding to the information collection Written Statements: Pursuant to 41 Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// to ensure they receive pay and benefits CFR 102–3.105(j) and 102–3.140, and www.regulations.gov. Follow the or to gain access to the accounting § 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory instructions for submitting comments. system as part of their assigned duties. Committee Act of 1972, the public or Mail: Department of Defense, Office of interested organizations may submit the Chief Management Officer, Dated: June 14, 2019. written statements to the ASB about its Directorate for Oversight and Aaron T. Siegel, mission and functions. Written Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison statements may be submitted at any Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, Officer, Department of Defense. time or in response to the stated agenda VA 22350–1700. [FR Doc. 2019–13030 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] of a planned meeting of the ASB. All Instructions: All submissions received BILLING CODE 5001–06–P written statements must be submitted to must include the agency name, docket the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at number and title for this Federal the address listed above, and this Register document. The general policy DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE individual will ensure that the written for comments and other submissions statements are provided to the from members of the public is to make Office of the Secretary membership for their consideration. these submissions available for public [Docket ID: DOD–2019–OS–0071] Written statements not received at least viewing on the internet at http:// 10 calendar days prior to the meeting www.regulations.gov as they are Proposed Collection; Comment may not be considered by the ASB prior received without change, including any Request to its scheduled meeting. After personal identifiers or contact AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary of information. reviewing written comments, the DFO Defense for Personnel and Readiness, may choose to invite the submitter of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To DoD. the comments to orally present their request more information on this ACTION: Information collection notice. issue during a future open meeting. proposed information collection or to Brenda S. Bowen, obtain a copy of the proposal and SUMMARY: In compliance with the Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. associated collection instruments, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the please write to Department of the Army, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense [FR Doc. 2019–13000 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Military Surface Deployment and for Personnel and Readiness announces BILLING CODE 3710–08–P Distribution Command, 1 Soldier Way, a proposed public information Scott AFB IL 62225–5006, ATTN: Ms. collection and seeks public comment on DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Estella McNaughton, or call (571) 515– the provisions thereof. Comments are 0231. invited on: Whether the proposed Office of the Secretary SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: collection of information is necessary Title; Associated Form; and OMB for the proper performance of the [Docket ID: DOD–2019–OS–0070] Number: SDDC Transportation functions of the agency, including Proposed Collection; Comment Financial Management System (TFMS) whether the information shall have Request Access Request; SDDC Form 417; OMB practical utility; the accuracy of the Control Number 0704–XXXX. agency’s estimate of the burden of the AGENCY: USTRANSCOM, DoD. Needs and Uses: The information proposed information collection; ways ACTION: Information collection notice. collection requirement is necessary to to enhance the quality, utility, and establish Human Resource (HR) clarity of the information to be SUMMARY: In compliance with the accounts within the Transportation collected; and ways to minimize the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Financial Management System (TFMS) burden of the information collection on VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28514 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices respondents, including through the use Center Drive, Suite 03G15, Alexandria, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE of automated collection techniques or VA 22350–2300 or call 800–342–9647. other forms of information technology. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Office of the Secretary DATES: Consideration will be given to all Title; Associated Form; and OMB comments received by August 19, 2019. Number: Spouse Education and Career [Transmittal No. 19–06] Opportunities Program (SECO); OMB ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Control Number 0704–0556. Arms Sales Notification identified by docket number and title, Needs and Uses: This information by any of the following methods: collection requirement is necessary to AGENCY: Defense Security Cooperation Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// allow eligible military spouses to access Agency, Department of Defense. www.regulations.gov. Follow the educational and employment resources. instructions for submitting comments. The DoD Spouse Education and Career ACTION: Arms sales notice. Mail: Department of Defense, Office of Opportunities (SECO) Program is the the Chief Management Officer, primary source of education, career and SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is Directorate for Oversight and employment counseling for all military publishing the unclassified text of an Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, spouses who are seeking post-secondary arms sales notification. education, training, licenses and Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: credentials needed for portable career VA 22350–1700. Karma Job at [email protected] employment. The SECO system delivers Instructions: All submissions received or (703) 697–8976. must include the agency name, docket the resources and tools necessary to number and title for this Federal assist spouses of service members with SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Register document. The general policy career exploration/discovery, career 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is for comments and other submissions education and training, employment published to fulfill the requirements of from members of the public is to make readiness, and career connections at any section 155 of Public Law 104–164 these submissions available for public point within the spouse career lifecycle. dated July 21, 1996. The following is a Affected Public: Individuals or viewing on the internet at http:// copy of a letter to the Speaker of the Households. www.regulations.gov as they are Annual Burden Hours: 19,500. House of Representatives, Transmittal received without change, including any Number of Respondents: 26,000. 19–06 with attached Policy Justification personal identifiers or contact Responses per Respondent: 1. and Sensitivity of Technology. information. Annual Responses: 26,000. Dated: June 13, 2019. Average Burden per Response: 45 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Aaron T. Siegel, request more information on this minutes. Frequency: On occasion. Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison proposed information collection or to Officer, Department of Defense. Dated: June 14, 2019. obtain a copy of the proposal and BILLING CODE 5001–06–P associated collection instruments, Aaron T. Siegel, please write to Office of Family Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Readiness Policy, ATTN: Pia Rose, Officer, Department of Defense. Spouse Education & Career [FR Doc. 2019–13035 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Opportunities Program, 4800 Mark BILLING CODE 5001–06–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28515 BILLING CODE 5001–06–C Five (5) Antenna Mast Groups (AMG) (v) Prior Related Cases, if any: None Transmittal No. 19-06 Three (3) Electrical Power Plants (EPP) (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, III Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Two (2) AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets (RS) (vii) Sensitivity of Technology Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Two (2) AN/MSQ-132 Engagement Arms Export Control Act, as amended Contained in the Defense Article or Control Stations (ECS) Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: (i) Prospective Purchaser: Government Non-MDE: See Attached Annex. Also included is communications of Bahrain (viii) Date Report Delivered to (ii) Total Estimated Value: equipment, tools and test equipment, Congress: May 3, 2019 range and test programs, support Major Defense Equipment * $1.445 billion * As defined in Section 47(6) of the Other ...... $1.033 billion equipment, prime movers, generators, Arms Export Control Act. publications and technical TOTAL ...... $2.478 billion documentation, training equipment, POLICY JUSTIFICATION (iii) Description and Quantity or spare and repair parts, personnel Bahrain—Patriot Missile System and Quantities of Articles or Services under training, Technical Assistance Field Related Support and Equipment Consideration for Purchase: Team (TAFT), U.S. Government and Major Defense Equipment (MDE): contractor technical, engineering, and The Government of Bahrain has Sixty (60) Patriot Advanced Capability- logistics support services, Systems requested to buy sixty (60) Patriot 3 (PAC-3) Missile Segment Integration and Checkout (SICO), field Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile Enhancement (MSE) Missiles office support, and other related Segment Enhancement (MSE) missiles, Thirty-six (36) Patriot MIM-104E elements of logistics and program thirty-six (36) Patriot MIM-104E Guidance Enhanced Missiles (GEM-T) support. Guidance Enhanced Missiles (GEM-T) Missiles with Canisters (iv) Military Department: Army (BA- missiles with canisters, nine (9) M903 Nine (9) M903 Launching Stations (LS) B-UKY) Launching Stations (LS), five (5) VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES EN19JN19.000 28516 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Antenna Mast Groups (AMG), three (3) Transmittal No. 19-06 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Electrical Power Plants (EPP) III, two (2) Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of AN/MPQ-65 Radar Sets (RS), and two Office of the Secretary Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the (2) AN/MSQ-132 Engagement Control Arms Export Control Act [Docket ID DOD–2019–OS–0068] Stations (ECS). Also included is communications equipment, tools and Annex Privacy Act of 1974; System of test equipment, range and test programs, Item No. vii Records support equipment, prime movers, AGENCY: Defense Logistics Agency, DoD. generators, publications and technical (vii) Sensitivity of Technology: ACTION: Rescindment of a system of documentation, training equipment, 1. The Patriot Air Defense System records notice. spare and repair parts, personnel contains classified CONFIDENTIAL training, Technical Assistance Field hardware components, SECRET tactical SUMMARY: The Defense Logistics Agency Team (TAFT), U.S. Government and software and critical/sensitive (DLA) is rescinding a system of records, contractor technical, engineering, and technology. Patriot ground support S240.28 DoD, Case Adjudication logistics support services, Systems equipment and Patriot missile hardware Tracking System (CATS). This system of Integration and Checkout (SICO), field contain CONFIDENTIAL components records recorded and documented office support, and other related and the associated launcher hardware is personnel security adjudicative actions elements of logistics and program UNCLASSIFIED. The items requested within the Department, federal agencies, support. The estimated cost is $2.478 represent significant technological and for DoD contractors. The system also provided a status of investigative billion. advances for Bahrain. The Patriot Air and adjudicative updates to security Defense System continues to hold a This proposed sale will support the officers, managers and other authorized significant technology lead over other foreign policy and national security of users. With the transfer of responsibility the United States by improving the surface-to-air missile systems in the for CATS from DLA to the Defense security of a Major Non-NATO ally world. Manpower Data Center (DMDC), and which is a force for political stability 2. The Patriot sensitive/critical subsequent publication of the DMDC 24 and economic progress in the Middle technology is primarily in the area of DoD, Defense Information System for East. This sale is consistent with U.S. design and production know-how and Security (DISS), system of records initiatives to provide key allies in the primarily inherent in the design, notice, the DLA CATS system of records region with modern systems that will development and/or manufacturing data is no longer in use as it is subsumed enhance interoperability with U.S. related to certain components. The list within the DISS system of records. All forces and increase security. of components is classified records previously covered by the DLA The proposed sale will enhance CONFIDENTIAL. CATS system of records are now covered by the DISS system of records. Bahrain’s interoperability with the 3. Information on system performance DATES: United States. Bahrain will use Patriot capabilities, effectiveness, survivability, This notice is applicable upon publication. to improve its missile defense missile seeker capabilities, select capability, defend its territorial software/software documentation and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To integrity, and deter regional threats. test data are classified up to and submit general questions about the Bahrain will have no difficulty including SECRET. rescinded system, please contact Mr. absorbing this system into its armed Lewis Oleinick, Chief FOIA and Privacy 4. If a technologically advanced forces. Act Officer, Defense Logistics Agency, adversary were to obtain knowledge of The proposed sale of these missiles Office of General Counsel, ATTN: DGA, the hardware and software elements, the 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Suite 1644, will not alter the basic military balance information could be used to develop Fort Belvoir, VA 22060–6221, or by in the region. countermeasures or equivalent systems phone at (703) 767–6193. The prime contractor for the PAC-3 which might reduce system SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Missile is Lockheed-Martin in Dallas, effectiveness or be used in the October 2, 2014, the Deputy Secretary of Texas. The prime contractor for the development of a system with similar or Defense signed Memorandum GEM-T missile is Raytheon Company in advanced capabilities. OSD010147, directing the transfer of the Andover, Massachusetts. There are no 5. A determination has been made Defense Travel System (DTS) and the known offset agreements proposed in that the Government of Bahrain can Defense Information System for Security connection with this potential sale. provide substantially the same degree of (DISS) programs from DLA to the Implementation of this proposed sale protection for the sensitive technology Defense Manpower Data Center will require approximately 25 U.S. being released as the U.S. Government. (DMDC), a component of the Defense Government and 40 contractor This sale is necessary in furtherance of Human Resources Agency (DHRA). On representatives to travel to Bahrain for the U.S. foreign policy and national July 27, 2015, DHRA and DLA signed a an extended period for equipment de- security objectives outlined in the Memorandum of Agreement transferring processing/fielding, system checkout, Policy Justification. operational and budgetary responsibility from DLA to DHRA. On June 15, 2016, training, and technical and logistics 6. All defense articles and services the Office of the Secretary of Defense, support. listed in this transmittal have been DoD, published a new system of There will be no adverse impact on authorized for release and export to the records, DMDC 24 DoD, Defense U.S. defense readiness as a result of this Government of Bahrain. Information System for Security (DISS) proposed sale. [FR Doc. 2019–12917 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] (81 FR 39032). The DISS system of BILLING CODE 5001–06–P records is comprised of the Case Adjudication Tracking System (CATS) and the Joint Verification System (JVS). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28517 The DLA CATS system of records has DATES: Comments, data, views, or a significant challenge to both SRS’s been subsumed within the DISS system arguments concerning the emergency management system and to of records and all records previously recommendation are due on or by July local emergency and medical facilities. covered by the DLA CATS system of 19, 2019. The current situation at the Tritium records are now covered by the DISS ADDRESSES: Send comments concerning Facilities does not adequately address system of records. The Defense Logistics this notice to: Defense Nuclear Facilities either DOE’s standards of care or Agency systems of records notices Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW, standards of practice as defined by its subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004–2001. own requirements. Consequently, U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been Comments may also be submitted by e- adequate protection is not assured. The published in the Federal Register and mail to [email protected]. Board has concluded that DOE needs to are available from the address in FOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: take actions to improve the safety of the FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at the Glenn Sklar at the address above or Tritium Facilities, upgrades to safety Defense Privacy, Civil Liberties and telephone number (202) 694–7000. management programs and the Transparency Division website at http:// SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: implementation of robust controls to dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNs/. ensure adequate protection of public The proposed systems reports, as Recommendation 2019–2 to the health and safety.2 Secretary of Energy required by the Privacy Act of 1974, as Recommendations. The Board amended, were submitted on January Safety of the Savannah River Site recommends that DOE: 15, 2019, to the House Committee on Tritium Facilities 1. Identify and implement near-term Oversight and Reform, the Senate Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2286a(b)(5) compensatory measures at SRS to Committee on Homeland Security and mitigate the potential for high Governmental Affairs, and on February Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended radiological consequences to 5, 2019, to the Office of Management Introduction. The Tritium Facilities at individuals who would be impacted by and Budget (OMB) pursuant to Section the Savannah River Site (SRS) consist of a release from the Tritium Facilities. 6 to OMB Circular No. A–108, ‘‘Federal several defense nuclear facilities, (For example, potential near-term Agency Responsibilities for Review, including the 217–H Vault, Buildings compensatory measures could include, Reporting, and Publication under the 233–H and 234–H, and the Tritium but are not limited to reducing the Privacy Act,’’ revised December 23, Extraction Facility, used for processing material at risk (MAR) and/or limiting 2016 (December 23, 2016, 81 FR 94424). and storing tritium. The Defense the number of potentially exposed SYSTEM NAME AND NUMBER Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) individuals or other physical or is concerned about adequate protection Case Adjudication Tracking System administrative controls.) of the public health and safety in the (CATS), S240.28 DoD 2. Identify and implement long-term event of an energetic accident at the actions and controls to prevent or HISTORY: Tritium Facilities. mitigate the hazards that pose July 09, 2015, 80 FR 39418 The facilities’ approved Documented significant radiological consequences to Safety Analysis (DSA) and the Dated: June 13, 2019. acceptably low values consistent with November 2018 revision to the DSA the requirements of DOE directives. Aaron T. Siegel, awaiting approval by the National 3. In parallel with the above Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Nuclear Security Administration recommendations, evaluate the Officer, Department of Defense. (NNSA) of the Department of Energy adequacy of the following safety [FR Doc. 2019–12945 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] (DOE) both have analyzed several management programs and upgrade BILLING CODE 5001–06–P credible accidents that could result in them as necessary to ensure that SRS very high doses, creating the potential can effectively respond to energetic for acute radiation sickness or fatality 1 accidents at the Tritium Facilities, and in a significant number of individuals. that it can quickly identify and properly DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES These energetic accidents include treat potential victims: SAFETY BOARD building-wide fires due to a variety of initiating events, crane drops, and a. The staffing and training Recommendation 2019–02 explosions with the potential to release requirements for individuals expected to take specific actions in response to AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities large quantities of tritium. alarms, abnormal operations, and Safety Board. The probability of such an event within the lifetime of the facility is not emergencies; ACTION: Notice; Recommendation. negligible. Assuming a 50-year lifetime b. The adequacy of the Emergency SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear for the facilities, the probability that an Preparedness programs in H-Area to Facilities Safety Board has made a unlikely event could occur within that account for all individuals in the Recommendation to the Secretary of time period ranges from 0.5 percent to vicinity and ensure that all potentially Energy concerning adequate protection about 40 percent. Such an event could affected individuals understand their of public health and safety in the event lead to a significant number of responsibilities and required actions in of an energetic accident at the Tritium potentially exposed individuals, posing the event of a large tritium release from Facilities at the Savannah River Site. Pursuant to the requirements of the 1 Acute radiation-induced sickness and acute 2 The Board has raised concerns regarding the radiation fatality, as used in this report, refers to safety posture at the Tritium facilities since 1992. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, possible outcomes of the acute radiation syndrome. The Board’s concerns over the potential for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety This syndrome is the result of an acute, or short energetic accidents with very high calculated dose Board is publishing the duration, exposure to a very high level of ionizing consequences have been frequently communicated Recommendation and associated radiation. In this context, the word acute does not to DOE. DOE has routinely responded to the Board’s imply immediate incapacitation or death, as the concerns with improvements in the safety controls, correspondence with the Department of syndrome and its impact on a human body may only to allow those controls to be downgraded after Energy and requesting comments from take hours to months to progress to recovery or a number of years. (See the Attachment for a list interested members of the public. death. of previous Board correspondence.) VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:43 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28518 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices the Tritium Facilities and are prepared challenges that complicate the controls for Tritium Facilities, such as to implement them; approaches to responding to such MAR segregation’’ to reduce the c. The ability of the site’s Fire accidents and providing medical consequences of a potential accident. Department to respond to fires, assistance to exposed individuals. A The attachment to the NNSA letter explosions, and other accidents at the tritium release becomes even more identified a series of analytical and Tritium Facilities that could lead to a challenging when considering that administrative activities that SRNS large tritium release; hundreds of workers in the SRS H-Area would conduct and stated that, ‘‘A d. The capability of the site-wide occupy the defense nuclear facilities review of the control selection for the radiological protection and occupational and other administrative and training design basis events considering the new medicine programs to respond to an buildings surrounding the Tritium analysis will be performed. Emphasis accident and monitor a large number of Facilities.5 will be placed on utilizing existing people with potentially serious uptakes Emergency Preparedness: Since 2011 passive and active engineered controls of tritiated water vapor; and the Tritium Facilities have conducted vice administrative controls. Any e. The ability and preparedness of several seismic and/or multi-facility changes to controls will be reflected in community emergency and medical drills and exercises. The Board’s staff a future update to the Documented resources to support the site in such have observed these drills and exercises Safety Analysis.’’ situations. and found that they have improved A letter from SRNS to NNSA dated communications and coordination Background July 12, 2018 [2], indicates that SRNS is among the tritium facilities, as well as considering a number of engineering Effects of Tritium Release: Much of coordination of protective actions with controls, but the Board is not aware of the in-process tritium at the Tritium other nuclear facilities within the H- any formal actions or implementation of Facilities may be in the form of gas, and Area. However, neither DOE nor the site any near-term compensatory measures material in storage is either in pressure contractor, Savannah River Nuclear based on this strategy. SRNS’s proposed vessels or deposited on hydride beds. Solutions (SRNS), has conducted strategy mainly consists of performing Exposure to tritium gas does not result exercises involving the evacuation of analyses. These analyses may result in in significant doses to individuals, as large numbers of individuals from an SRNS proposing revisions to the the gas is not retained by the human area due to a large tritium release, nor Tritium Facilities DSA to credit existing body after inhalation. However, any have they planned for the related engineered controls or may lead SRNS significant release of tritium gas during logistical issues or for monitoring large to pursue installation of new engineered an energetic accident or upset condition numbers of individuals to identify those controls. Any physical modifications or has a high potential of resulting in a fire, who might be at risk of a significant additions would likely take years to even if a fire did not initiate the release. tritium intake and would require implement under SRNS’s proposed In the energetic accidents of concern to immediate medical intervention. While strategy. Furthermore, the Board is not the Board, tritium, an isotope of reliance on the Emergency Preparedness aware of any commitments made by hydrogen, may be ignited, converted programs is not a long-term solution, NNSA to implement engineered into water by oxidation, and then this program will be essential in controls based on the contractor’s dispersed as a vapor. mitigating the consequences of a strategy. Tritiated water vapor represents a significant tritium release until an Conclusion. The Board has concluded significant risk to those exposed to it, as adequate control set can be that adequate protection of public its dose consequence to an exposed implemented. health and safety currently is not individual is 15,000 to 20,000 times Past Communication: During a June assured, should an accident, such as an higher than that for an equivalent 16, 2011, public hearing in Augusta, earthquake or large fire, occur at these 3 amount of tritium gas. As with normal Georgia, the Board raised concerns facilities and there continues to be a risk water vapor, tritiated water vapor is regarding high consequences due to a of exposure to significant radiological quickly absorbed into the lungs and potential fire in the Tritium Facilities. consequences in case of an energetic through the skin, and rapidly mixes The Board further communicated this event at these facilities. with the water in the body. The target concern to NNSA in an August 19, 2011, Bruce Hamilton, Chairman organ for the exposure is the whole Board correspondence in which it body, with a biological half-life 4 of 10 identified a shift in the safety Recommendation References days [1]. The combination of a rapid philosophy applied to the Tritium 1. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, intake and a short biological half-life Facilities at SRS. The Board noted that Health Effects, Dosimetry and Radiological means a large fraction of the radiological downgrading of safety related controls Protection of Tritium, Minster of Public dose is acutely delivered within hours at the Tritium Facilities has ‘‘weakened Works and Government Services Canada, to days rather than chronically the safety posture, reduced the safety INFO–0799, April 2010. delivered over many months to years. margin, and increased the potential for 2. Spangler, R. W., Senior Vice President Tritium’s chemical and radiological both the workers and the public to be NNSA Operations and Programs, SRNS, letter characteristics also create difficult exposed to higher consequences.’’ to N. N. Nelson-Jean, NNSA Savannah River The Deputy Administrator for Defense Field Office, Transmittal of the Schedule for 3 The ratio of the dose conversion factors for Implementing the Strategy for Risk Reduction Programs replied to the Board’s to the Co-Located Worker in Tritium inhalation between tritiated water and tritium gas concerns on November 14, 2011, stating is a factor of 10,000; additionally, a factor of 1.5 is Facilities (U), SRNS–T0000–2018–00227, applied for the workers, and a factor of 2.0 is that NNSA would develop new July 12, 2018. applied for the public, to account for tritiated water analytical models to better understand absorption through the skin [1]. the risk posed by the Tritium Facilities’ Risk Assessment for Recommendation 4 The biological half-life is defined as ‘‘the time operations, and at the same time NNSA 2019–2 required in a given radionuclide for its activity to decrease, by biological clearance and radiological would pursue ‘‘additional interim safety Safety of the Savannah River Site decay, to half its original activity’’ [8]. This half-life Tritium Facilities is a function of the radiological half-life of the 5 A training building with a cafeteria is about 300 radioactive material and how rapidly it is removed meters from the Tritium Facilities; the building In making its recommendations to the from the body by metabolic processes. hosts a significant transient population. Secretary of Energy and in accordance VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28519 with 42 U.S.C. 2286a.(b)(5), the Board • Tritium Facilities at the Savannah River review of the control selection for the shall consider, and specifically assess Site, design basis events considering the new • Building 991 at Rocky Flats, risk (whenever sufficient data exists). • analysis will be performed. Emphasis Risk is generally defined as the Nevada Test Site, will be placed on utilizing existing • Sandia National Laboratories (Albuquerque quantitative or qualitative expression of and Livermore), passive and active engineered controls possible loss that considers both the • Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, vice administrative controls. Any likelihood that an event will occur and and changes to controls will be reflected in the consequences of that event. For • Pinellas Plant a future update to the Documented Recommendation 2019–2, Safety of the As part of these additional technical Safety Analysis (DSA).’’ The current Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities, activities, in 1992 the Board and its staff Savannah River Site (SRS) contractor, sufficient data does not exist to began to review safety basis documents Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC precisely determine the likelihood that for Building 233–H (known at the time (SRNS), submitted that DSA update to an event will occur and the as the Replacement Tritium Facility, NNSA’s Savannah River Field Office consequences of that event. However, RTF) [2–9]. At that time the facility had (SRFO) in July 2017. SRFO requested the Board can use information from the been built but had not commenced and the contractor submitted a revised Tritium Facilities’ DSAs to develop a operations. Later, the Board reviewed version of that DSA on November 2018, qualitative risk assessment. the design and safety basis of the and it is currently undergoing DOE’s The Tritium Facilities’ DSAs use risk Tritium Extraction Facility from the review and approval process. binning to estimate the frequencies of conceptual design stage to its final Consequently, the currently approved several of the energetic accidents startup. In both cases, the Board safety bases still contain many of the discussed in the Recommendation to be identified safety issues that were weaknesses that concerned the Board in Unlikely, which DOE Standard 3009, remediated by design modifications or 2011. Preparation Guide for U.S. Department administration of operational limits to The following discussions briefly of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility ensure that the public and the workers describe some of the original activities Documented Safety Analyses, assigns a and the controls applied to for Building ¥ ¥ were adequately protected. frequency range of 10 2 to 10 4 per Since the Board’s initial interactions 233–H. This building contains the year. Assuming a 50-year lifetime for the with the Tritium Facilities in 1992, the majority of the process tritium inventory facility, and given the broad frequency Board’s concerns over the potential for and poses the most unmitigated risk in range, the probability that an event energetic accidents with very high dose case of an energetic accident. could occur within that time period consequences have been frequently Building 233–H’s Past Safety Basis— ranges from 0.5 percent to about 40 communicated to the Department of The Board and DOE worked through percent. Energy (DOE). A listing of those several issues with the hazards analysis The large-scale release of tritium communications is provided in the and control set in the original Final postulated for these accidents has a Attachment. These communications and Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) 6 [2–9] significant potential to result in acute the DOE responses to them illustrate a during the early 1990s, prior to startup injuries or fatalities. Such an event pattern that, in itself, is a concern to the of Building 233–H. The fire event could lead to a significant number of Board. The Board’s early involvement in analyzed in the FSAR was based on 0.1 potentially exposed individuals, the safety of the Tritium Facilities percent oxidation of the tritium released resulting in a mass casualty situation prompted DOE to implement a range of during the accident. The site contractor that would pose a significant challenge safety improvements; however, those at the time, Westinghouse Savannah both to the Savannah River Site’s improvements either were downgraded River Company 7 (WSRC) performed a emergency management system and to or were found to be ineffective by 1999. conservatively bounding analysis local emergency and medical facilities. After the Board’s interactions with DOE assuming that 100 percent of the tritium Therefore, the Board has determined in 1999, improvements were again would be oxidized in a facility fire and the qualitative risk at the Savannah identified and implemented. By 2011, documented this analysis in an River Site’s Tritium Facilities is those improvements had been addendum to the FSAR. Furthermore, significant enough to require the downgraded and the Board found it WSRC performed a seismic analysis that Department of Energy to take action. necessary to raise the subject again. indicated that a stack would collapse on top of the tritium reservoir storage vault. Findings, Supporting Data, and Today, the Board has determined that DOE and WSRC designed and Analysis its concerns are such that a formal Recommendation is needed to ensure constructed more than a dozen safes Degradation of Safety Posture prompt action is taken and sustained. known as HIVES (Highly Invulnerable Introduction—In December 1991, As noted, in 2011 the Board identified Encased Safes) to protect the storage Congress amended the Defense Nuclear a degradation in the facilities’ safety reservoirs from the impact load of a Facilities Safety Board’s (Board) posture that appears to have begun in stack and vault roof collapse. The enabling legislation, expanding its the period between 1999 and 2011. The bounding scenario conservatively jurisdiction into defense nuclear Board initially communicated those calculated the consequences of a facilities and activities involved in the concerns in 2011, and the National seismic event that triggers a fire assembly, disassembly, and testing of Nuclear Security Administration involving the entire inventory from the nuclear weapons. According to the (NNSA) responded on November 14, 2011, with a series of commitments that 6 Final Safety Analysis Reports were a Board’s 1992 Annual Report to Congress predecessor to the current Documented Safety [1]: included updating the methodology and Analysis documents. assumptions to meet current DOE 7 As a consequence, additional technical The current SRS contractor, Savannah River activities were conducted at the following requirements and expectations for Nuclear Solutions assumed responsibility for the site in August 2008. The prior contractor at the site, plants, sites and laboratories: conservative analyses, as reflected in • Westinghouse Savannah River Company, assumed Pantex Plant, Subpart B to 10 CFR 830 and its safe responsibility for the site in 1989. In 2005, • Oak Ridge Y–12 Plant, harbor methodology in DOE Standard Westinghouse Savannah River Company changed • Los Alamos National Laboratory, 3009–94. NNSA also stated that ‘‘A its name to Washington Savannah River Company. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28520 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices reservoirs and the process systems [9]. NNSA in a Board correspondence dated on calculations performed in 2008. The maximum individual dose at the August 19, 2011, in which the Board Those calculated dose consequences for site boundary for a two hour exposure identified a shift in the safety the energetic accidents of concern in was estimated to be about 5.1 rem total philosophy applied to the Tritium this Recommendation ranged up to effective dose equivalent (TEDE,8 an Facilities at SRS. The Board noted that 6,300 rem total effective dose (TED) to ionizing radiation dose unit in use at the the downgrading of safety related the co-located workers and about 2 to 13 time). The corresponding value for controls at the Tritium Facilities has rem TED to the offsite public [13–17]. onsite dose was 328 rem TEDE. [This ‘‘weakened the safety posture, reduced While those calculations were based on value was calculated prior to the the safety margin, and increased the methods and assumptions accepted at issuance of DOE Standard 3009; the potential for both the workers and the the time, they do not meet current DOE 1993 calculation used an older public to be exposed to higher expectations for safety basis methodology and different assumptions consequences.’’ calculations. More recent analysis, than those currently accepted for safety NNSA’s Deputy Administrator for completed by SRNS in 2013, concluded analyses. Consequently the results Defense Program sent a letter to the that, using current methodology and cannot be compared to the values in the Board on November 14, 2011, that assumptions, the calculated dose current safety bases.] relayed the Tritium Facilities consequences would increase by a The FSAR control set ultimately commitments to the Board for bounding factor of 7.42 for the co- established by WSRC was a mixture of improving safety posture of those located worker and a bounding factor of administrative operational limits and facilities. In the attachment to that 3.45 for the offsite public [18]. It should engineered controls. An administrative letter, the field office manager stated be noted that NNSA reduced the limit control limited the total amount of that, ‘‘A review of the control selection on the total amount of tritium that can tritium in the facility, including the for the design basis events considering be present within the Tritium Facilities reservoirs in the seismically qualified the new analysis will be performed. by about half in 2011, as discussed in areas. Four limiting conditions for Emphasis will be placed on utilizing the November 14, 2011, letter to the operations (LCO) limited the system existing passive and active engineered pressure for the relief tanks, controls vice administrative controls. Board, but that reduction has not been contaminated nitrogen tanks, and the Z- Any changes to controls will be included in the bounding factors given bed recovery tanks to sub-atmospheric reflected in a future update to the above. These factors are bounding conditions to protect their inventory Documented Safety Analysis (DSA).’’ values because there will be some from a system rupture. An additional SRNS submitted that DSA update to variation in the parameters specific to three LCOs limited the inventory of the SRFO in July 2017. As previously noted, each accident scenario. mix tanks, deuterium storage beds, and correspondence between SRFO and the Feasible solutions to address concerns the tritium reservoirs, which were SRNS led to a revised DSA submitted in could consist of several controls, each stored in non-seismically qualified areas November 2018, which is currently in providing layers of protection. [7]. WSRC classified the HIVES as safety DOE’s review and approval process. Furthermore, solutions may require related 9 to protect the reservoirs in the Tritium Facilities’ Current Safety pursuing controls that dramatically vault from impacts. Finally, WSRC used Basis—The current safety basis of the reduce the probability of an initiator, a tritium storage seismic detection and Tritium Facilities is comprised of a DSA but may not fully prevent an accident. isolation system to further reduce the [10] and technical safety requirements For example, a seismic power cut off amount of tritium released during a (TSR) [11] that are derived from the system may eliminate many, but not all, seismic event. Over the years though, DSA.10 The DSA and TSR documents ignition sources present in a facility many of the above controls were contain a set of controls that SRNS following a seismic event because some eliminated or downgraded for various commits to maintain to assure adequate systems may be required to continue to reasons. It is useful to review previously protection. The DSA is supported by a function or may have stored energy. implemented controls for ideas on how comprehensive hazard analysis Similarly, the reliability of systems like the Board’s current concerns might be documented in the Consolidated fire suppression systems may be addressed. Hazards Analysis Process (CHAP) [12], improved through upgrades and During a June 16, 2011, public hearing which is not subject to NNSA’s review modifications or performance of in Augusta, Georgia, the Board raised and approval. The CHAP concluded that additional surveillances and concerns regarding high consequences ‘‘[f]or some events, the mitigated maintenance, but they may not be able to co-located workers due to a potential consequences remained in the B1 or B to be fully qualified to protect fire in the Tritium Facilities. The Board region [consequence categories that individuals after all seismic events. further communicated this concern to require safety class controls for the public or safety significant controls for Mitigative controls, such as minimizing the number of non-essential 8 There are two basic components to an workers] because available controls individual’s radiation dose, the dose from internal either did not exist and/or were personnel in close proximity to the emitters and the dose from external emitters. Prior insufficient’’ to reduce the unmitigated Tritium Facilities; using readily to 2007, the dose from internal emitters such as available technologies to minimize tritiated water was measured in rem Committed dose consequences to the co-located Effective Dose Equivalent (rem CEDE); the dose workers for several high consequence humidity in the air of buildings used for from external radiation sources such as an X-ray accidents. sheltering in place; and having pre- machine was measured in rem Effective Dose (rem The calculated dose consequences approved plans for decreasing the ED); and the sum of the two components was the biological half-life of tritium, could Total Effective Dose Equivalent (rem TEDE). In 2007 supporting the current DSA were based the units were changed to committed effective dose potentially reduce both the number of (rem CED) and total effective dose (rem TED), but 10 At the time of this writing the Tritium individuals with intakes and the they are numerically equivalent to doses in rem Extraction Facility (TEF) was operating under a severity of those intakes. The CEDE and rem TEDE. separate safety basis, but SRNS combined the two development of near- and long-term 9 The RTF startup activities preceded DOE’s safety bases in the DSA submitted in November solutions may involve an integrated creation and issuance of Standard 3009–94. The 2018. However, TEF has a much smaller inventory terminology of ‘‘safety related’’ was meant for than the main processing building so it is not approach using multiple forms of protection of the public and/or the workers. discussed extensively in this section. controls. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28521 Analysis of Emergency Preparedness at Seismic Tritium Confinement System is RTF Safety Analysis Report, Attachment the Savannah River Site assumed to function and confine the 5.B Integrated DBE Analysis, Vol 20, Revision 0, WSRC–SA–1–1, August 23, The attachment to the NNSA letter inventory during a seismic event. However, the DSA does not qualify this 1993. dated November 14, 2011, described 5. N.K. Savani, Request for Information on improvements that would be made to system to be credited during a seismic the DBE Analysis, SRT–TML–93–0052, the site Emergency Preparedness event. Additionally, the drills and May 5, 1993. program to respond to a significant exercises often limit explosions and 6. J. Robertson, Determining Inventory LCOs event at the Tritium Facilities. The fires to one room, rather than involving for RTF, S NMP–SDG–93–0076, Revision Tritium Facilities conducted several the entire building, as the DSA and 4, September 20, 1993. 7. Westinghouse Savannah River Company, seismic and/or multi-facility drills and EPHA assume. Because the radiological consequences in the drill and exercise RTF Final Safety Analysis Report, exercises in subsequent years. The scenarios are much lower than those in Inventory Control, Revision 0, WSRC– Board’s staff observed these drills and the DSA and EPHA, the drill and SA–1–1–VOL–19, August 26, 1993. exercises and the planned 8. Westinghouse Savannah River Company, exercise scenarios assume that Tritium improvements. The drills and exercises RTF Final Safety Analysis Report, Facilities personnel can remain safely improved communications and Integrated DBE Analysis, Revision 0, indoors indefinitely, that operators can coordination among the Tritium WSRC–SA–1–1–VOL–20, August 26, perform their assumed response actions Facilities and helped improve 1993. with little impact from the release, that 9. S.J. Robertson, White Paper; Basis for MID coordination of protective actions with those workers evacuating to another Calculations for RTF DBA and BDBA other nuclear facilities within H-Area. building within the Tritium Facilities Scenarios, September 20, 1993. The Tritium Facilities also have made do so without any adverse effects, and 10. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, emergency preparedness drill and that the medical response is usually Tritium Facilities Documented Safety exercise scenarios more challenging by Analysis, Rev. 23, WSRC–SA–1–2, Vol. 1 limited to injured workers with and 2, May 2017. including deflagrations and stack relatively minor contamination or collapses, and have tested their ability 11. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, intakes. Tritium Facilities Technical Safety to respond to accidents during night Using radiological consequences from shifts, when staffing is lower. Requirements, Rev. 28, WSRC–TS–96– the severe accidents in the DSA or 17, May 2017. However, the Tritium Facilities EPHA, however, might drive the need to 12. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, Emergency Preparedness program has evacuate personnel at the Tritium Tritium Facilities Consolidated Hazards not prepared responses to the full range Facilities, and possibly other nearby Analysis, Rev. 11, WSRC–TR–2004– of credible accidents in the DSA and the areas, to a safer location to avoid a 00163, May 2017. Emergency Planning Hazards significant intake. SRS does not have 13. Washington Savannah River Company, Tritium Facilities Loss of Confinement Assessments (EPHA). The DSA includes any procedural guidance or criteria for credible scenarios with co-located Accident Analysis (U), Rev. 0, S–CLC– when workers should evacuate the H–01127, February 2008. worker doses reaching calculated dose Tritium Facilities area, and possibly consequences in the thousands of rem. 14. Washington Savannah River Company, other nearby areas, rather than remain Tritium Facilities Fire Accident Analysis The radiological consequences in the indoors, due to the potential for acute (U), Rev. 0, S–CLC–H–01131, February EPHAs [19, 20] are usually lower radiological consequences [23–26]. 2008. because of differences in the analytical Furthermore, SRS has not conducted 15. Washington Savannah River Company, methodologies and assumptions, but exercises involving evacuation of a large Tritium Facilities Explosion Accident still range up to 700 rem TED for co- number of workers from an area due to Analysis (U), Rev. 0, S–CLC–H–01137, February 2008. located workers and 62 rem TED for a radiological release, nor has the site workers at the nearby central training 16. Washington Savannah River Company, planned for the related logistical issues Tritium Facilities Natural Phenomena facility (which also includes a cafeteria). such as evacuating or monitoring a large However, the dose consequences to Plus Fire Accident Analysis (U), Rev. 0, number of workers to determine which S–CLC–H–01139, February 2008. workers in the most challenging drills ones may be at risk of a significant 17. Washington Savannah River Company, and exercises [21, 22] were less than 5 tritium uptake and may require medical Tritium Facilities Natural Phenomena rem TED. intervention. Plus Loss of Confinement Accident The default protective actions for the Analysis (U), Rev. 0, S–CLC–H–01144, Tritium Facilities’ Emergency Action Findings, Supporting Data, and February 2008. Levels are to evacuate the immediate Analysis References 18. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, area, and for all others to remain Dispersion Modeling Project indoors (as well as close all doors and Note: The current SRS contractor, Implementation, S–ESR–G–0033, Rev. 0, windows, and turn off ventilation to the Savannah River Nuclear Solutions assumed October 2013. responsibility for the site in August 2008. building) [23, 24]. During tritium drills 19. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, The prior contractor at the site, Westinghouse Emergency Planning Hazards and exercises, this usually involves Savannah River Company, assumed Assessment for the Tritium Facilities having workers evacuate the affected responsibility for the site in 1989. In 2005, (TF), Rev. 10, S–EHA–H–00006, March process area and/or evacuate from the Westinghouse Savannah River Company 2016. affected building to another nearby changed its name to Washington Savannah 20. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, building within the Tritium Facilities. River Company. Emergency Planning Hazards However, the EPHA has scenarios where 1. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Assessment for the Tritium Extraction the maximum distance for the Annual Report to Congress, April 1993. Facility (TEF), Rev. 2, S–EHA–H–00009, Threshold for Early Lethality may 2. Westinghouse Savannah River Company, January 2016. extend up to 320 meters, beyond the RTF Safety Analysis Report, DOE 21. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, Savannah River Site 2012 Site Tritium Facilities fence line. Approval Copy, Rev.1, WSRC–SA–1–1, August 28, 1992. Emergency Response Organization Part of the reason for the lower 3. K.R. O’Kula, RTF Compliance with Emergency Preparedness Evaluated radiological consequences in the drills Department of Energy Safety Goal, Exercise Multiple-Facility/Multiple- and exercises is that the assumed WSRC–TR–93–183, April, 1993. Contractor Seismic Event, Rev. 03, releases are much smaller because the 4. Westinghouse Savannah River Company, F9640052.DRSC000103, April 2012. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28522 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 22. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, Supplemental Staff Analysis of Dose that are the result of external radiation Savannah River Tritium Enterprise 2017 Consequences sources at very high dose rates, such as Facility Emergency Preparedness those that occur during a criticality Evaluated Exercise, Rev. 00, The calculated dose consequences supporting the current DSA were based accident. F3040087.DRSC000100, July 2017. However, high protracted exposures 23. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, on calculations performed in 2008. Emergency Classification (EALs), Rev. 29 Those calculated dose consequences for that occur over periods of days to weeks EPIP TRIT–001, IPC 1, May 1, 2017. the energetic accidents of concern in can also result in injury or fatality, but 24. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, this Recommendation ranged up to with somewhat higher thresholds. ICRP FEC Response Actions, Rev. 35, EPIP 6,300 rem total effective dose (TED) 11 to reports that for exposures where the TRIT–111, April 24, 2018. the co-located workers and about 2 to 13 dose rate is about 20 rad/hour the 25. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, rem TED to the offsite public [1–5]. thresholds may increase by about 50 Fire and Fire Alarm Response, Process Those calculations were based on percent, and if the dose is delivered Buildings, Rev. 31, EOP TRIT–1468, over the period of a month the May, 31, 2018. methods and assumptions accepted at the time. More recent analysis, thresholds may double [8]. This increase 26. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, in thresholds is due to the fact that for Response to Severe Weather and Natural completed by the SRS contractor in Disasters, Rev. 21, AOP TRIT–6122, IPC– 2013, concluded that using current lower dose rates, the body has more 1, August 16, 2018. methodology and assumptions would opportunity to repair the damage, thus reducing the likelihood of injury or Attachment increase the calculated dose consequences by a bounding factor of fatality. Therefore, protracted doses are Summary of Board Correspondence 7.42 for the co-located worker and a evaluated by looking at both the Concerning Safety at the Tritium bounding factor of 3.45 for the offsite accumulated dose and the rate at which Facilities public [6].12 It should be noted that SRS the dose accumulates. For internal exposures such as the lowered the limit on the total amount of • December 18, 1995 situations addressed in this tritium that can be present within the • To: Assistant Secretary for Recommendation, the dose to an Tritium Facilities by about a factor of Environmental Management exposed individual is cited as the two in 2011, but that reduction has not • Subject: Central Training Facility committed effective dose, which is the been included in the bounding factors capability to respond to releases total dose that has accumulated in the given above. These factors are bounding • body until the radioactive material has March 18, 1999 values because there will be some • either decayed away or been eliminated To: Under Secretary of Energy variation in the parameters specific to • through biological processes. The Subject: Review of Draft Consolidated each accident scenario. The calculations accumulation time is dependent on the Tritium Safety Analysis Report supporting the revised DSA indicate specific radioactive material and its • December 7, 1999 that calculated dose consequences for chemical form. Some materials such as • To: Assistant Secretary for Defense the co-located worker could exceed tritium gas are not retained in the body Programs 18,000 rem TED for some scenarios. [7] for any significant amount of time; other • Subject: Design review for Tritium According to the International materials, such as plutonium oxide, will Extraction Facility Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP), the threshold dose for a 1 be retained in the body for many years. • July 19, 2002 Dose Consequences to Workers and percent incidence rate of fatality in an • To: National Nuclear Security Co-Located Workers: The behavior of exposed population is 100 rad,13 and Administration Deputy Administrator tritiated water in the body can be the threshold for a 50 percent incidence for Defense Programs modelled in a straightforward manner. of fatality in an exposed population is • Subject: Seismic safety at the Tritium For the doses evaluated here, it is 300 to 500 rad, assuming no medical Extraction Facility assumed that the exposures occur intervention [8]. The onset of radiation- • July 16, 2010 within a 3-minute or 20-minute time induced sickness generally coincides • To: NNSA Administrator and period in accordance with the specific with the 1 percent fatality threshold. Assistant Secretary for Environmental DSA scenarios, and that the biological These thresholds are for acute exposures Management half-life of tritiated water in the body is • 10 days [9]. Although the intake is of a Subject: Inclusion of controls concern 11 There are two basic components to an at the Savannah River Site individual’s radiation dose, the dose from internal short duration, the rate at which the • August 19, 2011 emitters and the dose from external emitters. Prior radiation from the decay of the tritium • To: NNSA Administrator to 2007, the dose from internal emitters such as deposited in the body is determined by • tritiated water was measured in rem Committed the biological half-life. Therefore, the Subject: Review of Safety Basis, Effective Dose Equivalent (rem CEDE); the dose Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities from external radiation sources such as an X-ray doses from tritiated water in the body tend to be protracted doses, and must be • August 7, 2014 machine was measured in rem Effective Dose (rem ED); and the sum of the two components was the compared against the ICRP’s protracted • To: NNSA Administrator Total Effective Dose Equivalent (rem TEDE). In 2007 dose thresholds. Given these conditions, • Subject: Summary of Board views on the units were changed to committed effective dose the total dose and dose rates associated current challenges faced by NNSA (rem CED) and total effective dose (rem TED), but with an intake of tritiated water are • they are numerically equivalent to doses in rem January 7, 2016 CEDE and rem TEDE. inherently related to each other such • To: NNSA Administrator 12 These multiplication factors only apply to the that one can predict either parameter if • Subject: Review of the Tritium calculated radiological dose consequences for the other parameter is known. This Extraction Facility Documented certain accident scenarios (depending on the input parameters). Other accident scenarios may have a relationship allows one to directly Safety Analysis smaller multiplication factor. determine the specific total dose and • June 4, 2018 13 The rad is a unit of absorbed dose, which is the dose rate associated with each of the • To: Secretary of Energy quantity used for evaluating the potential for ICRP mortality thresholds discussed • deterministic ionizing radiation effects such as Subject: Review of the Revised acute injury or fatality. In the case of tritiated water above. Documented Safety Analysis at vapor, the absorbed dose in rad is numerically Table 1 shows that a postulated total Tritium Facilities equal to the committed effective dose. dose of about 18,000 rem TED will VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28523 exceed the dose threshold for radiation- induced sickness generally coincides symptoms are observed, medical induced sickness within the first two with the 1 percent fatality threshold). personnel would begin more aggressive hours, and a postulated dose of about Once the absorbed doses exceed the life-saving interventions on those 3,500 rem TED will exceed the onset of injury threshold, the onset of symptoms individuals. radiation-induced sickness within the of radiation-induced sickness likely will first fifteen hours (the onset of radiation- occur within hours to a day. When these TABLE 1—THRESHOLD DOSE AND DOSE RATE CRITERIA WITH NO MEDICAL INTERVENTION Threshold criteria [8] Corresponding tritium total dose * Criteria Threshold dose rate Threshold dose Total dose Time to threshold dose Acute Threshold for 1% Mortality** ... ∼50 rad/hr and up ...... 100 rad ...... 18,000 rem TED ...... 2 hours. Upper Protracted Threshold for 1% ∼10–30 rad/hr ...... 150 rad ...... 3,500 rem TED ...... 15 hours. Mortality. Lower Protracted Threshold for 1% ∼0.3 rad/hr ...... 200 rad ...... 250 rem TED ...... 28 days. Mortality. Acute Threshold for 50% Mortality .... ∼50 rad/hr and up ...... 300–500 rad ...... 18,000 rem TED ...... 6 hours. Upper Protracted Threshold for 50% ∼10—30 rad/hr ...... 450–750 rad ...... 3,500 rem TED ...... 45 hours. Mortality. Lower Protracted Threshold for 50% ∼0.8 rad/hr ...... 600–1000 rad ...... 750 rem TED ...... 31 days. Mortality. * When a range of doses or dose rates is used in the threshold criteria, the corresponding tritium dose and time to threshold dose were deter- mined using the lower values in order to identify the lowest total dose that would exceed the specified threshold dose. ** A 1 percent or 50 percent mortality threshold means that at the specified dose and dose rate values, fatalities could be expected in 1 per- cent or 50 percent of the exposed population, with no medical intervention. Prior to the onset of radiation-induced accurately estimate doses to individuals [DNFSB/Tech-20, 1999], protection of sickness, early medical intervention for nearer than 100 meters, as the doses are the offsite public rests heavily on tritiated water intakes could be taken by very sensitive to the specifics of each measures taken to protect co-located aggressively increasing fluid exchange release mechanism, the effects of workers, and protection of co-located in the patient. This could reduce the building wakes, the location of the workers rests heavily on measures taken biological half-life to as little as three individual, and a variety of other to protect the immediate facility days [10]. Such intervention would parameters. Consequently, radiation- workers. In other words, protection of reduce the total dose by up to about 60 induced sickness or fatalities within the the public begins with the protection of percent, but would have no impact on facility workers should be anticipated the workers. the dose already accumulated in the for all accidents where the 100-meter individual prior to the onset of dose is above 100 rem TED. References treatment. However, tritium’s chemical Dose Consequences to the Offsite 1. Washington Savannah River Company, and radiological characteristics create Public: While the facilities’ DSAs Tritium Facilities Loss of Confinement difficult challenges that complicate the estimate that the calculated dose Accident Analysis (U), Rev. 0, S–CLC–H– approaches to responding to such consequences to individuals beyond the 01127, February 2008. accidents and providing medical site boundary from these accidents are 2. Washington Savannah River Company, low enough to avoid immediate acute Tritium Facilities Fire Accident Analysis (U), assistance to exposed individuals. For Rev. 0, S–CLC–H–01131, February 2008. example, detection of tritium health effects, they do represent the 3. Washington Savannah River Company, contamination in the field and potential for an increased likelihood of Tritium Facilities Explosion Accident assessment of potential intakes require latent cancer fatalities in the exposed Analysis (U), Rev. 0, S–CLC–H–01137, specialized equipment, expertise, and population [8]. In addition, the February 2008. most importantly, timely response.14 calculated dose consequences challenge 4. Washington Savannah River Company, It must also be recognized that the DOE’s evaluation guideline of 25 rem Tritium Facilities Natural Phenomena Plus dose to co-located workers is calculated TED for safety-class controls. (The Fire Accident Analysis (U), Rev. 0, S–CLC– at 100 meters from the release point or evaluation guideline is not to be viewed H–01139, February 2008. at the point of plume touchdown, as an acceptable dose; it is a tool for 5. Washington Savannah River Company, Tritium Facilities Natural Phenomena Plus whichever results in a higher dose. determining the need for safety class Loss of Confinement Accident Analysis (U), Doses within that first 100 meters could controls.) However, the currently Rev. 0, S–CLC–H–01144, February 2008. be much higher, depending on the approved DSAs do not provide an 6. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, release mechanism and plume travel adequate set of controls to prevent or Dispersion Modeling Project Implementation, path. However, current models cannot mitigate some of these accidents. S–ESR–G–0033, Rev. 0, October 2013. It is no coincidence that the 7. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, 14 The Board’s staff does not have confidence that calculated dose consequences to the Consolidated Hazard Analysis for the current field equipment can provide the ability to offsite public approach the evaluation Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities, S– rapidly screen a large group of individuals for guideline for the same accident CHA–H–00030, Rev. 0, June 2017. potential intakes. Given these circumstances, the 8. International Commission on Radiation onset of symptoms from acute radiation sickness scenarios that result in very high calculated dose consequences to facility Protection, 2007 Recommendations of the may be the first signs of a significant tritium intake, International Commission on Radiological which would preclude early medical intervention. workers and co-located workers. As Protection, ICRP 103, Volume 37, No. 2–4., Dealing with the large number of people who could discussed in the Board’s Technical be adversely affected by a significant release at the New York: Elsevier Ltd., 2007. Tritium Facilities could severely strain or Report, Protection of Collocated 9. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, overwhelm local emergency response and medical Workers at the Department of Energy’s Health Effects, Dosimetry and Radiological resources. Defense Nuclear Facilities and Sites Protection of Tritium, Minster of Public VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28524 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Works and Government Services Canada, Bruce Hamilton generated a number of additional items INFO–0799, April 2010. Chairman requiring further action. The new 10. Carbaugh, E H, et al. Methods and Department of Energy Comments on analysis continues to conservatively Models of the Hanford Internal Dosimetry demonstrate that, even for a full facility Program, PNNL–MA–860, Pacific Northwest Draft Recommendation release, the dose consequences to the National Laboratory, Richland, WA, PNNL– The Honorable Bruce Hamilton, 15614, Rev. 1, September 2009. public remain below the evaluation Chairman guideline. Action items addressed in the Correspondence With the Secretary of Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board collocated worker risk reduction 625 Indiana NW, Suite 700 Energy strategy have been placed in a Washington, DC 20004 Department of Energy Request for commitment schedule submitted to Dear Chairman Hamilton: DOE/NNSA and are being actively Extension of Time The Department of Energy’s National managed. Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/ March 12, 2019 The Department believes that actions NNSA) appreciates the opportunity to The Honorable Bruce Hamilton contained in the Draft Recommendation review the Defense Nuclear Facilities Chairman 2019-1 are already in place or in Safety Board (DNFSB) Draft Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board development to continue the 625 Indiana Avenue NW, Suite 700 Recommendation 2019-1, Safety of the improvements to provide adequate Washington, DC 20004 Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities. protection of Tritium Facilities workers, DOE/NNSA is fully committed to Dear Chairman Hamilton: the environment, and the public. The ensuring continued safe operations of The Department of Energy (DOE) current Tritium Facilities DSA contains all our facilities and providing received the Defense Nuclear Facilities appropriate safety significant controls Safety Board (DNFSB) Draft assurance of adequate protection of our workers, the environment, and the and the new analysis, when Recommendation 2019-1, Safety of the implemented, will only strengthen that Savannah River Site Tritium Facilities, public. DOE/NNSA believes that ongoing actions at the Tritium Facilities safety posture. Considering the on-going on February 11, 2019, and is currently work, the Draft Recommendation would coordinating its review among relevant at the Savannah River Site (SRS) adequately address DNFSB concerns not drive the need for any additional offices. In accordance with 42 U.S.C. actions. Additionally, resources needed 2286d(a)(2), the Department requests a outlined in your Draft Recommendation, and make the need for additional to respond to a DNFSB recommendation 30-day extension to provide comments. would divert those critical resources DOE’s Under Secretary for Nuclear actions in response to a DNFSB Recommendation unnecessary. The that are needed to continue the Security, Lisa E. Gordon-Hagerty, will improvements underway to ensure provide the response to the DNFSB by commitment to safety in the Tritium Facilities has not wavered, and there safety of the collocated workers and/or April 12, 2019. the public. DOE is committed to the safe has been no change in the safety philosophy in the Tritium Facilities. We appreciate the Board’s operations at the Savannah River Site perspectives and look forward to Tritium Facilities. As you may be aware, As noted in the Draft Recommendation, DOE/NNSA continued positive interactions with DOE has already taken actions to you and your staff. If you have any address concerns identified in the Draft committed in 2011 to develop a new analytical model for dose consequences questions, please contact Ms. Nicole Recommendation. A 30-day extension Nelson-Jean, Manager of the Savannah will afford DOE sufficient time to assess for SRS. In 2011, DOE/NNSA outlined a plan to update the atmospheric River Field Office, at (803) 208-3689. the Draft Recommendation’s findings, Sincerely, supporting data, and analyses. dispersion model, which was completed in 2014. Implementation of that new Lisa E. Gordon-Hagerty If you have any questions, please Enclosure contact Ms. Nicole Nelson-Jean, analysis began shortly thereafter and Manager of the Savannah River Field included a review of the safety controls Enclosure—Comments on DNFSB Draft Office, at (803) 208-3689. selection and hierarchy. DOE/NNSA Recommendation 2019–1 decided to combine all of the Tritium Sincerely, Safety of the Savannah River Site Rick Perry Facilities’ safety bases and to conduct a holistic revision to the Documented Tritium Facilities Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Safety Analysis (DSA). The new Over the past several years, the Response to Extension Request analysis placed additional emphasis on Department of Energy’s National March 15, 2019 passive and engineered controls over Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/ The Honorable James Richard Perry administrative and programmatic NNSA) and the Savannah River Site Secretary of Energy controls. The new combined DSA was (SRS) Management and Operating U.S. Department of Energy submitted to DOE/NNSA in July 2017. contractor, Savannah River Nuclear 1000 Independence Avenue SW After an exhaustive review, significant Solutions (SRNS), have taken actions to Washington, DC 20585-1000 changes were identified, including improve the Tritium Facilities safety Dear Secretary Perry: development of a formal strategy that posture. A new hazards analysis has The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety will continue to strengthen the controls been conducted along with a revision to Board is in receipt of your March 12, available to protect collocated workers the Documented Safety Analysis (DSA). 2019, letter requesting a 30-day from large energetic events postulated This new analysis has further extension to provide comments on the by the safety analysis. The DOE/NNSA emphasized identifying passive and Board’s Draft Recommendation 2019-01, DSA review also generated hundreds of engineered controls over administrative Safety of the Savannah River Site additional comments to be addressed in and programmatic controls. The Board’s Tritium Facilities. the DSA resubmittal, which was technical staff was recently provided a In accordance with 42 U.S.C. delivered to DOE/NNSA in November draft of the new DSA. DOE/NNSA has 2286d(a)(2), the Board is granting the 2018. Subject matter experts from across reviewed the documents and provided extension for an additional 30 days. DOE and NNSA are completing a review the contractor with comments along Yours truly, of the resubmitted DSA and have with comments from a separate review VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28525 team from the DOE’s Office of reduction to the collocated worker (U– systems and seismic confinement Enterprise Assessments. After the ESR–H–00163, Rev.0). This strategy system are designated as formal review teams’ comments are resolved, describes the SRNS plans for additional Defense-in-Depth/Important to Safety the new DSA will be approved, which structural analyses and control (DID/ITS). DID/ITS systems are listed in is anticipated to occur in 2019. development for the remaining facilities the current DSA with a safety function, As noted in the Draft during a potential seismic event. It also are controlled by the Unreviewed Safety Recommendation, the new DSA includes analytical analysis for dose Question (USQ) process and cannot be includes updated dose consequence reduction (e.g. tritium oxidation eliminated without DOE/NNSA calculations. The calculations use a conversion rates and plume rise approval. It was determined that these bounding Material at Risk (MAR) and phenomena). In the aggregate, the plan systems currently cannot be qualified as default to extremely conservative includes 19 commitments that are being safety significant without further factors, such as 100 percent tritium pursued and managed (SRNS–T0000– analysis and upgrade. Part of the risk oxide conversion, a ground plume 2018–00227, Transmittal of the reduction strategy is to analyze various release, and structural failures during a Schedule for Implementing the Strategy buildings and SSCs for seismic seismic event. Although MAR for Risk Reduction to the Co-Located qualification, with the goal of reductions have been implemented, Worker in Tritium Facilities). determining the effort needed to further reductions listed in the DSA • Longer term plans include the upgrade the seismic detection and would raise the security classification of Tritium Finishing Facility capital line isolation system and ventilation system the documents. However, even with the item project, to replace the H-Area Old to safety significant controls if extreme conservatism in the parameters Manufacturing (HAOM) facility with a necessary. The plan will also evaluate selected, including a simultaneous seismically qualified facility with a the need for installing seismic detection release of all the tritium, from all the dedicated SC fire suppression system. and isolation systems on additional multiple facilities within 20 minutes as As noted in the Draft equipment in H-Area New a ground plume; the postulated Recommendation, SRS has worked hard Manufacturing (HANM) facility and the consequences to the public remain to improve its Emergency Preparedness Tritium Extraction Facility (TEF). below the Evaluation Guideline of DOE– (EP) program. The current EP program The Savannah River Field Office STD–3009–94, Preparation Guide for provides the appropriate training (SRFO) is routinely involved in the US. Department of Energy Nonreactor required for individuals to respond to development and review of documents Nuclear Facility Documented Safety alarms, abnormal operations, and supporting the basis of the DSA. SRFO Analyses. In addition, the modeling emergencies across SRS. The Tritium safety engineers attend and provide does not account for any Emergency Facilities EP program maintains a fully comment on a number of development Response actions, personnel self- qualified team that performs safety programs, such as the protection actions, nor any subsequent approximately 50 drills per year to train Consolidated Hazards Analysis Process, response actions to mitigate the and validate the organization’s ability to Facility Operations Safety Committee, consequences. Based on the current respond to various scenarios, from and DSA/Technical Safety DSA, and the new DSA in review, the weather induced incidents to large Requirements (TSR) development risk to the public remains low. energetic events. DOE/NNSA is meetings. The new DSA postulates a small set confident that appropriate drills are The hazards analysis for the new DSA of energetic events that rely on credited conducted for events as required by has a small number of scenarios that Specific Administrative Controls (SAC) DOE. rely on credited SACs that perform preventive functions. These scenarios that perform preventive functions. Safety Posture Seismic events in the Tritium Facilities can be categorized into four groups: • present another challenge as some The Draft Recommendation discusses Process explosion—There are two legacy buildings remain in service while the control set from the 1990s as being events in HANM and two in TEF that the Tritium Finishing Facility capital eliminated or downgraded and this conservatively involve one or two line item project establishes a modem, result is a perceived shift in safety process tanks. This would be caused by safe, and secure replacement to the H- philosophy in managing the Tritium an inadvertent introduction of oxygen Area Old Manufacturing Facility. The Facilities safety posture. DOE/NNSA into the system or inadvertent new DSA includes a number of new assures the DNFSB that there has not movement of tritium. Although many credited features, for example: been a shift in the safety philosophy, SSCs provide a defense in depth • The 217–H Vault walls and fire but rather changes in operations and function (e.g., inerted gas glovebox damper have been upgraded and are new hazards analysis techniques have confinement, ventilation, tritium air now designated as Safety Class (SC) driven a change in the control strategy. monitors, etc.), the hazard analysis team features that prevent a release of MAR Larger and more complex full facility did not feel these SSCs would fully from the building. Other passive fire events are now postulated in the safety mitigate or prevent the events. barriers are also credited. analysis that rendered previous Therefore, specific administrative • New SACs for fire water tank administrative individual tank Limiting controls are specified to prevent the volume verification and other new Fire Condition for Operations of the past less event. Suppression Surveillances have been effective. Operational events have an • Firearms discharge—There is an added. adequate set of controls identified, inadvertent firearms discharge scenario. • All current Programmatic Controls whether SSCs or administrative. Several Tritium air monitors are credited to alert have been replaced by at least one SAC. other controls mentioned in the draft personnel of a release if an inadvertent • Additional analyses are planned for recommendation include the Highly firearm discharge were to cause a other buildings and Systems, Structures, Invulnerable Encased Safes (HIVES), confinement breech. DOE/NNSA and Components (SSCs) to determine ventilation systems, and the seismic requires security personnel to routinely suitability for upgrading the functional detection and isolation system. The access the facilities and they are trained classification. HIVES continue to be credited as safety on proper response. • In 2018, DOE/NNSA requested and significant to protect reservoirs in a • External impacts—These events received from SRNS, a strategy for risk seismic event and the ventilation include vehicle crashes, crane drops, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28526 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices and airplane crashes. Events for the Postulated Dose Consequences data in Statewide Longitudinal Data vehicle crashes and crane drops have Attachment B of the DNFSB Draft Systems (SLDS) to inform their efforts to specific administrative controls credited Recommendation 2019–1 discusses the improve education in critical areas, to minimize the potential for these postulated high worker doses Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance events. documented in the DSA and the (CFDA) number 84.372A. This notice • Seismic event—These events may corresponding potential health relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number also include fires. The 217–H vault consequences. DOE standards require 1894–0006. walls, fire damper and other fire barriers that nuclear facilities perform are new SC controls that will be added conservative accident analyses. The DATES: in the DSA update. DOE/NNSA tritium analysis is very conservative and Applications Available: June 26, 2019. recognizes that additional controls are uses many bounding assumptions (e.g.; Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: desired for these events and are MAR, 100 percent oxide conversion, July 19, 2019. currently working through similar DSA ground level release, and others). Per Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 17, 2019. review team comments with SRNS. DOE–STD–3009–94, this conservative analysis is used to quantify the Pre-Application Webinar Information: Additionally, the risk reduction strategy ‘‘theoretical’’ dose consequences to (1) We intend to hold webinars designed to places emphasis on qualifying and determine if any SC SSC is required and provide technical assistance to developing controls for seismic events. (2) provide insight for selecting the interested applicants. Detailed The strategy takes a multi prong appropriate SC SSC(s) for each design information regarding these meetings approach to include evaluating the basis accident scenario. This analysis will be provided on the IES website at feasibility of upgrading current DID/ITS was never intended to calculate http://ies.ed.gov/funding. controls and evaluating an alternate fire predicted or expected accident ADDRESSES: suppression system. For the addresses for consequences for collocated workers or obtaining and submitting an Emergency Preparedness members of the public. Doses of this application, please refer to our Common magnitude are not expected for any Instructions for Applicants to SRS EP support organizations, like the event. In fact, a best estimate Department of Education Discretionary SRS Fire Department, are trained and determination by SRNS for a full tritium Grant Programs, published in the routinely evaluated to ensure that they fire event conservatively indicates a Federal Register on February 13, 2019 can properly respond to an event in any postulated exposure reduction factor of (84 FY 3768) and available at https:// facility across the site. For example, over 25 from what is listed in the DSA www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019- during the 2018 Site Exercise, the SRS (S–ESR–H–00031, Rev. 0). This best 02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf. emergency response team responded to estimate used the bounding MAR and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: a complex multi-facility and multi- did not factor in the effects of plume Nancy Sharkey, U.S. Department of contractor event that included H-Area, rise that would exist from a large fire. Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Tritium, and H-Tank Farm. Site level Additionally, the MAR in the Tritium Room 4162, Potomac Center Plaza, evaluated exercises routinely involve Facilities is spread out over multiple Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: multiple local, county, state, and federal facilities and mostly contained in (202) 245–7689. Email: nancy.sharkey@ agencies in the response efforts. In a various storage vessels (some robust) in ed.gov. trend to further challenge all gas form and on hydride beds. It would If you use a telecommunications organizations, the 2018 exercise tested not be expected that 100 percent of the device for the deaf (TDD) or a text the site’s Emergency Response MAR would be released in any event telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Organization (ERO) ability to manage a and all within a 20-minute timeframe. Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1–800–877– complex event with potential off-site The Savannah River Emergency 8339. consequences, the Area Emergency Protection Program is well prepared to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Coordinators ability to manage multiple protect the workers in the very unlikely issues within an impacted area, and the occurrence of a large-scale event at the Full Text of Announcement Tritium Facilities. ERO’s ability to manage these issues I. Funding Opportunity Description along with the balance of the site to (Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2286d(b)(2)) Purpose of Program: The SLDS protect onsite employees and the public. Dated: June 13, 2019. SRS has addressed several opportunities program awards grants to SEAs to Joyce L. Connery, design, develop, and implement for improvement identified in the Acting Chairman. exercise that included logistical statewide longitudinal data systems to [FR Doc. 2019–12918 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] challenges in the movement of efficiently and accurately manage, BILLING CODE 3670–01–P personnel from impacted areas and analyze, disaggregate, and use conducting appropriately scoped drills individual student data. The Department’s long-term goal in to validate the emergency response DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION operating the program is to help all effectiveness. DOE/NNSA believes that States create comprehensive P–20W drills conducted by SRNS are properly Applications for New Awards; (early learning through workforce) scoped and use valid assumptions Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems systems that foster the generation and pertaining to the facility processes and use of accurate and timely data, support safety systems. AGENCY: Institute of Education Sciences, Department of Education. analysis and informed decision-making As noted, the SRS and Tritium ACTION: Notice. at all levels of the education system, Facilities EP programs have made increase the efficiency with which data significant improvements over the past SUMMARY: The Institute of Education may be analyzed to support the several years. The EP programs are Sciences (IES) invites State educational continuous improvement of education adequate to continue protecting the SRS agencies (SEAs) to apply for fiscal year services and outcomes, facilitate workers and the surrounding public. (FY) 2019 grants to assist them in using research to improve student academic VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28527 achievement and close achievement apply for funding under this III. Eligibility Information gaps, support education accountability competition. Grants will not be made 1. Eligible Applicants: Eligible systems, and simplify the processes available to support ongoing applicants are limited to SEAs. An SEA used by SEAs to make education data maintenance of current data systems, is the agency primarily responsible for transparent through Federal and public but they may be used to improve the State supervision of elementary reporting. existing systems to make more effective schools and secondary schools. See 20 Under previous competitions, IES use of the data contained in these U.S.C. 9601 (which incorporates by awarded SLDS grants to 47 States, the statewide systems, or to create a system reference the definition of SEA set out District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the where none previously existed, or a in section 9101 of the Elementary and Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. linkage that did not already exist. Secondary Education Act of 1965, as These funds supported SLDS grantees in Exemption from Rulemaking: Under amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 7801). The the design, development, and section 191 of the Education Sciences implementation of statewide SEAs of the 50 States, the District of Reform Act, 20 U.S.C. 9581 IES is not Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto longitudinal kindergarten through grade subject to section 43(d) of the General 12 (K–12) data systems, or to expand Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Education Provisions Act, 20 U.S.C American Samoa, Guam, and the their K–12 systems to include early 1232(d), and is therefore not required to childhood data and/or postsecondary Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana offer interested parties the opportunity Islands are eligible. and workforce data. Grants awarded to comment on priorities, selection also supported the development and 2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This criteria, definitions, and requirements. competition does not require cost implementation of systems that link Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 9607. individual student data across time and Applicable Regulations: (a) The sharing or matching. across databases, including the Education Department General b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: The matching of teachers to students; Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in Educational Technical Assistance Act of promoting interoperability across 34 CFR parts 77, 82, 84, 97, 98, and 99. 2002 requires that funds made available institutions, agencies, and States; and (b) 34 CFR part 75, except for the under this grant program be used to protecting student and individual provisions in 34 CFR 75.100, 75.101(b), supplement, and not supplant, other privacy consistent with applicable 75.102, 75.103, 75.105, 75.109(a), State or local funds used for developing privacy protection laws. 75.200, 75.201, 75.209, 75.210, 75.211, or using State data systems. 3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this Priorities: Because States have been 75.217(a)–(c), 75.219, 75.220, 75.221, competition may not award subgrants to engaged in the process of developing 75.222, and 75.230. (c) The OMB entities to directly carry out project these longitudinal data systems for a Guidelines to Agencies on activities described in its application. number of years, two of the priorities of Governmentwide Debarment and this competition focus on using data Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR IV. Application and Submission that have already been linked or part 180, as adopted and amended as Information managed in State data systems. regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 1. Application Submission However, recognizing that infrastructure part 3485. Instructions: Applicants are required to conceived more than a decade ago may follow the Common Instructions for be increasingly obsolete, States may also II. Award Information Applicants to Department of Education apply for infrastructure grants in this Type of Award: Cooperative Discretionary Grant Programs, round. agreements. Applicants may apply for funds to Estimated Available Funds: published in the Federal Register on carry out projects to address one of the $26,132,000 to support the first year of February 13, 2019, and available at following priorities for development grant funding. www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019- and use of an SLDS: Estimated Range of Awards: 02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, which (1) Infrastructure; $3,250,000 to $3,500,000 for the entire contain requirements and information (2) Education Choice; or project period of 48 months. on how to submit an application. (3) Equity. Maximum Award: We will not make Additional information regarding Under any of these priorities, States an award exceeding $3,250,000 for the program requirements for this should consider how their proposals entire project period of 48 months to competition will be contained in the would enhance their ability to use their address one of the priorities. States that Request for Applications (RFA), which SLDS to address the needs of at-risk agree to participate in the School-Level will be available on June 19, 2019, on students, including children and youth Poverty project may request an the IES website at: https://ies.ed.gov/ who are or have been homeless or in the additional $250,000 for costs associated funding/. child welfare or juvenile justice with the school-level poverty measure 2. Submission of Proprietary systems. All applicants may also apply development and test work for a project Information: Given the types of projects for funds to assist the Department in period of no more than 48 months. that may be proposed in applications for testing a proposed school-level poverty Note: The Director of IES may change the SLDS grant program, your measure that is based on student the maximum award through a notice application may include business addresses instead of participation in free published in the Federal Register. information that you consider and reduced-price meals. States Estimated Number of Awards: We proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define participating in this activity would estimate making approximately 30 ‘‘business information’’ and describe the always be in control of the geocoded awards. The number of awards made process we use in determining whether student address directory that they under this competition will depend any of that information is proprietary create, and no individual student data upon the quality of the applications and, thus, protected from disclosure will be shared with the Department. received and the level of funding under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of SEAs for each of the 50 States, the requested. Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as District of Columbia, the Note: The Department is not bound by amended). Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any estimates in this notice. Because we plan to make successful each of the outlying areas are eligible to Project Period: Up to 48 months. applications available to the public, you VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28528 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices may wish to request confidentiality of applicant in carrying out a previous VI. Award Administration Information business information. award, such as the applicant’s use of 1. Award Notices: If your application Consistent with Executive Order funds, achievement of project is successful, we notify your U.S. 12600, please designate in your objectives, and compliance with grant Representative and U.S. Senators and application any information that you conditions. The Secretary may also send you a Grant Award Notification believe is exempt from disclosure under consider whether the applicant failed to (GAN); or we may send you an email Exemption 4. In the appropriate submit a timely performance report or containing a link to access an electronic Appendix section of your application, submitted a report of unacceptable version of your GAN. We may notify under ‘‘Other Attachments Form,’’ quality. you informally, also. please list the page number or numbers In addition, in making a competitive If your application is not evaluated or on which we can find this information. grant award, the Secretary requires not selected for funding, we notify you. For additional information please see 34 various assurances, including those 2. Administrative and National Policy CFR 5.11(c). applicable to Federal civil rights laws 3. Intergovernmental Review: This Requirements: We identify that prohibit discrimination in programs administrative and national policy program is not subject to Executive or activities receiving Federal financial Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 requirements in the application package assistance from the Department (34 CFR and reference these and other CFR part 79. 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). 4. Funding Restrictions: We reference requirements in the Applicable 3. Risk Assessment and Specific regulations outlining funding Regulations section of this notice. Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR restrictions in the Applicable We reference the regulations outlining 200.205, before awarding grants under Regulations section of this notice. the terms and conditions of an award in 5. Notice of Intent to Apply: We ask this program the Department conducts a the Applicable Regulations section of potential applicants to submit a letter of review of the risks posed by applicants. this notice and include these and other intent, indicating the priority under Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may specific conditions in the GAN. The which the State intends to apply for impose specific conditions and, in GAN also incorporates your approved funding. We use the information in the appropriate circumstances, high-risk application as part of your binding letters of intent to identify the expertise conditions on a grant if the applicant or commitments under the grant. needed for the scientific review panels grantee is not financially stable; has a 3. Open Licensing Requirements: and to secure a sufficient number of history of unsatisfactory performance; Unless an exception applies, if you are reviewers. For this reason, letters of has a financial or other management awarded a grant under this competition, intent are optional but strongly system that does not meet the standards you will be required to openly license encouraged. We request that letters of in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not to the public grant deliverables created intent be submitted using the link at: fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; in whole, or in part, with Department https://iesreview.ed.gov/. Applicants or is otherwise not responsible. grant funds. When the deliverable that do not submit a notice of intent to 4. Integrity and Performance System: consists of modifications to pre-existing apply may still apply for funding; If you are selected under this works, the license extends only to those applicants that do submit a notice of competition to receive an award that modifications that can be separately intent to apply are not bound to apply over the course of the project period identified and only to the extent that or bound by the information provided. may exceed the simplified acquisition open licensing is permitted under the threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 terms of any licenses or other legal V. Application Review Information CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a restrictions on the use of pre-existing 1. Selection Criteria: For all of its judgment about your integrity, business works. Additionally, a grantee or grant competitions, IES uses selection ethics, and record of performance under subgrantee that is awarded competitive criteria based on a peer-review process Federal awards—that is, the risk posed grant funds must have a plan to that has been approved by the National by you as an applicant—before we make disseminate these public grant Board for Education Sciences. The Peer an award. In doing so, we must consider deliverables. This dissemination plan Review Procedures for Grant any information about you that is in the can be developed and submitted after Applications can be found on the IES integrity and performance system your application has been reviewed and website at: https://ies.ed.gov/director/ (currently referred to as the Federal selected for funding. For additional sro/peer_review/application_review.asp. Awardee Performance and Integrity information on the open licensing For this competition, peer reviewers Information System (FAPIIS)), requirements please refer to 2 CFR will be asked to evaluate the substantial accessible through the System for 3474.20. need for the project; the quality and Award Management. You may review 4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a feasibility of its measurable outcomes, and comment on any information about grant under this competition, you must activities, and timelines; the yourself that a Federal agency ensure that you have in place the effectiveness of its management and previously entered and that is currently necessary processes and systems to governance plan; the quality of its data in FAPIIS. comply with the reporting requirements security and privacy protections; the Please note that, if the total value of in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive qualifications and experience of the your currently active grants, cooperative funding under the competition. This personnel; and the resources of the agreements, and procurement contracts does not apply if you have an exception applicant to support the proposed from the Federal Government exceeds under 2 CFR 170.110(b). activities. These criteria are described in $10,000,000, the reporting requirements (b) At the end of your project period, greater detail in the RFA. in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, you must submit a final performance 2. Review and Selection Process: We require you to report certain integrity report, including financial information, remind potential applicants that in information to FAPIIS semiannually. as directed by the Secretary. If you reviewing applications in any Please review the requirements in 2 CFR receive a multiyear award, you must discretionary grant competition, the part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant submit an annual performance report Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR plus all the other Federal funds you that provides the most current 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the receive exceed $10,000,000. performance and financial expenditure VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28529 information as directed by the Secretary edition of the Federal Register and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary Code of Federal Regulations at Full Text of Announcement may also require more frequent www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can performance reports under 34 CFR view this document, as well as all other I. Funding Opportunity Description 75.720(c). For specific requirements on documents of this Department Purpose of Program: The reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/ published in the Federal Register, in Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP) fund/grant/apply/appforms/ text or Portable Document Format provides grants to eligible institutions of appforms.html. (PDF). To use PDF you must have higher education (IHEs) to help them 5. Performance Measures: To evaluate Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is become self-sufficient and expand their the overall success of this program, the available free at the site. capacity to serve low-income students Department has established three You may also access documents of the by providing funds to improve and performance measures that assess Department published in the Federal strengthen the institution’s academic progress toward our strategic goal of Register by using the article search quality, institutional management, and ensuring that data are available to feature at www.federalregister.gov. fiscal stability. inform education decisions by Specifically, through the advanced Priorities: This notice contains two supporting States’ development and search feature at this site, you can limit competitive preference priorities and implementation of statewide your search to documents published by one invitational priority. The longitudinal data systems. The the Department. competitive preference priorities are Department measures: (1) The number from the Secretary’s Final Supplemental of States that link K–12 data with early Mark Schneider, Priorities and Definitions for childhood data; (2) the number of States Director, Institute of Education Sciences. Discretionary Grant Programs (83 FR that link K–12 data with postsecondary [FR Doc. 2019–13038 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] 9096) (Supplemental Priorities), which data; and (3) the number of States that BILLING CODE 4000–01–P link K–12 and postsecondary data with were published in the Federal Register workforce data. In addition, grantees on March 2, 2018. will be expected to report in their DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Competitive Preference Priorities: For annual and final performance reports on FY 2019 and any subsequent year in their progress in achieving the project Applications for New Awards; which we make awards from the list of objectives proposed in their grant Strengthening Institutions Program unfunded applications from this applications and on the status of their competition, these priorities are AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary competitive preference priorities. Under development and implementation of a Education, Department of Education. statewide longitudinal data system. 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to ACTION: 6. Continuation Awards: In making a Notice. an additional six points to an application that meets these priorities. continuation award under 34 CFR SUMMARY: The Department of Education 75.253, the Secretary considers, among These priorities are: (Department) is issuing a notice inviting Competitive Preference Priority 1— other things: Whether a grantee has applications for new awards for fiscal made substantial progress in achieving Fostering Flexible and Affordable Paths year (FY) 2019 for the Strengthening to Obtaining Knowledge and Skills (4 the goals and objectives of the project; Institutions Program (SIP), Catalog of whether the grantee has expended funds points). Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Projects that are designed to address in a manner that is consistent with its number 84.031A. This notice relates to approved application and budget; and, providing work-based learning the approved information collection experiences (such as internships, if the Secretary has established under OMB control number 1840–0114. performance measurement apprenticeships, and fellowships) that DATES: align with in-demand industry sectors requirements, the performance targets in Applications Available: June 19, 2019. the grantee’s approved application. or occupations (as defined in section Deadline for Transmittal of 3(23) of the Workforce Innovation and In making a continuation award, the Applications: July 19, 2019. Secretary also considers whether the Opportunity Act of 2014). ADDRESSES: grantee is operating in compliance with For the addresses for Competitive Preference Priority 2— the assurances in its approved obtaining and submitting an Fostering Knowledge and Promoting the application, including those applicable application, please refer to our Common Development of Skills that Prepare to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit Instructions for Applicants to Students to be Informed, Thoughtful, discrimination in programs or activities Department of Education Discretionary and Productive Individuals and Citizens receiving Federal financial assistance Grant Programs, published in the (2 points). from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, Federal Register on February 13, 2019 Projects that are designed to address 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). (84 FR 3768), and available at supporting instruction in personal www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019- financial literacy, knowledge of markets VII. Other Information 02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf. and economics, knowledge of higher Accessible Format: Individuals with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: education financing and repayment disabilities can obtain this document Nalini Lamba-Nieves, U.S. Department (e.g., college savings and student loans), and a copy of the application package in of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue or other skills aimed at building an accessible format (e.g., braille, large SW, Room 250–34, Washington, DC personal financial understanding and print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 20202–4260. Telephone: (202) 453– responsibility. request to the program contact person 7953. Email: Invitational Priority: For FY 2019 and listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION [email protected]. any subsequent year in which we make CONTACT. If you use a telecommunications awards from the list of unfunded Electronic Access to This Document: device for the deaf (TDD) or a text applications from this competition, this The official version of this document is telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay priority is an invitational priority. the document published in the Federal Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not Register. You may access the official 8339. give an application that meets this VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28530 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices invitational priority a competitive or significant impact on the State, regional, (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as absolute preference over other or local economy, as appropriate. adopted and amended as regulations of applications. (B) Determination. The determination the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) This priority is: of whether an industry sector or The Uniform Administrative Invitational Priority—Spurring occupation is in-demand under this Requirements, Cost Principles, and Investment in Opportunity Zones. paragraph shall be made by the State Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Under this priority, an applicant may board or local board, as appropriate, in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and address one or both of the following using State and regional business and amended as regulations of the priority areas: labor market projections, including the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The (1) Propose to serve children or use of labor market information. regulations for this program in 34 CFR students who reside, or attend Logic model (also referred to as theory part 607. (e) The Supplemental elementary or secondary schools or of action) means a framework that Priorities. institutions of higher education, in a identifies key project components of the qualified opportunity zone as proposed project (i.e., the active II. Award Information designated by the Secretary of the ‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to Type of Award: Discretionary grants. Treasury under section 1400Z–1 of the be critical to achieving the relevant Five-year Individual Development Internal Revenue Code, as amended by outcomes) and describes the theoretical Grants and Cooperative Arrangement the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 115– and operational relationships among the Development Grants will be awarded in 97). In addressing this priority, an key project components and relevant FY 2019. applicant must provide the census tract outcomes. Estimated Available Funds: number of the qualified opportunity Note: In developing logic models, Approximately $26,300,000 is available zone for which it proposes to serve applicants may want to use resources for new awards in the program children or students. A list of qualified such as the Regional Educational competition. opportunity zones, with census tract Laboratory Program’s (REL Pacific) Contingent upon the availability of numbers, is available at Education Logic Model Application, funds and the quality of applications, www.cdfifund.gov/Pages/Opportunity- available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/ we may make additional awards in Zones.aspx. edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp, to help subsequent years from the list of (2) Provide evidence in its application design their logic models. Other sources unfunded applications from this that it has received or will receive include: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/ competition. financial assistance from a qualified regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014025.pdf, Individual Development Grants: opportunity fund under section 1400Z– https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/ Estimated Range of Awards: 2 of the Internal Revenue Code, as pacific/pdf/REL_2014007.pdf, and $400,000–$450,000 per year. amended by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/ Estimated Average Size of Awards: for a purpose directly related to its northeast/pdf/REL_2015057.pdf. $425,000 per year. proposed project. In addressing this Project component means an activity, Maximum Award: We will not make priority, an applicant must identify the strategy, intervention, process, product, an award exceeding $450,000 for a qualified opportunity fund from which practice, or policy included in a project. single budget period of 12 months. it has received or will receive financial Evidence may pertain to an individual Estimated Number of Awards: 31. assistance. project component or to a combination Cooperative Arrangement Definitions: These definitions apply to of project components (e.g., training Development Grants: the priorities and the selection criteria teachers on instructional practices for Estimated Range of Awards: for this competition and are from English learners and follow-on coaching $500,000–$550,000 per year. section 3(23) of the Workforce for these teachers). Estimated Average Size of Awards: Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014 Relevant outcome means the student $525,000 per year. and from 34 CFR 77.1. outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key Maximum Award: We will not make Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component is designed to an award exceeding $550,000 for a project component included in the improve, consistent with the specific single budget period of 12 months. project’s logic model is informed by goals of the program. Estimated Number of Awards: 25. research or evaluation findings that Note: The Department is not bound by suggest the project component is likely Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1057–1059d any estimates in this notice. to improve relevant outcomes. (title III, part A, of the Higher Education Act Project Period: Up to 60 months. In-demand industry sector or of 1965, as amended (HEA)). III. Eligibility Information occupation means— Note: In 2008, the HEA was amended (a) In General.— (i) An industry sector by the Higher Education Opportunity 1. Eligible Applicants: This program is that has a substantial current or Act of 2008 (HEOA), Public Law 110– authorized by title III, part A, of the potential impact (including through jobs 315. The HEOA made a number of HEA. To qualify as an eligible that lead to economic self-sufficiency technical and substantive revisions to institution under any title III, part A and opportunities for advancement) on SIP. Please note that the regulations for program, an institution must— the State, regional, or local economy, as SIP in 34 CFR part 607 have not been (a) Be accredited or preaccredited by appropriate, and that contributes to the updated to reflect these statutory a nationally recognized accrediting growth or stability of other supporting changes. agency or association that the Secretary businesses, or the growth of other Applicable Regulations: (a) The has determined to be a reliable authority industry sectors; or Education Department General as to the quality of education or training (ii) An occupation that currently has Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in offered; or is projected to have a number of 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 82, 84, 86, 97, (b) Be legally authorized by the State positions (including positions that lead 98, and 99. (b) The Office of in which it is located to be a junior or to economic self-sufficiency and Management and Budget Guidelines to community college or to provide an opportunities for advancement) in an Agencies on Governmentwide educational program for which it industry sector so as to have a Debarment and Suspension awards a bachelor’s degree; VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28531 (c) Be designated as an ‘‘eligible case supplant those funds (34 CFR priorities, you should limit your institution’’ by demonstrating that it: (1) 607.30(b)). application narrative to no more than 50 Has an enrollment of needy students as pages for the Individual Development IV. Application and Submission described in 34 CFR 607.3; and (2) has Grant or 65 pages for the Cooperative Information low average educational and general Arrangement Development Grant. We expenditures per full-time equivalent 1. Application Submission also recommend that you use the (FTE) undergraduate student as Instructions: Applicants are required to following standards: described in 34 CFR 607.4. follow the Common Instructions for • A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side Note: The notice announcing the FY Applicants to Department of Education only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, 2019 process for designation of eligible Discretionary Grant Programs, and both sides. institutions, and inviting applications published in the Federal Register on • Double space (no more than three for waiver of eligibility requirements, February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and lines per vertical inch) all text in the was published in the Federal Register available at www.govinfo.gov/content/ application narrative, excluding titles, on January 29, 2019 (84 FR 451). Only pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, headings, footnotes, quotations, institutions that the Department which contain requirements and references, and captions, as well as all determines are eligible, or are granted a information on how to submit an text in charts, tables, figures, and waiver under the process described in application. graphs. 2. Intergovernmental Review: This • that notice, may apply for a grant in this Use a font that is either 12 point or program is subject to Executive Order program. larger, and no smaller than 10 pitch 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR (characters per inch). Relationship Between the Title III, Part part 79. However, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), • Use one of the following fonts: A Programs and the Developing we waive intergovernmental review in Times New Roman, Courier, Courier Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI) order to make awards by the end of FY New, or Arial. Program 2019. The recommended page limit does not 3. Funding Restrictions: We specify apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, A grantee under the HSI program, unallowable costs in 34 CFR 607.10(c). which is authorized under title V of the the budget section, including the We reference additional regulations narrative budget justification; Part IV, HEA, may not receive a grant under any outlining funding restrictions in the HEA, title III, part A program. The title the assurances and certifications; or the Applicable Regulations section of this one-page abstract and the bibliography. III, part A programs are: SIP; the notice. Tribally Controlled Colleges and However, the recommended page limit 4. Recommended Page Limit: The does apply to all of the application Universities program; the Alaska Native application narrative (Part III of the and Native Hawaiian-Serving narrative. application) is where you, the applicant, Note: The Budget Information-Non- Institutions program; the Asian address the selection criteria that American and Native American Pacific Construction Programs Form (ED 524) reviewers use to evaluate your Sections A–C are not the same as the Islander-Serving Institutions program; application. We recommend that you and the Native American-Serving narrative response to the Budget section limit the application narrative to no of the selection criteria. Nontribal Institutions program. more than 50 pages for Individual Furthermore, a current HSI program Development Grants and no more than V. Application Review Information grantee may not give up its HSI grant to 65 pages for Cooperative Arrangement 1. Selection Criteria: The selection receive a grant under SIP or any title III, Development Grants. If you are criteria for this program are from 34 CFR Part A program as described in 34 CFR addressing the invitational priority and/ 607.22(a) through (g), and from 34 CFR 607.2(g)(1). or either or both competitive preference 75.210. Applicants should address each An eligible HSI that is not a current priorities, you will have an additional of the following selection criteria grantee under the HSI program may seven pages total to respond to all three separately for each proposed activity. apply for a FY 2019 grant under all title priorities. To address the invitational The selection criteria are worth a total III, part A programs for which it is priority, you will have an additional of 100 points; the maximum score for eligible, as well as receive consideration two pages; for competitive preference each criterion is noted in parentheses. for a grant under the HSI program. priority one, you will have three (a) Quality of the Applicant’s However, a successful applicant may additional pages; and for competitive Comprehensive Development Plan. receive only one grant as described in preference priority two, you will have (Maximum 20 Points) The extent to 34 CFR 607.2(g)(1). two additional pages. If you address all which— 2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This three priorities, you should limit the (1) The strengths, weaknesses, and program does not require cost sharing or application narrative (Part III) to no significant problems of the institution’s matching unless the grantee uses a more than 57 pages for the Individual academic programs, institutional portion of its grant for establishing or Development Grant application and 72 management, and fiscal stability are improving an endowment fund. If a pages for the Cooperative Arrangement clearly and comprehensively analyzed grantee uses a portion of its grant for Development Grant application. Please and result from a process that involved endowment fund purposes, it must include a separate heading when major constituencies of the institution; match those grant funds with non- responding to the invitational priority (2) The goals for the institution’s Federal funds (20 U.S.C. 1057(d)–(2)). and one or both competitive preference academic programs, institutional b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This priorities. You may only use the management, and fiscal stability are program involves supplement-not- additional seven pages to address the realistic and based on comprehensive supplant funding requirements. Grant invitational or the competitive analysis; funds must be used so that they preference priorities. The additional (3) The objectives stated in the plan supplement and, to the extent practical, seven pages are not for an extended are measurable, related to institutional increase the funds that would otherwise response to the selection criteria. If you goals, and, if achieved, will contribute be available for the activities to be are not addressing the invitational to the growth and self-sufficiency of the carried out under the grant and in no priority or the competitive preference institution; and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28532 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices (4) The plan clearly and (2) The data analysis procedures are (2) Funds and administrative comprehensively describes the methods clearly described and are likely to management; and resources the institution will use to produce formative and summative (3) Development and improvement of institutionalize practice and results on attaining activity objectives academic programs; improvements developed under the and measuring the success of the project (4) Acquisition of equipment for use proposed project, including, in on achieving the goals of the in strengthening management and particular, how operational costs for comprehensive development plan. academic programs; personnel, maintenance, and upgrades (h) Budget. (Maximum 7 Points) The (5) Joint use of facilities such as of equipment will be paid with extent to which the proposed costs are libraries and laboratories; and institutional resources. necessary and reasonable in relation to (6) Student services, including (b) Quality of the Project Design. the project’s objectives and scope. services that will assist in the education (Maximum 10 Points) The Secretary 2. Review and Selection Process: We of special populations. considers the quality of the design of the remind potential applicants that in For the purpose of these funding proposed project. In determining the reviewing applications in any considerations, we use 2017–2018 data. quality of the design of the proposed discretionary grant competition, the If a tie remains after applying the tie- project, the Secretary considers the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR breaker mechanism above, priority will extent to which the proposed project 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the be given to applicants that have the demonstrates a rationale (as defined in applicant in carrying out a previous lowest endowment values per FTE this notice). award, such as the applicant’s use of enrolled student. (c) Quality of Activity Objectives. funds, achievement of project 3. Risk Assessment and Specific (Maximum 15 Points) The extent to objectives, and compliance with grant Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR which the objectives for each activity conditions. The Secretary may also 200.205, before awarding grants under are— consider whether the applicant failed to (1) Realistic and defined in terms of this program the Department conducts a submit a timely performance report or measurable results; and review of the risks posed by applicants. (2) Directly related to the problems to submitted a report of unacceptable Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may be solved and to the goals of the quality. impose specific conditions and, in comprehensive development plan. In addition, in making a competitive appropriate circumstances, high-risk (d) Quality of Implementation grant award, the Secretary requires conditions on a grant if the applicant or Strategy. (Maximum 15 Points) The various assurances including those grantee is not financially stable; has a extent to which— applicable to Federal civil rights laws history of unsatisfactory performance; (1) The implementation strategy for that prohibit discrimination in programs has a financial or other management each activity is comprehensive; or activities receiving Federal financial system that does not meet the standards (2) The rationale for the assistance from the Department (34 CFR in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not implementation strategy for each 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; activity is clearly described and is A panel of three non-Federal or is otherwise not responsible. supported by the results of relevant reviewers will review and score each 4. Integrity and Performance System: studies or projects; and application in accordance with the If you are selected under this (3) The timetable for each activity is selection criteria listed in this notice competition to receive an award that realistic and likely to be attained. from 34 CFR 607.22(a) through (g) and over the course of the project period (e) Quality of Key Personnel. 34 CFR 75.210. A rank order funding may exceed the simplified acquisition (Maximum 8 Points) The extent to slate will be made from this review. threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 which— Awards will be made in rank order CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a (1) The past experience and training according to the average score received judgment about your integrity, business of key professional personnel are from the peer review and from the two ethics, and record of performance under directly related to the stated activity competitive preference priorities. Federal awards—that is, the risk posed objectives; and Tie-breaker for Development Grants. by you as an applicant—before we make (2) The time commitment of key In tie-breaking situations for an award. In doing so, we must consider personnel is realistic. development grants, in accordance with any information about you that is in the (f) Quality of Project Management 20 U.S.C. 1057(b), we award one integrity and performance system Plan. (Maximum 10 Points) The extent additional point to an application from (currently referred to as the Federal to which— (1) Procedures for managing the an IHE that has an endowment fund of Awardee Performance and Integrity project are likely to ensure efficient and which the current market value, per FTE Information System (FAPIIS)), effective project implementation; and enrolled student, is less than the average accessible through the System for (2) The project coordinator and current market value of the endowment Award Management. You may review activity directors have sufficient funds, per FTE enrolled student, at and comment on any information about authority to conduct the project comparable type institutions that offer yourself that a Federal agency effectively, including access to the similar instruction. We award one previously entered and that is currently president or chief executive officer. additional point to an application from in FAPIIS. (g) Quality of Evaluation Plan. an IHE that has expenditures for library Please note that, if the total value of (Maximum 15 Points) The extent to materials per FTE enrolled student that your currently active grants, cooperative which— are less than the average expenditure for agreements, and procurement contracts (1) The data elements and the data library materials per FTE enrolled from the Federal Government exceeds collection procedures are clearly student at similar type institutions. We $10,000,000, the reporting requirements described and appropriate to measure also add one additional point to an in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, the attainment of activity objectives and application from an IHE that proposes to require you to report certain integrity to measure the success of the project in carry out one or more of the following information to FAPIIS semiannually. achieving the goals of the activities— Please review the requirements in 2 CFR comprehensive development plan; and (1) Faculty development; part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28533 plus all the other Federal funds you that provides the most current VII. Other Information receive exceed $10,000,000. performance and financial expenditure Accessible Format: Individuals with information as directed by the Secretary VI. Award Administration Information disabilities can obtain this document under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary and a copy of the application package in 1. Award Notices: If your application may also require more frequent an accessible format (e.g., braille, large is successful, we notify your U.S. performance reports under 34 CFR print, audiotape, or compact disc) on Representative and U.S. Senators and 75.720(c). For specific requirements on request to one of the persons listed send you a Grant Award Notification reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/ under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION (GAN); or we may send you an email fund/grant/apply/appforms/ CONTACT. containing a link to access an electronic appforms.html. Electronic Access to This Document: version of your GAN. We may notify 5. Performance Measures: The The official version of this document is you informally, also. Secretary has established the following the document published in the Federal If your application is not evaluated or key performance measures for assessing Register. You may access the official not selected for funding, we notify you. 2. Administrative and National Policy the effectiveness of SIP: edition of the Federal Register and the Requirements: We identify (a) The percentage change, over the Code of Federal Regulations via the administrative and national policy five-year period, of the number of full- Federal Digital System at requirements in the application package time degree-seeking undergraduates www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can and reference these and other enrolled at SIP institutions. Note that view this document, as well as all other requirements in the Applicable this is a long-term measure that will be documents of this Department Regulations section of this notice. used to periodically gauge performance. published in the Federal Register, in We reference the regulations outlining (b) The percentage of first-time, full- text or Portable Document Format the terms and conditions of an award in time degree-seeking undergraduate (PDF). To use PDF you must have the Applicable Regulations section of students at four-year SIP institutions Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is this notice and include these and other who were in their first year of available free at the site. You may also access documents of the specific conditions in the GAN. The postsecondary enrollment in the Department published in the Federal GAN also incorporates your approved previous year and are enrolled in the Register by using the article search application as part of your binding current year at the same SIP institution. feature at: www.federalregister.gov. commitments under the grant. (c) The percentage of first-time, full- 3. Open Licensing Requirements: Specifically, through the advanced time degree-seeking undergraduate feature at this site, you can limit your Unless an exception applies, if you are students at two-year SIP institutions search to documents published by the awarded a grant under this competition, who were in their first year of Department. you will be required to openly license postsecondary enrollment in the to the public grant deliverables created previous year and are enrolled in the Dated: June 14, 2019. in whole, or in part, with Department current year at the same SIP institution. Diane Auer Jones, grant funds. When the deliverable (d) The percentage of first-time, full- Principal Deputy Under Secretary, Delegated consists of modifications to pre-existing to Perform the Duties of Under Secretary and time degree-seeking undergraduate Assistant Secretary for the Office of works, the license extends only to those students enrolled at four-year SIP modifications that can be separately Postsecondary Education. institutions graduating within six years [FR Doc. 2019–13010 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] identified and only to the extent that of enrollment. open licensing is permitted under the BILLING CODE 4000–01–P (e) The percentage of first-time, full- terms of any licenses or other legal time degree-seeking undergraduate restrictions on the use of pre-existing students enrolled at two-year SIP works. Additionally, a grantee or DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION institutions graduating within three subgrantee that is awarded competitive years of enrollment. Applications for New Awards; grant funds must have a plan to 6. Continuation Awards: In making a Education Research and Special disseminate these public grant Education Research Grant Programs deliverables. This dissemination plan continuation award under 34 CFR can be developed and submitted after 75.253, the Secretary considers, among AGENCY: Institute of Education Sciences, your application has been reviewed and other things: Whether a grantee has Department of Education. made substantial progress in achieving selected for funding. For additional ACTION: Notice. information on the open licensing the goals and objectives of the project; requirements please refer to 2 CFR whether the grantee has expended funds SUMMARY: The Department of Education 3474.20. in a manner that is consistent with its (Department) is issuing a notice inviting 4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a approved application and budget; and, applications for new awards for fiscal grant under this competition, you must if the Secretary has established year (FY) 2020 for the Education ensure that you have in place the performance measurement Research and Special Education necessary processes and systems to requirements, the performance targets in Research Grant Programs, Catalog of comply with the reporting requirements the grantee’s approved application. Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive In making a continuation award, the numbers 84.305A, 84.305B, 84.305C, funding under the competition. This Secretary also considers whether the 84.305D, 84.305R, 84.324A, 84.324B, does not apply if you have an exception grantee is operating in compliance with and 84.324R. This notice relates to the under 2 CFR 170.110(b). the assurances in its approved approved information collection under (b) At the end of your project period, application, including those applicable OMB control number 4040–0001. you must submit a final performance to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit DATES: The dates when applications are report, including financial information, discrimination in programs or activities available and the deadlines for as directed by the Secretary. If you receiving Federal financial assistance transmittal of applications invited under receive a multiyear award, you must from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, this notice are indicated in the chart at submit an annual performance report 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). the end of this notice and in the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28534 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Requests for Applications (RFAs) that areas: Education research; education competition, NCER will consider only are posted at the following websites: research training; education research applications that address identifying https://ies.ed.gov/funding, www.ed.gov/ and development centers; statistical and what works in education through programs/edresearch/index.html, and research methodology in education; and systematic replication. The list of www.ed.gov/programs/ systematic replication in education. interventions identified for replication specialedresearch/index.html. The Institute’s National Center for is available on the IES website at: ADDRESSES: For the addresses for Special Education Research (NCSER) https://ies.ed.gov/director/remarks/4- obtaining and submitting an will hold a total of three competitions— 15-2019.asp. one competition in each of the following application, please refer to our Common NCSER Competitions Instructions for Applicants to areas: Special education research; Department of Education Discretionary special education research training, and The Special Education Research Grant Programs, published in the systematic replication in special Competition. Under this competition, Federal Register on February 13, 2019 education. NCSER will consider only applications (84 FR 3768) and available at that address one of the following topics: NCER Competitions www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019- • Autism Spectrum Disorders. 02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf. The Education Research Competition. • Cognition and Student Learning in Under this competition, NCER will Special Education. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The • contact person associated with a consider only applications that address Early Intervention and Early particular research competition is listed one of the following topics: Learning in Special Education. • • in the chart at the end of this notice, as Career and Technical Education. Families of Children with • well as in the relevant RFA and Cognition and Student Learning. Disabilities. • • application package. Early Learning Programs and Professional Development for If you use a telecommunications Policies. Educators and School-Based Service • device for the deaf (TDD) or a text Education Technology. Providers. • • telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Effective Instruction. Reading, Writing, and Language • Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– English Learners. Development. • • 8339. Improving Education Systems. Science, Technology, Engineering, • Postsecondary and Adult and Mathematics (STEM) Education. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Education. • Social and Behavioral Outcomes to Full Text of Announcement • Reading and Writing. Support Learning. • Science, Technology, Engineering, • Special Education Policy, Finance, I. Funding Opportunity Description and Mathematics (STEM) Education. and Systems. Purpose of Program: In awarding • Social and Behavioral Context for • Technology for Special Education. these grants, the Institute of Education Academic Learning. • Transition Outcomes for Secondary Sciences (Institute) intends to provide The Research Training Programs in Students with Disabilities. national leadership in expanding the Education Sciences Competition. • Special Topics, which include— knowledge and understanding of (1) Under this competition, NCER will • Career and Technical Education for developmental and school readiness consider only applications that address Students with Disabilities. outcomes for infants and toddlers with one of the following topics: • English Learners with Disabilities. or at risk for a disability, (2) education • Predoctoral Interdisciplinary • Systems-Involved Students with outcomes for all learners from early Research Training Program in the Disabilities. childhood education through Education Sciences. The Research Training Programs in postsecondary and adult education, and • Postdoctoral Research Training Special Education Competition. Under (3) employment and wage outcomes Program in the Education Sciences. this competition, NCSER will consider when relevant (such as for those • Methods Training for Education only applications that address one of the engaged in career and technical, Researchers. following three topics: postsecondary, or adult education). The The Education Research and • Postdoctoral Research Training Institute’s research grant programs are Development Centers Competition. Program in Special Education and Early designed to provide interested Under this competition, NCER will Intervention. individuals and the general public with consider only applications that address • Early Career Development and reliable and valid information about one of the following topics: Mentoring. education practices that support • Improving Opportunities and • Methods Training Using Single learning and improve academic Achievement for English Learners in Case Designs. achievement and access to education Secondary School Settings. Research Grants Focused on opportunities for all learners. These • Improving Teaching and Learning Systematic Replication. Under this interested individuals include parents, in Postsecondary Institutions. competition, NCSER will consider only educators, learners, researchers, and • Improving Access, Instruction, and applications that address identifying policymakers. In carrying out its grant Outcomes in Gifted Education. what works in special education programs, the Institute provides support The Statistical and Research through systematic replication. The list for programs of research in areas of Methodology in Education Competition. of interventions identified for demonstrated national need. Under this competition, NCER will replication is available on the IES Competitions in This Notice: The consider only applications that address website at: https://ies.ed.gov/director/ Institute will conduct eight research one of the following topics: remarks/4-15-2019.asp. competitions in FY 2020 through two of • Statistical and Research Exemption from Proposed its centers: Methodology Grants. Rulemaking: Under section 191 of the The Institute’s National Center for • Early Career Statistical and Education Sciences Reform Act, 20 Education Research (NCER) will hold a Research Methodology Grants. U.S.C. 9581, IES is not subject to section total of five competitions—one Research Grants Focused on 437(d) of the General Education competition in each of the following Systematic Replication. Under this Provisions Act, 20 U.S.C. 1232(d), and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28535 is therefore not required to offer Estimated Size and Number of 3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR interested parties the opportunity to Awards: The size of the awards will 75.708(b) and (c) a grantee under this comment on priorities, selection depend on the scope of the projects competition may award subgrants—to criteria, definitions, and requirements. proposed. The number of awards made directly carry out project activities Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 9501 et seq. under each competition will depend on described in its application—to the the quality of the applications received following types of entities: Nonprofit Applicable Regulations: (a) The for that competition, the availability of and for-profit organizations and public Education Department General funds, and the following limits on and private agencies and institutions of Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR awards for specific competitions and higher education. The grantee may parts 77, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. topics set by the Institute. See the chart award subgrants to entities it has In addition, the regulations in 34 CFR at the end of this notice for additional identified in an approved application. part 75 are applicable, except for the information. IV. Application and Submission provisions in 34 CFR 75.100, 75.101(b), The Institute may waive any of the Information 75.102, 75.103, 75.105, 75.109(a), following limits on awards for a specific 75.200, 75.201, 75.209, 75.210, 75.211, competition or topic in the special case 1. Application Submission 75.217(a)–(c), 75.219, 75.220, 75.221, that the peer review process results in Instructions: Applicants are required to 75.222, 75.230, and 75.708. (b) The a tie between two or more grant follow the Common Instructions for Office of Management and Budget applications, making it impossible to Applicants to Department of Education Guidelines to Agencies on adhere to the limits without funding Discretionary Grant Programs, Governmentwide Debarment and only some of the equally ranked published in the Federal Register on Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR applications. In that case, the Institute February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768) and part 180, as adopted and amended as may make a larger number of awards to available at www.govinfo.gov/content/ regulations of the Department in 2 CFR include all applications of the same pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, part 3485. (c) The Uniform rank. which contain requirements and Administrative Requirements, Cost For NCER’s Education Research and information on how to submit an Principles, and Audit Requirements for Development Center competition, we application. Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as intend to fund one grant under each of 2. Other Information: Information adopted and amended as regulations of the three topics. regarding program and application the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. For NCER’s Research Training requirements for the competitions will Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 Programs in the Education Sciences be contained in the NCER and NCSER apply to institutions of higher education competition, we intend to fund five RFAs, which will be available on or only. grants under the Predoctoral before June 24, 2019, on the Institute’s Interdisciplinary Research Training website at: https://ies.ed.gov/funding/. Note: The open licensing requirement in 2 Program in the Education Sciences The dates on which the application CFR 3474.20 does not apply for this topic. However, should funding be packages for these competitions will be competition. available, we may consider making available are indicated in the chart at the end of this notice. II. Award Information additional awards to high-quality applications that remain unfunded after 3. Content and Form of Application Types of Awards: Discretionary grants five awards are made. Submission: Requirements concerning and cooperative agreements. For NCSER’s Research Training the content of an application are Fiscal Information: Although Programs in Special Education contained in the RFA for the specific Congress has not yet enacted an competition, we intend to fund no more competition. The forms that must be appropriation for FY 2020, the Institute than one grant for Methods Training submitted are in the application package is inviting applications for these Using Single Case Designs. for the specific competition. competitions now so that applicants can Contingent on the availability of 4. Submission Dates and Times: The have adequate time to prepare their funds and the quality of applications, deadline date for transmittal of applications. The actual level of we may make additional awards in FY applications for each competition is funding, if any, depends on final 2021 from the list of highly-rated indicated in the chart at the end of this congressional action. The Department unfunded applications from the FY notice and in the RFAs for the may announce additional competitions 2020 competitions. competitions. We do not consider an application later in 2019. The actual award of grants Note: The Department is not bound by any that does not comply with the deadline will depend on the availability of funds. estimates in this notice. requirements. The Education Research and Project Period: See chart at the end of 5. Intergovernmental Review: These Development Center for Improving this notice. competitions are not subject to Access, Instruction and Outcomes in III. Eligibility Information Executive Order 12372 and the Gifted Education would be supported regulations in 34 CFR part 79. with funding authorized through the 1. Eligible Applicants: Applicants that 6. Funding Restrictions: We reference Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented have the ability and capacity to conduct regulations outlining funding Students Education Act. The scientifically valid research are eligible restrictions in the Applicable Administration’s budget request for FY to apply. Eligible applicants include, Regulations section of this notice. 2020 does not include funds for the but are not limited to, nonprofit and for- Javits program. However, we are profit organizations and public and V. Application Review Information inviting applications to allow enough private agencies and institutions of 1. Selection Criteria: For all of its time to complete the grant process if higher education, such as colleges and grant competitions, the Institute uses Congress appropriates funds for this universities. selection criteria based on a peer-review program. 2. Cost Sharing or Matching: These process that has been approved by the Estimated Range of Awards: See chart programs do not require cost sharing or National Board for Education Sciences. at the end of this notice. matching. The Peer Review Procedures for Grant VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28536 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Applications can be found on the In addition, in making a competitive version of your GAN. We may notify Institute’s website at https://ies.ed.gov/ grant award, the Institute also requires you informally, also. director/sro/peer_review/application_ various assurances including those If your application is not evaluated or review.asp. applicable to Federal civil rights laws not selected for funding, we notify you. For the 84.305A, 84.305D, 84.324A, that prohibit discrimination in programs 2. Administrative and National Policy 84.305R, and 84.324R competitions, or activities receiving Federal financial Requirements: We identify peer reviewers will be asked to evaluate assistance from the Department (34 CFR administrative and national policy the significance of the application, the 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). requirements in the application package quality of the research plan, the 3. Risk Assessment and Specific and reference these and other qualifications and experience of the Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR requirements in the Applicable personnel, and the resources of the 200.205, before awarding grants under Regulations section of this notice. applicant to support the proposed these competitions, the Department We reference the regulations outlining activities. These criteria are described in conducts a review of the risks posed by the terms and conditions of an award in greater detail in the RFAs. applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the the Applicable Regulations section of For the 84.305B and 84.324B Institute may impose specific conditions this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The competitions, peer reviewers for the and, in appropriate circumstances, high- GAN also incorporates your approved predoctoral, postdoctoral, and methods risk conditions on a grant if the application as part of your binding training programs will be asked to applicant or grantee is not financially commitments under the grant. evaluate the significance of the stable; has a history of unsatisfactory 3. Grant Administration: Applicants application, the quality of the research performance; has a financial or other should budget for an annual two-day training plan, the qualifications and management system that does not meet meeting for project directors to be held experience of the personnel, and the the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart in Washington, DC. resources of the applicant to support the D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a 4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a proposed activities. Peer reviewers for prior grant; or is otherwise not grant under one of the competitions the early career development and responsible. announced in this notice, you must mentoring program will be asked to 4. Integrity and Performance System: ensure that you have in place the evaluate the significance of the If you are selected under this necessary processes and systems to application, the quality of the research competition to receive an award that comply with the reporting requirements plan, the quality of the career over the course of the project period in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive development plan, the qualifications may exceed the simplified acquisition funding under the competition. This and experience of the personnel, and threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 does not apply if you have an exception the resources of the applicant to support CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a under 2 CFR 170.110(b). the proposed activities. These criteria judgment about your integrity, business (b) At the end of your project period, are described in greater detail in the ethics, and record of performance under you must submit a final performance RFA. Federal awards—that is, the risk posed report, including financial information, For the 84.305C competition, peer by you as an applicant—before we make as directed by the Institute. If you reviewers will be asked to evaluate the an award. In doing so, we must consider receive a multiyear award, you must significance of the application, the any information about you that is in the submit an annual performance report quality of the research plan for the integrity and performance system that provides the most current focused program of research, the quality (currently referred to as the Federal performance and financial expenditure of the plans for other center activities, Awardee Performance and Integrity information as directed by the Institute the quality of the management and Information System (FAPIIS)), under 34 CFR 75.118. The Institute may institutional resources, and the accessible through the System for also require more frequent performance qualifications and experience of the Award Management. You may review reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For personnel. These criteria are described and comment on any information about specific requirements on reporting, in greater detail in the RFA. yourself that a Federal agency please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/ For all of the Institute’s competitions, previously entered and that is currently apply/appforms/appforms.html. applications should include budgets no in FAPIIS. 5. Performance Measures: To evaluate higher than the relevant maximum Please note that, if the total value of the overall success of its education award as set out in the relevant RFA. your currently active grants, cooperative research and special education research The Institute will not make an award agreements, and procurement contracts grant programs, the Institute annually exceeding the maximum award amount from the Federal Government exceeds assesses the percentage of projects that as set out in the relevant RFA. $10,000,000, the reporting requirements result in peer-reviewed publications and 2. Review and Selection Process: We in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, the number of Institute-supported remind potential applicants that in require you to report certain integrity interventions with evidence of efficacy reviewing applications in any information to FAPIIS semiannually. in improving learner education discretionary grant competition, the Please review the requirements in 2 CFR outcomes. In addition, NCSER annually Institute may consider, under 34 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant assesses the number of newly developed 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the plus all the other Federal funds you or modified interventions with evidence applicant in carrying out a previous receive exceed $10,000,000. of promise for improving learner award, such as the applicant’s use of education outcomes. School readiness VI. Award Administration Information funds, achievement of project outcomes include pre-reading, reading, objectives, and compliance with grant 1. Award Notices: If your application pre-writing, early mathematics, early conditions. The Institute may also is successful, we notify your U.S. science, and social-emotional skills that consider whether the applicant failed to Representative and U.S. Senators and prepare young children for school. submit a timely performance report or send you a Grant Award Notification Student academic outcomes include submitted a report of unacceptable (GAN); or we may send you an email learning and achievement in academic quality. containing a link to access an electronic content areas, such as reading, writing, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28537 math, and science, as well as outcomes other things: Whether a grantee has to the appropriate program contact that reflect students’ successful made substantial progress in achieving person listed in the chart at the end of progression through the education the goals and objectives of the project; this notice. system, such as course and grade whether the grantee has expended funds Electronic Access to This Document: completion; high school graduation; and in a manner that is consistent with its The official version of this document is postsecondary enrollment, progress, and approved application and budget; and, the document published in the Federal completion. Social and behavioral if the Institute has established Register. You may access the official competencies include social and performance measurement edition of the Federal Register and the emotional skills, attitudes, and requirements, whether the grantee has Code of Federal Regulations at behaviors that are important to met the performance targets in the www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can academic and post-academic success. grantee’s approved application. view this document, as well as all other Additional education outcomes for In making a continuation award, the documents of this Department students with or at risk of a disability Institute also considers whether the published in the Federal Register, in (as defined in the relevant RFA) include grantee is operating in compliance with text or Portable Document Format developmental outcomes for infants and the assurances in its approved (PDF). To use PDF you must have toddlers (birth to age three) pertaining to application, including those applicable Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is cognitive, communicative, linguistic, to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit available free at the site. social, emotional, adaptive, functional, discrimination in programs or activities You may also access documents of the or physical development; and receiving Federal financial assistance Department published in the Federal developmental and functional outcomes from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, Register by using the article search that improve education outcomes, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). feature at www.federalregister.gov. transition to employment, independent VII. Other Information Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit living, and postsecondary education for Accessible Format: Individuals with students with disabilities. your search to documents published by disabilities can obtain this document the Department. 6. Continuation Awards: In making a and a copy of the RFA in an accessible continuation award under 34 CFR format (e.g., braille, large print, Mark Schneider, 75.253, the Institute considers, among audiotape, or compact disc) on request Director, Institute of Education Sciences. Application Deadline for CFDA No. and name package transmittal of Estimated range of awards * Project period For further available applications information contact National Center for Education Research (NCER) 84.305A Education Research 7/11/19 ...... 8/29/19 ...... $100,000 to $660,000 ...... Up to 5 years .. Erin Higgins, Erin.Higgins@ D Career and Technical Education ed.gov. D Cognition and Student Learning. D Early Learning Programs and Policies. D Education Technology. D Effective Instruction. D English Learners. D Improving Education Systems. D Postsecondary and Adult Education. D Reading and Writing. D Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education. D Social and Behavioral Context for Aca- demic Learning. 84.305B Research Training Programs in the 7/11/19 ...... 8/29/19 ...... $100,000 to $920,000 ...... Up to 5 years .. Katina Stapleton, Education Sciences [email protected]. D Predoctoral Interdisciplinary Research Training Program in the Education Sciences D Postdoctoral Research Training Program in the Education Sciences. D Methods Training for Education Research- ers. 84.305C Education Research and Development 7/11/19 ...... 9/26/19 ...... $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 ...... Up to 5 years .. Corinne Alfeld, Centers Corinne.Alfeld,@ed.gov. D Improving Opportunities and Achievement for English Learners in Secondary School Set- tings D Improving Teaching and Learning in Post- secondary Institutions. D Improving Access, Instruction and Out- comes in Gifted Education.. 84.305D Statistical and Research Methodology 7/11/19 ...... 8/29/19 ...... $40,000 to $300,000 ...... Up to 3 years .. Phill Gagne, Phill.Gagne@ in Education ed.gov. D Statistical and Research Methodology Grants D Early Career Statistical and Research Methodology Grants. 84.305R Research Grants Focused on System- 7/11/19 ...... 8/29/19 ...... $400,000 to $800,000 ...... Up to 5 years .. Christina Chhin, Chris- atic Replication [email protected]. National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER) 84.324A Special Education Research 7/11/19 ...... 8/29/19 ...... $100,000 to $660,000 ...... Up to 5 years .. Sarah Brasiel, Sarah.Brasiel@ D Autism Spectrum Disorders ed.gov. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28538 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Application Deadline for CFDA No. and name package transmittal of Estimated range of awards * Project period For further available applications information contact D Cognition and Student Learning in Special Education. D Early Intervention and Early Learning in Special Education. D Families of Children with Disabilities. D Professional Development for Educators and School-Based Service Providers. D Reading, Writing, and Language Develop- ment. D Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education. D Social and Behavioral Outcomes to Sup- port Learning. D Special Education Policy, Finance, and Systems. D Technology for Special Education. D Transition Outcomes for Secondary Stu- dents with Disabilities. D Special Topics. Æ Career and Technical Education for Students with Disabilities. Æ English Learners with Disabilities. Æ Systems-Involved Students with Dis- abilities. 84.324B Research Training Programs in Special 7/11/19 ...... 8/29/19 ...... $100,000 to $225,000 ...... Up to 5 years .. Katherine Taylor, Kath- Education. [email protected]. D Postdoctoral Research Training Program in Special Education and Early Intervention D Early Career Development and Mentoring. D Methods Training Using Single Case De- signs. 84.324R Research Grants Focused on System- 7/11/19 ...... 8/29/19 ...... $400,000 to $800,000 ...... Up to 5 years .. Katherine Taylor, Kath- atic Replication. [email protected]. * These estimates are annual amounts. Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice. Note: If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. [FR Doc. 2019–13041 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: For the addresses for technological careers, consistent with BILLING CODE 4000–01–P obtaining and submitting an nondiscrimination requirements application, please refer to our Common contained in the U.S. Constitution and Instructions for Applicants to Federal civil rights laws. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Department of Education Discretionary Priorities: This notice contains two Grant Programs, published in the competitive preference priorities and Applications for New Awards; Minority Federal Register on February 13, 2019 one invitational priority. The Science and Engineering Improvement (84 FR 3768), and available at competitive preference priorities are Program (MSEIP) www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019- from the Secretary’s Final Supplemental 02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf. AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Priorities and Definitions for Education, Department of Education. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Discretionary Grant Programs, Bernadette Hence, U.S. Department of published in the Federal Register on ACTION: Notice. Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096) (Supplemental Priorities). SUMMARY: The Department of Education Room 250–54, Washington, DC 20202. Competitive Preference Priorities: For (Department) is issuing a notice inviting Telephone: (202) 453–7913. Email: FY 2019, and any subsequent year in applications for fiscal year (FY) 2019 for [email protected]. which we make awards from the list of the MSEIP, Catalog of Federal Domestic If you use a telecommunications unfunded applications from this Assistance (CFDA) number 84.120A. device for the deaf (TDD) or a text competition, these priorities are This notice relates to the approved telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay competitive preference priorities. Under information collection under OMB Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1–800–877– 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award an control number 1840–0109. 8339. additional two points to an application DATES: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that meets Competitive Preference Applications Available: June 19, 2019. Full Text of Announcement Priority 1 or Competitive Preference Deadline for Transmittal of Priority 2, for a maximum of four Applications: July 19, 2019. I. Funding Opportunity Description additional points. Pre-Application Webinar Information: Purpose of Program: The MSEIP is These priorities are: The Department will hold a pre- designed to effect long-range Competitive Preference Priority 1— application meeting via webinar for improvement in science and Promoting Innovation and Efficiency, prospective applicants. Detailed engineering education at predominantly Streamlining Education With an information regarding this webinar will minority institutions and to increase the Increased Focus on Improving Student be provided on the website for the flow of underrepresented ethnic Outcomes, and Providing Increased MSEIP at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/ minorities, particularly minority Value to Students and Taxpayers (2 iduesmsi/index.html. women, into scientific and points). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28539 Projects that are designed to address and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on institutions are eligible. These special the following priority area: Governmentwide Debarment and project grants support activities that: (1) Supporting innovative strategies or Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR Improve quality training in science and research that have the potential to lead part 180, as adopted and amended as engineering at minority institutions; or to significant and wide-reaching regulations of the Department in 2 CFR (2) enhance the minority institutions’ improvements in the delivery of part 3485. (c) The Uniform general scientific research capabilities. educational services or other significant Administrative Requirements, Cost There also are special project grants for and tangible educational benefits to Principles, and Audit Requirements for which all applicants are eligible. These students, educators, or other Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as special project grants support activities Department stakeholders. adopted and amended as regulations of that: (1) Provide a needed service to a Competitive Preference Priority 2— the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) group of eligible minority institutions; Fostering Knowledge and Promoting the The regulations for this program in 34 or (2) provide in-service training for Development of Skills That Prepare CFR part 637. (e) The Supplemental project directors, scientists, and Students To Be Informed, Thoughtful, Priorities. engineers from eligible minority and Productive Individuals and Citizens Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 institutions. (2 points). apply to institutions of higher education Cooperative project grants assist Projects that are designed to address only. groups of nonprofit accredited colleges the following priority area: and universities to work together to Supporting instruction in personal II. Award Information conduct a science improvement financial literacy, knowledge of markets program. and economics, and knowledge of Type of Award: Discretionary grants. Design project grants assist minority higher education financing and Estimated Available Funds: institutions that do not have their own repayment (e.g., college savings and $5,964,726. appropriate resources or personnel to Contingent upon the availability of student loans) or other skills aimed at plan and develop long-range science funds and the quality of applications, building personal financial improvement programs. We will not we may make additional awards in understanding and responsibility. award design project grants in the FY subsequent years from the list of Invitational Priority: For FY 2019 and 2019 competition. any subsequent year in which we make unfunded applications from this (a) For institutional project grants, awards from the list of unfunded competition. eligible applicants are limited to— applications from this competition, this Estimated Range of Awards: (1) Public and private nonprofit priority is an invitational priority. Institutional Project Grants: institutions of higher education that: (i) Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do not $200,000–$250,000. Award baccalaureate degrees; and (ii) give an application that meets this Special Project Grants: $200,000– are minority institutions; invitational priority a competitive or $250,000. (2) Public or private nonprofit Cooperative Project Grants: $275,000– absolute preference over other institutions of higher education that: (i) $300,000. applications. Award associate degrees; and (ii) are This priority is: Estimated Average Size of Awards: minority institutions that (A) have a Invitational Priority—Projects that are Institutional Project Grants: $240,000. curriculum that includes science or Designed to Establish, Improve, or Special Project Grants: $249,000. engineering subjects; and (B) enter into Cooperative Project Grants: $300,000. Expand Professional Science Master’s a partnership with public or private Maximum Awards: (PSM) Degree Programs. nonprofit institutions of higher Institutional Project Grants: $250,000. Under this priority, we are education that award baccalaureate Special Project Grants: $250,000. particularly interested in projects that Cooperative Project Grants: $300,000. degrees in science and engineering. are designed to establish, improve, or (b) For special project grants for Estimated Number of Awards: expand PSM degree programs, which Institutional Project Grants: 19. which only minority institutions are combine traditional academic training Special Project Grants: 2. eligible, eligible applicants are with specialized knowledge and skills Cooperative Project Grants: 2. described in paragraph (a). that: (a) Closely align with the (c) For special project grants for expectations and needs of business and Note: The Department is not bound by any which all applicants are eligible, eligible industry and (b) prepare students for estimates in this notice. applicants include those described in direct entry into a variety of science, Project Period: Up to 36 months. paragraph (a), and— (1) Nonprofit science-oriented technology, engineering, and math III. Eligibility Information (STEM) career options in business and organizations, professional scientific industry, Federal government, or non- 1. Eligible Applicants: The eligibility societies, and institutions of higher profit organizations. of an applicant is dependent on the type education that award baccalaureate of MSEIP grant the applicant seeks. degrees that: (i) Provide a needed Note: Applicants must indicate in the one- page abstract and on the FY 2019 MSEIP There are four types of MSEIP grants: service to a group of minority Eligibility Certification Form in the Institutional project, special project, institutions; or (ii) provide in-service application package whether they intend to cooperative project, and design project. training to project directors, scientists, address one or both of the competitive Institutional project grants are grants and engineers from minority preference priorities and/or the invitational that support the implementation of a institutions; or priority. comprehensive science improvement (2) A consortia of organizations that plan, which may include any provide needed services to one or more Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1067–1067k. combination of activities for improving minority institutions, the membership Applicable Regulations: (a) The the preparation of minority students for of which may include: (i) Institutions of Education Department General careers in science. higher education which have a Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR There are two types of special project curriculum in science or engineering; parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, grants. First, there are special project (ii) institutions of higher education that and 99. (b) The Office of Management grants for which only minority have a graduate or professional program VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28540 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices in science or engineering; (iii) research Because we plan to make successful criteria. All applications will be laboratories of, or under contract with, applications available to the public, you evaluated based on the selection criteria the Department of Energy, the may wish to request confidentiality of as follows: Department of Defense, or the National business information. (a) Identification of need for the Institutes of Health; (iv) relevant offices Consistent with Executive Order project (Total 5 points). of the National Aeronautics and Space 12600, please designate in your (1) The Secretary reviews each Administration, National Oceanic and application any information that you application for information that shows Atmospheric Administration, National believe is exempt from disclosure under the identification of need for the project. Science Foundation, and National Exemption 4. In the appropriate (2) The Secretary looks for Institute of Standards and Technology; Appendix section of your application, information that shows— (v) quasi-governmental entities that under ‘‘Other Attachments Form,’’ (i) An adequate needs assessment; have a significant scientific or please list the page number or numbers (ii) An identification of specific needs engineering mission; or (vi) institutions on which we can find this information. in science; and (iii) Involvement of appropriate of higher education that have State- For additional information please see 34 individuals, especially science faculty, sponsored centers for research in CFR 5.11(c). in identifying the institutional needs. science, technology, engineering, and 3. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive Order (b) Plan of operation (Total 20 points). mathematics. (1) The Secretary reviews each 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR (d) For cooperative project grants, application for information that shows part 79. However, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), eligible applicants are groups of the quality of the plan of operation for we waive intergovernmental review in nonprofit accredited colleges and the project. universities whose primary fiscal agent order to make awards by the end of FY (2) The Secretary looks for is an eligible minority institution as 2019. information that shows— defined in 34 CFR 637.4(b). 4. Funding Restrictions: We reference (i) Higher quality in the design of the regulations outlining funding project; Note: As defined in 34 CFR 637.4(b), restrictions in the Applicable ‘‘minority institution’’ means an accredited (ii) An effective plan of management college or university whose enrollment of a Regulations section of this notice. that insures proper and efficient single minority group or a combination of 5. Recommended Page Limit: The administration of the project; minority groups as defined in 34 CFR 637.4 application narrative (Part III of the (iii) A clear description of how the exceeds 50 percent of the total enrollment. application) is where you, the applicant, objectives of the project relate to the address the selection criteria that 2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This purpose of the program; reviewers use to evaluate your program does not require cost sharing or (iv) The way the applicant plans to application. We recommend that you (1) matching. use its resources and personnel to limit the application narrative to no b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This achieve each objective; and more than 50 pages and (2) use the program involves supplement-not- (v) Methods of coordination. (See 34 following standards: supplant funding requirements. CFR 75.580) • A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side (c) Quality of key personnel (Total 10 3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, points). competition may not award subgrants to and both sides. (1) The Secretary reviews each entities to directly carry out project • Double-space (no more than three application for information that shows activities described in its application. lines per vertical inch) all text in the the quality of the key personnel the IV. Application and Submission application narrative, except titles, applicant plans to use on the project. Information headings, footnotes, quotations, (2) The Secretary looks for references, and captions. information that shows— 1. Application Submission • Use a font that is either 12 point or (i) The qualifications of the project Instructions: Applicants are required to larger or no smaller than 10 pitch director (if one is to be used); follow the Common Instructions for (characters per inch). (ii) The qualifications of each of the Applicants to Department of Education • Use one of the following fonts: other key personnel to be used in the Discretionary Grant Programs, Times New Roman, Courier, Courier project; published in the Federal Register on New, or Arial. (iii) The time that each person February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and The recommended page limit does not referred to in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) available at www.govinfo.gov/content/ apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, of this section plans to commit to the pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, budget section, including the narrative project; and which contain requirements and budget justification; Part IV, the (iv) The extent to which the applicant, information on how to submit an assurance and certifications; or the one- as part of its nondiscriminatory application. page abstract, the resumes, the employment practices, encourages 2. Submission of Proprietary biography, or letters of support. applications for employment from Information: Given the types of projects However, the recommended page limit persons who are members of groups that that may be proposed in applications for does apply to all the application have been traditionally the MSEIP grant competition, your narrative. underrepresented, such as members of a application may include business racial or ethnic minority group, women, V. Application Review Information information that you consider handicapped persons, and the elderly. proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define 1. Selection Criteria: The selection (3) To determine the qualifications of ‘‘business information’’ and describe the criteria for this program are from 34 CFR a person, the Secretary considers process we use in determining whether 637.32. Applicants should address each evidence of past experience and any of that information is proprietary of the selection criteria. The points training, in fields related to the and, thus, protected from disclosure assigned to each criterion are indicated objectives of the project, as well as other under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of in the parentheses next to the criterion. information that the applicant provides. Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as An applicant may earn up to a total of (d) Budget and cost effectiveness amended). 100 points based on the selection (Total 10 points). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28541 (1) The Secretary reviews each (2) The Secretary looks for (iii) Potential use of some aspects of application for information that shows information that shows— the project at other institutions. that the project has an adequate budget (i) For an institutional or cooperative 2. Review and Selection Process: We and is cost effective. project, the extent to which both the remind potential applicants that in (2) The Secretary looks for established science education reviewing applications in any information that shows— program(s) and the proposed project discretionary grant competition, the (i) The budget for the project is will expand or strengthen the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR adequate to support the project established program(s) in relation to the 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the activities; and identified needs; or applicant in carrying out a previous (ii) Costs are reasonable in relation to (ii) For a special project, the extent to award, such as the applicant’s use of the objective of the project. which it addresses needs that have not funds, achievement of project Note: The Comprehensive Budget Narrative been adequately addressed by an objectives, and compliance with grant will be part of the information reviewed existing institutional science program or conditions. The Secretary may also under this selection criterion. takes a particularly new and exemplary consider whether the applicant failed to approach that has not been taken by any submit a timely performance report or (e) Evaluation plan (Total 15 points). existing institutional science program. submitted a report of unacceptable (1) The Secretary reviews each (h) Institutional commitment to the quality. application for information that shows project (Total 5 points). In addition, in making a competitive the quality of the evaluation plan for the (1) The Secretary reviews each grant award, the Secretary also requires project. (See 34 CFR 75.590) application for information that shows various assurances, including those (2) The Secretary looks for that the applicant plans to continue the applicable to Federal civil rights laws information that shows methods of project activities when funding ceases. that prohibit discrimination in programs evaluation that are appropriate for the (2) The Secretary looks for or activities receiving Federal financial project and, to the extent possible, are information that shows— assistance from the Department (34 CFR objective and produce data that are (i) Adequate institutional 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). quantifiable. commitment to absorb any after-the- 3. Risk Assessment and Specific Note: In considering the quality of an grant burden initiated by the project; Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR evaluation plan, for each proposed objective, (ii) Adequate plans for continuation of 200.205, before awarding grants under the Secretary may consider, among other project activities when funding ceases; this competition, the Department things, the baseline indicators of progress for (iii) Clear evidence of past conducts a review of the risks posed by each proposed grant year, the methods of institutional commitment to the applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the evaluation, the types of data that will be provision of quality science programs Secretary may impose specific collected to assess the final project outcomes for its minority students; and and the data collection procedures that will conditions and, in appropriate (iv) A local review statement signed circumstances, high-risk conditions on a be used, the proposed timetable for by the chief executive officer of the conducting the evaluation, and the grant if the applicant or grantee is not procedures for analyzing and using both institution endorsing the project and financially stable; has a history of formative and summative data. indicating how the project will unsatisfactory performance; has a accelerate the attainment of the financial or other management system Note: In considering whether an evaluation institutional goals in science. that does not meet the standards in 2 plan shows methods of evaluation that are (i) Expected outcomes (Total 10 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not objective, the Secretary considers whether points). fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; the evaluation is to be conducted by an (1) The Secretary reviews each independent evaluator. or is otherwise not responsible. application to determine the extent to 4. Integrity and Performance System: (f) Adequacy of resources (Total 5 which minority students, particularly If you are selected under this points). minority women, will benefit from the competition to receive an award that (1) The Secretary reviews each project. over the course of the project period application for information that shows (2) The Secretary looks for may exceed the simplified acquisition that the applicant plans to devote information that shows— threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 (i) Expected outcomes likely to result adequate resources to the project. CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a in the accomplishment of the program (2) The Secretary looks for judgment about your integrity, business information that shows— goal; (ii) Educational value for science ethics, and record of performance under (i) The facilities that the applicant Federal awards—that is, the risk posed plans to use are adequate; and students; and (iii) Possibility of long-term benefits by you as an applicant—before we make (ii) The equipment and supplies that an award. In doing so, we must consider the applicant plans to use are adequate. to minority students, faculty, or the institution. any information about you that is in the Note: An Applicant should indicate if (j) Scientific and educational value of integrity and performance system these resources are available at its institution the proposed project (Total 10 points). (currently referred to as the Federal or at partner institutions or if the applicant (1) The Secretary reviews each Awardee Performance and Integrity plans to acquire them. application for information that shows Information System (FAPIIS)), (g) Potential institutional impact of its potential for contributions to science accessible through the System for the project (Total 10 points). education. Award Management. You may review (1) The Secretary reviews each (2) The Secretary looks for and comment on any information about application to determine the extent to information that shows— yourself that a Federal agency which the proposed project gives (i) The relationship of the proposed previously entered and that is currently evidence of potential for enhancing the project to the present state of science in FAPIIS. institution’s capacity for improving and education; Please note that, if the total value of maintaining quality science education (ii) The use or development of your currently active grants, cooperative for its minority students, particularly effective techniques and approaches in agreements, and procurement contracts minority women. science education; and from the Federal Government exceeds VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28542 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices $10,000,000, the reporting requirements (b) At the end of your project period, request to the program contact person in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, you must submit a final performance listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION require you to report certain integrity report, including financial information, CONTACT. information to FAPIIS semiannually. as directed by the Secretary. If you Electronic Access to This Document: Please review the requirements in 2 CFR receive a multiyear award, you must The official version of this document is part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant submit an annual performance report the document published in the Federal plus all the other Federal funds you that provides the most current Register. You may access the official receive exceed $10,000,000. performance and financial expenditure edition of the Federal Register and the information as directed by the Secretary VI. Award Administration Information Code of Federal Regulations at under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 1. Award Notices: If your application may also require more frequent view this document, as well as all other is successful, we notify your U.S. performance reports under 34 CFR documents of this Department Representative and U.S. Senators and 75.720(c). For specific requirements on published in the Federal Register, in send you a Grant Award Notification reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/ text or Portable Document Format (GAN); or we may send you an email fund/grant/apply/appforms/ (PDF). To use PDF you must have containing a link to access an electronic appforms.html. Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is version of your GAN. We may notify 5. Performance Measures: Under the available free at the site. you informally, also. Government Performance and Results You may also access documents of the If your application is not evaluated or Act, the Department will use the Department published in the Federal not selected for funding, we notify you. following performance measures to Register by using the article search 2. Administrative and National Policy evaluate the success of the MSEIP feature at www.federalregister.gov. Requirements: We identify grants: (1) The percentage of change in Specifically, through the advanced administrative and national policy the number of full-time, degree-seeking search feature at this site, you can limit requirements in the application package minority undergraduate students at the your search to documents published by and reference these and other grantee’s institution enrolled in the the Department. requirements in the Applicable fields of engineering or physical or Regulations section of this notice. biological sciences, compared to the Dated: June 14, 2019. We reference the regulations outlining average minority enrollment in the same Diane Auer Jones, the terms and conditions of an award in fields in the three-year period Principal Deputy Under Secretary Delegated the Applicable Regulations section of immediately prior to the beginning of to Perform the Duties of Under Secretary and this notice and include these and other the current grant; (2) the percentage of Assistant Secretary for the Office of specific conditions in the GAN. The minority students enrolled at four-year Postsecondary Education. GAN also incorporates your approved minority institutions in the fields of [FR Doc. 2019–13008 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] application as part of your binding engineering or physical or biological BILLING CODE 4000–01–P commitments under the grant. sciences who graduate within six years 3. Open Licensing Requirements: of enrollment. Please see the application Unless an exception applies, if you are package for details of data collection DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION awarded a grant under this competition, and reporting requirements for these [Docket No.: ED–2019–ICCD–0028] you will be required to openly license measures. to the public grant deliverables created 6. Continuation Awards: In making a Agency Information Collection in whole, or in part, with Department continuation award under 34 CFR Activities; Submission to the Office of grant funds. When the deliverable 75.253, the Secretary considers, among Management and Budget for Review consists of modifications to pre-existing other things: Whether a grantee has and Approval; Comment Request; works, the license extends only to those made substantial progress in achieving Integrated Postsecondary Education modifications that can be separately the goals and objectives of the project; Data System (IPEDS) 2019–20 Through identified and only to the extent that whether the grantee has expended funds 2021–22 open licensing is permitted under the in a manner that is consistent with its AGENCY: National Center for Education terms of any licenses or other legal approved application and budget; and, Statistics (NCES), Department of restrictions on the use of pre-existing if the Secretary has established Education (ED). works. Additionally, a grantee or performance measurement subgrantee that is awarded competitive requirements, the performance targets in ACTION: Notice. grant funds must have a plan to the grantee’s approved application. SUMMARY: In accordance with the disseminate these public grant In making a continuation award, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is deliverables. This dissemination plan Secretary also considers whether the proposing a revision of an existing can be developed and submitted after grantee is operating in compliance with information collection. your application has been reviewed and the assurances in its approved selected for funding. For additional application, including those applicable DATES: Interested persons are invited to information on the open licensing to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit submit comments on or before July 19, requirements please refer to 2 CFR discrimination in programs or activities 2019. 3474.20. receiving Federal financial assistance ADDRESSES: To access and review all the 4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, documents related to the information grant under this competition, you must 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). collection listed in this notice, please ensure that you have in place the use http://www.regulations.gov by necessary processes and systems to VII. Other Information searching the Docket ID number ED– comply with the reporting requirements Accessible Format: Individuals with 2019–ICCD–0028. Comments submitted in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive disabilities can obtain this document in response to this notice should be funding under the competition. This and a copy of the application package in submitted electronically through the does not apply if you have an exception an accessible format (e.g., braille, large Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// under 2 CFR 170.110(b). print, audiotape, or compact disc) on www.regulations.gov by selecting the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28543 Docket ID number or via postal mail, Respondents/Affected Public: State, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Local, and Tribal Governments. If the regulations.gov site is not Total Estimated Number of Annual [FE Docket No. 19–61–LNG] available to the public for any reason, Responses: 67,785. ED will temporarily accept comments at Freeport LNG Development, L.P.; [email protected]. Please include the Total Estimated Number of Annual Application for Blanket Authorization docket ID number and the title of the Burden Hours: 791,721. To Export Previously Imported information collection request when Abstract: The National Center for Liquefied Natural Gas on a Short-Term requesting documents or submitting Education Statistics (NCES) seeks Basis to Non-Free Trade Agreement comments. Please note that comments authorization from OMB to make a Countries submitted by fax or email and those change to the Integrated Postsecondary submitted after the comment period will Education Data System (IPEDS) data AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE. not be accepted. Written requests for collection. Current authorization expires ACTION: Notice of application. information or comments submitted by February 29, 2020 (OMB# 1850–0582 postal mail or delivery should be v.20–23). NCES is requesting a new SUMMARY: The Office of Fossil Energy addressed to the Director of the clearance for the 2019–20, 2020–21, and (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) Information Collection Clearance 2021–22 data collections to enable us to gives notice of receipt of an application Division, U.S. Department of Education, make a change to six of the IPEDS data (Application), filed on May 20, 2019, by 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9086, collection components, clarify Freeport LNG Development, L.P. Washington, DC 20202–0023. definitions and instructions throughout (Freeport LNG), requesting blanket authorization to export liquefied natural FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the components, and to continue the IPEDS collection of postsecondary data gas (LNG) previously imported into the specific questions related to collection United States from foreign sources in an activities, please contact Kashka over the next three years. IPEDS is a web-based data collection system amount up to the equivalent of 24 Kubzdela, 202–245–7377 or email billion cubic feet (Bcf) of natural gas on [email protected]. designed to collect basic data from all postsecondary institutions in the United a short-term or spot market basis for a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The States and the other jurisdictions. IPEDS two-year period commencing on July 19, Department of Education (ED), in 2019. In the portion of the Application enables NCES to report on key accordance with the Paperwork subject to this Notice, Freeport LNG dimensions of postsecondary education Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. seeks to export the LNG from the such as enrollments, degrees and other 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general Freeport LNG Terminal owned by awards earned, tuition and fees, average public and Federal agencies with an Freeport LNG, on Quintana Island, net price, student financial aid, opportunity to comment on proposed, Texas, to any country with which the graduation rates, student outcomes, revised, and continuing collections of United States does not have a free trade revenues and expenditures, faculty information. This helps the Department agreement (FTA) requiring national salaries, and staff employed. The IPEDS assess the impact of its information treatment for trade in natural gas, and web-based data collection system was collection requirements and minimize with which trade is not prohibited by implemented in 2000–01. In 2017–18, the public’s reporting burden. It also U.S. law or policy (non-FTA countries). helps the public understand the IPEDS collected data from 6,642 The Application was filed under section Department’s information collection postsecondary institutions in the United 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). requirements and provide the requested States and the other jurisdictions that Additional details can be found in data in the desired format. ED is are eligible to participate in Title IV Freeport LNG’s Application, posted on soliciting comments on the proposed Federal financial aid programs. All Title the DOE/FE website at: https:// information collection request (ICR) that IV institutions are required to respond www.energy.gov/fe/freeport-lng- is described below. The Department of to IPEDS (Section 490 of the Higher development-lp-fe-docket-no-19-61-lng- Education is especially interested in Education Amendments of 1992 [Pub. L. export-lng. public comment addressing the 102–325]). IPEDS allows other (non-title Protests, motions to intervene, notices following issues: (1) Is this collection IV) institutions to participate on a of intervention, and written comments necessary to the proper functions of the voluntary basis; approximately 200 non- are invited. title IV institutions elect to respond Department; (2) will this information be DATES: each year. IPEDS data are available to Protests, motions to intervene or processed and used in a timely manner; notices of intervention, as applicable, (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; the public through the College Navigator and IPEDS Data Center websites. This requests for additional procedures, and (4) how might the Department enhance written comments are to be filed using clearance package includes a number of the quality, utility, and clarity of the procedures detailed in the Public proposed changes to the data collection. information to be collected; and (5) how Comment Procedures section no later As part of the public comment period might the Department minimize the than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, July 19, review, NCES requests that IPEDS data burden of this collection on the 2019. respondents, including through the use submitters and other stakeholders of information technology. Please note respond to the directed questions found ADDRESSES: that written comments received in in Appendix D of this submission. Electronic Filing by Email response to this notice will be Dated: June 14, 2019. [email protected] considered public records. Kate Mullan, Regular Mail Title of Collection: Integrated PRA Coordinator, Information Collection Postsecondary Education Data System Clearance Program, Information Management U.S. Department of Energy (FE–34), (IPEDS) 2019–20 through 2021–22. Branch, Office of the Chief Information Office of Regulation, Analysis and OMB Control Number: 1850–0582. Officer. Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, Type of Review: A revision of an [FR Doc. 2019–12993 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] P.O. Box 44375, Washington, DC 20026– existing information collection. BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 4375. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28544 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Public Comment Procedures on the official record, including the Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.) In response to this Notice, any person Application and responses filed by parties pursuant to this notice, in U.S. Department of Energy (FE–34), may file a protest, comments, or a accordance with 10 CFR 590.316. Office of Regulation, Analysis and motion to intervene or notice of The Application is available for Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, intervention, as applicable. Interested inspection and copying in the Office of Forrestal Building, Room 3E–042, 1000 parties will be provided 30 days from Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Independence Avenue SW, Washington, the date of publication of this Notice in docket room, Room 3E–042, 1000 DC 20585. which to submit comments, protests, motions to intervene, or notices of Independence Avenue SW, Washington, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DC 20585. The docket room is open Beverly Howard or Larine Moore, U.S. intervention. Any person wishing to become a party between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 Department of Energy (FE–34), Office of to the proceeding must file a motion to p.m., Monday through Friday, except Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement, intervene or notice of intervention. The Federal holidays. The Application and Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal filing of comments or a protest with any filed protests, motions to intervene Building, Room 3E–042, 1000 respect to the Application will not serve or notice of interventions, and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, to make the commenter or protestant a comments will also be available DC 20585, (202) 586–9387; (202) 586– party to the proceeding, although electronically by going to the following 9478. protests and comments received from DOE/FE Web address: http:// Cassandra Bernstein, U.S. Department persons who are not parties will be www.fe.doe.gov/programs/ of Energy, Office of the Assistant considered in determining the gasregulation/index.html. General Counsel for Electricity and appropriate action to be taken on the Signed in Washington, DC, on June 13, Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room Application. All protests, comments, 2019. 6D–033, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, motions to intervene, or notices of Amy Sweeney, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–9793. intervention must meet the Director, Office of Regulation, Analysis, and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: requirements specified by the Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy. DOE/FE Evaluation regulations in 10 CFR part 590. [FR Doc. 2019–12978 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Filings may be submitted using one of BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Freeport LNG’s current blanket the following methods: (1) Emailing the authorization to export previously filing to [email protected], with FE imported LNG, granted in DOE/FE Docket No. 19–61–LNG in the title line; DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Order No. 4054, began on July 19, 2017, (2) mailing an original and three paper and extends through July 18, 2019. In copies of the filing to the Office of [FE Docket No. 19–62–LNG] requesting this authorization, Freeport Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Cameron LNG, LLC; Application for LNG states that it does not seek to at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) export any domestically produced Blanket Authorization To Export hand delivering an original and three Previously Imported Liquefied Natural natural gas or LNG. DOE/FE notes that paper copies of the filing to the Office Freeport LNG currently holds a blanket Gas on a Short-Term Basis to Non- of Regulation, Analysis, and Free Trade Agreement Countries authorization to import LNG from Engagement at the address listed in various international sources by vessel ADDRESSES. All filings must include a AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE. in an amount up to the equivalent of 30 reference to FE Docket No. 19–61–LNG. ACTION: Notice of application. Bcf of natural gas. Freeport LNG is PLEASE NOTE: If submitting a filing via requesting this authorization on its own email, please include all related SUMMARY: The Office of Fossil Energy behalf and as agent for other parties who documents and attachments (e.g., (FE) of the Department of Energy (DOE) hold title to the LNG at the time of exhibits) in the original email gives notice of receipt of an application export. correspondence. Please do not include (Application), filed on May 23, 2019, by The Application will be reviewed any active hyperlinks or password Cameron LNG, LLC (Cameron LNG), pursuant to section 3 of the NGA, 15 protection in any of the documents or requesting blanket authorization to U.S.C. 717b. In reviewing this attachments related to the filing. All export liquefied natural gas (LNG) Application, DOE will consider electronic filings submitted to DOE previously imported into the United domestic need for the natural gas, as must follow these guidelines to ensure States from foreign sources in an well as any other issues determined to that all documents are filed in a timely amount up to the equivalent of 2 billion be appropriate, including whether the manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted cubic feet (Bcf) of natural gas on a short- arrangement is consistent with DOE’s greater in length than 50 pages must term or spot market basis for a two-year policy of promoting competition in the also include, at the time of the filing, a period commencing no later than marketplace by allowing commercial digital copy on disk of the entire October 1, 2019. Cameron LNG seeks to parties to freely negotiate their own submission. export the LNG from the Cameron LNG trade arrangements. Parties that may A decisional record on the Terminal located in Cameron and oppose this application should Application will be developed through Calcasieu Parishes, Louisiana, to any comment in their responses on these responses to this notice by parties, country with which the United States issues. including the parties’ written comments does not have a free trade agreement The National Environmental Policy and replies thereto. Additional (FTA) requiring national treatment for Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., procedures will be used as necessary to trade in natural gas, and with which requires DOE to give appropriate achieve a complete understanding of the trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or consideration to the environmental facts and issues. If an additional policy (non-FTA countries). The effects of its proposed decisions. No procedure is scheduled, notice will be Application was filed under section 3 of final decision will be issued in this provided to all parties. If no party the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Additional proceeding until DOE has met its NEPA requests additional procedures, a final details can be found in Cameron LNG’s responsibilities. Opinion and Order may be issued based Application, posted on the DOE/FE VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28545 website at: https://www.energy.gov/fe/ The National Environmental Policy and replies thereto. Additional cameron-lng-llc-fe-docket-no-19-62-lng- Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., procedures will be used as necessary to ftanfta. Protests, motions to intervene, requires DOE to give appropriate achieve a complete understanding of the notices of intervention, and written consideration to the environmental facts and issues. If an additional comments are invited. effects of its proposed decisions. No procedure is scheduled, notice will be DATES: Protests, motions to intervene or final decision will be issued in this provided to all parties. If no party notices of intervention, as applicable, proceeding until DOE has met its NEPA requests additional procedures, a final requests for additional procedures, and responsibilities. Opinion and Order may be issued based written comments are to be filed using Public Comment Procedures on the official record, including the procedures detailed in the Public Application and responses filed by Comment Procedures section no later In response to this Notice, any person parties pursuant to this notice, in than 4:30 p.m., Eastern time, July 19, may file a protest, comments, or a accordance with 10 CFR 590.316. 2019. motion to intervene or notice of The Application is available for intervention, as applicable. Interested inspection and copying in the Office of ADDRESSES: Electronic Filing by email: parties will be provided 30 days from [email protected]. Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement the date of publication of this Notice in docket room, Room 3E–042, 1000 Regular Mail: U.S. Department of which to submit comments, protests, Energy (FE–34) Office of Regulation, Independence Avenue SW, Washington, motions to intervene, or notices of DC 20585. The docket room is open Analysis and Engagement, Office of intervention. Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 Any person wishing to become a party p.m., Monday through Friday, except Washington, DC 20026–4375. to the proceeding must file a motion to Hand Delivery or Private Delivery Federal holidays. The Application and intervene or notice of intervention. The any filed protests, motions to intervene Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.): U.S. filing of comments or a protest with Department of Energy (FE–34) Office of or notice of interventions, and respect to the Application will not serve comments will also be available Regulation, Analysis and Engagement, to make the commenter or protestant a Office of Fossil Energy, Forrestal electronically by going to the following party to the proceeding, although DOE/FE Web address: http:// Building, Room 3E–042, 1000 protests and comments received from Independence Avenue SW, Washington, www.fe.doe.gov/programs/ persons who are not parties will be gasregulation/index.html. DC 20585. considered in determining the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: appropriate action to be taken on the Signed in Washington, DC, on June 13, Beverly Howard or Larine Moore, U.S. Application. All protests, comments, 2019. Department of Energy (FE–34), Office motions to intervene, or notices of Amy Sweeney, of Regulation, Analysis, and intervention must meet the Director, Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, requirements specified by the Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy. Forrestal Building, Room 3E–042, regulations in 10 CFR part 590. [FR Doc. 2019–12979 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Filings may be submitted using one of BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586– the following methods: (1) Emailing the 9387; (202) 586–9478. filing to [email protected], with FE Cassandra Bernstein, U.S. Department of Docket No. 19–62–LNG in the title line; DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy, Office of the Assistant (2) mailing an original and three paper General Counsel for Electricity and copies of the filing to the Office of Federal Energy Regulatory Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Commission Room 6D–033, 1000 Independence at the address listed in ADDRESSES; or (3) Combined Notice of Filings #1 Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585, hand delivering an original and three (202) 586–9793. paper copies of the filing to the Office Take notice that the Commission SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of Regulation, Analysis, and received the following exempt Engagement at the address listed in wholesale generator filings: DOE/FE Evaluation ADDRESSES. All filings must include a Docket Numbers: EG19–123–000. Cameron LNG states that it does not reference to FE Docket No. 19–62–LNG. Applicants: Burke Wind, LLC. seek authorization to export any Please Note: If submitting a filing via Description: Notice of Self- domestically produced natural gas or email, please include all related Certification of Exempt Wholesale LNG. Cameron LNG is requesting this documents and attachments (e.g., Generator Status of Burke Wind, LLC. authorization on its own behalf and as exhibits) in the original email Filed Date: 6/11/19. agent for other parties who hold title to correspondence. Please do not include Accession Number: 20190611–5049. the LNG at the time of export. The any active hyperlinks or password Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/19. Application will be reviewed pursuant protection in any of the documents or Docket Numbers: EG19–124–000. to section 3 of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b. attachments related to the filing. All Applicants: Skeleton Creek Wind, In reviewing this Application, DOE will electronic filings submitted to DOE LLC. consider domestic need for the natural must follow these guidelines to ensure Description: Notice of Self- gas, as well as any other issues that all documents are filed in a timely Certification of Exempt Wholesale determined to be appropriate, including manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted Generator Status of Skeleton Creek whether the arrangement is consistent greater in length than 50 pages must Wind, LLC. with DOE’s policy of promoting also include, at the time of the filing, a Filed Date: 6/11/19. competition in the marketplace by digital copy on disk of the entire Accession Number: 20190611–5081. allowing commercial parties to freely submission. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/19. negotiate their own trade arrangements. A decisional record on the Take notice that the Commission Parties that may oppose this application Application will be developed through received the following electric rate should comment in their responses on responses to this notice by parties, filings: these issues. including the parties’ written comments Docket Numbers: ER10–3140–03.5. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28546 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Applicants: Inland Empire Energy Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Center, LLC. 20190610 ADIT Double Averaging to be Description: Triennial Updated effective 8/9/2019. Federal Energy Regulatory Market Power Analysis for the Filed Date: 6/10/19. Commission Southwest Region of Inland Empire Accession Number: 20190610–5103. [Docket No. RM98–1–000] Energy Center, LLC. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. Filed Date: 6/10/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–2095–000. Records Governing Off-the-Record Accession Number: 20190610–5130. Communications; Public Notice Applicants: Rocky Mountain Reserve Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/9/19. Group. This constitutes notice, in accordance Docket Numbers: ER19–2088–000. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt Applicants: Lamarr Energy, LLC. RMRG Bylaws Revision to be effective of prohibited and exempt off-the-record Description: Tariff Cancellation: 8/1/2019. communications. Market Based Rate Tariff to be effective Filed Date: 6/10/19. Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, 6/10/2019. September 22, 1999) requires Filed Date: 6/10/19. Accession Number: 20190610–5104. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. Commission decisional employees, who Accession Number: 20190610–5065. make or receive a prohibited or exempt Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–2096–000. off-the-record communication relevant Docket Numbers: ER19–2089–000. Applicants: Emera Energy Services to the merits of a contested proceeding, Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. Subsidiary No. 14 LLC. to deliver to the Secretary of the Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Commission, a copy of the Certificate of Concurrence to the LGIA Notice of Succession to be effective 6/ communication, if written, or a (Northwestern) to be effective 6/10/ 12/2019. summary of the substance of any oral 2019. Filed Date: 6/11/19. communication. Filed Date: 6/10/19. Accession Number: 20190611–5041. Prohibited communications are Accession Number: 20190610–5097. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/19. included in a public, non-decisional file Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. Take notice that the Commission associated with, but not a part of, the Docket Numbers: ER19–2090–000. received the following electric securities decisional record of the proceeding. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, filings: Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any Inc. Docket Numbers: ES19–33–000. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: responses thereto should become a part Applicants: Northern Indiana Public 2899R1 Pawnee Wind Farm GIA of the decisional record, the prohibited Service Company. Cancellation to be effective 5/12/2019. off-the-record communication will not Description: Application under Filed Date: 6/10/19. be considered by the Commission in Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for Accession Number: 20190610–5098. reaching its decision. Parties to a Authorization to Issue Securities of Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. proceeding may seek the opportunity to Northern Indiana Public Service Docket Numbers: ER19–2091–000. respond to any facts or contentions Company LLC. made in a prohibited off-the-record Applicants: Midcontinent Filed Date: 6/11/19. Independent System Operator, Inc. communication, and may request that Accession Number: 20190611–5020. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: the Commission place the prohibited Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/19. 2019–06–10_SA 3314 Entergy communication and responses thereto Louisiana-St James Solar GIA (J1142) to The filings are accessible in the in the decisional record. The be effective 5/24/2019. Commission’s eLibrary system by Commission will grant such a request Filed Date: 6/10/19. clicking on the links or querying the only when it determines that fairness so Accession Number: 20190610–5099. docket number. requires. Any person identified below as Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. Any person desiring to intervene or having made a prohibited off-the-record Docket Numbers: ER19–2092–000. protest in any of the above proceedings communication shall serve the Applicants: GridLiance Heartland must file in accordance with Rules 211 document on all parties listed on the LLC. and 214 of the Commission’s official service list for the applicable Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and proceeding in accordance with Rule Initial Rate Filing—OATT to be effective 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. Exempt off-the-record 8/9/2019. time on the specified comment date. communications are included in the Filed Date: 6/10/19. Protests may be considered, but decisional record of the proceeding, Accession Number: 20190610–5101. intervention is necessary to become a unless the communication was with a Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. party to the proceeding. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed cooperating agency as described by 40 Docket Numbers: ER19–2093–000. information relating to filing CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR Applicants: Southwestern Public requirements, interventions, protests, 385.2201(e)(1)(v). Service Company. service, and qualifying facilities filings The following is a list of off-the- Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ record communications recently SPS–INV–G–EP–Gen–2016–123_ docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For received by the Secretary of the Sagamore Wind EP Agrmt—0.0.0 to be other information, call (866) 208–3676 Commission. The communications effective 6/11/2019. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. listed are grouped by docket numbers in Filed Date: 6/10/19. ascending order. These filings are Accession Number: 20190610–5102. Dated: June 11, 2019. available for electronic review at the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Commission in the Public Reference Docket Numbers: ER19–2094–000. Deputy Secretary. Room or may be viewed on the Applicants: Public Service Company [FR Doc. 2019–12967 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Commission’s website at http:// of Colorado. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28547 Enter the docket number, excluding the assistance, please contact FERC Online ferc.gov or toll free at (866) 208–3676, or last three digits, in the docket number Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ for TTY, contact (202) 502–8659. field to access the document. For Docket No. File date Presenter or requestor Prohibited: 1. CP17–495–000, CP17–494–000 ...... 6–4–2019 West Coast Contractors. 2. P–14227–003 ...... 6–4–2019 William and Teryn Miller. 3. P–14227–000 ...... 6–4–2019 Daniel R. Hume. Exempt: P–14795–002 ...... 6–4–2019 FERC Staff.1 1 Telephone Memorandum conference call on June 4, 2019 with JT Steenkamp from Shell North America (US) L.P. (Shell). Dated: June 11, 2019. Description: Tariff Amendment: Rate Filed Date: 6/13/19. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Schedule No. 118, EPE–EDF Accession Number: 20190613–5031. Deputy Secretary. Engineering & Procurement Agreement Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. [FR Doc. 2019–12972 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] to be effective 5/10/2019. Docket Numbers: ER19–2115–000. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Filed Date: 6/10/19. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Accession Number: 20190610–5136. Inc. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/1/19. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Docket Numbers: ER19–1874–001. 1883R8 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA Applicants: PJM Interconnection, NOA—Alma to be effective 9/1/2019. Federal Energy Regulatory L.L.C. Filed Date: 6/13/19. Commission Description: Tariff Amendment: Accession Number: 20190613–5037. Amendment to NQ147–1 Filing; Notice Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Combined Notice of Filings #1 of Cancellation of NQ147 to be effective Docket Numbers: ER19–2116–000. Take notice that the Commission 4/22/2019. Applicants: NorthWestern received the following exempt Filed Date: 6/12/19. Corporation. wholesale generator filings: Accession Number: 20190612–5148. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SA Docket Numbers: EG19–126–000. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/3/19. 808 Rev 1st—LGIA with Clearwater Applicants: Emmons-Logan Wind, Docket Numbers: ER19–2111–000. (Rosebud County Wind) to be effective LLC. Applicants: Public Service Company 8/13/2019. Description: Notice of Self- of New Mexico. Filed Date: 6/13/19. Certification of Exempt Wholesale Description: Notice of cancellation of Accession Number: 20190613–5061. Generator Status of Emmons-Logan Interconnection Service Agreement (No. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Wind, LLC. 305) of Public Service Company of New Docket Numbers: ER19–2117–000. Filed Date: 6/13/19. Mexico. Applicants: NorthWestern Accession Number: 20190613–5107. Filed Date: 6/12/19. Corporation. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Accession Number: 20190612–5107. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SA Take notice that the Commission Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/3/19. 807 Rev 1st—LGIA with Buffalo Trail received the following electric rate Docket Numbers: ER19–2112–000. Solar Energy to be effective 8/13/2019. filings: Applicants: Sky River LLC. Filed Date: 6/13/19. Docket Numbers: ER10–1257–007; Description: Compliance filing: Sky Accession Number: 20190613–5062. ER10–1258–007. River LLC Order No. 845 & 845–A Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Applicants: Wabash Valley Power Compliance Filing to be effective 5/22/ Docket Numbers: ER19–2118–000. Association, Inc., Wabash Valley Energy 2019. Applicants: Midcontinent Marketing, Inc. Filed Date: 6/12/19. Independent System Operator, Inc., Description: Supplement to December Accession Number: 20190612–5150. Otter Tail Power Company. 21, 2017 Updated Triennial Market Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/3/19. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Power Analysis in the MISO Balancing Docket Numbers: ER19–2113–000. 2019–06–12_SA 3319 Otter Tail-Flying Area Authority of Wabash Valley Power Applicants: PJM Interconnection, Cow Wind FSA Blair (J493) to be Association, Inc., et al. L.L.C. effective 8/13/2019. Filed Date: 6/13/19. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Filed Date: 6/13/19. Accession Number: 20190613–5098. Original ISA No. 5409; Queue No. AC1– Accession Number: 20190613–5064. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. 166 to be effective 5/16/2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–1463–002. Filed Date: 6/13/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–2119–000. Applicants: Upper Michigan Energy Accession Number: 20190613–5000. Applicants: Midcontinent Resources Corporation. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Independent System Operator, Inc., Description: Tariff Amendment: Docket Numbers: ER19–2114–000. Otter Tail Power Company. Supplement to Filing of Amendment to Applicants: Midcontinent Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: WDSA to be effective 4/1/2019. Independent System Operator, Inc., 2019–06–13_SA 3320 Otter Tail-Deuel Filed Date: 6/13/19. Otter Tail Power Company. Harvest Wind Energy Blair (J526) to be Accession Number: 20190613–5069. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: effective 8/13/2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. 2019–06–13_SA 3316 Otter Tail-Dakota Filed Date: 6/13/19. Docket Numbers: ER19–1818–001. Range III FSA Blair (J488) to be effective Accession Number: 20190613–5071. Applicants: El Paso Electric Company. 8/13/2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28548 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Docket Numbers: ER19–2120–000. Docket Numbers: ER19–2127–000. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Applicants: Midcontinent Federal Energy Regulatory Inc. Independent System Operator, Inc. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Commission 1884R9 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2019–06–13_SA 2465 Rock Aetna NOA—Blue Mound to be effective 9/1/ [Docket No. ID–8709–000] 2019. Power-Northern States Power 2nd Filed Date: 6/13/19. Revised GIA (G621) to be effective 6/14/ Henley, Greg; Notice of Filing Accession Number: 20190613–5073. 2019. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Filed Date: 6/13/19. Take notice that on June 13, 2019, Greg Henley filed an application for Docket Numbers: ER19–2121–000. Accession Number: 20190613–5130. authorization to hold interlocking Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. positions, pursuant to section 305(b) of Inc. the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Docket Numbers: ER19–2128–000. 825d(b), and Part 45 of the Federal 1885R9 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA Applicants: NRG Sterlington Power Energy Regulatory Commission’s NOA—Bronson to be effective 9/1/2019. LLC. (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part Filed Date: 6/13/19. 45 (2019). Accession Number: 20190613–5077. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Notice of Succession to be effective 5/ Any person desiring to intervene or to 15/2019. protest this filing must file in Docket Numbers: ER19–2122–000. accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Filed Date: 6/13/19. the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Inc. Accession Number: 20190613–5141. Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Protests will be considered by the 1886R8 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA Commission in determining the NOA—Doniphan REC to be effective 9/ Take notice that the Commission appropriate action to be taken, but will 1/2019. received the following electric securities not serve to make protestants parties to Filed Date: 6/13/19. filings: the proceeding. Any person wishing to Accession Number: 20190613–5090. Docket Numbers: ES19–34–000. become a party must file a notice of Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Applicants: Consumers Energy intervention or motion to intervene, as Docket Numbers: ER19–2123–000. Company. appropriate. Such notices, motions, or Applicants: Sierra Pacific Power protests must be filed on or before the Description: Application under Company. comment date. On or before the Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: comment date, it is not necessary to Authorization to Issue Securities of Service Agreement No. 19–00026 SPPC serve motions to intervene or protests Consumers Energy Company. Open Mountain SGIA to be effective 6/ on persons other than the Applicant. 14/2019. Filed Date: 6/12/19. The Commission encourages Filed Date: 6/13/19. Accession Number: 20190612–5175. electronic submission of protests and Accession Number: 20190613–5110. interventions in lieu of paper using the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/3/19. ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Docket Numbers: ER19–2124–000. The filings are accessible in the Persons unable to file electronically Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Commission’s eLibrary system by should submit an original and 5 copies Inc. clicking on the links or querying the of the protest or intervention to the Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: docket number. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 1887R9 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA Any person desiring to intervene or 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC NOA—Elsmore to be effective 9/1/2019. protest in any of the above proceedings 20426. Filed Date: 6/13/19. must file in accordance with Rules 211 This filing is accessible on-line at Accession Number: 20190613–5116. and 214 of the Commission’s http://www.ferc.gov, using the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for Docket Numbers: ER19–2125–000. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern electronic review in the Commission’s Applicants: PJM Interconnection, time on the specified comment date. Public Reference Room in Washington, L.L.C. Protests may be considered, but DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: intervention is necessary to become a the website that enables subscribers to Amendment to First Revised ISA, SA party to the proceeding. receive email notification when a No. 4776, Queue No. AB1–014/AC2–066 eFiling is encouraged. More detailed document is added to a subscribed to be effective 4/16/2018. information relating to filing docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Filed Date: 6/13/19. requirements, interventions, protests, Online service, please email Accession Number: 20190613–5124. service, and qualifying facilities filings [email protected], or call Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Docket Numbers: ER19–2126–000. docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For (202) 502–8659. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, other information, call (866) 208–3676 Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Inc. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Time on July 5, 2019. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 1897R9 Westar Energy, Inc. NITSA Dated: June 13, 2019. Dated: June 13, 2019. NOA—Elwood to be effective 9/1/2019. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Filed Date: 6/13/19. Deputy Secretary. Deputy Secretary. Accession Number: 20190613–5125. [FR Doc. 2019–12964 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2019–12965 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/5/19. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P BILLING CODE 6717–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28549 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and and 214 of the Commission’s 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Federal Energy Regulatory time on the specified comment date. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Commission Protests may be considered, but time on the specified date(s). Protests intervention is necessary to become a may be considered, but intervention is Combined Notice of Filings party to the proceeding. necessary to become a party to the Take notice that the Commission has eFiling is encouraged. More detailed proceeding. received the following Natural Gas information relating to filing eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings: requirements, interventions, protests, information relating to filing service, and qualifying facilities filings requirements, interventions, protests, Filings Instituting Proceedings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ service, and qualifying facilities filings Docket Numbers: RP18–1115–003. docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ Applicants: Saltville Gas Storage other information, call (866) 208–3676 docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For Company L.L.C. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. other information, call (866) 208–3676 Description: Compliance filing Dated: June 13, 2019. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Saltville RP18–1115 Compliance Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Dated: June 11, 2019. Filing—Fuel Reimbursement to be Deputy Secretary. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., effective 7/1/2019. [FR Doc. 2019–12968 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Deputy Secretary. Filed Date: 6/10/19. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P [FR Doc. 2019–12969 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Accession Number: 20190610–5073. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/24/19. Docket Numbers: RP19–1311–000. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Applicants: Granite State Gas ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Transmission, Inc. Federal Energy Regulatory AGENCY Description: Compliance filing Commission internet Compliance Filing to be [EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0039; FRL–9993–91] effective 8/1/2019. Combined Notice of Filings Pesticide Product Registration; Filed Date: 6/11/19. Take notice that the Commission has Receipt of Applications for New Active Accession Number: 20190611–5124. received the following Natural Gas Ingredients (April 2019) Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/24/19. Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings: Docket Numbers: RP19–1312–000. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Applicants: Iroquois Gas Filings Instituting Proceedings Agency (EPA). Transmission System, L.P. Docket Number: PR17–54–001. ACTION: Notice. Description: Compliance filing Applicants: B&W Pipeline, LLC. 061219 Compliance Filing Description: Tariff filing per SUMMARY: EPA has received applications Implementing Approved Settlement 284.123(b),(e)/: SOC to be effective 7/17/ to register pesticide products containing Rates to be effective 7/1/2019. 2017. active ingredients not included in any Filed Date: 6/12/19. Filed Date: 6/6/19. currently registered pesticide products. Accession Number: 20190612–5020. Accession Number: 201906065083. Pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/24/19. Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/ Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 27/19. (FIFRA), EPA is hereby providing notice Docket Numbers: RP19–1313–000. of receipt and opportunity to comment Applicants: Texas Eastern Docket Numbers: RP01–382–029. on these applications. Transmission, LP. Applicants: Northern Natural Gas DATES: Comments must be received on Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Company. or before July 19, 2019. Negotiated Rates Cleanup Filing June Description: Northern Natural Gas 2019—various South Jersey to be Company submits Carlton ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, effective 7/12/2019. Reimbursement Report under RP01– identified by docket identification (ID) Filed Date: 6/12/19. 382. number and the File Symbol of interest Accession Number: 20190612–5026. Filed Date: 6/3/19. as shown in the body of this document, by one of the following methods: Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/24/19. Accession Number: 20190603–5197. • Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/19. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Docket Numbers: RP19–343–005. www.regulations.gov. Follow the online Applicants: Texas Eastern Docket Numbers: RP19–1310–000. instructions for submitting comments. Transmission, LP. Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Do not submit electronically any Description: Compliance filing TETLP Company. information you consider to be Compliance Filing—RP19–343–000 to Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Confidential Business Information (CBI) be effective 1/1/2019. 20190607 Negotiated Rate to be effective or other information whose disclosure is Filed Date: 6/12/19. 6/8/2019. restricted by statute. Accession Number: 20190612–5102. Filed Date: 6/7/19. • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/24/19. Accession Number: 20190607–5128. Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ The filings are accessible in the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/19/19. DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. Commission’s eLibrary system by The filings are accessible in the NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. clicking on the links or querying the Commission’s eLibrary system by • Hand Delivery: To make special docket number. clicking on the links or querying the arrangements for hand delivery or Any person desiring to intervene or docket number. delivery of boxed information, please protest in any of the above proceedings Any person desiring to intervene or follow the instructions at https:// must file in accordance with Rules 211 protest in any of the above proceedings www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send- and 214 of the Commission’s must file in accordance with Rules 211 comments-epa-dockets. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28550 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Additional instructions on II. Registration Applications SciReg, Inc., 12733 Director’s Loop, commenting or visiting the docket, EPA has received applications to Woodbridge, VA 22192). Product name: along with more information about register pesticide products containing Vintec. Active ingredient: Fungicide— dockets generally, is available at https:// active ingredients not included in any Trichoderma atroviride strain SC1 at www.epa.gov/dockets/about-epa- currently registered pesticide products. 15.0%. Proposed use: Protection of dockets. Pursuant to the provisions of FIFRA almonds and grapevines against wood fungal diseases. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: section 3(c)(4) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(4)), EPA Robert McNally, Biopesticides and is hereby providing notice of receipt and Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), opportunity to comment on these Dated: May 15, 2019. Office of Pesticide Programs, applications. Notice of receipt of these Delores Barber, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 applications does not imply a decision Director, Information Technology and Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC by the Agency on these applications. Resources Management Division, Office of 20460–0001; main telephone number: A. New Active Ingredients Pesticide Programs. (703) 305–7090; email address: [FR Doc. 2019–12949 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] [email protected]. 1. File Symbol: 85797–U. Docket ID number: EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0067. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Applicant: TDA Research, Inc., 12345 I. General Information West 52nd Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033. Product name: ElimiMold. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS A. Does this action apply to me? Active ingredient: Light activator— COMMISSION Erythrosine at 0.001%. Proposed use: You may be potentially affected by [OMB 3060–1078] Antimicrobial/algaecide. this action if you are an agricultural 2. File Symbol: 87978–I. Docket ID Information Collection Being producer, food manufacturer, or number: EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0265. Submitted for Review and Approval to pesticide manufacturer. The following Applicant: AgBiTech Pty Ltd., 8 Rocla Office of Management and Budget list of North American Industrial Ct., Glenvale, Queensland 4350, Classification System (NAICS) codes is Australia (c/o V.A. Forster Consulting, AGENCY: Federal Communications not intended to be exhaustive, but rather Inc., P.O. Box 4097, Wilmington, DE Commission. provides a guide to help readers 19807). Product name: Surtivo Ultra. ACTION: Notice and request for determine whether this document Active ingredients: Insecticide— comments. applies to them. Potentially affected Autographa californica MNPV strain R3 entities may include: SUMMARY: at 8.6%, Helicoverpa armigera As part of its continuing effort • Crop production (NAICS code 111). Nucleopolyhedrovirus ABA–NPV–U at to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction • Animal production (NAICS code 8.6%, Chrysodeixis includens Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal 112). Nucleopolyhedrovirus isolate #460 at Communications Commission (FCC or • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 8.6%, and Spodoptera frugiperda MNPV strain 3AP2 at 8.6%. Proposed the Commission) invites the general 311). public and other Federal Agencies to • use: Field and greenhouse. Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 3. File Symbol: 87978–O. Docket ID take this opportunity to comment on the code 32532). number: EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0265. following information collection. Pursuant to the Small Business B. What should I consider as I prepare Applicant: AgBiTech Pty Ltd., 8 Rocla Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the FCC my comments for EPA? Ct., Glenvale, Queensland 4350, Australia (c/o V.A. Forster Consulting, seeks specific comment on how it might 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this Inc., P.O. Box 4097, Wilmington, DE ‘‘further reduce the information information to EPA through 19807). Product name: Surtivo Plus. collection burden for small business regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark Active ingredients: Insecticide— concerns with fewer than 25 the part or all of the information that Autographa californica MNPV strain R3 employees.’’ you claim to be CBI. For CBI at 19.6%, Helicoverpa armigera The Commission may not conduct or information in a disk or CD–ROM that Nucleopolyhedrovirus ABA–NPV–U at sponsor a collection of information you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 4.9%, Chrysodeixis includens unless it displays a currently valid disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then Nucleopolyhedrovirus isolate #460 at Office of Management and Budget identify electronically within the disk or 4.9%, and Spodoptera frugiperda (OMB) control number. No person shall CD–ROM the specific information that MNPV strain 3AP2 at 4.9%. Proposed be subject to any penalty for failing to is claimed as CBI. In addition to one use: Field and greenhouse. comply with a collection of information complete version of the comment that 4. File Symbol: 87978–T. Docket ID subject to the PRA that does not display includes information claimed as CBI, a number: EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0265. a valid OMB control number. copy of the comment that does not Applicant: AgBiTech Pty Ltd., 8 Rocla DATES: Written comments should be contain the information claimed as CBI Ct., Glenvale, Queensland 4350, submitted on or before July 19, 2019. If must be submitted for inclusion in the Australia (c/o V.A. Forster Consulting, you anticipate that you will be public docket. Information so marked Inc., P.O. Box 4097, Wilmington, DE submitting comments but find it will not be disclosed except in 19807). Product name: Lepigen. Active difficult to do so with the period of time accordance with procedures set forth in ingredient: Insecticide—Autographa allowed by this notice, you should 40 CFR part 2. californica MNPV strain R3 at 34.2%. advise the contacts listed below as soon 2. Tips for preparing your comments. Proposed use: Field and greenhouse. as possible. When preparing and submitting your 5. File Symbol: 92083–E. Docket ID ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to comments, see the commenting tips at number: EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0084. Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB, via email https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ Applicant: Bi-PA nv, Technologielaan 7, [email protected]; and commenting-epa-dockets. B–1840 Londerzeel, Belgium (c/o to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28551 [email protected] and to Cathy.Williams@ Respondents: Business or other for- Federal Communications Commission. fcc.gov. Include in the comments the profit entities; Not-for-profit Katura Jackson, OMB control number as shown in the institutions; Individuals or households. Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below. Number of Respondents and Secretary. Responses: 1,908.572 respondents; [FR Doc. 2019–12982 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 1,908,572 responses. BILLING CODE 6712–01–P additional information or copies of the Estimated Time per Response: .5–1 information collection, contact Cathy hour (average per response). Williams at (202) 418–2918. To view a Frequency of Response: FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION copy of this information collection Recordkeeping requirement; On request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go occasion reporting requirements; Third Notice of Agreements Filed to the web page http://www.reginfo.gov/ party disclosure requirement. public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the Obligation to Respond: Required to The Commission hereby gives notice section of the web page called obtain or retain benefits. The statutory of the filing of the following agreement ‘‘Currently Under Review,’’ (3) click on authority for this information collection under the Shipping Act of 1984. the downward-pointing arrow in the is the CAN–SPAM Act of 2003, 15 Interested parties may submit comments ‘‘Select Agency’’ box below the U.S.C. 7701–7713, Public Law 108–187, on the agreement to the Secretary by ‘‘Currently Under Review’’ heading, (4) 117 Stat. 2719. email at [email protected], or by mail, select ‘‘Federal Communications Total Annual Burden: 1,237,036 Federal Maritime Commission, Commission’’ from the list of agencies hours. Washington, DC 20573, within twelve presented in the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, Total Annual Cost: $579,995. days of the date this notice appears in (5) click the ‘‘Submit’’ button to the Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: the Federal Register. Copies of right of the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, (6) Confidentiality is an issue to the extent agreements are available through the when the list of FCC ICRs currently that individuals and households Commission’s website (www.fmc.gov) or under review appears, look for the Title provide personally identifiable by contacting the Office of Agreements of this ICR and then click on the ICR information, which is covered under the at (202)-523–5793 or tradeanalysis@ Reference Number. A copy of the FCC FCC’s updated system of records notice fmc.gov. submission to OMB will be displayed. (SORN), FCC/CGB–1, ‘‘Informal Agreement No.: 201251–002. Complaints, Inquiries and Requests for Agreement Name: Hapag-Lloyd/ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of Dispute Assistance’’, which became Maersk Line Slot Exchange Agreement. its continuing effort to reduce effective on September 24, 2014. Parties: Hapag-Lloyd AG and Maersk paperwork burdens, as required by the Privacy Impact Assessment: The Line A/S. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), the FCC invited Informal Complaints and Inquiries was O’Connor. the general public and other Federal completed on June 28, 2007. It may be Synopsis: The amendment revises Agencies to take this opportunity to reviewed at http://www.fcc.gov/omd/ Article 5.1 to reflect changes in the comment on the following information privacyact/Privacy_Impact_ amount of space to be exchanged under collection. Comments are requested Assessment.html. The Commission is in the Agreement. concerning: (a) Whether the proposed the process of updating the PIA to Proposed Effective Date: 7/26/2019. collection of information is necessary incorporate various revisions to it as a Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/ for the proper performance of the result of revisions to the SORN. FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/ functions of the Commission, including Needs and Uses: The reporting AgreementHistory/10190. whether the information shall have requirements included under this OMB Dated: June 14, 2019. practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Control Number 3060–1078 enable the Rachel Dickon, Commission’s burden estimates; (c) Commission to collect information Secretary. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and regarding violations of the Controlling clarity of the information collected; and the Assault of Non-Solicited [FR Doc. 2019–13042 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] (d) ways to minimize the burden of the Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 BILLING CODE 6731–AA–P collection of information on the (CAN–SPAM Act). This information is respondents, including the use of used to help wireless subscribers stop automated collection techniques or receiving unwanted commercial mobile FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH other forms of information technology. services messages. REVIEW COMMISSION Pursuant to the Small Business On August 12, 2004, the Commission Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public released an Order, Rules and Sunshine Act Notice Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), Regulations Implementing the June 17, 2019. the FCC seeks specific comment on how Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Wednesday, it might ‘‘further reduce the information Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003, July 17, 2019. collection burden for small business CG Docket No. 04–53, FCC 04–194, concerns with fewer than 25 published at 69 FR 55765, September PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing employees.’’ 16, 2004, adopting rules to prohibit the Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004 OMB Control Number: 3060–1078. sending of commercial messages to any address referencing an internet domain (enter from F Street entrance). Title: Rules and Regulations name associated with wireless STATUS: Open. Implementing the Controlling the subscribers’ messaging services, unless MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography the individual addressee has given the Commission will consider and act upon and Marketing Act of 2003, CG Docket sender express prior authorization. The the following in open session: Secretary No. 04–53. Form Number: N/A. information collection requirements of Labor v. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc., Docket Type of Review: Extension of a consist § 64.3100 (a)(4), (d), (e) and (f) of No. VA 2013–291. (Issues include currently approved collection. the Commission’s rules. whether the Judge erred in ruling that a VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28552 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices particular location in a preheat tower FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this was a ‘‘working place’’ for purposes of matter settles alleged violations of an examination requirement.) Formations of, Acquisitions by, and federal law prohibiting unfair or Any person attending this meeting Mergers of Bank Holding Companies deceptive acts or practices. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment who requires special accessibility The companies listed in this notice describes both the allegations in the features and/or auxiliary aids, such as have applied to the Board for approval, complaint and the terms of the consent sign language interpreters, must inform pursuant to the Bank Holding Company order—embodied in the consent the Commission in advance of those Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) agreement—that would settle these needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part allegations. and 2706.160(d). 225), and all other applicable statutes CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: and regulations to become a bank DATES: Comments must be received on Emogene Johnson (202) 434–9935/(202) holding company and/or to acquire the or before July 19, 2019. 708–9300 for TDD Relay/1–800–877– assets or the ownership of, control of, or ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file 8339 for toll free. the power to vote shares of a bank or comments online or on paper, by PHONE NUMBER FOR LISTENING TO bank holding company and all of the following the instructions in the MEETING: 1–(866) 867–4769, Passcode: banks and nonbanking companies Request for Comment part of the 678–100. owned by the bank holding company, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section including the companies listed below. below. Write: ‘‘SecurTest, Inc.; File No. Sarah L. Stewart, The applications listed below, as well 182 3152’’ on your comment, and file Deputy General Counsel. as other related filings required by the your comment online at https:// [FR Doc. 2019–13102 Filed 6–17–19; 4:15 pm] Board, are available for immediate www.regulations.gov by following the BILLING CODE 6735–01–P inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank instructions on the web-based form. If indicated. The applications will also be you prefer to file your comment on available for inspection at the offices of paper, mail your comment to the FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH the Board of Governors. Interested following address: Federal Trade REVIEW COMMISSION persons may express their views in Commission, Office of the Secretary, writing on the standards enumerated in 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite [BAC 6735–01] the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the CC–5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC proposal also involves the acquisition of 20580, or deliver your comment to the Sunshine Act Notice a nonbanking company, the review also following address: Federal Trade includes whether the acquisition of the Commission, Office of the Secretary, June 17, 2019. nonbanking company complies with the Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Tuesday, July standards in section 4 of the BHC Act 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), 16, 2019. (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise Washington, DC 20024. PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing noted, nonbanking activities will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania conducted throughout the United States. Robin Wetherill (202–326–2220), Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004 Unless otherwise noted, comments Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal (enter from F Street entrance). regarding each of these applications Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580. STATUS: Open. must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Governors not later than July 15, 2019. to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission will hear oral argument in A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and the matter Secretary of Labor v. Sunbelt (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is Rentals, Inc., Docket No. VA 2013–291. President) 230 South LaSalle Street, hereby given that the above-captioned (Issues include whether the Judge erred Chicago, Illinois 60690–1414: consent agreement containing a consent in ruling that a particular location in a 1. First State Bancshares, Inc., New order to cease and desist, having been preheat tower was a ‘‘working place’’ for London, Wisconsin; to merge with filed with and accepted, subject to final purposes of an examination Pioneer Bancorp, Inc. and indirectly approval, by the Commission, has been requirement.) acquire Pioneer Bank, both of placed on the public record for a period Any person attending this oral Auburndale, Wisconsin. of thirty (30) days. The following argument who requires special Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Analysis to Aid Public Comment accessibility features and/or auxiliary System, June 14, 2019. describes the terms of the consent aids, such as sign language interpreters, Yao-Chin Chao, agreement and the allegations in the must inform the Commission in advance complaint. An electronic copy of the of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR Assistant Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. 2019–13034 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] full text of the consent agreement 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d). package can be obtained from the FTC BILLING CODE P CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: Home Page (for June 14, 2019), on the Emogene Johnson (202) 434–9935/(202) World Wide Web, at https:// 708–9300 for TDD Relay/1–800–877– www.ftc.gov/news-events/commission- FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 8339 for toll free. actions. PHONE NUMBER FOR LISTENING TO [File No. 182 3152] You can file a comment online or on MEETING: 1–(866) 867–4769, Passcode: paper. For the Commission to consider 678–100. SecurTest, Inc.; Analysis To Aid Public your comment, we must receive it on or Comment before July 19, 2019. Write ‘‘SecurTest, Sarah L. Stewart, AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. Inc.; File No. 182 3152’’ on your Deputy General Counsel. comment. Your comment—including ACTION: Proposed consent agreement; [FR Doc. 2019–13098 Filed 6–17–19; 4:15 pm] your name and your state—will be request for comment. BILLING CODE 6735–01–P placed on the public record of this VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28553 proceeding, including, to the extent record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your limitation; access; and recourse, practicable, on the https:// comment will be kept confidential only enforcement, and liability. The related www.regulations.gov website. if the General Counsel grants your requirements include, for example, Postal mail addressed to the request in accordance with the law and securing an independent recourse Commission is subject to delay due to the public interest. Once your comment mechanism to handle any disputes heightened security screening. As a has been posted on the public FTC about how the company handles result, we encourage you to submit your website—as legally required by FTC information about EU citizens. comments online through the https:// Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot redact or To participate in the frameworks, a www.regulations.gov website. remove your comment from the FTC company must comply with the Privacy If you prefer to file your comment on website, unless you submit a Shield principles and self-certify that paper, write ‘‘SecurTest, Inc.; File No. confidentiality request that meets the compliance to the U.S. Department of 182 3152’’ on your comment and on the requirements for such treatment under Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’). Commerce envelope, and mail your comment to the FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General reviews companies’ self-certification following address: Federal Trade Counsel grants that request. applications and maintains a public Commission, Office of the Secretary, Visit the FTC website at http:// website, https://www.privacyshield.gov/ 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite www.ftc.gov to read this Notice and the list, where it posts the names of CC–5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC news release describing it. The FTC Act companies who have completed the 20580; or deliver your comment to the and other laws that the Commission requirements for certification. following address: Federal Trade administers permit the collection of Companies are required to recertify Commission, Office of the Secretary, public comments to consider and use in every year in order to continue Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, this proceeding, as appropriate. The benefitting from Privacy Shield. 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), Commission will consider all timely SecurTest is a background screening Washington, DC 20024. If possible, and responsive public comments that it company. It primarily performs pre- submit your paper comment to the receives on or before July 19, 2019. For employment background screening for Commission by courier or overnight information on the Commission’s private companies and government service. privacy policy, including routine uses entities. According to the Commission’s Because your comment will be placed permitted by the Privacy Act, see complaint, from approximately October on the publicly accessible website at https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/ 2017 until July 2018, SecurTest https://www.regulations.gov, you are privacy-policy. published on its website, http:// solely responsible for making sure that www.securtest.com, a privacy policy your comment does not include any Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To containing statements related to its sensitive or confidential information. In Aid Public Comment participation in Privacy Shield. particular, your comment should not The Federal Trade Commission The Commission’s proposed one- include any sensitive personal (‘‘Commission’’) has accepted, subject to count complaint alleges that information, such as your or anyone final approval, an agreement containing Respondent violated Section 5(a) of the else’s Social Security number; date of a consent order from SecurTest, Inc. Federal Trade Commission Act. birth; driver’s license number or other (‘‘SecurTest’’ or ‘‘Respondent’’). Specifically, the proposed complaint state identification number, or foreign The proposed consent order alleges that Respondent engaged in a country equivalent; passport number; (‘‘proposed order’’) has been placed on deceptive act or practice by falsely financial account number; or credit or the public record for thirty (30) days for representing that it was a certified debit card number. You are also solely receipt of comments by interested participant in the EU-U.S. and Swiss- responsible for making sure that your persons. Comments received during this U.S. Privacy Shield Frameworks. comment does not include any sensitive period will become part of the public Part I of the proposed order prohibits health information, such as medical record. After thirty (30) days, the the company from making records or other individually Commission will again review the misrepresentations about its identifiable health information. In agreement and the comments received, membership in any privacy or security addition, your comment should not and will decide whether it should program sponsored by the government include any ‘‘trade secret or any withdraw from the agreement and take or any other self-regulatory or standard- commercial or financial information appropriate action or make final the setting organization, including, but not which . . . is privileged or agreement’s proposed order. limited to, the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield confidential’’—as provided by Section This matter concerns alleged false or framework and the Swiss-U.S. Privacy 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and misleading representations that Shield framework. FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)— SecurTest made concerning its Parts II through V of the proposed including in particular competitively participation in the Privacy Shield order are reporting and compliance sensitive information such as costs, frameworks agreed upon by the U.S. provisions. Part II requires sales statistics, inventories, formulas, and, respectively, the European Union acknowledgement of the order and patterns, devices, manufacturing (‘‘EU’’) and the Swiss Federation. The dissemination of the order now and in processes, or customer names. Privacy Shield frameworks allow U.S. the future to persons with Comments containing material for companies to receive personal data responsibilities relating to the subject which confidential treatment is transferred from the EU and Switzerland matter of the order. Part III ensures requested must be filed in paper form, without violating EU or Swiss law. The notification to the FTC of changes in must be clearly labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ frameworks consist of a set of principles corporate status and mandates that the and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). and related requirements that have been company submit an initial compliance In particular, the written request for deemed by the European Commission report to the FTC. Part IV requires the confidential treatment that accompanies and the Swiss authorities as providing company to create certain documents the comment must include the factual ‘‘adequate’’ privacy protection. The relating to its compliance with the order and legal basis for the request, and must principles include notice; choice; for ten years and to retain those identify the specific portions of the accountability for onward transfer; documents for a five-year period. Part V comment to be withheld from the public security; data integrity and purpose mandates that the company make VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28554 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices available to the FTC information or service acceptance receipt is on or comments only as a written/paper subsequent compliance reports, as before that date. submission. You should submit two requested. copies total. One copy will include the Electronic Submissions Part VI is a provision ‘‘sun-setting’’ information you claim to be confidential the order after twenty (20) years, with Submit electronic comments in the with a heading or cover note that states certain exceptions. following way: ‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS • The purpose of this analysis is to aid Federal eRulemaking Portal: CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The public comment on the proposed order. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Agency will review this copy, including It is not intended to constitute an instructions for submitting comments. the claimed confidential information, in official interpretation of the complaint Comments submitted electronically, its consideration of comments. The or proposed order, or to modify in any including attachments, to https:// second copy, which will have the way the proposed order’s terms. www.regulations.gov will be posted to claimed confidential information the docket unchanged. Because your By direction of the Commission. redacted/blacked out, will be available comment will be made public, you are for public viewing and posted on April J. Tabor, solely responsible for ensuring that your https://www.regulations.gov. Submit Acting Secretary. comment does not include any both copies to the Dockets Management [FR Doc. 2019–13003 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] confidential information that you or a Staff. If you do not wish your name and BILLING CODE 6750–01–P third party may not wish to be posted, contact information to be made publicly such as medical information, your or available, you can provide this anyone else’s Social Security number, or information on the cover sheet and not DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND confidential business information, such in the body of your comments and you HUMAN SERVICES as a manufacturing process. Please note must identify this information as that if you include your name, contact ‘‘confidential.’’ Any information marked Food and Drug Administration information, or other information that as ‘‘confidential’’ will not be disclosed identifies you in the body of your except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 [Docket No. FDA–2013–N–0557] comments, that information will be and other applicable disclosure law. For posted on https://www.regulations.gov. more information about FDA’s posting Agency Information Collection • If you want to submit a comment Activities; Proposed Collection; of comments to public dockets, see 80 with confidential information that you FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access Comment Request; Postmarket do not wish to be made available to the Surveillance of Medical Devices the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/ public, submit the comment as a fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015- AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, written/paper submission and in the 23389.pdf. HHS. manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper Docket: For access to the docket to Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’). ACTION: Notice. read background documents or the Written/Paper Submissions electronic and written/paper comments SUMMARY: The Food and Drug received, go to https:// Administration (FDA or Agency) is Submit written/paper submissions as www.regulations.gov and insert the follows: announcing an opportunity for public • docket number, found in brackets in the comment on the proposed collection of Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for heading of this document, into the certain information by the Agency. written/paper submissions): Dockets ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and and/or go to the Dockets Management 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, required to publish notice in the Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Rockville, MD 20852. • For written/paper comments Federal Register concerning each FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: submitted to the Dockets Management proposed collection of information, Amber Sanford, Office of Operations, Staff, FDA will post your comment, as including each proposed extension of an Food and Drug Administration, Three well as any attachments, except for existing collection of information, and White Flint North, 10A–12M, 11601 information submitted, marked and to allow 60 days for public comment in Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD identified, as confidential, if submitted response to the notice. This notice 20852, 301–796–8867, PRAStaff@ as detailed in ‘‘Instructions.’’ solicits comments on information Instructions: All submissions received fda.hhs.gov. collection requirements for postmarket must include the Docket No. FDA– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the surveillance of medical devices. 2013–N–0557 for ‘‘Agency Information PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal DATES: Submit either electronic or Collection Activities; Proposed Agencies must obtain approval from the written comments on the collection of Collection; Comment Request; Office of Management and Budget information by August 19, 2019. Postmarket Surveillance of Medical (OMB) for each collection of ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Devices.’’ Received comments, those information they conduct or sponsor. as follows. Please note that late, filed in a timely manner (see ‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined untimely filed comments will not be ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR considered. Electronic comments must and, except for those submitted as 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests be submitted on or before August 19, ‘‘Confidential Submissions,’’ publicly or requirements that members of the 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov viewable at https://www.regulations.gov public submit reports, keep records, or electronic filing system will accept or at the Dockets Management Staff provide information to a third party. comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 at the end of August 19, 2019. through Friday. U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Comments received by mail/hand • Confidential Submissions—To Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in delivery/courier (for written/paper submit a comment with confidential the Federal Register concerning each submissions) will be considered timely information that you do not wish to be proposed collection of information, if they are postmarked or the delivery made publicly available, submit your including each proposed extension of an VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28555 existing collection of information, information to be collected; and (4) procedures that FDA uses to approve before submitting the collection to OMB ways to minimize the burden of the and disapprove PS plans. The regulation for approval. To comply with this collection of information on provides instructions to manufacturers, requirement, FDA is publishing notice respondents, including through the use so they know what information is of the proposed collection of of automated collection techniques, required in a PS plan submission. FDA information set forth in this document. when appropriate, and other forms of reviews PS plan submissions in With respect to the following information technology. accordance with 21 CFR 822.15 through collection of information, FDA invites Postmarket Surveillance of Medical 822.19 of the regulation, which describe comments on these topics: (1) Whether Devices—21 CFR Part 822 the grounds for approving or the proposed collection of information disapproving a PS plan. In addition, the is necessary for the proper performance OMB Control Number 0910–0449— PS regulation provides instructions to of FDA’s functions, including whether Extension manufacturers to submit interim and the information will have practical Section 522 of the Federal Food, Drug, final reports in accordance with utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA’s and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360l) § 822.38 (21 CFR 822.38). Respondents estimate of the burden of the proposed authorizes FDA to require a to this collection of information are collection of information, including the manufacturer to conduct postmarket those manufacturers that require PS of validity of the methodology and surveillance (PS) of any device that their products. assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance meets the criteria set forth in the statute. FDA estimates the burden of this the quality, utility, and clarity of the The PS regulation establishes collection of information as follows: TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1 Number of Average Activity/21 CFR section Number of responses per Total annual burden Total hours respondents respondent responses per response PS submission (822.9 and 822.10) ...... 25 1 25 120 3,000 Changes to PS plan after approval (822.21) ...... 9 1 9 40 360 Changes to PS plan for a device that is no longer mar- keted (822.28) ...... 6 1 6 8 48 Waiver (822.29) ...... 1 1 1 40 40 Exemption request (822.30) ...... 16 1 16 40 640 Periodic reports (822.38) ...... 25 3 75 40 3,000 Total ...... 7,088 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Explanation of Reporting Burden 822.26, 822.27, and 822.34 do not necessary to identify the respondent, the Estimate: The burden captured in table constitute information collection subject date, the respondent’s address, and the 1 is based on the data from FDA’s to review under the PRA because it nature of the instrument (See 5 CFR internal tracking system. Sections entails no burden other than that 1320.3(h)(1)). TABLE 2—ESTIMATED ANNUAL RECORDKEEPING BURDEN 1 Number of Average Activity/21 CFR section Number of responses per Total annual burden Total hours respondents respondent responses per response Manufacturer records (822.31) ...... 25 1 25 20 500 Investigator records (822.32) ...... 75 1 75 5 375 Total ...... 875 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Explanation of Recordkeeping Burden decrease of 29,982 hours. We attribute DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Estimate: FDA expects that at least some this adjustment to a decrease in the HUMAN SERVICES of the manufacturers will be able to number of submissions we received satisfy the PS requirement using over the last few years. Food and Drug Administration information or data they already have. Dated: June 14, 2019. For purposes of calculating burden, [Docket No. FDA–2013–N–0823] Lowell J. Schiller, however, FDA has assumed that each PS order can only be satisfied by a 3-year Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy. Agency Information Collection clinically based surveillance plan, using [FR Doc. 2019–13004 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Activities; Proposed Collection; three investigators. These estimates are BILLING CODE 4164–01–P Comment Request; Format and Content Requirements for Over-the- based on FDA’s knowledge and Counter Drug Product Labeling experience with PS. Our estimated burden for the AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, information collection reflects a HHS. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28556 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices ACTION: Notice. manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015- Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’). 23389.pdf. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is Written/Paper Submissions Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the announcing an opportunity for public Submit written/paper submissions as electronic and written/paper comments comment on the proposed collection of follows: received, go to https:// certain information by the Agency. • Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for www.regulations.gov and insert the Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of written/paper submissions): Dockets docket number, found in brackets in the 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and required to publish notice in the Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers heading of this document, into the Federal Register concerning each Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts proposed collection of information, • For written/paper comments and/or go to the Dockets Management including each proposed extension of an submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, existing collection of information, and Staff, FDA will post your comment, as Rockville, MD 20852. to allow 60 days for public comment in well as any attachments, except for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: response to the notice. This notice information submitted, marked and Domini Bean, Office of Operations, solicits comments on the standardized identified, as confidential, if submitted format and content requirements for the Food and Drug Administration, Three as detailed in ‘‘Instructions.’’ White Flint North, 10A–12M, 11601 labeling of over-the-counter (OTC) drug Instructions: All submissions received products. Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD must include the Docket No. FDA– 20852, 301–796–5733, PRAStaff@ DATES: Submit either electronic or 2013–N–0823 for ‘‘Agency Information fda.hhs.gov. written comments on the collection of Collection Activities; Proposed information by August 19, 2019. Collection; Comment Request; Format SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments and Content Requirements for Over-the- PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal as follows. Please note that late, Counter Drug Product Labeling.’’ Agencies must obtain approval from the untimely filed comments will not be Received comments, those filed in a Office of Management and Budget considered. Electronic comments must timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be (OMB) for each collection of be submitted on or before August 19, placed in the docket and, except for information they conduct or sponsor. 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov those submitted as ‘‘Confidential ‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined electronic filing system will accept Submissions,’’ publicly viewable at in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time https://www.regulations.gov or at the 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests Dockets Management Staff between 9 at the end of August 19, 2019. or requirements that members of the a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Comments received by mail/hand public submit reports, keep records, or delivery/courier (for written/paper Friday. provide information to a third party. submissions) will be considered timely • Confidential Submissions—To Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 if they are postmarked or the delivery submit a comment with confidential U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal service acceptance receipt is on or information that you do not wish to be before that date. made publicly available, submit your Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in comments only as a written/paper the Federal Register concerning each Electronic Submissions submission. You should submit two proposed collection of information, Submit electronic comments in the copies total. One copy will include the including each proposed extension of an following way: information you claim to be confidential existing collection of information, • Federal eRulemaking Portal: with a heading or cover note that states before submitting the collection to OMB https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the ‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS for approval. To comply with this instructions for submitting comments. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The requirement, FDA is publishing notice Comments submitted electronically, Agency will review this copy, including of the proposed collection of including attachments, to https:// the claimed confidential information, in information set forth in this document. www.regulations.gov will be posted to its consideration of comments. The With respect to the following the docket unchanged. Because your second copy, which will have the collection of information, FDA invites comment will be made public, you are claimed confidential information comments on these topics: (1) Whether solely responsible for ensuring that your redacted/blacked out, will be available the proposed collection of information comment does not include any for public viewing and posted on is necessary for the proper performance confidential information that you or a https://www.regulations.gov. Submit of FDA’s functions, including whether third party may not wish to be posted, both copies to the Dockets Management the information will have practical such as medical information, your or Staff. If you do not wish your name and anyone else’s Social Security number, or contact information to be made publicly utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA’s confidential business information, such available, you can provide this estimate of the burden of the proposed as a manufacturing process. Please note information on the cover sheet and not collection of information, including the that if you include your name, contact in the body of your comments and you validity of the methodology and information, or other information that must identify this information as assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance identifies you in the body of your ‘‘confidential.’’ Any information marked the quality, utility, and clarity of the comments, that information will be as ‘‘confidential’’ will not be disclosed information to be collected; and (4) posted on https://www.regulations.gov. except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 ways to minimize the burden of the • If you want to submit a comment and other applicable disclosure law. For collection of information on with confidential information that you more information about FDA’s posting respondents, including through the use do not wish to be made available to the of comments to public dockets, see 80 of automated collection techniques, public, submit the comment as a FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access when appropriate, and other forms of written/paper submission and in the the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/ information technology. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28557 Format and Content Requirements for Therefore, burden for this information § 201.66, so they will incur no further Over-the-Counter Drug Product collection is that which is necessary to burden under the information collection Labeling—21 CFR Part 201 comply with the labeling requirements provisions in the regulation. However, a in § 201.66, applicable to new OTC drug OMB Control Number 0910–0340— new OTC sunscreen drug product, like Extension products and OTC sunscreen drug any new OTC drug product, will be products introduced to the marketplace subject to a one-time burden to comply This information collection supports under new drug applications, with Drug Facts labeling requirements FDA regulations at § 201.66 (21 CFR abbreviated new drug applications, or in § 201.66. We estimate, based on our 201.66), which establish standardized an OTC drug monograph. New OTC electronic drug registration and listing content and format requirements for the drug products must comply with the labeling of all marketed OTC drug database, that 5,253 new SKUs of OTC labeling requirements in § 201.66 as sunscreen drug products will be products. The regulations set forth the they are introduced to the marketplace. content and format requirements for the marketed each year. We estimate that Based on our electronic drug Drug Facts portion of labels on OTC these 5,253 SKUs will be marketed by registration and listing database, we drug products. These regulations require 294 manufacturers. We estimate that 12 estimate that approximately 10,463 new OTC drug product labeling to include hours will be spent on each label. This uniform headings and subheadings, OTC drug product stock keeping units is reflected in table 1, row 1. (SKUs) are introduced to the presented in a standardized order, with When determining the burden for minimum standards for type size and marketplace each year. We estimate that these SKUs are marketed by 1,416 § 201.66, it is also important to consider other graphical features. exemptions or deferrals of the regulation Currently marketed OTC drug manufacturers. We estimate that the allowed products under § 201.66(e). We products are already required to comply preparation of labeling for new OTC receive very few requests for with these labeling requirements and drug products requires 12 hours to will incur no further burden to comply prepare, complete, and review prior to exemptions or deferrals. We also with Drug Facts labeling requirements submitting the new labeling to us. Based estimate that a request for deferral or in § 201.66. Labeling modifications on this estimate, the annual reporting exemption requires 24 hours to already required to be in Drug Facts burden for this type of labeling is 94,296 complete. This is reflected in table 1, format are ‘‘usual and customary’’ as hours. row 2. part of routine redesign practice, thus All currently marketed sunscreen We estimate the burden of this they do not create additional burden products are required to comply with collection of information as follows: within the meaning of the PRA. the Drug Facts labeling requirements in TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL THIRD-PARTY DISCLOSURE BURDEN 1 Number of Number of disclosures Total annual Average 21 CFR section respondents per disclosure burden per Total hours respondent disclosure § 201.66(c) and (d) for new OTC drug products ...... 855 9.19 7,858 12 94,296 § 201.66(e) ...... 1 1 1 24 24 Total ...... 94,320 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Our estimated burden for the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND required to publish notice in the information collection reflects an HUMAN SERVICES Federal Register concerning each overall increase of 82,797 hours and a proposed collection of information, corresponding increase of 6,898 Food and Drug Administration including each proposed extension of an disclosures. This increase corresponds existing collection of information, and [Docket No. FDA–2016–N–2683] with data obtained from our database. to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice Dated: June 14, 2019. Agency Information Collection solicits comments on a generic Lowell J. Schiller, Activities; Proposed Collection; clearance to collect information to Comment Request; Data To Support Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy. support social and behavioral research Social and Behavioral Research as used by FDA about drug products. [FR Doc. 2019–12996 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Used by the Food and Drug DATES: Submit either electronic or BILLING CODE 4164–01–P Administration written comments on the collection of AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, information by August 19, 2019. HHS. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments ACTION: Notice. as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be SUMMARY: The Food and Drug considered. Electronic comments must Administration (FDA or Agency) is be submitted on or before August 19, announcing an opportunity for public 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov comment on the proposed collection of electronic filing system will accept certain information by the Agency. comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of at the end of August 19, 2019. 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are Comments received by mail/hand VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28558 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices delivery/courier (for written/paper • Confidential Submissions—To Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in submissions) will be considered timely submit a comment with confidential the Federal Register concerning each if they are postmarked or the delivery information that you do not wish to be proposed collection of information, service acceptance receipt is on or made publicly available, submit your including each proposed extension of an before that date. comments only as a written/paper existing collection of information, submission. You should submit two before submitting the collection to OMB Electronic Submissions copies total. One copy will include the for approval. To comply with this Submit electronic comments in the information you claim to be confidential requirement, FDA is publishing notice following way: with a heading or cover note that states of the proposed collection of • Federal eRulemaking Portal: ‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS information set forth in this document. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The With respect to the following instructions for submitting comments. Agency will review this copy, including collection of information, FDA invites Comments submitted electronically, the claimed confidential information, in comments on these topics: (1) Whether including attachments, to https:// its consideration of comments. The the proposed collection of information www.regulations.gov will be posted to second copy, which will have the is necessary for the proper performance the docket unchanged. Because your claimed confidential information of FDA’s functions, including whether comment will be made public, you are redacted/blacked out, will be available the information will have practical solely responsible for ensuring that your for public viewing and posted on utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA’s comment does not include any https://www.regulations.gov. Submit estimate of the burden of the proposed confidential information that you or a both copies to the Dockets Management collection of information, including the third party may not wish to be posted, Staff. If you do not wish your name and validity of the methodology and such as medical information, your or contact information to be made publicly assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance anyone else’s Social Security number, or available, you can provide this the quality, utility, and clarity of the confidential business information, such information on the cover sheet and not information to be collected; and (4) as a manufacturing process. Please note in the body of your comments and you ways to minimize the burden of the that if you include your name, contact must identify this information as collection of information on information, or other information that ‘‘confidential.’’ Any information marked respondents, including through the use identifies you in the body of your as ‘‘confidential’’ will not be disclosed of automated collection techniques, comments, that information will be except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 when appropriate, and other forms of posted on https://www.regulations.gov. and other applicable disclosure law. For information technology. • If you want to submit a comment more information about FDA’s posting with confidential information that you of comments to public dockets, see 80 Data To Support Social and Behavioral do not wish to be made available to the FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access Research as Used by the Food and Drug public, submit the comment as a the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/ Administration written/paper submission and in the fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015- OMB Control Number 0910–0847— manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper 23389.pdf. Extension Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’). Docket: For access to the docket to Understanding patients, consumers, Written/Paper Submissions read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments and healthcare professionals’ Submit written/paper submissions as received, go to https:// perceptions and behaviors plays an follows: important role in improving FDA’s • www.regulations.gov and insert the Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for docket number, found in brackets in the regulatory decisionmaking processes written/paper submissions): Dockets heading of this document, into the and communications impacting various Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts stakeholders. The methods used to Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers and/or go to the Dockets Management achieve these goals include individual Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, in-depth interviews, general public • For written/paper comments Rockville, MD 20852. focus group interviews, intercept submitted to the Dockets Management interviews, self-administered surveys, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Staff, FDA will post your comment, as Ila gatekeeper surveys, and focus group well as any attachments, except for S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations, Food interviews. The methods used serve the information submitted, marked and and Drug Administration, Three White narrowly defined need for direct and identified, as confidential, if submitted Flint North, 10A–12M, 11601 informal opinion on a specific topic and as detailed in ‘‘Instructions.’’ Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD as a qualitative and quantitative Instructions: All submissions received 20852, 301–796–7726, PRAStaff@ research tool, and have two major must include the Docket No. FDA– fda.hhs.gov. purposes: 2016–N–2683 for ‘‘Agency Information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 1. To obtain information that is useful Collection Activities; Proposed PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal for developing variables and measures Collection; Comment Request; Data to Agencies must obtain approval from the for formulating the basic objectives of Support Social and Behavioral Research Office of Management and Budget social and behavioral research and as Used by the Food and Drug (OMB) for each collection of 2. To assess the potential effectiveness Administration.’’ Received comments, information they conduct or sponsor. of FDA communications, behavioral those filed in a timely manner (see ‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined interventions and other materials in ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR reaching and successfully and, except for those submitted as 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests communicating and addressing ‘‘Confidential Submissions,’’ publicly or requirements that members of the behavioral change with their intended viewable at https://www.regulations.gov public submit reports, keep records, or audiences. or at the Dockets Management Staff provide information to a third party. FDA will use these methods to test between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 and refine its ideas and to help develop through Friday. U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal communication and behavioral VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28559 strategies research, but will generally communications and social and Annually, FDA projects about 45 conduct further research before making behavioral methods about regulated social and behavioral studies using the important decisions such as adopting drug products on a variety of subjects variety of test methods listed in this new policies and allocating or related to consumer, patient, or document. FDA is requesting this redirecting significant resources to healthcare professional perceptions, burden so as not to restrict the Agency’s support these policies. beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, and use of ability to gather information on public FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and drug and biological products and related sentiment for its proposals in its Research, Center for Biologics materials including, but not limited to, regulatory and communications Evaluation and Research, Office of the social and behavioral research, decision- programs. Commissioner, and any other Centers or making processes, and communication FDA estimates the burden of this Offices will use this mechanism to test and behavioral change strategies. collection of information as follows: TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1 Number of Average Activity Number of responses per Total annual burden per Total hours respondents respondent responses response Interviews/Surveys ...... 2,520 14.6 36,792 .25 (15 min- 9,198 utes). 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Based on a review of the information ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to Resident/Fellow FTE Chart requires collection since our last request for [email protected] or mail them to applicants to provide: (a) Data related to OMB approval, we have made no HRSA Information Collection Clearance the size and/or growth of the residency adjustments to our burden estimate. Officer, Room 14N136B, 5600 Fishers program over previous academic years, Dated: June 14, 2019. Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857. (b) the number of residents enrolled in Lowell J. Schiller, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To the program during the baseline academic year, and (c) a projection of Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy. request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the program’s proposed expansion over [FR Doc. 2019–13001 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] the data collection plans and draft the next five academic years. It is BILLING CODE 4164–01–P instruments, email [email protected] imperative that applicants complete this or call Lisa Wright-Solomon, the HRSA chart to quantify the total supported residents. THCGME funding is used to DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Information Collection Clearance Officer support an expanded number of HUMAN SERVICES at (301) 443–1984. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: When residents in a residency program, to Health Resources and Services submitting comments or requesting establish a new residency training Administration information, please include the program, or to maintain filled positions information request collection title for at existing programs. Utilization of a Agency Information Collection reference. chart to gather this important Activities: Proposed Collection: Public Information Collection Request Title: information has decreased the number Comment Request; Information The Teaching Health Center Graduate of errors in the eligibility review process Collection Request Title: The Teaching Medical Education (THCGME) Program resulting in a more accurate review and Health Center Graduate Medical Eligible Resident/Fellow FTE Chart, funding process, and comports with the Education Program Eligible Resident/ OMB No. 0915–0367—Extension. regulatory requirement imposed by 45 Fellow FTE Chart, OMB No. 0915– Abstract: The Teaching Health Center CFR 75.206(a) ‘‘Standard application 0367—Extension Graduate Medical Education (THCGME) requirements, including forms for Program, Section 340H of the Public applying for HHS financial assistance, AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Health Service Act, was established by and state plans.’’ Administration (HRSA), Department of Section 5508 of Public Law 111–148. Likely Respondents: Teaching Health Health and Human Services. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. Centers applying for THCGME funding ACTION: Notice. L. 115–123) provided continued funding through a THCGME NOFO process, for the THCGME Program. The which may include new applicants and SUMMARY: In compliance with the THCGME Program awards payment for existing awardees. requirement of the Paperwork both direct and indirect expenses to Burden Statement: Burden in this Reduction Act of 1995 for opportunity support training for primary care context means the time expended by for public comment on proposed data residents in community-based persons to generate, maintain, retain, collection projects, HRSA announces ambulatory patient care settings. The disclose, or provide the information plans to submit an Information THCGME Program Eligible Resident/ requested. This includes the time Collection Request (ICR), described Fellow Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) needed to review instructions; to below, to the Office of Management and Chart, published in the THCGME Notice develop, acquire, install, and utilize Budget (OMB). Prior to submitting the of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), is a technology and systems for the purpose ICR to OMB, HRSA seeks comments means for determining the number of of collecting, validating, and verifying from the public regarding the burden eligible resident/fellow FTE’s in an information, processing and estimate, below, or any other aspect of applicant’s primary care residency maintaining information, and disclosing the ICR. program. and providing information; to train DATES: Comments on this ICR should be Need and Proposed Use of the personnel and to be able to respond to received no later than August 19, 2019. Information: THCGME Program Eligible a collection of information; to search VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28560 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices data sources; to complete and review transmit or otherwise disclose the hours estimated for this ICR are the collection of information; and to information. The total annual burden summarized in the table below. TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS Average Number of Number of Total burden per Total burden Form name respondents responses per responses response hours respondent (in hours) Teaching Health Center GME Program Eligible Resident/ Fellow FTE Chart ...... 90 1 90 1 90 Total ...... 90 ...... 90 ...... 90 HRSA specifically requests comments DATES: Comments on this ICR should be Need and Proposed Use of the on (1) the necessity and utility of the received no later than August 19, 2019. Information: The information collected proposed information collection for the ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to by the SWP form is necessary to proper performance of the agency’s [email protected] or mail the HRSA standardize and streamline the data functions, (2) the accuracy of the Information Collection Clearance used by HRSA in reviewing applications estimated burden, (3) ways to enhance Officer, Room 14N136B, 5600 Fishers and monitoring awardees. The form will the quality, utility, and clarity of the Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857. ask applicants to provide a description information to be collected, and (4) the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To of the activities or steps the recipient use of automated collection techniques request more information on the will take to achieve each of the or other forms of information proposed project or to obtain a copy of objectives proposed during to the entire technology to minimize the information the data collection plans and draft period of performance. The current collection burden. instruments, email [email protected] variation in formats and data submitted by applicants reduces efficiency in Maria G. Button, or call Lisa Wright-Solomon, the HRSA Information Collection Clearance Officer reviewing, awarding, and monitoring Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat. at (301) 443–1984. each project, so this change will remedy [FR Doc. 2019–12961 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: When that inefficiency. In addition, seeking BILLING CODE 4165–15–P submitting comments or requesting OMB approval comports with the information, please include the regulatory requirement imposed by 45 CFR 75.206(a), Paperwork clearances. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND information request collection title for HUMAN SERVICES reference. The proposed SWP form will be used Information Collection Request Title: to provide information to assess Health Resources and Services Standardized Work Plan (SWP) Form for applications for awards including Administration Use with Applications to the Bureau of ranking applications as part of the grant Health Workforce (BHW) Research and review process. BHW will also use the Agency Information Collection Training Grants and Cooperative information to assess whether current Activities: Proposed Collection: Public Agreements, OMB No. 0906–xxxx–New. recipients of grant funding have met Comment Request; Information Abstract: BHW requires applicants for statutory and programmatic Collection Request Title: Standardized training and research grants and requirements. cooperative agreements to submit a Work Plan Form for Use With Likely Respondents: Respondents will work plan that describes the timeframes Applications to the Bureau of Health be applicants to HRSA’s research and and deliverables required during the Workforce Research and Training training programs in BHW. Grants and Cooperative Agreements, grant period of performance to address Burden Statement: Burden in this OMB No. 0906–xxxx–New each of the needs detailed in the Purpose and Need section of the context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, AGENCY: Health Resources and Services application, as required in the Notice of Administration (HRSA), Department of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) disclose, or provide the information Health and Human Services. announcement. Applicants are currently requested. This includes the time able to submit work plans in a non- needed to review instructions; to ACTION: Notice. standardized format. develop, acquire, install, and utilize In order to standardize the data technology and systems for the purpose SUMMARY: In compliance with the provided by applicants to make of collecting, validating, and verifying requirement for opportunity for public informed decisions about funding and information, processing and comment on proposed data collection assist with monitoring awardee maintaining information, and disclosing projects of the Paperwork Reduction Act progress, BHW plans to require and providing information; to train of 1995, HRSA announces plans to applicants to complete a SWP form in personnel and to be able to respond to submit an Information Collection lieu of submitting a work plan in the a collection of information; to search Request (ICR), described below, to the applicant’s own format. Applicants will data sources; to complete and review Office of Management and Budget use the SWP form when they submit the collection of information; and to (OMB). Prior to submitting the ICR to their proposals, and grantees and Project transmit or otherwise disclose the OMB, HRSA seeks comments from the Officers will use the SWP information to information. The total annual burden public regarding the burden estimate, assist in monitoring progress once hours estimated for this ICR are below, or any other aspect of the ICR. HRSA makes the awards. summarized in the table below. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28561 TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS Average Number of Number of Total burden per Total burden Form name respondents responses per responses response hours respondent (in hours) SWP ...... 1,000 1 1,000 1 1,000 Total ...... 1,000 ...... 1,000 ...... 1,000 HRSA specifically requests comments FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To The project team has developed a on (1) the necessity and utility of the request more information on the draft submission form and criteria for proposed information collection for the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the types of strategies and interventions proper performance of the agency’s the data collection plans and draft to be included in the compilation based functions; (2) the accuracy of the instruments, email [email protected] on: (1) The quality and relevance of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance or call Lisa Wright-Solomon, the HRSA approach to the RWHAP; (2) the level of the quality, utility, and clarity of the Information Collection Clearance feasibility, replicability, and information to be collected; and (4) the Officer, at (301) 443–1984. sustainability; and (3) the quality of use of automated collection techniques SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: When evidence that supports the approach’s or other forms of information submitting comments or requesting results. technology to minimize the information information, please include the Specifically, this information collection burden. information request collection title for collection request involves three forms of data collection as described below. Maria G. Button, reference. Information Collection Request Title: 1. Pre-Submission Screening Form: Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat. Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program Through extensive outreach, the project [FR Doc. 2019–12959 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] (RWHAP) Recipient Compilation of Best team expects up to 70 recipients and BILLING CODE 4165–15–P Practice Strategies and Interventions, subrecipients to express interest in OMB No. 0906–xxxx–New. submission. They will be asked four Abstract: HRSA’s Ryan White HIV/ screening questions to determine DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AIDS Program (RWHAP) funds and whether they are eligible for inclusion HUMAN SERVICES coordinates with cities, states, and local in the compilation. 2. Submission Form: Recipients and clinics/community-based organizations Health Resources and Services subrecipients that screen eligible will to deliver efficient and effective HIV Administration then complete a submission form care, treatment, and support to low- describing their strategy or intervention, income people with HIV. Nearly two- Agency Information Collection including service delivery model, target thirds of clients (patients) live at or Activities: Proposed Collection: Public population, expected or achieved below 100 percent of the federal poverty Comment Request Information outcomes, and resource requirements. level and approximately three-quarters Collection Request Title: Ryan White The project team will score the of RWHAP clients are racial/ethnic HIV/AIDS Program Recipient submissions based on the established Compilation of Best Practice minorities. Since 1990, the RWHAP has criteria. Strategies and Interventions, OMB No. developed a comprehensive system of 3. Site Visit Discussion Guide: The 0906–xxxx–New safety net providers who deliver high project team will conduct up to 30 site quality direct health care and support visits to test the criteria and gather AGENCY: Health Resources and Services services to over half a million people feedback on the submission form and Administration (HRSA), Department of living with HIV—more than 50 percent Health and Human Services. compilation. The half-day site visits will of all people living with diagnosed HIV involve individual or small group ACTION: Notice. in the United States. HRSA’s HIV/AIDS discussions with program staff involved Bureau (HAB) is developing a in implementation (e.g., program SUMMARY: In compliance with the comprehensive, web-based compilation requirement for opportunity for public managers, direct service providers, and of RWHAP recipient and subrecipient evaluators). The project team will then comment on proposed data collection best practice strategies and projects of the Paperwork Reduction Act revise the submission form, criteria, and interventions. When completed, the compilation template based on of 1995, HRSA announces plans to online recipient compilation will be submit an Information Collection feedback. housed on TargetHIV.org (HRSA HAB’s Need and Proposed Use of the Request (ICR), described below, to the technical assistance site for recipients Information: The purpose of this data Office of Management and Budget and subrecipients) and structured to collection effort is for HRSA contractors (OMB). Prior to submitting the ICR to allow programs to easily search and to assess the review criteria being used OMB, HRSA seeks comments from the identify RWHAP best practice strategies to systematically identify and select public regarding the burden estimate, and interventions for implementation. RWHAP-funded best practice strategies below, or any other aspect of the ICR. Recipients and subrecipients may or interventions that demonstrate DATES: Comments on this ICR should be voluntarily complete a submission form, impact across the HIV care continuum received no later than August 19, 2019. also housed on TargetHIV.org, when for the online compilation. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to they have a best practice strategy or Assessing the review criteria will [email protected] or mail the HRSA intervention to share. Strategies and allow HRSA to obtain important Information Collection Clearance interventions that meet certain criteria information from recipients and Officer, Room 14N136B, 5600 Fishers will be incorporated into the online determine if the strategies or Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857. compilation. interventions shared via the submission VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28562 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices form are effective in improving strategy or intervention will participate disclose, or provide the information outcomes across the HIV care in the data collection. The project team requested. This includes the time continuum. Strategies and interventions expects that up to 70 recipients and needed to review instructions; to that meet the review criteria verified by subrecipients will complete the develop, acquire, install, and utilize HRSA contractors and approved by screening form and 50 will screen technology and systems for the purpose HRSA program staff through this data eligible and complete the full of collecting, validating, and verifying collection will be considered best submission form. For the site visits, the information, processing and practices and made available through project team will strategically select 30 maintaining information, and disclosing the online compilation for sites from the universe of submitted and providing information; to train consideration, adaptation, and eligible initiatives, ensuring a range of personnel and to be able to respond to replication by other HIV programs. In scores and representativeness of factors a collection of information; to search addition, the best practices will support such as Census region, proposed peer exchange to resolve problems strategy/intervention outcome, priority data sources; to complete and review impacting HIV care and treatment and population, and the type of agency or the collection of information; and to eliminating disparities in health provider implementing the strategy or transmit or otherwise disclose the outcomes. intervention. information. The total annual burden Likely Respondents: RWHAP Burden Statement: Burden in this hours estimated for this ICR are recipients and subrecipients that context means the time expended by summarized in the table below. voluntarily submit a best practice persons to generate, maintain, retain, TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS Average Number of Number of Total burden per Total burden Form name respondents responses per responses response hours respondent (in hours) Pre-Submission Screening Form ...... 70 1 70 0.08 5.60 Submission Form ...... 50 1 50 3.00 150.00 Site Visit Discussion Guide ...... * 120 1 120 1.00 120.00 Program Manager Interview ...... 30 1 30 1.00 30.00 Direct Service Provider Interview ...... 60 1 60 1.00 60.00 Evaluator Interview ...... 30 1 30 1.00 30.00 Total ...... ** 240 ...... 240 ...... 275.60 * For a total of 120 hours, each of the 30 site visits will include one-hour interviews with a program manager (30 hours), up to two 1-hour inter- views with direct service providers (60 hours), and an 1-hour interview with an evaluator (30 hours).’ ** The total number of respondents is 240 as comprised by the number of respondents for the pre-submission screening form (70), the submis- sion form (50), and the site visit discussion guide (120). HRSA specifically requests comments SUMMARY: As stipulated by the Federal DATES: The Council meeting is on: (1) The necessity and utility of the Advisory Committee Act, the U.S. scheduled to convene on Monday, July proposed information collection for the Department of Health and Human 8 from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. ET and proper performance of the agency’s Service is hereby giving notice that the Tuesday, July 9 from 9:00 to 3:00 p.m. functions; (2) the accuracy of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/ ET (times are tentative and subject to estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance AIDS (PACHA or the Council) will be change). The meeting agenda will be the quality, utility, and clarity of the holding the 64th full Council meeting in posted on the PACHA web page at information to be collected; and (4) the Jackson, Mississippi. Members will hear https://www.hiv.gov/federal-response/ use of automated collection techniques a panel presentation regarding Ending pacha/about-pacha. Public attendance or other forms of information the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America is limited to available space. technology to minimize the information and will discuss possible ADDRESSES: Hilton Jackson located at collection burden. recommendations regarding programs, 1001 E County Line Road, Jackson, Maria G. Button, policies, and research to promote Mississippi 39211. The meeting can also Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat. effective, prevention, treatment and cure be accessed through a live webcast on the day of the meeting. [FR Doc. 2019–12960 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] of HIV disease and AIDS. The meeting BILLING CODE 4165–15–P will be open to the public; a public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. comment session will be held during Caroline Talev, MPA, Public Health the meeting. Pre-registration is Analyst, Presidential Advisory Council DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND encouraged for members of the public on HIV/AIDS, 330 C Street SW, Room HUMAN SERVICES who wish to attend the meeting and L106B, Washington, DC 20024; (202) who wish to participate in the public 795–7622 or [email protected]. Meeting of the Presidential Advisory comment session. Individuals who wish Additional information can be obtained Council on HIV/AIDS to attend the meeting and/or send in by accessing the Council’s page on the HIV.gov site at www.hiv.gov/pacha. AGENCY: Office of the Assistant their public comment via email should Secretary for Health, Office of the send an email to Caroline Talev, MPA, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PACHA Secretary, Department of Health and at [email protected]. Pre- was established by Executive Order Human Services. Registration must be complete by 12963, dated June 14, 1995, as amended by Executive Order 13009, dated June ACTION: Notice. Monday, July 1, 2019. 14, 1996 and is currently operating VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28563 under the authority given in Executive DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Name of Committee: AIDS and Related Order 13811, dated September 29, 2017. HUMAN SERVICES Research Integrated Review Group; HIV/ The Council was established to provide AIDS Intra- and Inter-personal Determinants advice, information, and National Institutes of Health and Behavioral Interventions Study Section. recommendations to the Secretary Date: July 11–12, 2019. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. regarding programs and policies Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings Agenda: To review and evaluate grant intended to promote effective applications. prevention and care of HIV infection Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Place: Sheraton Grand Seattle, 1400 6th and AIDS. The functions of the Council Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. are solely advisory in nature. amended, notice is hereby given of the Contact Person: Mark P. Rubert, Ph.D., The Council consists of not more than following meetings. Scientific Review Officer, Center for 25 members. Council members are The meetings will be closed to the Scientific Review, National Institutes of selected from prominent community public in accordance with the Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5218, leaders with particular expertise in, or MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–806– provisions set forth in sections 6596, [email protected]. knowledge of, matters concerning HIV 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., and AIDS, public health, global health, as amended. The grant applications and Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member philanthropy, marketing or business, as the discussions could disclose well as other national leaders held in Conflict: GI Mucosal Immunology and confidential trade secrets or commercial Pathology. high esteem from other sectors of property such as patentable material, Date: July 11, 2019. society. Council members are appointed and personal information concerning Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. by the Secretary or designee, in individuals associated with the grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant consultation with the White House. The applications, the disclosure of which applications. agenda for will be posted on HIV.gov at would constitute a clearly unwarranted Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 https://www.hiv.gov/federal-response/ invasion of personal privacy. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 pacha/about-pacha. (Telephone Conference Call). Public attendance at the meeting is Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Meenakshisundar Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: limited to space available. Individuals Ananthanarayanan, Ph.D., Scientific Review AIDS and Related Research. Officer, Center for Scientific Review, who plan to attend and need special Date: July 8, 2019. assistance, such as sign language National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Time: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Drive, Room 2178, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301– interpretation or other reasonable Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 827–6281, meena.ananthanarayanan@ accommodations, should notify Caroline applications. nih.gov. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Talev at [email protected]. Due to Name of Committee: Center for Scientific space constraints, pre-registration for Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting). Review Special Emphasis Panel; Health public attendance is advisable and can Services Research on Minority Health and be accomplished by contacting Caroline Contact Person: Shalanda A. Bynum, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Health Disparities. Talev at [email protected] by Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: July 12, 2019. close of business Monday, July 1, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3206, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Members of the public will have the Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–755–4355, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant opportunity to provide comments [email protected]. applications. Place: The Dupont Hotel, 1500 New during the meeting. Comments will be Name of Committee: Center for Scientific limited to two minutes per speaker. Any Hampshire Avenue NW, Washington, DC Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR–19– 20036. 209: Next Generation Multipurpose individual who wishes to participate in Contact Person: Mark Allen Vosvick, Ph.D., Prevention Technologies. the public comment session must Scientific Review Officer, Center for Date: July 10, 2019. register with Caroline Talev at Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. [email protected] by close of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3110, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant business Monday, July 1, 2019; Bethesda, MD 20892, [email protected]. applications. registration for public comment will not Place: National Institutes of Health, RKL II, Name of Committee: AIDS and Related be accepted by telephone. Individuals 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Research Integrated Review Group; HIV are encouraged to provide a written (Telephone Conference Call). Molecular Virology, Cell Biology, and Drug statement of any public comment(s) for Contact Person: Barna Dey, Ph.D., Development Study Section. accurate minute taking purposes. Public Scientific Review Officer, Center for Date: July 15–16, 2019. comment will be limited to two minutes Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. per speaker. Any members of the public Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3184, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. who wish to have printed material Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451–2796, bdey@ Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 distributed to PACHA members at the mail.nih.gov. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. meeting are asked to submit, at a Contact Person: Kenneth A. Roebuck, minimum, 1 copy of the material(s) to Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Business: Digestive Sciences. Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Caroline Talev, no later than close of Date: July 11, 2019. Scientific Review, National Institutes of business on Monday, July 1, 2019. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5214, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Dated: May 31, 2019. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1166, [email protected]. B. Kaye Hayes, applications. Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Executive Director, Presidential Advisory Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Council on HIV/AIDS, Deputy Director, Office North Bethesda, MD 20852. Conflict: Community Health and Health of HIV/AIDS and Infectious Disease Policy, Contact Person: Ganesan Ramesh, Ph.D., Disparities. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Center for Scientific Review, National Date: July 15, 2019. Department of Health and Human Services. Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Time: 12:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. [FR Doc. 2019–12986 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Room 2182 MSC 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant BILLING CODE 4150–43–P 301–827–5467, [email protected]. applications. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28564 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Name of Committee: National Institute on Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel; Mobile (Telephone Conference Call). Conflict: Topics in Cancer Biology. Technologies Extending Reach of Primary Contact Person: Lauren Fordyce, Ph.D., Date: July 17, 2019. Care for Substance-Use-Disorders (R41/R42/ Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. R43/R44—Clinical Trial Optional). Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 14, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3214, applications. Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–827–8269, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [email protected]. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (Telephone Conference Call). Place: National Institutes of Health, Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA–NS18– Contact Person: Amy L. Rubinstein, Ph.D., Neuroscience Center Building (NSC), 6001 018 Brain Initiative: Biology and Biophysics Scientific Review Officer, Center for Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 of Neural Stimulation. Scientific Review, National Institutes of (Telephone Conference Call). Date: July 16, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5152, Contact Person: Ipolia R. Ramadan, Ph.D., Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–408– Scientific Review Officer, Office of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 9754, [email protected]. Extramural Policy and Review, Division of Extramural Research, National Institute on applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, 6001 Executive Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Boulevard, Room 4228, MSC 9550, Bethesda, Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Conflict: Dental, Microbiology and Oral (Telephone Conference Call). MD 20892, 301–827–5842, ramadanir@ Biology. mail.nih.gov. Contact Person: Sharon S. Low, Ph.D., Date: July 17, 2019. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. This notice is being published less than 15 Scientific Review, National Institutes of days prior to the meeting due to the timing Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5104, limitations imposed by the review and applications. MSC 5104, Bethesda, MD 20892–5104, 301– funding cycle. Place: National Institutes of Health, RKL II, 237–1487, [email protected]. 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Name of Committee: National Institute on Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (Telephone Conference Call). Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel; Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Contact Person: Baljit S. Moonga, Ph.D., Evaluating the NIDA Standardized Research Conflict: Medical Imaging Investigations. Scientific Review Officer, Center for E-Cigarette in Risk Reduction and Related Date: July 17, 2019. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Studies (U01 Clinical Trial Optional). Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4214, Date: June 21, 2019. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. applications. 1777, [email protected]. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 applications. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Place: National Institutes of Health, (Virtual Meeting). Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; Neuroscience Center Building (NSC), 6001 Contact Person: Guo Feng Xu, Ph.D., 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 Scientific Review Officer, Center for 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, (Telephone Conference Call). Scientific Review, National Institutes of 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Contact Person: Ipolia R. Ramadan, Ph.D., Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5122, Institutes of Health, HHS) Scientific Review Officer, Office of MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–237– Dated: June 14, 2019. Extramural Policy and Review, Division of 9870, [email protected]. Ronald J. Livingston, Jr., Extramural Research, National Institute on Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, 6001 Executive Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Boulevard, Room 4228, MSC 9550, Bethesda, Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Committee Policy. Conflict: Neural Basis of Brain and MD 20892, 301–827–5842, ramadanir@ Neurodegenerative Disorders. [FR Doc. 2019–13025 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] mail.nih.gov. Date: July 17, 2019. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Name of Committee: National Institute on Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel; Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Identification of Genetic and Genomic applications. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Variants by Next-Gen Sequencing in Non- Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 HUMAN SERVICES human Animal Models (U01). Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Date: June 28, 2019. (Telephone Conference Call). National Institutes of Health Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Contact Person: Paula Elyse Schauwecker, Agenda: To review and evaluate Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National National Institute on Drug Abuse; cooperative agreement applications. Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Notice of Closed Meetings Place: National Institutes of Health, Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5211, Neuroscience Center Building (NSC), 6001 Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–760–8207, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 [email protected]. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as (Telephone Conference Call). Name of Committee: Center for Scientific amended, notice is hereby given of the Contact Person: Ipolia R. Ramadan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Review Special Emphasis Panel; Synthetic following meetings. Psychoactive Drugs and Strategic Approaches Extramural Policy and Review, Division of to Counteract Their Deleterious Effects. The meetings will be closed to the Extramural Research, National Institute on Date: July 17, 2019. public in accordance with the Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, 6001 Executive Time: 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. provisions set forth in sections Boulevard, Room 4228, MSC 9550, Bethesda, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., MD 20892, 301–827–5842, ramadanir@ applications. as amended. The grant applications and mail.nih.gov. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 the discussions could disclose Name of Committee: National Institute on Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 confidential trade secrets or commercial Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel; Device- (Telephone Conference Call). property such as patentable material, Based Treatments for Substance Use Contact Person: Geoffrey G. Schofield, Disorders (UH2/UH3) (Clinical Trial Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for and personal information concerning Optional). Scientific Review, National Institutes of individuals associated with the grant Date: July 9, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4040–A, applications, the disclosure of which Time: 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– would constitute a clearly unwarranted Agenda: To review and evaluate 1235, [email protected]. invasion of personal privacy. cooperative agreement applications. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28565 Place: National Institutes of Health, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Alzheimer’s Disease and Its Related Neuroscience Center Building (NSC), 6001 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Dementias. Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Virtual Meeting). Date: July 16, 2019. (Telephone Conference Call). Contact Person: Maria Nurminskaya, Ph.D., Time: 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Contact Person: Susan O. McGuire, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Extramural Policy and Review, National Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1222, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes [email protected]. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 of Health, DHHS, 6001 Executive Blvd., Name of Committee: AIDS and Related (Virtual Meeting). Room 4245, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 827– Research Integrated Review Group; HIV Contact Person: Karen Nieves Lugo, Ph.D., 5817, [email protected]. Coinfections and HIV Associated Cancers Scientific Review Officer, Center for (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Study Section. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Program Nos.: 93.279, Drug Abuse and Date: July 11, 2019. Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, Addiction Research Programs, National Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. [email protected]. Institutes of Health, HHS) Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Dated: June 14, 2019. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Conflict: Cancer Prevention and Therapy. Natasha M. Copeland, Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Date: July 16, 2019. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Contact Person: Jingsheng Tuo, Ph.D., Time: 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Committee Policy. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [FR Doc. 2019–13027 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3196, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451–5953, tuoj@ Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 csr.nih.gov. (Telephone Conference Call). DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Lilia Topol, Ph.D., HUMAN SERVICES Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Scientific Review Officer, Center for Business: Radiation Therapy and Biology. Scientific Review, National Institutes of National Institutes of Health Date: July 11–12, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6192, Time: 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–451– Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 0131, [email protected]. applications. Closed Meetings Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Conflict: Molecular Neurophysiology. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as (Virtual Meeting). Date: July 16, 2019. Contact Person: Bo Hong, Ph.D., Scientific Time: 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. amended, notice is hereby given of the Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, following meetings. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge applications. The meetings will be closed to the Drive, Room 6194, MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD public in accordance with the Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 20892, 301–996–6208, [email protected]. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (Telephone Conference Call). 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Review Special Emphasis Panel; Discovery & Contact Person: Geoffrey G. Schofield, as amended. The grant applications and Validation of Novel Safe and Effective Pain Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for the discussions could disclose Treatment. Scientific Review, National Institutes of confidential trade secrets or commercial Date: July 16, 2019. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4040–A, property such as patentable material, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– and personal information concerning Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1235, [email protected]. individuals associated with the grant applications. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 applications, the disclosure of which Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, would constitute a clearly unwarranted (Virtual Meeting). invasion of personal privacy. 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Contact Person: John Bishop, Ph.D., 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Officer, Center for Institutes of Health, HHS) Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR: Scientific Review, National Institutes of Dated: June 14, 2019. Exosomes and Substance Use Disorders. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5182, Date: July 8, 2019. MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408– Natasha M. Copeland, Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. 9664, [email protected]. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Committee Policy. applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel; Discovery & [FR Doc. 2019–13023 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Validation of Novel Safe and Effective Pain BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Treatment. (Telephone Conference Call). Date: July 16, 2019. Contact Person: Peter B. Guthrie, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. HUMAN SERVICES Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4142, Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 National Institutes of Health 1239, [email protected]. (Virtual Meeting). National Institute of Allergy and Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: M. Catherine Bennett, Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Business: Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Scientific Review, National Institutes of Meeting Sciences. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5182, Date: July 9, 2019. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 1766, [email protected]. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific amended, notice is hereby given of the applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: following meeting. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28566 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices The meeting will be closed to the Dated: June 14, 2019. or fax 202–372–8405, for questions on public in accordance with the Ronald J. Livingston, Jr., these documents. provisions set forth in sections Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Committee Policy. Public Participation and Request for as amended. The grant applications and [FR Doc. 2019–13024 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Comments the discussions could disclose BILLING CODE 4140–01–P confidential trade secrets or commercial This notice relies on the authority of property such as patentable material, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; and personal information concerning DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to OIRA seeking individuals associated with the grant SECURITY the approval, extension, or renewal of a applications, the disclosure of which Coast Guard Coast Guard collection of information would constitute a clearly unwarranted (Collection). The ICR contains invasion of personal privacy. [Docket No. USCG–2019–0249] information describing the Collection’s purpose, the Collection’s likely burden Name of Committee: National Institute of Collection of Information Under on the affected public, an explanation of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Review by Office of Management and Emphasis Panel; Radiation Biodosimetry the necessity of the Collection, and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625– Assays and Devices (U01 Clinical Trial Not other important information describing 0052 Allowed). the Collection. There is one ICR for each Date: July 10–11, 2019. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Collection. Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting The Coast Guard invites comments on Agenda: To review and evaluate grant comments. whether this ICR should be granted applications. based on the Collection being necessary Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 SUMMARY: In compliance with the for the proper performance of Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the Departmental functions. In particular, (Telephone Conference Call). U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an the Coast Guard would appreciate Contact Person: Thomas F. Conway, Ph.D., Information Collection Request (ICR), comments addressing: (1) The practical Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review abstracted below, to the Office of utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Management and Budget (OMB), Office of the estimated burden of the Room 3G51, National Institutes of Health, of Information and Regulatory Affairs Collection; (3) ways to enhance the NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, (OIRA), requesting an extension of its quality, utility, and clarity of Bethesda, MD 20892–9823, 240–507–9685, approval for the following collection of information subject to the Collection; [email protected]. information: 1625–0052, Nondestructive and (4) ways to minimize the burden of (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Testing of Certain Cargo Tanks on the Collection on respondents, Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, Unmanned Barges; without change. Our including the use of automated and Transplantation Research; 93.856, ICR describes the information we seek collection techniques or other forms of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases to collect from the public. Review and information technology. Consistent with Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) comments by OIRA ensure we only the requirements of Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Dated: June 14, 2019. impose paperwork burdens Controlling Regulatory Costs, and Natasha M. Copeland, commensurate with our performance of duties. Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Committee Policy. Guard is also requesting comments on Guard and OIRA on or before July 19, [FR Doc. 2019–13026 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] the extent to which this request for 2019. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P information could be modified to reduce ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the burden on respondents. These identified by Coast Guard docket comments will help OIRA determine DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND number [USCG–2019–0249] to the Coast whether to approve the ICR referred to HUMAN SERVICES Guard using the Federal eRulemaking in this notice. Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. We encourage you to respond to this National Institutes of Health Alternatively, you may submit request by submitting comments and comments to OIRA using one of the related materials. Comments to Coast Center for Scientific Review; Amended following means: Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB Notice of Meeting (1) Email: dhsdeskofficer@ Control Number of the ICR. They must omb.eop.gov. also contain the docket number of this Notice is hereby given of a change in (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, request, [USCG–2019–0249], and must the meeting of the Tumor Washington, DC 20503, attention Desk be received by July 19, 2019. Microenvironment Study Section, June Officer for the Coast Guard. Submitting Comments 24, 2019, 08:00 a.m. to June 25, 2019, A copy of the ICR is available through 05:00 p.m., The Crowne Plaza Seattle, the docket on the internet at https:// We encourage you to submit 1113 6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101 www.regulations.gov. Additionally, comments through the Federal copies are available from: Commandant which was published in the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https:// (CG–612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Register on May 28, 2019, 84 FR 24528. www.regulations.gov. If your material Act Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 cannot be submitted using https:// The meeting will now be held at the Martin Luther King Jr Ave. SE, Stop www.regulations.gov, contact the person Renaissance Seattle Hotel, 515 Madison 7710, Washington, DC 20593–7710. in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Street, Seattle, WA 98104. The meeting FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. CONTACT section of this document for date and time remain the same. The Anthony Smith, Office of Information alternate instructions. Documents meeting is closed to the public. Management, telephone 202–475–3532, mentioned in this notice, and all public VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28567 comments, are in our online docket at Dated: June 13, 2019. Management, telephone 202–475–3532, https://www.regulations.gov and can be James D. Roppel, or fax 202–372–8405, for questions on viewed by following that website’s U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information these documents. instructions. Additionally, if you go to Management. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the online docket and sign up for email [FR Doc. 2019–12919 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Public Participation and Request for alerts, you will be notified when BILLING CODE 9110–04–P comments are posted. Comments We accept anonymous comments. All This notice relies on the authority of comments received will be posted DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; without change to https:// SECURITY 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An www.regulations.gov and will include ICR is an application to OIRA seeking any personal information you have Coast Guard the approval, extension, or renewal of a provided. For more about privacy and [Docket No. USCG–2019–0253] Coast Guard collection of information the docket, you may review a Privacy (Collection). The ICR contains Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Collection of Information Under information describing the Collection’s Management System in the March 24, Review by Office of Management and purpose, the Collection’s likely burden 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625– on the affected public, an explanation of FR 15086). 0042 the necessity of the Collection, and other important information describing OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. the Collection. There is one ICR for each online at https://www.reginfo.gov/ ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting Collection. public/do/PRAMain after the comment comments. The Coast Guard invites comments on period for each ICR. An OMB notice of whether this ICR should be granted Action on each ICR will become SUMMARY: In compliance with the based on the Collection being necessary available via a hyperlink in the OMB Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the for the proper performance of Control Number: 1625–0052. U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Departmental functions. In particular, Previous Request for Comments Information Collection Request (ICR), the Coast Guard would appreciate abstracted below, to the Office of comments addressing: (1) The practical This request provides a 30-day Management and Budget (OMB), Office utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy comment period required by OIRA. The of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the estimated burden of the Coast Guard published the 60-day (OIRA), requesting an extension of its Collection; (3) ways to enhance the notice (84 FR 13946, April 8, 2019) approval for the following collection of quality, utility, and clarity of required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That information: 1625–0042, Requirements information subject to the Collection; notice elicited no comments. for Lightering of Oil and Hazardous and (4) ways to minimize the burden of Accordingly, no changes have been Material Cargoes, and Advance Notice the Collection on respondents, made to the Collections. of Transfer; without change. Our ICR including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of Information Collection Request describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Review and information technology. Consistent with Title: Nondestructive Testing of comments by OIRA ensure we only the requirements of Executive Order Certain Cargo Tanks on Unmanned impose paperwork burdens 13771, Reducing Regulation and Barges. commensurate with our performance of Controlling Regulatory Costs, and OMB Control Number: 1625–0052. duties. Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast Summary: The Coast Guard uses the DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard is also requesting comments on results of nondestructive testing to Guard and OIRA on or before July 19, the extent to which this request for evaluate the suitability of older 2019. information could be modified to reduce pressure-vessel-type cargo tanks of ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the burden on respondents. These unmanned barges to remain in service. identified by Coast Guard docket comments will help OIRA determine Such a tank, on an unmanned barge, 30 number [USCG–2019–0253] to the Coast whether to approve the ICR referred to years old or older is subject to Guard using the Federal eRulemaking in this notice. nondestructive testing once every ten Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. We encourage you to respond to this years. Alternatively, you may submit request by submitting comments and Need: Under Title 46 U.S.C. 3703, the comments to OIRA using one of the related materials. Comments to Coast Coast Guard is responsible for ensuring following means: Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB safe shipment of liquid dangerous (1) Email: dhsdeskofficer@ Control Number of the ICR. They must cargoes and has promulgated omb.eop.gov. also contain the docket number of this regulations for certain barges to ensure (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, request, [USCG–2019–0253], and must the meeting of safety standards. Washington, DC 20503, attention Desk be received by July 19, 2019. Forms: None. Officer for the Coast Guard. A copy of the ICR is available through Submitting Comments Respondents: Owners of tank barges. the docket on the internet at https:// We encourage you to submit Frequency: Every 10 years. www.regulations.gov. Additionally, comments through the Federal Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated copies are available from: Commandant eRulemaking Portal at https:// burden has decreased from 130 hours to (CG–612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction www.regulations.gov. If your material 104 hours a year, due to a decrease in Act Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 cannot be submitted using https:// the estimated annual number of Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, STOP www.regulations.gov, contact the person respondents. 7710, Washington, DC 20593–7710. in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. CONTACT section of this document for of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. Anthony Smith, Office of Information alternate instructions. Documents VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28568 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices mentioned in this notice, and all public of a new form CG–4020—4 Hour Guard using the Federal eRulemaking comments, are in our online docket at Advance Notice of Transfer, because we Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. https://www.regulations.gov and can be believe that the form will improve Alternatively, you may submit viewed by following that website’s communications and enhance comments to OIRA using one of the instructions. Additionally, if you go to information exchange accuracy. The following means: the online docket and sign up for email optional form provides a facility (1) Email: dhsdeskofficer@ alerts, you will be notified when representative with a simple means of omb.eop.gov. comments are posted. complying with the existing advance (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, We accept anonymous comments. All notice of transfer requirements in 33 Washington, DC 20503, attention Desk comments received will be posted CFR 156.118. Officer for the Coast Guard. without change to https:// Respondents: Owners, masters and A copy of the ICR is available through www.regulations.gov and will include agents of lightering vessels, and facility the docket on the internet at https:// any personal information you have representatives. www.regulations.gov. Additionally, provided. For more about privacy and Frequency: On occasion. copies are available from: the docket, you may review a Privacy Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated COMMANDANT (CG–612), ATTN: Act notice regarding the Federal Docket burden has increased from 372 hours to PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT Management System in the March 24, 985 hours a year, due to an increase in MANAGER, U.S. COAST GUARD, 2703 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 the estimated annual number of MARTIN LUTHER KING JR AVE SE, FR 15086). responses. STOP 7710, WASHINGTON, DC 20593– OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act 7710. online at https://www.reginfo.gov/ of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. public/do/PRAMain after the comment Dated: June 13, 2019. Anthony Smith, Office of Information period for each ICR. An OMB notice of Management, telephone 202–475–3532, Action on each ICR will become James D. Roppel, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information or fax 202–372–8405, for questions on available via a hyperlink in the OMB these documents. Control Number: 1625–0042. Management. [FR Doc. 2019–12920 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Previous Request for Comments BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Public Participation and Request for This request provides a 30-day Comments comment period required by OIRA. The This notice relies on the authority of Coast Guard published the 60-day DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; notice (84 FR 13945, April 8, 2019) SECURITY 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That ICR is an application to OIRA seeking notice elicited no comments. Coast Guard the approval, extension, or renewal of a Accordingly, no changes have been [Docket No. USCG–2019–0039] Coast Guard collection of information made to the Collections. Collection of Information Under (Collection). The ICR contains Information Collection Request Review by Office of Management and information describing the Collection’s Title: Requirements for Lightering of Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625– purpose, the Collection’s likely burden Oil and Hazardous Material Cargoes, 0061 on the affected public, an explanation of and Advance Notice of Transfer. the necessity of the Collection, and OMB Control Number: 1625–0042. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. other important information describing Summary: The information for this ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting the Collection. There is one ICR for each report allows the U.S. Coast Guard to comments. Collection. provide timely response to an The Coast Guard invites comments on SUMMARY: In compliance with the emergency and minimize the whether this ICR should be granted Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the environmental damage from an oil or based on the Collection being necessary U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an hazardous material spill. The for the proper performance of Information Collection Request (ICR), information also allows the Coast Guard Departmental functions. In particular, abstracted below, to the Office of to control the location and procedures the Coast Guard would appreciate Management and Budget (OMB), Office for lightering activities. It also provides comments addressing: (1) The practical of Information and Regulatory Affairs advance notice of transfers at certain utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy (OIRA), requesting approval for facilities. of the estimated burden of the Need: Section 3715 of Title 46 U.S.C. reinstatement without change, of the Collection; (3) ways to enhance the authorizes the Coast Guard to establish following collection of information: quality, utility, and clarity of lightering regulations. Title 33 CFR 1625–0061, Commercial Fishing information subject to the Collection; 156.200 to 156.330 and 156.400 to Industry Vessel Safety Regulations. Our and (4) ways to minimize the burden of 156.430 prescribes the Coast Guard ICR describes the information we seek the Collection on respondents, regulations for lightering, including pre- to collect from the public. Review and including the use of automated arrival notice, reporting of incidents and comments by OIRA ensure we only collection techniques or other forms of operating conditions. Section 1225 of 33 impose paperwork burdens information technology. Consistent with U.S.C. authorizes the Coast Guard to commensurate with our performance of the requirements of Executive Order prescribe advance notice of transfer duties. 13771, Reducing Regulation and regulations. Title 33 CFR 156.118 DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Controlling Regulatory Costs, and prescribe the regulations. Guard and OIRA on or before July 19, Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Forms: CG–4020, 4 Hour Advance 2019. Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast Notice of Transfer. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Guard is also requesting comments on Why Is Coast Guard Proposing A New identified by Coast Guard docket the extent to which this request for Form: The Coast Guard proposes the use number [USCG–2019–0039] to the Coast information could be modified to reduce VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28569 the burden on respondents. These Need: Under the authority of 46 number [USCG–2019–0246] to the Coast comments will help OIRA determine U.S.C. 6104, the U.S. Coast Guard has Guard using the Federal eRulemaking whether to approve the ICR referred to promulgated regulations in 46 CFR part Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. in this notice. 28 to reduce the unacceptably high level Alternatively, you may submit We encourage you to respond to this of fatalities and accidents in the comments to OIRA using one of the request by submitting comments and commercial fishing industry. The rules following means: related materials. Comments to Coast allowing the collection also provide (1) Email: dhsdeskofficer@ Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB means of verifying compliance and omb.eop.gov. Control Number of the ICR. They must enhancing safe operation of fishing (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, also contain the docket number of this vessels. Washington, DC 20503, attention Desk request, [USCG–2019–0039], and must Forms: None. Officer for the Coast Guard. be received by July 19, 2019. Respondents: Owners, agents, A copy of the ICR is available through individuals-in-charge of commercial the docket on the internet at https:// Submitting Comments fishing vessels, and insurance www.regulations.gov. Additionally, We encourage you to submit underwriters. copies are available from: Commandant comments through the Federal Frequency: On occasion. (CG–612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction eRulemaking Portal at https:// Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated Act Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 www.regulations.gov. If your material burden has decreased from 6,617 hours Martin Luther King Jr Ave SE, Stop cannot be submitted using https:// to 4,832 hours a year, due to a decrease 7710, Washington, DC 20593–7710. www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the estimated annual number of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION responses. Anthony Smith, Office of Information CONTACT section of this document for Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act Management, telephone 202–475–3532, alternate instructions. Documents of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. or fax 202–372–8405, for questions on mentioned in this notice, and all public these documents. comments, are in our online docket at Dated: June 13, 2019. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: https://www.regulations.gov and can be James D. Roppel, viewed by following that website’s U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information Public Participation and Request for instructions. Additionally, if you go to Management. Comments the online docket and sign up for email [FR Doc. 2019–12913 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] This notice relies on the authority of alerts, you will be notified when BILLING CODE 9110–04–P the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; comments are posted. 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An We accept anonymous comments. All ICR is an application to OIRA seeking comments received will be posted DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND the approval, extension, or renewal of a without change to https:// SECURITY Coast Guard collection of information www.regulations.gov and will include Coast Guard (Collection). The ICR contains any personal information you have information describing the Collection’s provided. For more about privacy and [Docket No. USCG–2019–0246] purpose, the Collection’s likely burden the docket, you may review a Privacy on the affected public, an explanation of Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Collection of Information Under the necessity of the Collection, and Management System in the March 24, Review by Office of Management and other important information describing 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625– the Collection. There is one ICR for each FR 15086). 0122 Collection. OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. online at https://www.reginfo.gov/ The Coast Guard invites comments on ACTION: public/do/PRAMain after the comment Thirty-day notice requesting whether this ICR should be granted period for each ICR. An OMB notice of comments. based on the Collection being necessary Action on each ICR will become for the proper performance of SUMMARY: In compliance with the Departmental functions. In particular, available via a hyperlink in the OMB Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the Control Number: 1625–0061. the Coast Guard would appreciate U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an comments addressing: (1) The practical Previous Request for Comments Information Collection Request (ICR), utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy abstracted below, to the Office of of the estimated burden of the This request provides a 30-day Management and Budget (OMB), Office comment period required by OIRA. The Collection; (3) ways to enhance the of Information and Regulatory Affairs quality, utility, and clarity of Coast Guard published the 60-day (OIRA), requesting an extension of its notice (84 FR 13938, April 8, 2019) information subject to the Collection; approval for the following collection of and (4) ways to minimize the burden of required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That information: 1625–0122, Cargo Securing notice elicited no comments. the Collection on respondents, Manuals; without change. Our ICR including the use of automated Accordingly, no changes have been describes the information we seek to made to the Collections. collection techniques or other forms of collect from the public. Review and information technology. Consistent with Information Collection Request comments by OIRA ensure we only the requirements of Executive Order Title: Commercial Fishing Industry impose paperwork burdens 13771, Reducing Regulation and Vessel Safety Regulations. commensurate with our performance of Controlling Regulatory Costs, and OMB Control Number: 1625–0061. duties. Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Summary: This information collection DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast is intended to improve safety on board Guard and OIRA on or before July 19, Guard is also requesting comments on vessels in the commercial fishing 2019. the extent to which this request for industry. The requirements apply to ADDRESSES: You may submit comments information could be modified to reduce those vessels and to seamen on them. identified by Coast Guard docket the burden on respondents. These VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28570 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices comments will help OIRA determine Need: Sections 2103 and 3306 of Title (1) Email: dhsdeskofficer@ whether to approve the ICR referred to 46 U.S.C. authorizes the Coast Guard to omb.eop.gov. in this notice. establish these regulations. Title 33 CFR (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, We encourage you to respond to this 97 prescribes the Cargo Securing Washington, DC 20503, attention Desk request by submitting comments and Manual regulations. Officer for the Coast Guard. related materials. Comments to Coast Forms: None. A copy of the ICR is available through Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB Respondents: Owners, operators and the docket on the internet at https:// Control Number of the ICR. They must masters of certain cargo vessels. www.regulations.gov. Additionally, also contain the docket number of this Frequency: On occasion. copies are available from: Commandant request, [USCG–2019–0246], and must Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated (CG–612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction be received by July 19, 2019. burden has decreased from 4,210 hours Act Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 to 226 hours a year, due to a decrease Martin Luther King Jr Ave. SE, Stop Submitting Comments in the estimated annual number of 7710, Washington, DC 20593–7710. We encourage you to submit responses. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments through the Federal Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of eRulemaking Portal at https:// Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as Information Management, telephone www.regulations.gov. If your material amended. 202–475–3532, or fax 202–372–8405, for cannot be submitted using https:// Dated: June 13, 2019. questions on these documents. www.regulations.gov, contact the person James D. Roppel, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information Public Participation and Request for CONTACT section of this document for Management. Comments alternate instructions. Documents [FR Doc. 2019–12916 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] mentioned in this notice, and all public BILLING CODE 9110–04–P This notice relies on the authority of comments, are in our online docket at the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; https://www.regulations.gov and can be 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An viewed by following that website’s DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND ICR is an application to OIRA seeking instructions. Additionally, if you go to SECURITY the approval, extension, or renewal of a the online docket and sign up for email Coast Guard collection of information alerts, you will be notified when Coast Guard (Collection). The ICR contains comments are posted. [Docket No. USCG–2019–0042] information describing the Collection’s We accept anonymous comments. All purpose, the Collection’s likely burden comments received will be posted Collection of Information Under on the affected public, an explanation of without change to https:// Review by Office of Management and the necessity of the Collection, and www.regulations.gov and will include Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625– other important information describing any personal information you have 0033 the Collection. There is one ICR for each provided. For more about privacy and Collection. the docket, you may review a Privacy AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. The Coast Guard invites comments on Act notice regarding the Federal Docket ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting whether this ICR should be granted Management System in the March 24, comments. based on the Collection being necessary 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 for the proper performance of FR 15086). SUMMARY: In compliance with the Departmental functions. In particular, OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the the Coast Guard would appreciate online at https://www.reginfo.gov/ U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an comments addressing: (1) The practical public/do/PRAMain after the comment Information Collection Request (ICR), utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy period for each ICR. An OMB notice of abstracted below, to the Office of of the estimated burden of the Action on each ICR will become Management and Budget (OMB), Office Collection; (3) ways to enhance the available via a hyperlink in the OMB of Information and Regulatory Affairs quality, utility, and clarity of Control Number: 1625–0122. (OIRA), requesting approval for information subject to the Collection; reinstatement, without change, of the and (4) ways to minimize the burden of Previous Request for Comments following collection of information: the Collection on respondents, This request provides a 30-day 1625–0033, Display of Fire Control including the use of automated comment period required by OIRA. The Plans for Vessels. Our ICR describes the collection techniques or other forms of Coast Guard published the 60-day information we seek to collect from the information technology. Consistent with notice (84 FR 13939, April 8, 2019) public. Review and comments by OIRA the requirements of Executive Order required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That ensure we only impose paperwork 13771, Reducing Regulation and notice elicited no comments. burdens commensurate with our Controlling Regulatory Costs, and Accordingly, no changes have been performance of duties. Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the made to the Collections. DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast Guard and OIRA on or before July 19, Information Collection Request Guard is also requesting comments on 2019. the extent to which this request for Title: Cargo Securing Manuals. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments information could be modified to reduce OMB Control Number: 1625–0122. identified by Coast Guard docket the burden on respondents. These Summary: The information is used by number [USCG–2019–0042] to the Coast comments will help OIRA determine the Coast Guard to review/approve new Guard using the Federal eRulemaking whether to approve the ICR referred to or updated cargo securing manuals, and Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. in this notice. to determine the proper response to a Alternatively, you may submit We encourage you to respond to this notification of a hazardous condition, comments to OIRA using one of the request by submitting comments and including lost or jettisoned cargo. following means: related materials. Comments to Coast VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28571 Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB 196 to ensure that safety standards are A copy of the ICR is available through Control Number of the ICR. They must met. the docket on the internet at https:// also contain the docket number of this Forms: None. www.regulations.gov. Additionally, request, [USCG–2019–0042], and must Respondents: Owners and operators copies are available from: Commandant be received by July 19, 2019. of vessels. (CG–612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Frequency: On occasion. Act Manager, U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Submitting Comments Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated Martin Luther King Jr Ave SE, Stop We encourage you to submit burden has decreased from 576 hours to 7710, Washington, DC 20593–7710. comments through the Federal 472 hours a year, due to a decrease in eRulemaking Portal at https:// the estimated number of respondents. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: www.regulations.gov. If your material Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act Information Management, telephone cannot be submitted using https:// of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. www.regulations.gov, contact the person 202–475–3532, or fax 202–372–8405, for Dated: June 13, 2019. in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION questions on these documents. James D. Roppel, CONTACT section of this document for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: alternate instructions. Documents U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information Public Participation and Request for mentioned in this notice, and all public Management. Comments comments, are in our online docket at [FR Doc. 2019–12914 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] https://www.regulations.gov and can be BILLING CODE 9110–04–P This notice relies on the authority of viewed by following that website’s the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; instructions. Additionally, if you go to 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An the online docket and sign up for email DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ICR is an application to OIRA seeking alerts, you will be notified when the approval, extension, or renewal of a comments are posted. Coast Guard Coast Guard collection of information We accept anonymous comments. All (Collection). The ICR contains comments received will be posted [Docket No. USCG–2019–0245] information describing the Collection’s without change to https:// purpose, the Collection’s likely burden Collection of Information Under www.regulations.gov and will include on the affected public, an explanation of Review by Office of Management and any personal information you have the necessity of the Collection, and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625– provided. For more about privacy and other important information describing 0117 the docket, you may review a Privacy the Collection. There is one ICR for each Act notice regarding the Federal Docket AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Collection. The Coast Guard invites Management System in the March 24, ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments on whether this ICR should 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 comments. be granted based on the Collection being FR 15086). necessary for the proper performance of OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs SUMMARY: In compliance with the Departmental functions. In particular, online at https://www.reginfo.gov/ Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the the Coast Guard would appreciate public/do/PRAMain after the comment U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an comments addressing: (1) The practical period for each ICR. An OMB notice of Information Collection Request (ICR), utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy Action on each ICR will become abstracted below, to the Office of of the estimated burden of the available via a hyperlink in the OMB Management and Budget (OMB), Office Collection; (3) ways to enhance the Control Number: 1625–0033. of Information and Regulatory Affairs quality, utility, and clarity of Previous Request for Comments (OIRA), requesting an extension of its information subject to the Collection; approval for the following collection of and (4) ways to minimize the burden of This request provides a 30-day information: 1625–0117, Towing the Collection on respondents, comment period required by OIRA. The Vessels—Title 46 CFR Subchapter M; including the use of automated Coast Guard published the 60-day without change. Our ICR describes the collection techniques or other forms of notice (84 FR 12630, April 2, 2019) information we seek to collect from the information technology. Consistent with required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That public. Review and comments by OIRA the requirements of Executive Order notice elicited no comments. ensure we only impose paperwork 13771, Reducing Regulation and Accordingly, no changes have been burdens commensurate with our Controlling Regulatory Costs, and made to the Collections. performance of duties. Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Information Collection Request DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast Title: Display of Fire Control Plans for Guard and OIRA on or before July 19, Guard is also requesting comments on Vessels. 2019. the extent to which this request for OMB Control Number: 1625–0033. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments information could be modified to reduce Summary: This information collection identified by Coast Guard docket the burden on respondents. These is for the posting or display of specific number [USCG–2019–0245] to the Coast comments will help OIRA determine plans on certain categories of Guard using the Federal eRulemaking whether to approve the ICR referred to commercial vessels. The availability of Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. in this notice. these plans aid firefighters and damage Alternatively, you may submit We encourage you to respond to this control efforts in response to comments to OIRA using one of the request by submitting comments and emergencies. following means: related materials. Comments to Coast Need: Under 46 U.S.C. 3305 and 3306, (1) Email: dhsdeskofficer@ Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB the Coast Guard is responsible for omb.eop.gov. Control Number of the ICR. They must ensuring the safety of inspected vessels (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, also contain the docket number of this and has promulgated regulations in 46 Washington, DC 20503, attention Desk request, [USCG–2019–0245], and must CFR parts 35, 78, 97, 109, 131, 169, and Officer for the Coast Guard. be received by July 19, 2019. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28572 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Submitting Comments Respondents: Owners and operators Background of towing vessels, and third party We encourage you to submit On June 5, 2019, U.S. Customs and organizations. comments through the Federal Border Protection (CBP) published in eRulemaking Portal at https:// Frequency: On occasion. the Federal Register a document www.regulations.gov. If your material Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated requesting comments from the public cannot be submitted using https:// burden has decreased from 181,669 and affected agencies on Customs-Trade www.regulations.gov, contact the person hours to 151,219 hours a year, due to a Partnership Against Terrorism (C– in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION decrease in the estimated annual TPAT) and the Trusted Trader Program. CONTACT section of this document for number of responses. 84 FR 26130. That document contained alternate instructions. Documents Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act an error in the subject heading by mentioned in this notice, and all public of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. referring to the ‘‘Trusted Trader Program’’ as the ‘‘Trusted Traveler comments, are in our online docket at Dated: June 13, 2019. Program.’’ This correction is being https://www.regulations.gov and can be James D. Roppel, viewed by following that website’s issued to clarify that the agency Chief, Office of Information Management, information collection relates to the instructions. Additionally, if you go to U.S. Coast Guard. the online docket and sign up for email Customs-Trade Partnership Against alerts, you will be notified when [FR Doc. 2019–12915 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Terrorism (C–TPAT) and the Trusted comments are posted. BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Trader Program. We accept anonymous comments. All Correction comments received will be posted DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND In the Federal Register of June 5, without change to https:// SECURITY www.regulations.gov and will include 2019, in the document at 84 FR 26130, in the first column, correct the subject any personal information you have U.S. Customs and Border Protection provided. For more about privacy and heading to read: Subject Heading: Agency Information the docket, you may review a Privacy [1651–0077] Collection Activities: Customs-Trade Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Partnership Against Terrorism (C– Management System in the March 24, Agency Information Collection TPAT) and the Trusted Trader Program. 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 Activities: Customs-Trade Partnership FR 15086). Against Terrorism (C–TPAT) and the Dated: June 13, 2019. OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs Trusted Trader Program; Correction Seth D. Renkema, online at https://www.reginfo.gov/ Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis public/do/PRAMain after the comment AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. period for each ICR. An OMB notice of Protection (CBP), Department of [FR Doc. 2019–12940 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Action on each ICR will become Homeland Security. BILLING CODE 9111–14–P available via a hyperlink in the OMB ACTION: 30-Day notice and request for Control Number: 1625–0117. comments; Extension of an existing collection of information; correction. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Previous Request for Comments SECURITY This request provides a 30-day SUMMARY: On June 5, 2019, U.S. U.S. Customs and Border Protection comment period required by OIRA. The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Coast Guard published the 60-day published a document in the Federal [1651–0005] notice (84 FR 13942, April 8, 2019) Register requesting comments from the required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That public and affected agencies on Agency Information Collection notice elicited no comments. Customs-Trade Partnership Against Activities: Application-Permit-Special Accordingly, no changes have been Terrorism (C–TPAT) and the Trusted License Unlading-Lading-Overtime made to the Collections. Trader Program. That document Services Information Collection Request contained an error in the subject AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border heading. This document corrects the Protection (CBP), Department of Title: Towing Vessels—Title 46 CFR June 5, 2019 document to reflect the Homeland Security. Subchapter M. correct subject heading. ACTION: 30-Day notice and request for OMB Control Number: 1625–0117. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seth comments; Extension of an existing Summary: The Coast Guard uses the Renkema, Chief, Economic Impact collection of information. information to document that towing Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and vessels meet inspection requirements of Border Protection, Office of Trade, SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland 46 CFR Subchapter M. The information Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street Security, U.S. Customs and Border aids in the administration and NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229– Protection will be submitting the enforcement of the towing vessel 1177, Telephone number (202) 325– following information collection request inspection program. 0056 or via email CBP_PRA@ to the Office of Management and Budget Need: Under the authority of 46 cbp.dhs.gov. Please note that the contact (OMB) for review and approval in U.S.C. 3306, the Coast Guard prescribed information provided here is solely for accordance with the Paperwork regulations for the design, construction, questions regarding this notice. Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The alteration, repair and operation of Individuals seeking information about information collection is published in towing vessels. The Coast Guard uses other CBP programs should contact the the Federal Register to obtain comments the information in this collection to CBP National Customer Service Center from the public and affected agencies. ensure compliance with the at 877–227–5511, (TTY) 1–800–877– DATES: Comments are encouraged and requirements. 8339, or CBP website at https:// must be submitted (no later than July Forms: None. www.cbp.gov/. 19, 2019) to be assured of consideration. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28573 ADDRESSES: Interested persons are comments that are submitted will be DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND invited to submit written comments on summarized and included in the request SECURITY this proposed information collection to for approval. All comments will become the Office of Information and Regulatory a matter of public record. Federal Emergency Management Affairs, Office of Management and Agency Budget. Comments should be addressed Overview of This Information Collection [Docket ID FEMA–2019–0001; Internal to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs Agency Docket No. FEMA–4433–DR] and Border Protection, Department of Title: Application-Permit-Special Homeland Security, and sent via Guam; Major Disaster and Related License Unlading-Lading-Overtime electronic mail to dhsdeskofficer@ Determinations omb.eop.gov. Services. OMB Number: 1651–0005. AGENCY: Federal Emergency FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Management Agency, DHS. Requests for additional PRA information Form Number: CBP Form 3171. ACTION: Notice. should be directed to Seth Renkema, Action: CBP proposes to extend the Chief, Economic Impact Analysis expiration date of this information SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Branch, U.S. Customs and Border collection with no change to the Presidential declaration of a major Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations estimated burden hours or to CBP Form disaster for the territory of Guam and Rulings, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, 3171. (FEMA–4433–DR), dated May 7, 2019, Washington, DC 20229–1177, and related determinations. Type of Review: Extension (without Telephone number (202) 325–0056 or DATES: The declaration was issued May _ via email CBP [email protected]. Please change). 7, 2019. note that the contact information Affected Public: Businesses. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: provided here is solely for questions Abstract: The Application-Permit- Dean Webster, Office of Response and regarding this notice. Individuals Recovery, Federal Emergency seeking information about other CBP Special License Unlading-Lading- Overtime Services (CBP Form 3171) is Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, programs should contact the CBP Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2833. National Customer Service Center at used by commercial carriers and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 877–227–5511, (TTY) 1–800–877–8339, importers as a request for permission to Notice is or CBP website at https://www.cbp. unlade imported merchandise, baggage, hereby given that, in a letter dated May gov/. or passengers. It is also used to request 7, 2019, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CBP overtime services from CBP officers in connection with lading or unlading of of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief invites the general public and other and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 Federal agencies to comment on the merchandise, or the entry or clearance of a vessel, including the boarding of a U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ‘‘Stafford Act’’), proposed and/or continuing information as follows: collections pursuant to the Paperwork vessel for preliminary supplies, ship’s Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 stores, sea stores, or equipment not to be I have determined that the damage in et seq.). This proposed information reladen. CBP Form 3171 is provided for certain areas of the territory of Guam resulting from Typhoon Wutip during the collection was previously published in 19 CFR 4.10, 4.30, 4.39, 4.91, 10.60, period of February 23 to February 25, 2019, the Federal Register (84 FR 7098) on 24.16, 122.38, 123.8, 146.32 and 146.34. is of sufficient severity and magnitude to March 1, 2019, allowing for a 60-day This form is accessible at: https:// warrant a major disaster declaration under comment period. This notice allows for www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/ the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and an additional 30 days for public forms?title=3171. Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et comments. This process is conducted in seq. (the ‘‘Stafford Act’’). Therefore, I declare Estimated Number of Respondents: accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written that such a major disaster exists in the 1,500. comments and suggestions from the territory of Guam. Estimated Number of Annual In order to provide Federal assistance, you public and affected agencies should are hereby authorized to allocate from funds address one or more of the following Responses per Respondent: 266. available for these purposes such amounts as four points: (1) Whether the proposed Estimated Number of Total Annual you find necessary for Federal disaster collection of information is necessary Responses: 399,000 assistance and administrative expenses. for the proper performance of the You are authorized to provide Public functions of the agency, including Estimated Time per Response: 8 Assistance in the designated areas and whether the information will have minutes. Hazard Mitigation throughout the territory. practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the Estimated Total Annual Burden Consistent with the requirement that Federal agency’s estimate of the burden of the Hours: 53,187. assistance be supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for proposed collection of information, Dated: June 13, 2019. Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 including the validity of the Seth D Renkema, percent of the total eligible costs. Federal methodology and assumptions used; (3) funds provided under the Stafford Act for suggestions to enhance the quality, Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 utility, and clarity of the information to Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. percent of the total eligible costs, with the be collected; and (4) suggestions to [FR Doc. 2019–12939 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] exception of projects that meet the eligibility minimize the burden of the collection of BILLING CODE 9111–14–P criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing information on those who are to percentage under the Public Assistance respond, including through the use of Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for Debris Removal implemented pursuant to appropriate automated, electronic, section 428 of the Stafford Act. mechanical, or other technological Further, you are authorized to make collection techniques or other forms of changes to this declaration for the approved information technology, e.g., permitting assistance to the extent allowable under the electronic submission of responses. The Stafford Act. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:43 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28574 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices The Federal Emergency Management where applicable, in the supporting www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_ Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, main.html. pursuant to the authority vested in the prepared by the Federal Emergency SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Administrator, under Executive Order Management Agency (FEMA) for each specific flood hazard determinations are 12148, as amended, Tracy A. Haynes, of community, is appropriate because of not described for each community in FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal new scientific or technical data. The this notice. However, the online Coordinating Officer for this major FIRM, and where applicable, portions of location and local community map disaster. the FIS report, have been revised to repository address where the flood The following areas of the territory of reflect these flood hazard hazard determination information is Guam have been designated as determinations through issuance of a available for inspection is provided. adversely affected by this major disaster: Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in Any request for reconsideration of The territory of Guam for Public accordance with Federal Regulations. flood hazard determinations must be Assistance. The LOMR will be used by insurance submitted to the Chief Executive Officer All areas within the territory of Guam are agents and others to calculate of the community as listed in the table eligible for assistance under the Hazard appropriate flood insurance premium Mitigation Grant Program. below. rates for new buildings and the contents The modifications are made pursuant The following Catalog of Federal Domestic of those buildings. For rating purposes, Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used to section 201 of the Flood Disaster the currently effective community Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, number is shown in the table below and Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora and are in accordance with the National must be used for all new policies and Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; renewals. 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); DATES: These flood hazard The FIRM and FIS report are the basis 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; determinations will be finalized on the of the floodplain management measures 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to dates listed in the table below and that the community is required either to Individuals and Households In Presidentially adopt or to show evidence of having in Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, revise the FIRM panels and FIS report Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— in effect prior to this determination for effect in order to qualify or remain Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals the listed communities. qualified for participation in the and Households; 97.050, Presidentially From the date of the second National Flood Insurance Program Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals publication of notification of these (NFIP). and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, changes in a newspaper of local These flood hazard determinations, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance circulation, any person has 90 days in together with the floodplain (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, management criteria required by 44 CFR Hazard Mitigation Grant. which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate 60.3, are the minimum that are required. Pete Gaynor, Administrator for Insurance and They should not be construed to mean Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Mitigation reconsider the changes. The that the community must change any Management Agency. flood hazard determination information existing ordinances that are more [FR Doc. 2019–12928 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] may be changed during the 90-day stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The BILLING CODE 9111–23–P period. community may at any time enact ADDRESSES: The affected communities stricter requirements of its own or DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND are listed in the table below. Revised pursuant to policies established by other SECURITY flood hazard information for each Federal, State, or regional entities. The community is available for inspection at flood hazard determinations are in Federal Emergency Management both the online location and the accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. Agency respective community map repository The affected communities are listed in address listed in the table below. [Docket ID FEMA–2019–0002; Internal the following table. Flood hazard Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1937] Additionally, the current effective FIRM determination information for each and FIS report for each community are community is available for inspection at Changes in Flood Hazard accessible online through the FEMA both the online location and the Determinations Map Service Center at https:// respective community map repository msc.fema.gov for comparison. address listed in the table below. AGENCY: Federal Emergency Submit comments and/or appeals to Additionally, the current effective FIRM Management Agency, DHS. the Chief Executive Officer of the and FIS report for each community are ACTION: Notice. community as listed in the table below. accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at https:// SUMMARY: This notice lists communities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick msc.fema.gov for comparison. where the addition or modification of Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood Branch, Federal Insurance and (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. depths, Special Flood Hazard Area Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) (SFHA) boundaries or zone C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, Michael M. Grimm, designations, or the regulatory floodway (202) 646–7659, or (email) Assistant Administrator for Risk (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard [email protected]; or visit Management, Department of Homeland determinations), as shown on the Flood the FEMA Map Information eXchange Security, Federal Emergency Management Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and (FMIX) online at https:// Agency. Location and Chief executive Online location of Date of modi- Community State and county case No. officer of community Community map repository letter of map revision fication No. Arizona: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28575 Location and Chief executive Online location of Date of modi- Community State and county case No. officer of community Community map repository letter of map revision fication No. Maricopa ...... City of Peoria The Honorable Cathy Carlat, Mayor, City Hall, 8401 West Monroe https://msc.fema.gov/ Sep. 13, 2019 040050 (19–09–0336P). City of Peoria, 8401 West Monroe Street, Peoria, AZ 85345. portal/ Street, Peoria, AZ 85345. advanceSearch. Pima ...... City of Tucson The Honorable Jonathan Roth- Planning and Development https://msc.fema.gov/ Aug. 23, 2019 040076 (18–09–2360P). schild, Mayor, City of Tucson, Services, Public Works portal/ City Hall, 255 West Alameda Building, 201 North Stone advanceSearch. Street, 10th Floor, Tucson, AZ Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701. 85701. Pima ...... Unincorporated The Honorable Richard Elias, Chair- Pima County Flood Control https://msc.fema.gov/ Aug. 23, 2019 040073 Areas of Pima man, Board of Supervisors, Pima District, 201 North Stone portal/ County (18–09– County, 130 West Congress Avenue, 9th Floor, Tuc- advanceSearch. 2360P). Street, 11th Floor, Tucson, AZ son, AZ 85701. 85701. California: Orange City of Irvine (19– The Honorable Christina L. Shea, City Hall, 1 Civic Center https://msc.fema.gov/ Sep. 20, 2019 060222 09–0114P). Mayor, City of Irvine, 1 Civic Cen- Plaza, Irvine, CA 92606. portal/ ter Plaza, Irvine, CA 92606. advanceSearch. Florida: Clay ...... Unincorporated Ms. Diane Hutchings, Commis- Clay County, Public Works https://msc.fema.gov/ Aug. 30, 2019 120064 Areas of Clay sioner, Clay County Board of Department, 5 Esplanade portal/ County (19–04– County Commissioners, P.O. Box Avenue, Green Cove advanceSearch. 2097P). 1366, Green Cove Springs, FL Springs, FL 32043. 32043. Michigan: Washtenaw ... Township of Scio Mr. Jack Knowles, Supervisor, Township Hall, 827 North https://msc.fema.gov/ Aug. 9, 2019 260537 (19–05–0515P). Township of Scio, 100 North 5th Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI portal/ Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48104. 48103. advanceSearch. Wayne ...... Township of Can- The Honorable Pat Williams, Town- Municipal Complex, 1150 https://msc.fema.gov/ Aug. 30, 2019 260219 ton (18–05– ship Supervisor, Township of South Canton Center portal/ 5772P). Canton, Canton Municipal Com- Road, Canton, MI 48188. advanceSearch. plex, 1150 South Canton Center Road, Canton, MI 48188. Nebraska: Wash- City of Blair (18– The Honorable Richard Hansen, City Hall, 218 South 16th https://msc.fema.gov/ Sep. 23, 2019 310228 ington. 07–0934P). Mayor, City of Blair, 218 South Street, Blair, NE 68008. portal/ 16th Street, Blair, NE 68008. advanceSearch. New York: West- Village of Ma- The Honorable Thomas A. Murphy, Building Inspector, Village https://msc.fema.gov/ Oct. 18, 2019 360916 chester. maroneck (19– Mayor, Village of Mamaroneck, Hall, 3rd Floor, 169 Mount portal/ 02–0392P). 123 Mamaroneck Avenue, Ma- Pleasant Avenue, Ma- advanceSearch. maroneck, NY 10543. maroneck, NY 10543. Texas: Dallas ...... City of Mesquite The Honorable Stan Pickett, Mayor, City Engineering Services, https://msc.fema.gov/ Aug. 27, 2019 485490 (19–06–0203P). City of Mesquite, P.O. Box 1515 North Galloway Ave- portal/ 850137, Mesquite, TX 75185. nue, Mesquite, TX 75185. advanceSearch. [FR Doc. 2019–12943 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] the information collection, the Washington, DC 20529–2140, telephone BILLING CODE 9110–12–P categories of respondents, the estimated number 202–272–8377 (This is not a burden (i.e. the time, effort, and toll-free number. Comments are not resources used by the respondents to accepted via telephone message). Please DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND respond), the estimated cost to the note contact information provided here SECURITY respondent, and the actual information is solely for questions regarding this collection instruments. notice. It is not for individual case U.S. Citizenship and Immigration DATES: Comments are encouraged and status inquiries. Applicants seeking Services will be accepted for 60 days until information about the status of their [OMB Control Number 1615–0038] August 19, 2019. individual cases can check Case Status ADDRESSES: All submissions received Online, available at the USCIS website Agency Information Collection must include the OMB Control Number at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the Activities; Revision of a Currently 1615–0038 in the body of the letter, the USCIS Contact Center at 800–375–5283 Approved Collection: Petition To agency name and Docket ID USCIS– (TTY 800–767–1833). Remove the Conditions on Residence 2009–0008. To avoid duplicate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submissions, please use only one of the AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Comments Immigration Services, Department of following methods to submit comments: Homeland Security. (1) Online. Submit comments via the You may access the information Federal eRulemaking Portal website at ACTION: 60-Day notice. collection instrument with instructions, http://www.regulations.gov under e- or additional information by visiting the SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Docket ID number USCIS–2009–0008; Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and (2) Mail. Submit written comments to http://www.regulations.gov and enter Immigration (USCIS) invites the general DHS, USCIS, Office of Policy and USCIS–2009–0008 in the search box. public and other Federal agencies to Strategy, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Regardless of the method used for comment upon this proposed revision of Division, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW, submitting comments or material, all a currently approved collection of Washington, DC 20529–2140. submissions will be posted, without information. In accordance with the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: change, to the Federal eRulemaking Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, 1995, the information collection notice Regulatory Coordination Division, and will include any personal is published in the Federal Register to Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 information you provide. Therefore, obtain comments regarding the nature of Massachusetts Avenue NW, submitting this information makes it VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28576 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices public. You may wish to consider (5) An estimate of the total number of and associated response time, must be limiting the amount of personal respondents and the amount of time directed to the OMB USCIS Desk Officer information that you provide in any estimated for an average respondent to via email at dhsdeskofficer@ voluntary submission you make to DHS. respond: The estimated total number of omb.eop.gov. All submissions received DHS may withhold information respondents for the information must include the agency name and the provided in comments from public collection I–751 is 153,000 and the OMB Control Number 1615–0005 in the viewing that it determines may impact estimated hour burden per response is subject line. the privacy of an individual or is 4.57 hours; the estimated total number You may wish to consider limiting the offensive. For additional information, of respondents for the information amount of personal information that you please read the Privacy Act notice that collection biometrics is 306,000 and the provide in any voluntary submission is available via the link in the footer of estimated hour burden per response is you make. For additional information http://www.regulations.gov. 1.17 hours. please read the Privacy Act notice that Written comments and suggestions (6) An estimate of the total public is available via the link in the footer of from the public and affected agencies burden (in hours) associated with the http://www.regulations.gov. should address one or more of the collection: The total estimated annual FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: following four points: hour burden associated with this USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection is 1,057,230 hours. Regulatory Coordination Division, collection of information is necessary (7) An estimate of the total public Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 for the proper performance of the burden (in cost) associated with the Massachusetts Avenue NW, functions of the agency, including collection: The estimated total annual Washington, DC 20529–2140, whether the information will have cost burden associated with this Telephone number (202) 272–8377 practical utility; collection of information is $19,698,750. (This is not a toll-free number; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Dated: June 13, 2019. comments are not accepted via agency’s estimate of the burden of the Samantha L. Deshommes, telephone message.). Please note contact proposed collection of information, information provided here is solely for including the validity of the Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship questions regarding this notice. It is not methodology and assumptions used; for individual case status inquiries. (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security. Applicants seeking information about clarity of the information to be [FR Doc. 2019–12936 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] the status of their individual cases can collected; and check Case Status Online, available at (4) Minimize the burden of the BILLING CODE 9111–97–P the USCIS website at http:// collection of information on those who www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS are to respond, including through the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Contact Center at (800) 375–5283; TTY use of appropriate automated, SECURITY (800) 767–1833. electronic, mechanical, or other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: technological collection techniques or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration other forms of information technology, Services Comments e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. [OMB Control Number 1615–0005] The information collection notice was previously published in the Federal Overview of This Information Agency Information Collection Register on November 5, 2018, at 83 FR Collection Activities; Extension, Without Change, 55389, allowing for a 60-day public (1) Type of Information Collection: of a Currently Approved Collection: comment period. USCIS did receive 1 Revision of a Currently Approved Application for Family Unity Benefits comment in connection with the 60-day notice. Collection. AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and (2) Title of the Form/Collection: You may access the information Immigration Services, Department of Petition to Remove the Conditions on collection instrument with instructions, Homeland Security. Residence. or additional information by visiting the (3) Agency form number, if any, and ACTION: 30-Day notice. Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: the applicable component of the DHS http://www.regulations.gov and enter SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland sponsoring the collection: I–751 USCIS. USCIS–2009–0021 in the search box. Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and (4) Affected public who will be asked Written comments and suggestions from Immigration Services (USCIS) will be or required to respond, as well as a brief the public and affected agencies should submitting the following information abstract: Primary: Individuals or address one or more of the following collection request to the Office of households. The information collected four points: Management and Budget (OMB) for on Form I–751 is used by U.S. (1) Evaluate whether the proposed review and clearance in accordance Citizenship and Immigration Services collection of information is necessary with the Paperwork Reduction Act of (USCIS) to verify the alien’s status and for the proper performance of the 1995. The purpose of this notice is to determine whether he or she is eligible functions of the agency, including allow an additional 30 days for public to have the conditions on his or her whether the information will have comments. status removed. Form I–751 serves the practical utility; purpose of standardizing requests for DATES: The purpose of this notice is to (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the benefits and ensuring that basic allow an additional 30 days for public agency’s estimate of the burden of the information required to assess eligibility comments. Comments are encouraged proposed collection of information, is provided by petitioners. and will be accepted until July 19, 2019. including the validity of the USCIS also collects biometric ADDRESSES: Written comments and/or methodology and assumptions used; information from the alien to verify suggestions regarding the item(s) (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and their identity and check or update their contained in this notice, especially clarity of the information to be background information. regarding the estimated public burden collected; and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28577 (4) Minimize the burden of the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Contact Center at (800) 375–5283; TTY collection of information on those who SECURITY (800) 767–1833. are to respond, including through the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: use of appropriate automated, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Comments electronic, mechanical, or other Services technological collection techniques or [OMB Control Number 1615–0054] The information collection notice was other forms of information technology, previously published in the Federal e.g., permitting electronic submission of Agency Information Collection Register on February 1, 2019, at 84 FR responses. Activities; Revision of a Currently 1188, allowing for a 60-day public Approved Collection: Notice of comment period. USCIS received 5 Overview of This Information Naturalization Oath Ceremony comments in connection with the 60- Collection day notice. AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and You may access the information (1) Type of Information Collection Immigration Services, Department of collection instrument with instructions, Request: Extension, Without Change, of Homeland Security. or additional information by visiting the a Currently Approved Collection. ACTION: 30-Day notice. Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: (2) Title of the Form/Collection: http://www.regulations.gov and enter SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Application for Family Unity Benefits. USCIS–2006–0055 in the search box. Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Written comments and suggestions from (3) Agency form number, if any, and Immigration Services (USCIS) will be the public and affected agencies should the applicable component of the DHS submitting the following information address one or more of the following sponsoring the collection: I–817; USCIS. collection request to the Office of four points: (4) Affected public who will be asked Management and Budget (OMB) for (1) Evaluate whether the proposed or required to respond, as well as a brief review and clearance in accordance collection of information is necessary abstract: Primary: Individuals or with the Paperwork Reduction Act of for the proper performance of the households. The information collected 1995. The purpose of this notice is to functions of the agency, including will be used to determine whether the allow an additional 30 days for public whether the information will have applicant meets the eligibility comments. practical utility; requirements for benefits under 8 CFR DATES: The purpose of this notice is to (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the 236.14 and 245a.33. allow an additional 30 days for public agency’s estimate of the burden of the comments. Comments are encouraged proposed collection of information, (5) An estimate of the total number of and will be accepted until July 19, 2019. including the validity of the respondents and the amount of time ADDRESSES: Written comments and/or methodology and assumptions used; estimated for an average respondent to suggestions regarding the item(s) (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and respond: The estimated total number of contained in this notice, especially clarity of the information to be respondents for the information regarding the estimated public burden collected; and collection I–817 is approximately 1,000 and associated response time, must be (4) Minimize the burden of the and the estimated hour burden per directed to the OMB USCIS Desk Officer collection of information on those who response is 2 hours per response; and via email at dhsdeskofficer@ are to respond, including through the the estimated number of respondents omb.eop.gov. All submissions received use of appropriate automated, providing biometrics is 1,000 and the must include the agency name and the electronic, mechanical, or other estimated hour burden per response is OMB Control Number 1615–0054 in the technological collection techniques or 1.17 hours. subject line. other forms of information technology, You may wish to consider limiting the e.g., permitting electronic submission of (6) An estimate of the total public responses. burden (in hours) associated with the amount of personal information that you collection: The total estimated annual provide in any voluntary submission Overview of This Information hour burden associated with this you make. For additional information Collection collection is 3,170 hours. please read the Privacy Act notice that (1) Type of Information Collection is available via the link in the footer of Request: Revision of a Currently (7) An estimate of the total public http://www.regulations.gov. burden (in cost) associated with the Approved Collection. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: collection: The estimated total annual (2) Title of the Form/Collection: USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Notice of Naturalization Oath cost burden associated with this Regulatory Coordination Division, Ceremony. collection of information is $122,500. Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 (3) Agency form number, if any, and Dated: June 13, 2019. Massachusetts Avenue NW, the applicable component of the DHS Samantha L. Deshommes, Washington, DC 20529–2140, sponsoring the collection: N–445; Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Telephone number (202) 272–8377 USCIS. Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship (This is not a toll-free number; (4) Affected public who will be asked and Immigration Services, Department of comments are not accepted via or required to respond, as well as a brief Homeland Security. telephone message.) Please note contact abstract: Primary: Individuals or [FR Doc. 2019–12938 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] information provided here is solely for households. The information furnished questions regarding this notice. It is not on Form N–445 refers to events that may BILLING CODE 9111–97–P for individual case status inquiries. have occurred since the applicant’s Applicants seeking information about initial interview and prior to the the status of their individual cases can administration of the oath of allegiance. check Case Status Online, available at Several months may elapse between the USCIS website at http:// these dates and the information that is www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS provided assists the officer to make and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28578 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices render an appropriate decision on the and Urban Development, 451 7th Street (4) Ways to minimize the burden of application. USCIS will use this SW, Washington, DC 20410; email the collection of information on those information to determine if any changes Colette Pollard at Colette.Pollard@ who are to respond; including through to the respondent’s prior statements hud.gov or telephone 202–402–3400. the use of appropriate automated affect the decisions the agency has made Persons with hearing or speech collection techniques or other forms of in regards to the respondent’s ability to impairments may access this number information technology, e.g., permitting be naturalized. through TTY by calling the toll-free electronic submission of responses. (5) An estimate of the total number of Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339. HUD encourages interested parties to respondents and the amount of time This is not a toll-free number. Copies of submit comment in response to these estimated for an average respondent to available documents submitted to OMB questions. respond: The estimated total number of may be obtained from Ms. Pollard. C. Authority respondents for the information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This collection N–445 is 741,541 and the notice informs the public that HUD has Section 3507 of the Paperwork estimated hour burden per response is submitted to OMB a request for Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. .25 hours. approval of the information collection Chapter 35. (6) An estimate of the total public described in Section A. Dated: June 13, 2019. burden (in hours) associated with the Colette Pollard, collection: The total estimated annual A. Overview of Information Collection hour burden associated with this Department Reports Management Officer, Title of Information Collection: Office of the Chief Information Officer. collection is 185,385 hours. Housing Counseling Training Grant [FR Doc. 2019–13019 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] (7) An estimate of the total public Program. burden (in cost) associated with the OMB Approval Number: 2502–0567. BILLING CODE 4210–67–P collection: The estimated total annual Type of Request: Emergency. cost burden associated with this Form Number: SF–424, Application collection of information is $0. for Federal Assistance; HUD–92910, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Dated: June 14, 2019. Housing Counseling Training Charts; Fish and Wildlife Service Samantha L Deshommes, HUD–2880, Applicant/Recipient Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Disclosure/Update Report. Description of the need for the [FWS–R8–ES–2019–N053; Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship FXES11140800000–190–FF08ECAR00] and Immigration Services, Department of information and proposed use: Eligible Homeland Security. organizations submit information to Habitat Conservation Plan for the [FR Doc. 2019–13017 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] HUD through Grants.gov when applying Coastal California Gnatcatcher; BILLING CODE 9111–97–P for grant funds to provide housing Categorical Exclusion for 93–129 Ltd, counseling training to housing Orange County, California counselors. HUD uses the information AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND collected to evaluate applicants Interior. URBAN DEVELOPMENT competitively and then select qualified organizations to receive funding that ACTION: Notice of availability; request [Docket No. FR–7011–N–28] supplement their housing counseling for comments. training program. Post-award collection, Notice of Emergency Approval of an such as quarterly reports, will allow SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Information Collection: Housing HUD to evaluate grantees’ performance. Wildlife Service, have received an Counseling Training Grant Program Respondents: Not-for-profit application from 93–129 Ltd for a 10- year incidental take permit for the AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information institutions. Officer, HUD. Estimated Number of Respondents: coastal California gnatcatcher pursuant 24. to the Endangered Species Act. We are ACTION: Notice. Estimated Number of Responses: 40. requesting comments on the permit SUMMARY: In accordance with the Frequency of Response: One-time application and on our preliminary Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, HUD application and quarterly reports. determination that the applicant’s has requested from the Office of Average Hours per Response: 34.50. accompanying proposed habitat Management and Budget (OMB) Total Estimated Burdens: 1,380. conservation plan qualifies as low emergency approval of the information B. Solicitation of Public Comment effect, eligible for a categorical collection described in this notice. exclusion under the National This notice is soliciting comments DATES: Environmental Policy Act. The basis for Comments Due Date: August 5, from members of the public and affected 2019. this determination is discussed in our parties concerning the collection of environmental action statement and ADDRESSES: Interested persons are information described in Section A on associated low-effect screening form, invited to submit comments regarding the following: which are also available for public this proposal. Comments should refer to (1) Whether the proposed collection review. the proposal by name and/or OMB of information is necessary for the Control Number and should be sent to: proper performance of the functions of DATES: Written comments should be HUD Desk Officer, Office of the agency, including whether the received on or before July 19, 2019. Management and Budget, New information will have practical utility; ADDRESSES: Submitting Comments: You Executive Office Building, Washington, (2) The accuracy of the agency’s may submit comments by one of the DC 20503; fax: 202–395–5806. Email: estimate of the burden of the proposed following methods. Please include ‘‘93– [email protected]. collection of information; 129 Ltd’’ at the beginning of your FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (3) Ways to enhance the quality, comments. Colette Pollard, Reports Management utility, and clarity of the information to • U.S. Mail: Field Supervisor, Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing be collected; and Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28579 Fish and Wildlife Service, 2177 Salk which are also available for public project lighting into the conserved area; Avenue, Suite 250, Carlsbad, CA 92008. review. providing educational brochures to • Fax: Field Supervisor, 760–431– residents on the responsibilities Background 9624. associated with living near a conserved • Email: [email protected]. Section 9 of the ESA and its area; removing previously used dirt Obtaining Documents: You may implementing Federal regulations access roads to reduce illegal obtain copies of the documents by the prohibit the take of animal species listed trespassing into natural areas; and following methods: as endangered or threatened. ‘‘Take’’ is monitoring and reporting to the Service • Internet: https://www.fws.gov/ defined under the ESA as to ‘‘harass, upon project completion. carlsbad/HCPs/HCP_Docs.html. harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, • Telephone: 760–431–9440. trap, capture, or collect [listed animal Proposed Action and Alternatives • U.S. Mail: Carlsbad Fish and species], or to attempt to engage in such The Proposed Action consists of the Wildlife Office (address above). conduct’’ (16 U.S.C. 1538). ‘‘Harm’’ issuance of an incidental take permit • In-Person: You may examine the includes significant habitat modification and implementation of the proposed documents by appointment during or degradation that actually kills or HCP, which includes measures to avoid, regular business hours at the Carlsbad injures listed wildlife by significantly minimize, and mitigate impacts to the Fish and Wildlife Office (address impairing essential behavioral patterns, gnatcatcher. If we approve the permit, above). Please call to make an such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering take of gnatcatcher would be authorized appointment (see FOR FURTHER (50 CFR 17.3). However, under section for the applicant’s activities associated INFORMATION CONTACT). 10(a) of the ESA, the Service may issue with the implementation of the 93–129 permits to authorize incidental take of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. project. In the proposed HCP, the Karen Goebel, Assistant Field listed species. ‘‘Incidental taking’’ is applicant considers two alternatives. Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife defined by the ESA implementing Under the No Action Alternative, no Office, 760–431–9440. If you use a regulations as taking that is incidental permit would be issued and incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out telecommunications device for the deaf take of the gnatcatcher resulting from an otherwise lawful activity (50 CFR (TDD), please call the Federal Relay habitat loss would occur, and no long- 17.3). Regulations governing incidental Service (FRS) at 800–877–8339. term protection and management would take permits for endangered and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the be afforded to the species. The No threatened species, respectively, are Action Alternative would not meet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), found in the Code of Federal have received an application from 93– primary goal of the proposed Project, Regulations at 50 CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR which is to construct residential homes. 129 Ltd (applicant) for a 10-year 17.32. incidental take permit for one covered Under the Parcel by Parcel Alternative, species pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) Applicant’s Proposed Project each individual parcel owner would of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, The project is located on a 50-acre conduct grading and slope stabilization as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et property in the City of Laguna Niguel in activities. This alternative would seq.). The application addresses the Orange County, California (Tentative necessitate the construction of an anticipated ‘‘take’’ of the threatened Parcel Map 93–129). The applicant additional road immediately adjacent to coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila requests a 10-year permit under section the coastal sage scrub habitat californica californica; gnatcatcher). The 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. If we approve the conservation area on the north side of applicant proposes to grade, subdivide, permit, the applicant anticipates taking the property’s ridgeline and would and construct infrastructure for four gnatcatcher as a result of permanent significantly increase the impacts to estate custom home parcels on the impacts to 4.3 acres of coastal sage scrub coastal sage scrub habitat. approximately 50-acre parcel (Tentative that the species uses for breeding, Our Preliminary Determination Parcel Map 93–129) in Laguna Niguel, feeding, and sheltering. The take would California. The proposed project will be incidental to the applicant’s activities The Service has made a preliminary impact an estimated 4.3 acres of coastal associated with the grading, determination that approval of the HCP sage scrub and up to two pairs of subdivision, and construction of four and issuance of an incidental take gnatcatchers. A conservation program to estate custom home parcels. permit qualify for categorical exclusion avoid, minimize, and mitigate for The applicant proposes to mitigate under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as project activities would be implemented permanent impacts to 4.3 acres of provided by the Department of the as described in the applicant’s proposed occupied gnatcatcher habitat through Interior implementing regulations in habitat conservation plan (HCP). On the creation and restoration of 10.61 part 46 of title 43 of the Code of Federal June 25, 2007, the Service issued a 10- acres of coastal sage scrub and Regulations (43 CFR 46.205, 46.210, and year incidental take permit for the conservation of 12.8 acres of coastal 46.215), and that the HCP qualifies as a subject project. Implementation of the sage scrub (including the created and low-effect plan as defined by the Habitat project was delayed and the permit restored habitat). The conserved habitat Conservation Planning Handbook expired on June 25, 2017. will be managed in perpetuity. (December 2016). We are requesting comments on the The applicant’s proposed HCP also We base our determination that a HCP permit application and on our contains measures to minimize the qualifies as a low-effect plan on the preliminary determination that the effects of construction activities on the following three criteria: proposed HCP qualifies as a low-effect gnatcatcher, including the following: (1) Implementation of the HCP would HCP, eligible for a categorical exclusion Oversight of project activities by a result in minor or negligible effects on under the National Environmental biological monitor; fencing the project federally listed, proposed, and Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA; limits; implementing an erosion control candidate species and their habitats; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The basis for plan to avoid and minimize degradation (2) Implementation of the HCP would this determination is discussed in our of adjacent native habitat; removing result in minor or negligible effects on environmental action statement and invasive plant species from the other environmental values or associated low-effect screening form, property; minimizing the spillage of resources; and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28580 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices (3) Impacts of the HCP, considered DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Dated: May 17, 2019. together with the impacts of other past, Tara Sweeney, present, and reasonably foreseeable Bureau of Indian Affairs Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. similarly situated projects, would not The Comanche Indian Tribe Liquor result, over time, in cumulative effects [190A2100DD/AAKC001030/ Control Ordinance, Article VII. Taxes, to environmental values or resources A0A501010.999900 253G] Section (1), as amended, shall read as that would be considered significant. Comanche Nation; Amendment to follows: Based upon this preliminary Liquor Control Ordinance Article VII, Taxes, Section (1) determination, we do not intend to Section (1) Tax. There is hereby prepare further NEPA documentation. AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, levied and shall be collected a tax on We will consider public comments in Interior. making the final determination on each wholesale and retail sale of ACTION: Notice. Alcohol Beverages on Tribal land in the whether to prepare such additional amount of one percent (1%) of the retail documentation. SUMMARY: This notice publishes the sales and an additional (5%) on-Premise Next Steps amendment to the Comanche Indian Poured Liquor Tax, respectively, to be Tribe Liquor Control Ordinance. The added to the wholesale and retail sales We will evaluate the proposed HCP liquor control ordinance regulates and price. All taxes from the sale of such and comments we receive to determine controls the possession, sale, Alcohol Beverages shall be paid into a whether the permit application meets manufacture, and distribution of alcohol separate account under exclusive the requirements and issuance criteria on Comanche trust lands in conformity authority of the Tax Commission. This under section 10(a) of the ESA (16 with the laws of the State of Oklahoma tax may be adjusted as requested by the U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). We will also where applicable and necessary. The Tax Commission and approved by the evaluate whether issuance of a section amendment does not become effective Business Committee. 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit would until published in the Federal Register. [FR Doc. 2019–12942 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] comply with section 7 of the ESA by DATES: This ordinance shall become BILLING CODE 4337–15–P conducting an intra-Service effective on July 19, 2019. consultation. We will use the results of this consultation, in combination with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the above findings, in our final analysis Sherry Lovin, Tribal Government to determine whether or not to issue a Officer, Southern Plains Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs permit. If the requirements and issuance Bureau of Indian Affairs, Post Box 368, criteria under section 10(a) are met, we Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005, telephone: [190A2100DD/AAKC001030/ will issue the permit to the applicant for (405) 247–1534 or (405) 247–6673, fax: A0A501010.999900 253G; OMB Control Number 1076–0155] incidental take of the gnatcatcher. (405) 247–1534; or Ms. Laurel Iron Cloud, Chief, Division of Tribal Public Availability of Comments Government Services, Office of Indian Agency Information Collection Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 Activities; Submission to the Office of Before including your address, phone C Street NW, MS–4513–MIB, Management and Budget for Review number, email address, or other Washington, DC 20240, telephone: (202) and Approval; Leases and Permits personal identifying information in your 513–7641. AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, comment, you should be aware that Interior. your entire comment—including your SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant ACTION: personal identifying information—may to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public Notice of information collection; request for comment. be made publicly available at any time. Law 83–277, 67 Stat. 5886, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme While you may ask us in your comment Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 SUMMARY: In accordance with the to withhold your personal identifying (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, information from public review, we certify and publish in the Federal the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are cannot guarantee that we will be able to Register notice of adopted liquor control proposing to renew an information do so. ordinances for the purpose of regulating collection. Authority liquor transactions in Indian country. DATES: Interested persons are invited to On April 7, 2001, the Comanche submit comments on or before July 19, We provide this notice under section Business Committee duly adopted the 2019. 10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) Comanche Indian Tribe Liquor Control ADDRESSES: Send written comments on and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). Ordinance. The Comanche Tribe Liquor this information collection request (ICR) Control Ordinance was published in the Scott Sobiech, to the Office of Management and Federal Register on October 25, 2001 at Budget’s Desk Officer for the Acting Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and 66 FR 54022. Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California. Department of the Interior by email at This notice is published in [email protected]; or via [FR Doc. 2019–12953 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] accordance with the delegated authority facsimile to (202) 395–5806. Please BILLING CODE 4333–15–P by the Secretary of the Interior to the provide a copy of your comments to Ms. Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian certify that the Comanche Nation Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, Business Committee duly adopted the 1001 Indian School Road NW, Mailbox amendment to the Comanche Tribe #44, Albuquerque, NM 87104; or by Liquor Control Ordinance by Resolution email to [email protected]. 89–18 on May 17, 2018. Please reference OMB Control Number VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28581 1076–0155 in the subject line of your restricted status for individual Indians of properties nominated before June 1, comments. and Indian Tribes. The information is 2019, for listing or related actions in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To used to determine approval of a lease, National Register of Historic Places. amendment, assignment, sublease, request additional information about DATES: Comments should be submitted mortgage or related document. A this ICR, Ms. Sharlene Round Face by by July 5, 2019. email at [email protected], response is required to obtain or retain or by telephone at (505) 563–5258. You a benefit. ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent via may also view the ICR at http:// Title of Collection: Leases and U.S. Postal Service and all other carriers www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Permits. to the National Register of Historic OMB Control Number: 1076–0155. Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Form Number: None. NW, MS 7228, Washington, DC 20240. accordance with the Paperwork Type of Review: Extension of a Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the currently approved collection. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The general public and other Federal Respondents/Affected Public: properties listed in this notice are being agencies with an opportunity to Individual Indians and Indian Tribes considered for listing or related actions comment on new, proposed, revised, seeking to lease their trust or restricted in the National Register of Historic and continuing collections of land and businesses that lease trust and Places. Nominations for their information. This helps us assess the restricted land. consideration were received by the impact of our information collection Total Estimated Number of Annual National Park Service before June 1, requirements and minimize the public’s Respondents: 99,340. 2019. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 reporting burden. It also helps the Total Estimated Number of Annual CFR part 60, written comments are public understand our information Responses: 99,340. being accepted concerning the collection requirements and provide the Estimated Completion Time per significance of the nominated properties requested data in the desired format. Response: Varies from 15 minutes to 2 under the National Register criteria for A Federal Register notice with a 60- hours. evaluation. day public comment period soliciting Total Estimated Number of Annual Before including your address, phone comments on this collection of Burden Hours: 81,899. number, email address, or other information was published April 19, Respondent’s Obligation: Required to personal identifying information in your 2019 (84 FR 16529). No comments were Obtain or Retain a Benefit. comment, you should be aware that received. Frequency of Collection: In general, We are soliciting comments on the your entire comment—including your once per approval per lease. Some personal identifying information—may proposed ICR that is described below. collections occur upon request for We are especially interested in public be made publicly available at any time. modification or assignment or upon a While you can ask us in your comment comment addressing the following trespass violation, which occur, on issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to to withhold your personal identifying average, fewer than once per lease. information from public review, we the proper functions of the BIA; (2) will Additionally, rent payments occur, on this information be processed and used cannot guarantee that we will be able to average, once per month. do so. in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate Total Estimated Annual Nonhour of burden accurate; (4) how might the Burden Cost: $1,813,000. Nominations submitted by State BIA enhance the quality, utility, and An agency may not conduct or Historic Preservation Officers: clarity of the information to be sponsor and a person is not required to ARKANSAS collected; and (5) how might the BIA respond to a collection of information minimize the burden of this collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB Garland County on the respondents, including through control number. Hot Springs Central Avenue Historic District the use of information technology. The authority for this action is the (Boundary Decrease), Central Ave., from Comments that you submit in Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Prospect to Park Sts., Hot Springs, response to this notice are a matter of U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). BC100004164 public record. Before including your LOUISIANA address, phone number, email address, Elizabeth K. Appel, or other personal identifying Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and East Baton Rouge Parish, Courthouse Office information in your comment, you Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs. Building should be aware that your entire [FR Doc. 2019–13018 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] (Non-Residential Mid-Century Modern comment—including your personal BILLING CODE 4337–15–P Architecture in Baton Rouge, 1945–1975 identifying information—may be made MPS), 233 St. Ferdinand St., Baton Rouge, publicly available at any time. While MP100004150 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR you can ask us in your comment to St. Tammany Parish withhold your personal identifying National Park Service Claiborne Cottage Hotel, 19130 Rogers Ln., information from public review, we Covington, SG100004152 cannot guarantee that we will be able to [NPS–WASO–NRNHL–DTS#–28182; do so. PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] MICHIGAN Abstract: Generally trust and Monroe County restricted land may be leased by Indian National Register of Historic Places; land owners, with the approval of the Notification of Pending Nominations St. Mary’s Academy Historic District, (City of Monroe MRA), 610 W Elm Ave., Monroe, Secretary of the Interior, except when and Related Actions 82005047 specified by statute. Submission of this AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. Oakland County information allows BIA to review ACTION: Notice. applications for obtaining, modifying Oxford Downtown Historic District, and assigning leases and permits of land SUMMARY: The National Park Service is Washington St./MI–24 and Burdick St., that the United States holds in trust or soliciting comments on the significance Oxford, SG100004158 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28582 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices MISSISSIPPI WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Lincoln County Milwaukee County Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Ruston Power and Light Plant, 300 E Jones-Hill House, 2463 N Palmer St., Mississippi Ave., Ruston, SG100004151 Milwaukee, SG100004165 [Docket No. BOEM–2018–0067] NEW YORK A request for removal has been made Commercial Renewable Energy Onondaga County for the following resource: Transmission on the Outer Continental Whedon-Schumacher House, 365 W ARIZONA Shelf Offshore New York and New Onondaga St., Syracuse, SG100004182 Jersey; Notice of Proposed Grant Area Coconino County and Request for Competitive Interest Rockland County Mormon Lake Lookout Cabin, (National Pig Knoll School, 584 NY 306, Pomona, Forest Fire Lookouts in the Southwestern AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy SG100004183 Region TR), Coconino National Forest, Management, Interior. Mormon Lake vicinity, OT87002459 ACTION: Public notice. OKLAHOMA Garfield County Additional documentation has been SUMMARY: The purpose of this public received for the following resources: notice is to: Describe the New York and Enid Downtown Historic District (Boundary New Jersey Ocean Grid proposed by Increase), Roughly bounded by Maple MICHIGAN Ave., 2nd St., Cherokee Ave., and Adams Anbaric Development Partners, LLC St., Enid, BC100004167 Midland County (ADP); determine if there is competitive Greene, George, House, (Residential interest in a right-of-way (ROW) grant Kay County Architecture of Alden B. Dow in Midland for renewable energy purposes in the Marland, Charlotte, House, 919 E Grand Ave., 1933—1938 MPS), 115 W Sugnet, Midland, area identified in this notice; and solicit Ponca City, SG100004168 AD89001441 public input regarding the proposal, its First Presbyterian Church, 1505 E Grand OKLAHOMA potential environmental consequences, Ave., Ponca City, SG100004169 and other uses of the area in which the Cleary, Jack and Helen, House, 13 Hillcrest Garfield County proposal would be located. Dr., Ponca City, SG100004170 Enid Downtown Historic District, Roughly Marland Estate, Inc. Gatehouse, 747 N 14th DATES: If you are submitting an bounded by Maple Ave., 2nd St., Cherokee St., Ponca City, SG100004171 indication of interest in acquiring a Ave., and Adams St., Enid, AD07001265 Ponca City Milling Company Elevator, 114 W ROW grant for the area ADP requested, Central Ave., Ponca City, SG100004172 OREGON your submission must be sent by mail, Ponca City Municipal Airport Hangar, 2231 postmarked no later than July 19, 2019 Multnomah County Waverly St., Ponca City, SG100004173 for your submission to be considered. If Ponca City Power Plant, 1420 N Union St., Irvington Historic District, Roughly bounded you are providing comments or other Ponca City, SG100004174 by NE Fremont, NE 27th Ave., NE information, you may send them by Temple Emanuel, 1201 E Highland Ave., Broadway, NE 7th Ave., Portland, mail, postmarked by this same date, or Ponca City, SG100004175 AD10000850 you may submit them through the Muskogee County PENNSYLVANIA Federal Rulemaking Portal at http:// First Church of Christ, Scientist, 302 N 7th Allegheny County www.regulations.gov, also by this same date. St., Muskogee, SG100004176 Heinz, H.J., Company, Roughly bounded by Hotel Muskogee, 26 W Broadway St., Chestnut St., River Ave., S. Canal St., ADDRESSES: If you are submitting an Muskogee, SG100004177 Progress St. and Heinz, modern indication of competitive interest for a Oklahoma County Manufacturing Facilities, Pittsburgh, ROW grant, please submit it by mail to AD02000774 the following address: Bureau of Ocean Capitol Hill Commercial Historic District, Energy Management, Office of 100–400 SW 25th St./W, Commercial Ave., Nomination submitted by Federal Renewable Energy Programs, 45600 Oklahoma City, SG100004178 Preservation Officers: Stonegate Elementary School, 2525 NW Woodland Road, Mailstop: VAM–OREP, 112th St., Oklahoma City, SG100004179 The State Historic Preservation Sterling, VA 20166. Submissions must Officer reviewed the following be postmarked by July 19, 2019 to be OREGON nomination and responded to the considered by BOEM in determining Multnomah County Federal Preservation Officer within 45 whether there is competitive interest. In Amundsen, Roy E. and Hildur L., House, 477 days of receipt of the nomination and addition to a paper copy of your NW Overlook Ave., Gresham, supports listing the property in the submission, include an electronic copy SG100004161 National Register of Historic Places. on a compact disc or portable storage device. BOEM will list the parties that CALIFORNIA PENNSYLVANIA submit indications of competitive Cambria County San Bernardino County interest in the area ADP requested on Ebensburg Historic District, Bounded Vulcan Mine Historic District, 5.28 mi, E of the BOEM website after the 30-day Roughly by Highland Ave., West St., Sugar Kelbaker Rd., on Vulcan Mine Rd., Kelso comment period has closed. St., and Triumph St., Ebensburg, vicinity, SG100004180 If you are submitting comments and SG100004163 Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60. other information concerning the proposed grant area, you may use either VERMONT Dated: June 3, 2019. of the following two methods: Caledonia County Christopher Hetzel, 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Lower Waterford Congregational Church, Acting Chief, National Register of Historic www.regulations.gov. In the entry (Religious Buildings, Sites and Structures Places/National Historic Landmarks Program. entitled, ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter in Vermont MPS), 63 Lower Waterford Rd., [FR Doc. 2019–12932 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] BOEM–2018–0067 and then click Waterford, MP100004181 BILLING CODE 4312–52–P ‘‘search.’’ Follow the instructions to VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28583 submit public comments and view 585.306–307. Subsection 8(p)(3) of the noncompetitive procedures contained in supporting and related materials OCS Lands Act requires that OCS 30 CFR 585.309. available for this notice. renewable energy leases, easements, and Background 2. Alternatively, you may submit ROWs be issued ‘‘on a competitive basis comments by mail to the following unless the Secretary determines after Statutory Authorization address: Bureau of Ocean Energy public notice of a lease, easement, or Under OCSLA subsection 8(p)(1)(C), Management, Office of Renewable right-of-way that there is no competitive the Secretary of the Interior (the Energy Programs, 45600 Woodland interest.’’ The regulations at 30 CFR Secretary) may issue leases or ROWs for Road, Mailstop: VAM–OREP, Sterling, 585.306–307 set forth BOEM’s activities that produce or support VA 20166. procedures for making such production, transportation, or If you wish to protect the determinations for ROW grants. This transmission of energy from sources confidentiality of your submissions or RFCI provides public notice of the other than oil or gas, including comments, clearly mark the relevant proposed ROW grant area that ADP renewable energy sources. Section 8(p) sections and request that BOEM treat requested, and invites the submission of also requires the Secretary to issue any them as confidential. Please label indications of competitive interest. necessary regulations to carry out this privileged or confidential information BOEM will consider the responses to authority. Regulations were issued for ‘‘Contains Confidential Information’’ this public notice to determine whether this purpose on April 29, 2009, and are and consider submitting such competitive interest exists for the area codified in BOEM regulations at 30 CFR information as a separate attachment. ADP requested, as required by 43 U.S.C. part 585. The Secretary has delegated Treatment of confidential information is 1337(p)(3). Parties wishing to obtain a the authority to issue leases, easements, addressed in the section of this notice grant for the area that ADP requested and ROWs to the Director of BOEM. entitled, ‘‘Privileged or Confidential should submit detailed and specific Information.’’ BOEM will post all information, as described in the section Determination of Competitive Interest comments on regulations.gov unless entitled, ‘‘Required Indication of and Granting Process labeled as confidential. Information that Interest Information.’’ This BOEM will evaluate indications of is not labeled as privileged or announcement also requests interested competitive interest in the ROW grant confidential will be regarded by BOEM and affected parties to comment and area ADP requested to install cables for as suitable for public release. provide information about site the transmission of renewable FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: conditions and existing and future uses electricity, and will determine whether Casey Reeves, Project Coordinator, of the area identified in this notice that there is competitive interest in BOEM, Office of Renewable Energy would be relevant to the proposed accordance with 30 CFR 585.307. At the Programs, 45600 Woodland Road, project or its impacts. BOEM has conclusion of the comment period for Mailstop: VAM–OREP, Sterling, VA described the type of information that it this public notice, BOEM will review 20166, (703) 787–1671. is requesting in the section entitled, the submissions received to ensure that SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April ‘‘Requested Information from Interested they are complete and that the 30, 2018, the Bureau of Ocean Energy or Affected Parties.’’ submitters are qualified to hold a ROW Management (BOEM) received an Purpose of the RFCI grant under 30 CFR 585.106 and 107, application from ADP, later revised on and then will make its competitiveness June 22, 2018, for a ROW grant on the Responses to this public notice will determination. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) offshore allow BOEM to determine, pursuant to BOEM may find that competitive New York and New Jersey. ADP’s 30 CFR 585.306, whether or not there is interest exists if it receives a proposal to proposed project, the New York and competitive interest in acquiring the acquire an OCS ROW grant that cannot New Jersey Ocean Grid (NY/NJ Ocean ROW grant area ADP requested, as coexist with ADP’s proposed activities Grid), would entail the construction, described in this notice. In addition, within its requested grant corridor. In installation, and operation of an this notice provides an opportunity for rendering its determination regarding offshore transmission system of interested stakeholders to provide competitive interest, BOEM will analyze approximately 185 nautical miles of comments on the ADP ROW request, whether the proposal by ADP would submarine cable on the OCS and including information relating to prevent a known competitor’s approximately 118 nautical miles of potential environmental consequences subsequent, or parallel, use of the area submarine cable on State submerged from the proposed project on existing for renewable energy transmission. lands to deliver offshore wind energy geological, geophysical, and biological Under BOEM’s regulations at 30 CFR generation to the onshore electric grid. (habitat and species) conditions, as well 585.302(b)(1), the rights accorded in a The NY/NJ Ocean Grid also includes the as any potential impacts to existing ROW grant do not prevent the issuance siting of several offshore collector ocean users (e.g., fishing industry and of other rights in the same area, platforms (OCPs), each connected to one mariners) in the area described in this provided that any subsequent rights or more high voltage submarine cables notice. If, in response to this notice, BOEM grants in the area of a previously to onshore points of interconnection. BOEM receives one or more indications issued ROW grant do not unreasonably Each proposed OCP would be designed of competitive interest from qualified interfere with activities approved under to handle 800 to 1,200 MW of offshore entities that wish to transmit renewable the previously-issued ROW grant. wind energy generation with the ability energy in the proposed ADP ROW grant Consequently, if you have an interest in to connect multiple offshore wind area, it may decide to move forward obtaining a commercial lease for projects and accommodate phased with the ROW grant issuance process generating offshore wind energy in the development within BOEM’s designated using competitive procedures pursuant area of ADP’s ROW grant request, it is Wind Energy Areas (WEAs). to 30 CFR 585.308. However, if BOEM not necessary to submit indications of BOEM is publishing this Request for receives no qualified competing interest in response to this notice to Competitive Interest (RFCI) pursuant to indications of interest, BOEM may protect your interest in obtaining a subsection 8(p)(3) of the OCS Lands Act decide to move forward with the ROW lease. This is because BOEM could issue (43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(3)) and 30 CFR grant issuance process using the a lease for generating offshore wind VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28584 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices energy in the same area as the ROW, so with relevant Federal agencies, affected Act, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), long as the lease activities do not tribes, and affected state and local the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery unreasonably interfere with BOEM- governments in issuing a grant; Conservation and Management Act, the approved activities on the ROW grant. developing grant terms and conditions; National Historic Preservation Act If BOEM determines that competitive and deciding whether to approve, (NHPA), Executive Order 13175, and interest exists, it may decide to proceed disapprove, or approve with other laws, regulations, and authorities with the competitive granting process modifications any activities proposed in determined necessary throughout the outlined in 30 CFR 585.308. If BOEM a GAP. process. determines that there is no competitive interest in the proposed grant area, it Environmental Review and Permitting Description of the Grant Request will publish in the Federal Register a Process notice that there is no competitive Prior to issuing any ROW grant or The area for which ADP has requested interest. At that point, BOEM may authorizing any construction activities a ROW grant is located on the OCS off decide to proceed with the on that ROW grant, BOEM would the coasts of New York and New Jersey. noncompetitive grant issuance process conduct a site-specific environmental A ROW grant corridor, in which a cable, pursuant to 30 CFR 585.306(b). If BOEM review under the National pipeline, or associated facility is issues a ROW grant to ADP, ADP would Environmental Policy Act, during which located, is generally 200 feet in width need to conduct any construction it would act as the lead agency, centered on the cable and includes areas activities on the ROW pursuant to a coordinate with cooperating or for the associated facilities limited to BOEM-approved General Activities Plan consulting Federal agencies, and the area reasonably necessary for the (GAP) pursuant to 30 CFR 585.600(c). provide additional opportunities for OCP’s or other necessary accessory Whether BOEM proceeds with the public comment. BOEM would also facilities (30 CFR 585.301). The competitive or noncompetitive grant participate in associated consultations requested grant corridor crosses process, it will consult and coordinate under the Coastal Zone Management portions of the following OCS blocks: Protraction Protraction No. Lease block No. Lease block NK18–12 ...... 6457 NJ18–03 6001 NK18–12 ...... 6458 NJ18–03 6002 NK18–11 ...... 6540 NJ18–03 6003 NK18–12 ...... 6501 NJ18–03 6004 NK18–12 ...... 6505 NJ18–03 6053 NK18–12 ...... 6506 NJ18–03 6054 NK18–12 ...... 6507 NJ18–03 6055 NK18–12 ...... 6508 NJ18–03 6104 NK18–12 ...... 6509 NJ18–03 6105 NK18–12 ...... 6551 NJ18–03 6152 NK18–12 ...... 6552 NJ18–03 6153 NK18–12 ...... 6555 NJ18–03 6154 NK18–12 ...... 6558 NJ18–03 6155 NK18–12 ...... 6559 NJ18–02 6240 NK18–12 ...... 6560 NJ18–03 6201 NK18–12 ...... 6561 NJ18–03 6202 NK18–12 ...... 6562 NJ18–03 6203 NK18–12 ...... 6601 NJ18–02 6289 NK18–12 ...... 6602 NJ18–02 6290 NK18–12 ...... 6604 NJ18–03 6251 NK18–12 ...... 6605 NJ18–02 6338 NK18–12 ...... 6610 NJ18–02 6339 NK18–12 ...... 6611 NJ18–02 6340 NK18–12 ...... 6612 NJ18–02 6387 NK18–12 ...... 6652 NJ18–02 6388 NK18–12 ...... 6653 NJ18–02 6389 NK18–12 ...... 6654 NJ18–02 6437 NK18–12 ...... 6661 NJ18–02 6438 NK18–12 ...... 6662 NJ18–02 6487 NK18–12 ...... 6702 NJ18–02 7078 NK18–12 ...... 6703 NJ18–02 7079 NK18–12 ...... 6704 NJ18–02 7128 NK18–12 ...... 6711 NJ18–02 7129 NK18–12 ...... 6712 NJ18–05 6028 NK18–12 ...... 6713 NJ18–05 6029 NK18–12 ...... 6714 NJ18–05 6078 NK18–12 ...... 6715 NJ18–05 6079 NK18–12 ...... 6752 NJ18–02 6831 NK18–12 ...... 6753 NJ18–02 6832 NK18–12 ...... 6754 NJ18–02 6833 NK18–12 ...... 6764 NJ18–02 6881 NK18–12 ...... 6765 NJ18–02 6882 NK18–12 ...... 6802 NJ18–02 6930 NK18–12 ...... 6803 NJ18–02 6931 NK18–12 ...... 6804 NJ18–02 6979 NK18–12 ...... 6851 NJ18–02 6980 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28585 Protraction Protraction No. Lease block No. Lease block NK18–12 ...... 6852 NJ18–02 6981 NK18–12 ...... 6853 NJ18–02 7029 NK18–12 ...... 6854 NJ18–02 7030 NK18–11 ...... 6939 NJ18–02 6537 NK18–11 ...... 6940 NJ18–02 6538 NK18–12 ...... 6901 NJ18–02 6585 NK18–12 ...... 6902 NJ18–02 6586 NK18–11 ...... 6989 NJ18–02 6587 NK18–11 ...... 6990 NJ18–02 6635 NK18–12 ...... 6951 NJ18–02 6636 NK18–11 ...... 7039 NJ18–02 6684 NK18–11 ...... 7040 NJ18–02 6685 NK18–11 ...... 7089 NJ18–02 6686 NK18–11 ...... 7090 NJ18–02 6733 NK18–12 ...... 7051 NJ18–02 6734 NK18–11 ...... 7140 NJ18–02 6735 NK18–12 ...... 7101 NJ18–02 6781 NK18–12 ...... 7102 NJ18–02 6782 NK18–12 ...... 7103 NJ18–02 6783 NJ18–02 6784 BOEM requests public comments and Protected Resources in much of the area. Consultations with indications of competitive interest in Several species of birds, marine NMFS may be required to identify the ROW grant area identified by this mammals, sea turtles, and fish listed as measures to avoid and minimize notice. The centerline of the eventual threatened or endangered under the impacts on EFH during the siting and ROW grant may be adjusted based on ESA may occur permanently or installation phases of development. the results of future surveys or new seasonally in the proposed ROW grant Required Indication of Competitive information obtained from stakeholder area. Protection of such species falls Interest Information outreach and public comments, but the within the jurisdiction of the United proposed project, if approved, is States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) If you intend to submit an indication expected to occur within the listed lease or the NOAA National Marine Fisheries of competitive interest for a ROW grant blocks. Service (NMFS). The proposed route for the area identified in this notice for the purpose of transmitting electricity Map of the Area would cross North Atlantic right whale habitat and would therefore likely generated from a renewable source, you You can find a map of the area require consultation with NMFS to must provide the following: proposed for a ROW grant at the ensure adequate protection through (1) Documentation demonstrating that following URL: https://www.boem.gov/ mitigation measures. In addition to you are legally qualified to hold a lease Renewable-Energy-Program/State- ESA-listed species, the area likely or grant in accordance with the Activities/Regional-Proposals.aspx. A contains, seasonally or permanently, requirements of 30 CFR 585.106 and large-scale map of the RFCI area seabirds protected under the Migratory 585.107(c). Examples of the showing boundaries of the area is Bird Treaty Act and marine mammals documentation appropriate for available from BOEM upon request to protected under the Marine Mammal demonstrating your legal qualifications the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER Protection Act. BOEM will coordinate and related guidance can be found in INFORMATION CONTACT section above. with the FWS and NMFS to avoid, Chapter 2 and Appendix B of the BOEM Renewable Energy Framework Guide Multiple Use Considerations mitigate, and/or minimize potential impacts to the resources under their Book available at: http://www.boem.gov/ BOEM has identified the following jurisdiction. REnGuidebook03/. The documents you multiple use issues through early provide to demonstrate your coordination and outreach efforts: Existing Infrastructure qualifications to hold a lease or grant will be placed in a file kept by BOEM Department of Defense The proposed ROW grant crosses international fiber optic that may be made available for public The Department of Defense (DoD) telecommunications cable. In order to review. If you wish that any part of your conducts offshore testing, training, and construct its proposed project, ADP is legal qualification documentation be operations on the Atlantic above the expected to establish crossing kept confidential, clearly identify what OCS. BOEM would consult with the agreements with their owners and should be kept confidential, and submit DoD on any activities proposed on the ensure that installation activities do not it under separate cover (see ‘‘Protection requested ROW grant to ensure that they cause any disruption to service, of Privileged or Confidential are compatible with DoD activities on maintenance, or decommissioning, or Information Section,’’ below). the Atlantic above the OCS. otherwise damage those pipelines and (2) Documentation demonstrating that you are technically and financially Shipping Traffic cables identified by the affected parties. capable of constructing, operating, Shipping traffic occurs within the Fisheries and Essential Fish Habitat maintaining, and decommissioning the vicinity of the requested ROW grant. Portions of the area identified are facilities described in (4) below in BOEM will coordinate with the United used by the commercial and recreational accordance with the requirements of 30 States Coast Guard to avoid or minimize fishing industry, and NMFS has CFR 585.107(a). Guidance regarding the potential conflicts. designated essential fish habitat (EFH) documentation required to demonstrate VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28586 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices your technical and financial will inform you of this determination Protection of Privileged or Confidential qualifications can be found at: http:// and describe the information necessary Information www.boem.gov/Renewable-Energy- in order for BOEM to deem your Program/Regulatory-Information/ submission complete. If BOEM Freedom of Information Act QualificationGuidelines-pdf.aspx. Any determines your second submission is BOEM will not disclose privileged or documentation you submit to also insufficient or that it has not confidential information that you demonstrate your legal, technical, and received the requested information by a submit if it qualifies for Freedom of date BOEM specified, we reserve the financial qualifications must be Information Act (FOIA) exemption for provided to BOEM in both paper and right to deem your submission invalid. trade secrets and commercial or electronic formats. BOEM considers an In such a case, BOEM would not financial information, provided that you Adobe PDF file on a storage media consider your submission. device to be an acceptable format for an clearly label the submission with Requested Information From Interested electronic copy. ‘‘Contains Confidential Information’’ (3) A statement that you wish to or Affected Parties and request that BOEM treat it as acquire a renewable energy ROW grant BOEM is also requesting specific and confidential. Please consider submitting for the proposed grant corridor ADP detailed comments from interested or such information as a separate requested for the NY/NJ Ocean Grid affected parties regarding the following: attachment. project, and a description of how your (1) The current and future need for a BOEM will not treat as confidential proposal would interfere with, or suffer regional transmission system in the any aggregate summaries of such interference from, the proposed project. proposed area, including utility, information or comments not containing You should submit any request for a available grid connections, economics, such confidential or privileged ROW grant that does not conflict with efficiency or other relevant metrics. information. Additionally, BOEM will the proposed grant corridor separately (2) Whether BOEM should develop a not treat as confidential (1) the legal title pursuant to 30 CFR 585.305. broader strategic approach for regional of the nominating entity (for example, (4) A description of your objectives, transmission cables in which BOEM the name of your company), or (2) the including: considers limits on the number and • Devices and infrastructure involved list of whole or partial blocks that you location of future ROW grants or, are nominating. Information that is not (if your project would require the use of alternatively, processes unsolicited bottom-founded structures such as labeled as privileged or confidential will ROW grant requests on a case-by-case be regarded by BOEM as suitable for booster stations, please indicate where basis as it receives them from industry. those platforms would be located); public release. • Anticipated capacity; (3) Conditions to make such a • How the project would support network compatible with offshore wind Personal Identifying Information projects. renewable energy; and BOEM does not consider anonymous • (4) Offshore wind project developer A statement that the proposed comments; please include your name interest in use of regional transmission activity conforms with applicable state and address as part of your submittal. and local energy planning requirements, networks on the OCS. You should be aware that your entire initiatives, or guidance. (5) Geological and geophysical (5) A schedule of proposed activities, conditions (including bottom and comment, including your name, including those leading to commercial shallow hazards) in the area described address, and your personal identifying operations. in this notice. information, may be made publicly (6) Available and pertinent data and (6) Known archaeological, historic or available at any time. All submissions information concerning environmental cultural resource sites on the seabed in from identified individuals, businesses conditions in the area, including any the area described in this notice. and organizations will be available for energy and resource data and (7) Multiple uses of the area described public viewing on regulations.gov. In information used to evaluate the area. in this notice, including navigation (in order for BOEM to withhold from Further guidance for the particular, commercial and recreational disclosure your personal identifying qualifications process and requirements vessel usage) and commercial and information, you must identify any is available at: http://www.boem.gov/ recreational fisheries. information contained in the submittal Renewable-Energy-Program/Regulatory- (8) Potential impacts to existing of your comments that, if released, Information/QualificationGuidelines- communication cables. would constitute a clearly unwarranted pdf.aspx. Your complete submission, invasion of your personal privacy. You including the items identified in (1) (9) DoD operational, training, and testing activities (surface and must also briefly describe any possible through (6) above, must be provided to harmful consequences of the disclosure BOEM in both paper and electronic subsurface) in the area described in this notice that may be impacted by the of information, such as embarrassment, formats. BOEM considers an Adobe PDF injury or other harm. file stored on a compact disc (CD) or proposed project. portable storage device to be an (10) Potential future uses of the area. National Historic Preservation Act (16 acceptable format for submitting an (11) Advisable setback distance for U.S.C. 470w–3(a)) electronic copy. Where applicable, you other offshore structures, including should submit spatial information in a other cables, and renewable energy BOEM is required, after consultation format compatible with ArcGIS in a structures. with the Secretary, to withhold the geographic coordinate system (NAD 83). (12) The potential risk to the proposed location, character, or ownership of It is critical that you provide a offshore transmission cable posed by historic resources if it determines that complete submission of competitive anchors or other hazards, and burial disclosure may, among other things, risk interest so that BOEM may consider depths that would be required to harm to the historic resources or impede your submission in a timely manner. If mitigate such risks. the use of a traditional religious site by BOEM reviews your submission and (13) Relevant environmental and practitioners. Tribal entities should determines that it is incomplete, BOEM socioeconomic information. designate as confidential information VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28587 that falls under Section 304 of the ([email protected] or 202–205– should, to the extent information is NHPA. 2383) for information specific to this available: investigation. For information on the a. Identify the sectors in which U.S. Walter D. Cruickshank, legal aspects of this investigation, imports of goods and services from SSA Acting Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy contact William Gearhart of the have increased the most, in both value Management. Commission’s Office of the General and percentage terms, and indicate [FR Doc. 2019–12962 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Counsel ([email protected] or major factors behind this growth. Data BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 202–205–3091). The media should on goods should include both AGOA contact Margaret O’Laughlin, Office of (including GSP) imports and total External Relations (margaret.olaughlin@ imports. INTERNATIONAL TRADE usitc.gov or 202–205–1819). Hearing- b. Identify the SSA countries in which COMMISSION impaired individuals may obtain exports of goods and services to the United States have increased the most, [Investigation No. 332–571] information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal at 202– in both value and percentage terms, and U.S. Trade and Investment With Sub- 205–1810. General information indicate the major factors behind this Saharan Africa: Recent Trends and concerning the Commission may also be growth. Data on goods should include New Developments obtained by accessing its internet server both AGOA (including GSP) imports (https://www.usitc.gov). Persons with and total imports. AGENCY: United States International mobility impairments who will need 3. To the extent information is Trade Commission. special assistance in gaining access to available, describe the intellectual ACTION: Institution of investigation and the Commission should contact the property environment, including scheduling of public hearing. Office of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. national and regional laws, enforcement measures, and infringement issues, in Background: The Commission SUMMARY: Following receipt of a request key SSA markets. Through case studies instituted this investigation following dated May 6, 2019 from the United describe the effects of the intellectual receipt of a letter from the USTR dated States Trade Representative (USTR) property environment on trade and May 6, 2019. The letter requested that under the section 332(g) of the Tariff investment in the key SSA markets. Act of 1930, the U.S. International Trade the Commission conduct an 4. Provide a broad overview and Commission (Commission) has investigation and provide a report on examples of technological innovation in instituted Investigation No. 332–571, U.S. trade and investment with sub- the SSA food and agricultural U.S. Trade and Investment with Sub- Saharan Africa (SSA). The USTR asked production, processing, and marketing Saharan Africa: Recent Trends and New that the Commission’s report, to the system. This should include a broad Developments, for the purpose of extent information is available, focus description of SSA food and agricultural preparing the report requested by the primarily on the years 2016–2018, or the producers’ use of technological USTR. The Commission has scheduled latest three years for which data are improvements in such areas as crop and a public hearing in connection with this available, but where appropriate livestock nutrition and genetics investigation for July 24, 2019. examine longer-term trends since 2000. (including biotechnology); machinery The USTR asked that this report should DATES: and equipment; data processing and include the following: analytics; and digital market July 12, 2019: Deadline for filing 1. An overview of U.S. exports of information and risk management requests to appear at the public goods and services to SSA, which systems. Through case studies, describe hearing. should, to the extent information is how the adoption of such technological July 17, 2019: Deadline for filing pre- available: improvements has affected certain SSA hearing briefs and statements. a. Identify the sectors in which U.S. food and agricultural producers’ overall July 24, 2019: Public hearing. exports of goods and services to SSA production and export performance. July 31, 2019: Deadline for filing post- have increased the most, in both value Additionally, describe current national hearing briefs and statements. and percentage terms, and indicate August 16, 2019: Deadline for filing all and regional regulatory policies and major factors behind this growth. market conditions in key countries in other written submissions. b. Identify the SSA countries to which March 31, 2020: Transmittal of SSA that may affect the adoption of U.S. exports of goods and services have Commission report to USTR. technological improvements in the SSA increased the most, in both value and food and agricultural sector. ADDRESSES: All Commission offices, percentage terms, and indicate the major 5. Provide a broad overview and including the Commission’s hearing factors behind this growth. describe recent developments in the rooms, are located in the United States c. Identify SSA countries to which digital economy for key SSA markets. International Trade Commission U.S. outward FDI has increased the Provide information on the market for Building, 500 E Street SW, Washington, most, in both value and percentage digital technologies in those key SSA DC. All written submissions should be terms, and indicate major factors behind markets as well as the role of digital addressed to the Secretary, United this growth. products and services from the United States International Trade Commission, d. Provide examples of how products States. To the extent that data are 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC and services from the United States available, describe the market for digital 20436. The public record for this integrate into key SSA value chains; products and services, such as internet- investigation may be viewed on the identify possible opportunities for U.S. connected devices, cloud computing, Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) firms to better integrate into these value e-commerce, Internet of Things, at https://edis.usitc.gov/edis3-internal/ chains, where appropriate; and describe blockchain, and internet search and app. national or regional policies and other digital content, as well as how adoption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: macroeconomic factors that may affect of digital technologies affects other Project Leaders Arthur Chambers future demand for these U.S. products. industry sectors, such as manufacturing ([email protected] or 202– 2. An overview of U.S. imports of and other services. Describe current 205–2766) or Wen Jin (Jean) Yuan goods and services from SSA, which national and regional regulatory and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28588 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices policy measures and market conditions paragraphs for further information should not include any confidential in key countries in SSA that affect regarding confidential business business information. The summary will digital trade. information). Persons with questions be included in the report as provided if 6. Provide a summary of recent regarding electronic filing should it meets these requirements and is developments of regional integration contact the Office of the Secretary, germane to the subject matter of the efforts in SSA, including progress on the Docket Services Division (202–205– investigation. The Commission will negotiation and implementation of the 1802). identify the name of the organization African Continental Free Trade Area. Confidential Business Information. furnishing the summary and will 7. Briefly summarize the AGOA Any submissions that contain include a link to the Commission’s utilization strategies that have been confidential business information must Electronic Document Information developed by SSA countries. also conform to the requirements of System (EDIS) where the full written 8. To the extent practicable, provide section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules submission can be found. a summary of the most recent 2019 data of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR By order of the Commission. on U.S. trade flows of goods with SSA. 201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules Issued: June 14, 2019. 9. The USTR asked that the requires that the cover of the document Commission provide its report by March and the individual pages be clearly Lisa Barton, 31, 2020. marked as to whether they are the Secretary to the Commission. Public Hearing: A public hearing in ‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘non-confidential’’ [FR Doc. 2019–13029 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] connection with this investigation will version, and that the confidential BILLING CODE 7020–02–P be held at the U.S. International Trade business information is clearly Commission Building, 500 E Street SW, identified by means of brackets. All Washington, DC, beginning at 9:30 a.m. written submissions, except for INTERNATIONAL TRADE on July 24, 2019. Requests to appear at confidential business information, will COMMISSION the hearing should be filed with the be made available for inspection by [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–447 and 731– Secretary no later than 5:15 p.m., July interested parties. TA–1116 (Second Review)] 12, 2019, in accordance with the In his request letter, the USTR stated requirements in the ‘‘written that his office intends to make the Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel submissions’’ section below. All pre- Commission’s report available to the Pipe From China hearing briefs and statements should be public and asked that the Commission Determinations filed not later than 5:15 p.m., July 17, not include any confidential business 2019; and all post-hearing briefs and information or national security On the basis of the record 1 developed statements addressing matters raised at information in the report. The in the subject five-year reviews, the the hearing should be filed not later Commission will not include any United States International Trade than 5:15 p.m., July 31, 2019. In the confidential business information in the Commission (‘‘Commission’’) event that, as of the close of business on report that it sends to the USTR or determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of July 12, 2019, no witnesses are makes available to the public. However, 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that revocation of the scheduled to appear at the hearing, the all information, including confidential countervailing and antidumping duty hearing will be canceled. Any person business information, submitted in this orders on circular welded carbon- interested in attending the hearing as an investigation may be disclosed to and quality steel pipe from China would be observer or nonparticipant may call the used: (i) By the Commission, its likely to lead to continuation or Secretary to the Commission (202–205– employees and Offices, and contract recurrence of material injury to an 2000) after July 12, 2019, for personnel (a) for developing or industry in the United States within a information concerning whether the maintaining the records of this or a reasonably foreseeable time.2 hearing will be held. related proceeding, or (b) in internal Background Written Submissions: In lieu of or in investigations, audits, reviews, and addition to participating in the hearing, evaluations relating to the programs, The Commission, pursuant to section interested parties are invited to file personnel, and operations of the 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), written submissions concerning this Commission including under 5 U.S.C. instituted these reviews on November 1, investigation. All written submissions Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government 2018 (83 FR 54936) and determined on should be addressed to the Secretary, employees and contract personnel for March 11, 2019 that it would conduct and should be received not later than cybersecurity purposes. The expedited reviews (84 FR 17889, April 5:15 p.m., August 16, 2019. All written Commission will not otherwise disclose 26, 2019). submissions must conform to the any confidential business information in The Commission made these provisions of section 201.8 of the a manner that would reveal the determinations pursuant to section Commission’s Rules of Practice and operations of the firm supplying the 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It Procedure (19 CFR 201.8). Section 201.8 information. completed and filed its determinations and the Commission’s Handbook on Summaries of Written Submissions: in these reviews on June 14, 2019. The Filing Procedures require that interested The Commission intends to publish views of the Commission are contained parties file documents electronically on summaries of the positions of interested in USITC Publication 4901 (June 2019), or before the filing deadline and submit persons. Persons wishing to have a entitled Circular Welded Carbon- eight (8) true paper copies by noon summary of their position included in Quality Steel Pipe from China: eastern time on the next business day. the report should include a summary Investigation Nos. 701–TA–447 and In the event that confidential treatment with their written submission and 731–TA–1116 (Second Review). of a document is requested, interested should specifically state the summary is By order of the Commission. parties must file, at the same time as the intended for that purpose, and it should eight paper copies, at least four (4) be titled as such. The summary may not 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 additional true paper copies in which exceed 500 words, should be in CFR 207.2(f)). the confidential business information MSWord format or a format that can be 2 Commissioner Meredith M. Broadbent not must be deleted (see the following easily converted to MSWord, and participating. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28589 Issued: June 14, 2019. address one or more of the following burden associated with this collection is Lisa Barton, four points: 200 hours, which is equal to 400 (# of Secretary to the Commission. —Evaluate whether the proposed respondents) * 1 (# of times per [FR Doc. 2019–12975 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] collection of information is necessary response) * .5 (30 minutes). BILLING CODE 7020–02–P for the proper performance of the If additional information is required functions of the agency, including contact: Melody Braswell, Department whether the information will have Clearance Officer, United States practical utility; Department of Justice, Justice DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s Management Division, Policy and estimate of the burden of the Planning Staff, Two Constitution Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms proposed collection of information, Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A, and Explosives including the validity of the Washington, DC 20530. [OMB Number 1140–0006] methodology and assumptions used; Dated: June 14, 2019. —Evaluate whether and if so how the Melody Braswell, Agency Information Collection quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Activities; Proposed eCollection Department of Justice. eComments Requested; Application enhanced; and [FR Doc. 2019–13031 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] and Permit for Importation of Firearms, —Minimize the burden of the collection Ammunition and Defense Articles— of information on those who are to BILLING CODE 4410–14–P ATF Form 6—Part II (5330.3B) respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, mechanical, or other technological DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Firearms and Explosives, Department of collection techniques or other forms Justice. of information technology, e.g., Office of the Secretary ACTION: 30-Day notice. permitting electronic submission of Agency Information Collection responses. SUMMARY: The Department of Justice Activities; Submission for OMB (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Overview of This Information Review; Comment Request; National Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will Collection Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 submit the following information (1) Type of Information Collection: ACTION: Notice of availability; request collection request to the Office of Extension, with change, of a currently for comments. Management and Budget (OMB) for approved collection. review and approval in accordance with (2) The Title of the Form/Collection: SUMMARY: The Department of Labor the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Application and Permit for Importation (DOL) is submitting the Bureau of Labor DATES: The proposed information of Firearms, Ammunition and Defense Statistics (BLS) sponsored information collection was previously published in Articles. collection request (ICR) titled, ‘‘National the Federal Register, on April 10, 2019, (3) The agency form number, if any, Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997,’’ to allowing for a 60-day comment period. and the applicable component of the the Office of Management and Budget Comments are encouraged and will be Department sponsoring the collection: (OMB) for review and approval for use accepted for an additional 30 days until Form number: ATF Form 6—Part II in accordance with the Paperwork July 19, 2019. (5330.3B). Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995. Public Component: Bureau of Alcohol, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments on the ICR are invited. If Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. DATES: you have additional comments, Department of Justice. The OMB will consider all particularly with respect to the (4) Affected public who will be asked written comments that agency receives estimated public burden or associated or required to respond, as well as a brief on or before July 19, 2019. response time, have suggestions, need a abstract: ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with copy of the proposed information Primary: Individuals or households. applicable supporting documentation; collection instrument with instructions, Other: Federal Government, State, including a description of the likely or desire any other additional Local or Tribal Government. respondents, proposed frequency of information, please contact: Desiree M. Abstract: The information on the response, and estimated total burden Dickinson, ATF Firearms and Application and Permit for Importation may be obtained free of charge from the Explosives Imports Branch either by of Firearms, Ammunition and Defense RegInfo.gov website at http:// mail at 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, Articles—ATF Form 6—Part II (5330.3B) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAView WV 25405, or by email at is used to determine if the article(s) ICR?ref_nbr=201903-1220-002 (this link [email protected], or by described in the application qualifies for will only become active on the day telephone at 304–616–4584. Written importation by the importer, and to following publication of this notice) or comments and/or suggestions can also serve as the authorization for the by contacting Frederick C. Licari by be directed to the Office of Management importer. telephone at 202–693–8073, TTY 202– and Budget, Office of Information and (5) An estimate of the total number of 693–8064, (these are not toll-free Regulatory Affairs, Attention respondents and the amount of time numbers) or sending an email to DOL_ Department of Justice Desk Officer, estimated for an average respondent to [email protected]. _ Washington, DC 20503 or sent to OIRA respond: An estimated 400 respondents Submit comments about this request [email protected]. will utilize this form, and it will take by mail or courier to the Office of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written each respondent approximately 30 Information and Regulatory Affairs, comments and suggestions from the minutes to complete this form. Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL–BLS, public and affected agencies concerning (6) An estimate of the total public Office of Management and Budget, the proposed collection of information burden (in hours) associated with the Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, are encouraged. Your comments should collection: The estimated annual public Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202– VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28590 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 395–5806 (this is not a toll-free approved by the OMB under the PRA NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE number); or by email: OIRA_ and displays a currently valid OMB ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES [email protected]. Commenters Control Number. In addition, are encouraged, but not required, to notwithstanding any other provisions of National Endowment for the send a courtesy copy of any comments law, no person shall generally be subject Humanities by mail or courier to the U.S. to penalty for failing to comply with a Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of collection of information if the Meeting of National Council on the the Chief Information Officer, Attn: collection of information does not Humanities Departmental Information Compliance display a valid Control Number. See 5 AGENCY: National Endowment for the Management Program, Room N1301, CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. For Humanities, National Foundation on the 200 Constitution Avenue NW, additional information, see the related Arts and the Humanities. Washington, DC 20210; or by email: notice published in the Federal Register ACTION: Notice of meeting. [email protected]. on February 12, 2019 (84 FR 3496). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Interested parties are encouraged to SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Frederick C. Licari by telephone at 202– send comments to the OMB, Office of Advisory Committee Act, notice is 693–8073, TTY 202–693–8064, (these Information and Regulatory Affairs at hereby given that the National Council are not toll-free numbers) or by email at the address shown in the ADDRESSES on the Humanities will meet to advise [email protected]. section within thirty (30) days of the Chairman of the National SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This ICR publication of this notice in the Federal Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) seeks approval under the PRA for the Register. In order to help ensure with respect to policies, programs and National Longitudinal Survey of Youth appropriate consideration, comments procedures for carrying out his 1997 (NLSY97) information collection should mention OMB Control Number functions; to review applications for that includes respondents who were 1220–0157. The OMB is particularly financial assistance under the National born from 1980 through 1984 and lived interested in comments that: Foundation on the Arts and Humanities in the United States when the survey • Evaluate whether the proposed Act of 1965 and make recommendations began in 1997. The primary objective of collection of information is necessary thereon to the Chairman; and to the survey is to study the transition for the proper performance of the consider gifts offered to NEH and make from full-time schooling to the functions of the agency, including recommendations thereon to the establishment of careers and families. whether the information will have Chairman. The longitudinal focus of the survey practical utility; • DATES: The meeting will be held on requires information to be collected Evaluate the accuracy of the Thursday, July 11, 2019, from 9:00 a.m. about the same individuals over many agency’s estimate of the burden of the until 12:00 p.m., and Friday, July 12, years in order to trace their education, proposed collection of information, 2019, from 9:00 a.m. until adjourned. including the validity of the training, work experience, fertility, ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at income, and program participation. methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, Research based on the NLSY97 Washington, DC 20506. contributes to the formation of national clarity of the information to be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: policy in the areas of education, collected; and Elizabeth Voyatzis, Committee training, employment programs, and • Minimize the burden of the Management Officer, 400 7th Street SW, school-to-work transitions. The NLSY97 collection of information on those who 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20506; (202) will continue to use the telephone as the are to respond, including through the 606–8322; [email protected]. primary mode of interviews. Approving use of appropriate automated, this ICR would allow the BLS to electronic, mechanical, or other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reinstate and revise the collection by technological collection techniques or National Council on the Humanities is including new questions on other forms of information technology, meeting pursuant to the National expectations of working in the future, e.g., permitting electronic submission of Foundation on the Arts and Humanities on tax filing, on chronic pain, on the use responses. Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 951–960, as of painkillers, and on device ownership. Agency: DOL–BLS. amended). The Committee meetings of In addition, the BLS has attempted to Title of Collection: National the National Council on the Humanities streamline the questionnaire so that it Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997. will be held on July 11, 2019, as follows: will be shorter and less burdensome for OMB Control Number: 1220–0157. The policy discussion session (open to respondents. To this end, fewer Affected Public: Individuals or the public) will convene at 9:00 a.m. questions will be asked about household Households. until approximately 10:30 a.m., members, college attendance and Total Estimated Number of followed by the discussion of specific experience, and financial insecurity. Respondents: 6,520. grant applications and programs before Questions on wage bargaining and using Total Estimated Number of the Council (closed to the public) from the internet for job search will be Responses: 6,650. 10:30 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. The dropped used to classify jobs as regular, Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: following Committees will meet in the self-employed, or nontraditional have 7,616 hours. NEH offices: been streamlined. The BLS Authorizing Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Digital Humanities/Education Programs/ Statue authorizes this information Burden: $0. Federal/State Partnership; collection. See 29 U.S.C. 1, 2. Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D). Preservation and Access/Challenge This proposed information collection Grants; is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency Dated: June 13, 2019. Public Programs; and generally cannot conduct or sponsor a Michel Smyth, Research Programs. collection of information, and the public Departmental Clearance Officer. The plenary session of the National is generally not required to respond to [FR Doc. 2019–12977 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Council on the Humanities will convene an information collection, unless it is BILLING CODE 4510–24–P on July 12, 2019, at 9:00 a.m. in the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28591 Conference Center at Constitution NUCLEAR REGULATORY the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One Center. The agenda for the morning COMMISSION White Flint North, 11555 Rockville session (open to the public) will be as Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. [Docket No. 50–219; NRC–2018–0288] follows: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Minutes of the Previous Meeting Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Amy M. Snyder, Office of Nuclear Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating B. Reports Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Station Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1. Chairman’s Remarks AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 2. Senior Deputy Chairman’s Remarks Commission. 301–415–6822; email: Amy.Snyder@ nrc.gov. 3. Presentation by guest speaker Brent ACTION: Exemption; reissuance. Seales, Professor of Computer SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of Science at the University of SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory the exemption is attached. Kentucky Commission (NRC) is reissuing an 4. Reports on Policy and General exemption, originally approved on Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on June 14, 2019. Matters December 19, 2018, that exempted Exelon Generation Company, LLC For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. a. Digital Humanities (Exelon or the licensee) for Oyster Creek Bruce A. Watson, Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster b. Education Programs Chief, Reactor Decommissioning Branch, c. Federal/State Partnership Creek) to reduce the minimum Division of Decommissioning, Uranium insurance coverage limit from $1.06 d. Preservation and Access Recovery and Waste Programs, Office of billion to $50 million. The December 19, Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. e. Challenge Grants 2018, exemption originally had an Attachment—Exemption f. Public Programs effective date of 12 months (365 days) from the certification of permanent g. Research Programs NUCLEAR REGULATORY cessation of power operations. The COMMISSION The remainder of the plenary session reissued exemption has a new effective will be for consideration of specific date of 9.38 months (285 days) after Docket No. 50–219 applications and therefore will be from the certification of permanent Exelon Generation Company, LLC closed to the public. cessation of power operations. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating DATES: The exemption was reissued on As identified above, portions of the Station meeting of the National Council on the June 12, 2019. Humanities will be closed to the public ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID Exemption pursuant to sections 552b(c)(4), NRC–2018–0288 when contacting the Onsite Property Damage Insurance 552b(c)(6), and 552b(c)(9)(B) of Title 5 NRC about the availability of U.S.C., as amended. The closed sessions information regarding this document. I. Background You may obtain publicly-available will include review of personal and/or Exelon Generation Company, LLC proprietary financial and commercial information related to this document using any of the following methods: (Exelon, the licensee), is the holder of information given in confidence to the • Renewed Facility Operating License No. agency by grant applicants, and Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search DPR–16 for Oyster Creek Nuclear discussion of certain information, the Generating Station Oyster Creek Nuclear premature disclosure of which could for Docket ID NRC–2018–0288. Address questions about NRC docket IDs in Generating Station (Oyster Creek). By significantly frustrate implementation of letter dated February 14, 2018 proposed agency action. I have made Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; email: (Agencywide Documents Access and this determination pursuant to the [email protected]. For technical Management System (ADAMS) authority granted me by the Chairman’s questions, contact the individual listed Accession No. ML18045A084), Exelon Delegation of Authority to Close in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Advisory Committee Meetings dated CONTACT section of this document. Regulatory Commission (NRC) a April 15, 2016. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents certification in accordance with Section Please note that individuals planning Access and Management System 50.82(a)(1)(i) of Title 10 of the Code of to attend the public sessions of the (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- Federal Regulations (10 CFR), indicating meeting are subject to security screening available documents online in the that it plans to cease permanent procedures. If you wish to attend any of ADAMS Public Documents collection at operation no later than October 31, the public sessions, please inform NEH http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 2018. By letter dated September 25, as soon as possible by contacting adams.html. To begin the search, select 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. Melanie Gaylord at (202) 606–8322 or ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For ML18268A258), Exelon submitted to the [email protected]. Please also problems with ADAMS, please contact NRC a certification in accordance with provide advance notice of any special the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(ii), stating that needs or accommodations, including for reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– Oyster Creek permanently ceased power a sign language interpreter. 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ operations on September 17, 2018, and nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number that, as of September 25, 2018, all fuel Dated: June 13, 2019. for each document referenced (if it is had been permanently removed from Elizabeth Voyatzis, available in ADAMS) is provided the the Oyster Creek reactor vessel. The Committee Management Officer, National first time that it is mentioned in this facility consists of a permanently Endowment for the Humanities. document. shutdown and defueled boiling-water [FR Doc. 2019–12937 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and reactor located in the town of Forked BILLING CODE 7536–01–P purchase copies of public documents at River, Ocean County, New Jersey. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28592 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices II. Request/Action would result in significant onsite letter dated April 4, 2019, Exelon On December 19, 2018, the NRC contamination at Oyster Creek is also discusses both design-basis and beyond exempted Exelon from 10 CFR much lower than the risk of such an design-basis events involving irradiated 50.54(w)(1) to allow Exelon to reduce event at operating reactors. Therefore, fuel stored in the spent fuel pool (SFP). the minimum insurance coverage limit Exelon requested an exemption from 10 The licensee determined that there are for Oyster Creek from $1.06 billion to CFR 50.54(w)(1) to reduce its onsite no possible design-basis events at $50 million (ADAMS Accession Nos. property damage insurance from $1.06 Oyster Creek that could result in an ML18228A852 [Cover Letter]; billion to $50 million, commensurate offsite radiological release exceeding the ML18228A851 [Exemption]). The with the reduced risk of an incident at limits established by the U.S. the permanently shutdown and Environmental Protection Agency’s December 19, 2018, exemption defueled Oyster Creek site. (EPA) early-phase Protective Action originally had an effective date of 12 Guidelines (PAGs) of 1 rem (roentgen months (365 days) from the certification III. Discussion equivalent man) at the exclusion area of permanent cessation of power Under 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission boundary, as a way to demonstrate that operations under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1). may, upon application by any interested any possible radiological releases would By letter dated April 4, 2019 (ADAMS person or upon its own initiative, grant be minimal and not require Accession No. ML19094B776), Exelon exemptions from the requirements of 10 precautionary protective actions (e.g., requested to change the effective date of CFR part 50 when (1) the exemptions sheltering in place or evacuation). The the December 19, 2018, exemption from are authorized by law, will not present NRC staff evaluated the radiological 12 months (365 days) to 9.38 months an undue risk to public health or safety, consequences associated with various (285 days) from the certification of and are consistent with the common decommissioning activities, and design- permanent cessation of power defense and security; and (2) any of the basis accidents at Oyster Creek, in operations under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1). special circumstances listed in 10 CFR consideration of a permanently Exelon certified that Oyster Creek 50.12(a)(2) are present. shutdown and defueled condition. The permanently ceased power operations The financial protection limits of 10 possible design-basis accident scenarios on September 17, 2018. Therefore, the CFR 50.54(w)(1) were established after at Oyster Creek have greatly reduced revised effective date of the exemption the Three Mile Island accident out of radiological consequences. Based on its would be June 29, 2019. concern that licensees may be unable to review, the NRC staff concluded that no To provide a complete record of the financially cover onsite cleanup costs in reasonably conceivable design-basis NRC staff’s review, the NRC is reissuing the event of a major nuclear accident. accident exists that could cause an the December 19, 2018, exemption from The specified $1.06 billion coverage offsite release greater than the EPA 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) with a revised amount requirement was developed PAGs. effective date of 9.38 months (285 days) based on an analysis of an accident at The only incident that might lead to from the certification of permanent a nuclear reactor operating at power, a significant radiological release at a cessation of power operations under 10 resulting in a large fission product decommissioning reactor is a zirconium CFR 50.82(a)(1). This reissued release and requiring significant fire. The zirconium fire scenario is a exemption supersedes the exemption resource expenditures to stabilize the postulated, but highly unlikely, beyond issued on December 19, 2018. reactor and ultimately decontaminate design-basis accident scenario that The reissued exemption from the and cleanup the site. involves loss of water inventory from requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) These cost estimates were developed the SFP, resulting in a significant permits the licensee to reduce the based on the spectrum of postulated heatup of the spent fuel, and required level of onsite property damage accidents for an operating nuclear culminating in substantial zirconium insurance from $1.06 billion to $50 reactor. Those costs were derived from cladding oxidation and fuel damage. million for Oyster Creek effective at 9.38 the consequences of a release of The probability of a zirconium fire months (285 days) after certification of radioactive material from the reactor. scenario is related to the decay heat of permanent cessation of operations at Although the risk of an accident at an the irradiated fuel stored in the SFP. Oyster Creek, commensurate with the operating reactor is very low, the Therefore, the risks from a zirconium reduced risk of an incident at the consequences onsite and offsite can be fire scenario continue to decrease as a permanently shutdown facility. significant. In an operating plant, the function of the time since Oyster Creek The regulation at 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) high temperature and pressure of the has been permanently shut down. requires each licensee to have and reactor coolant system (RCS), as well as The Commission has previously maintain onsite property damage the inventory of relatively short-lived authorized a lesser amount of onsite insurance to stabilize and radionuclides, contribute to both the financial protection, based on this decontaminate the reactor and reactor risk and consequences of an accident. analysis of the zirconium fire risk. In site in the event of an accident. The With the permanent cessation of reactor SECY–96–256, ‘‘Changes to Financial onsite insurance coverage must be either operations at Oyster Creek and the Protection Requirements for $1.06 billion or whatever amount of permanent removal of the fuel from the Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power insurance is generally available from reactor vessel, such accidents are no Reactors, 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) and 10 private sources (whichever is less). longer possible. As a result, the reactor CFR 140.11,’’ dated December 17, 1996 The licensee states that the risk of an vessel, RCS, and supporting systems no (ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A483), incident at a permanently shutdown longer operate and have no function the NRC staff recommended changes to and defueled reactor is much less than related to the storage of the irradiated the power reactor financial protection the risk from an operating power fuel. Therefore, postulated accidents regulations that would allow licensees reactor. In addition, since reactor involving failure or malfunction of the to lower onsite insurance levels to $50 operation is no longer authorized at reactor, RCS, or supporting systems are million upon demonstration that the Oyster Creek, there are no events that no longer be applicable. fuel stored in the SFP can be air-cooled. would require the stabilization of During reactor decommissioning, the In its Staff Requirements Memorandum reactor conditions after an accident. largest radiological risks are associated to SECY–96–256, dated January 28, Similarly, the risk of an accident that with the storage of spent fuel onsite. By 1997 (ADAMS Accession No. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28593 ML15062A454), the Commission temperatures far below those associated take appropriate action to protect the supported the NRC staff’s with a significant radiological release. health and safety of the public, if fuel recommendation that, among other As discussed in the staff response to and cladding oxidation occurs in air). things, would allow permanently a question in SECY–00–0145, ‘‘the staff The NRC staff reviewed the calculation shutdown power reactor licensees to believes that full insurance coverage to verify that important physical reduce commercial onsite property must be maintained for 5 years or until properties of materials were within damage insurance coverage to $50 a licensee can show by analysis that its acceptable ranges and the results were million when the licensee was able to SFP is no longer vulnerable to such [a accurate. The NRC staff determined that demonstrate the technical criterion that zirconium] fire.’’ physical properties were appropriate. the spent fuel could be air-cooled if the The licensee’s adiabatic heatup Therefore, the NRC staff found that after SFP was drained of water. The NRC staff analyses demonstrate that there would 9.38 months (285 days) from the has used this technical criterion to grant be at least 10 hours after the loss of all permanent shutdown of the facility on similar exemptions to other means of cooling (both air and/or water) September 17, 2018, more than 10 hours decommissioning reactors (e.g., Maine before the spent fuel cladding would would be available before a significant Yankee Atomic Power Station, reach a temperature where the potential offsite release could begin. The NRC published in the Federal Register on for a significant offsite radiological staff concluded that the adiabatic January 19, 1999 [64 FR 2920]; and Zion release could occur. The licensee states heatup calculation provided an Nuclear Power Station, published in the that for this loss of all cooling scenario, acceptable method for determining the Federal Register on December 28, 1999 10 hours is sufficient time for personnel minimum time available for deployment [64 FR 72700]). These prior exemptions to respond with additional resources, of mitigation equipment and, if were based on these licensees equipment, and capability to restore necessary, implementing measures demonstrating that the SFP could be air- cooling to the SFPs, even after a non- under a comprehensive general cooled, consistent with the technical credible, catastrophic event. emergency plan. criterion discussed above. In the analysis provided in the The NRC staff performed an Attachment to its submittal dated evaluation of the design-basis accidents In SECY–00–0145, ‘‘Integrated November 6, 2018, as supplemented by Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power for Oyster Creek being permanently letter dated February 13, 2019, with defueled as part of SECY–18–0062, Plant Decommissioning,’’ dated June 28, Attachment 1, Response to NRC’s 2000, and SECY–01–0100, ‘‘Policy ‘‘Request By The Exelon Generation Request for Additional Information and Company, LLC For Exemptions From Issues Related to Safeguards, Insurance, Attachment 2, Zirconium Fire Analysis Certain Emergency Planning and Emergency Preparedness for Drained Spent Fuel Pool, C–1302– Requirements For The Oyster Creek Regulations at Decommissioning 226–E310–457, Revision 2, (ADAMS Nuclear Generating Station,’’ dated May Nuclear Power Plants Storing Fuel in Accession Nos. ML18310A306, and 31, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. the Spent Fuel Pool,’’ dated June 4, 2001 ML19044A643, respectively), the ML18030B340). The staff also evaluated (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML003721626 licensee compared the conditions for the licensee’s updated adiabatic heatup and ML011450420, respectively), the the hottest fuel assembly stored in the calculation in its submittal dated NRC staff discussed additional SFP to a criterion proposed in SECY– November 6, 2018, as supplemented by information concerning SFP zirconium 99–168, ‘‘Improving Decommissioning letter dated February 13, 2019 with fire risks at decommissioning reactors Regulations for Nuclear Power Plants’’ Attachment 1, Response to NRC’s and associated implications for onsite (ADAMS Accession No. ML12265A598), Request for Additional Information and property damage insurance. Providing applicable to offsite emergency response Attachment 2, Zirconium Fire Analysis an analysis of when the spent fuel for the unit in the decommissioning for Drained Spent Fuel Pool, C–1302– stored in the SFP is capable of air- process. This criterion considers the 226–E310–457, Revision 2, (ADAMS cooling is one measure that can be used time for the hottest assembly to heat up Accession Nos. ML18310A306, and to demonstrate that the probability of a from 30 degrees Celsius (°C) to 900 °C ML19044A643, respectively). zirconium fire is exceedingly low. adiabatically. If the heatup time is Based on the NRC staff’s evaluation of However, the NRC staff has more greater than 10 hours, then offsite the licensee’s adiabatic heatup recently used an additional analysis that emergency preplanning involving the calculation as well as the evaluation in bounds an incomplete drain down of plant is not necessary. Based on the SECY–18–0062 and SECY–96–256, the the SFP water, or some other limiting fuel assembly for decay heat NRC staff determined $50 million to be catastrophic event (such as a complete and adiabatic heatup analysis presented an adequate level of onsite property drainage of the SFP with rearrangement in the licensee’s submittals, at 9.38 damage insurance for a of spent fuel rack geometry and/or the months (285 days) after permanent decommissioning reactor, once the addition of rubble to the SFP). The cessation of power operations (i.e., 9.38 spent fuel in the SFP is no longer analysis postulates that decay heat months decay time), the time for the susceptible to a zirconium fire. The NRC transfer from the spent fuel via hottest fuel assembly to reach 900 °C is staff has postulated that there is still a conduction, convection, or radiation 10 hours after the assemblies have been potential for other radiological incidents would be impeded. This analysis is uncovered. As stated in NUREG–1738, at a decommissioning reactor that could often referred to as an adiabatic heatup. ‘‘Technical Study of Spent Fuel Pool result in significant onsite The licensee’s analyses referenced in Accident Risk at Decommissioning contamination besides a zirconium fire. its exemption request demonstrates that Nuclear Power Plants’’ (ADAMS In SECY–96–256, the NRC staff cited the under conditions where the SFP water Accession No. ML010430066), 900 °C is rupture of a large contaminated liquid inventory has drained completely and an acceptable temperature to use for storage tank (∼450,000 gallon), causing only air-cooling of the stored irradiated assessing onset of fission product soil contamination and potential fuel is available, there is reasonable release under transient conditions (to groundwater contamination, as the most assurance that after 9.38 months (285 establish the critical decay time for costly postulated event to days) from the permanent shutdown of determining availability of 10 hours for decontaminate and remediate (other the facility on September 17, 2018, the deployment of mitigation equipment than a SFP zirconium fire). The Oyster Creek spent fuel will remain at and, if necessary, for offsite agencies to postulated large liquid radiological VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28594 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices waste storage tank rupture event was CFR part 50 when the exemptions are C. The Exemption Is Consistent With the determined to have a bounding onsite authorized by law. Common Defense and Security cleanup cost of approximately $50 As explained above, the NRC staff has The reissued exemption would not million. Therefore, the NRC staff determined that the licensee’s proposed determined that the licensee’s proposal eliminate any requirements associated reduction in onsite property damage with physical protection of the site and to reduce onsite insurance to a level of insurance coverage to a level of $50 $50 million would be consistent with would not adversely affect Exelon’s million is consistent with SECY–96– ability to physically secure the site or the bounding cleanup and 256. Moreover, the NRC staff concluded decontamination cost, as discussed in protect special nuclear material. that 9.38 months (285 days) after the SECY–96–256, to account for the Physical security measures at Oyster permanent shutdown of the facility, postulated rupture of a large liquid Creek are not affected by the requested sufficient irradiated fuel decay time will radiological waste tank at the Oyster exemption. Therefore, the reissued have elapsed at Oyster Creek to decrease Creek site, should such an event occur. exemption is consistent with the The NRC staff has determined that the the probability of an onsite and offsite common defense and security. radiological release from a postulated licensee’s proposed reduction in onsite D. Special Circumstances property damage insurance coverage to zirconium fire accident to negligible a level of $50 million is consistent with levels. In addition, the licensee’s Special circumstances, in accordance SECY–96–256 and subsequent proposal to reduce onsite insurance to a with 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), are present insurance considerations, resulting from level of $50 million is consistent with whenever application of the regulation additional zirconium fire risks, as the maximum estimated cleanup costs in the particular circumstances is not discussed in SECY–00–0145 and SECY– for the recovery from the rupture of a necessary to achieve the underlying 01–0100. In addition, the NRC staff large liquid radiological waste storage purpose of the regulation. tank. notes that similar exemptions have been The underlying purpose of 10 CFR granted to other permanently shutdown The NRC staff has determined that 50.54(w)(1) is to provide reasonable and defueled power reactors, upon reissuing the licensee’s proposed assurance that adequate funds will be demonstration that the criterion of the exemption will not result in a violation available to stabilize reactor conditions zirconium fire risks from the irradiated of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as and cover onsite cleanup costs fuel stored in the SFP is of negligible amended, or the Commission’s associated with site decontamination, concern. As previously stated, the NRC regulations. Therefore, based on its following an accident that results in the staff concluded that 9.38 months (285 review of Exelon’s exemption request as release of a significant amount of days) after the permanent shutdown of discussed above, and consistent with radiological material. Oyster Creek the facility on September 17, 2018, SECY–96–256, the NRC staff concludes permanently shut down on September sufficient irradiated fuel decay time has that the exemption is authorized by law. 17, 2018, and permanently defueled on elapsed at Oyster Creek to decrease the September 25, 2018, it is no longer B. The Exemption Presents No Undue probability of an onsite radiological possible for the radiological Risk to the Public Health and Safety release from a postulated zirconium fire consequences of design-basis accidents accident to negligible levels. In The onsite property damage insurance or other credible events at Oyster Creek addition, the licensee’s proposal to to exceed the limits of the EPA PAGs at reduce onsite insurance to a level of $50 requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) were established to provide financial the exclusion area boundary. The million is consistent with the maximum licensee has evaluated the consequences estimated cleanup costs for the recovery assurance that following a significant nuclear incident, onsite conditions of highly unlikely, beyond-design-basis from the rupture of a large liquid conditions involving a loss of coolant radwaste storage tank. could be stabilized and the site from the SFP. The analyses show that The NRC staff also notes that in decontaminated. The requirements of 10 after 9.38 months (285 days) from accordance with the Oyster Creek Post CFR 50.54(w)(1) and the existing level Shutdown Decommissioning Activities of onsite insurance coverage for Oyster permanent cessation of power Report (PSDAR) dated May 21, 2018 Creek are predicated on the assumption operations on September 17, 2018, the (ADAMS Accession No. ML18141A775), that the reactor is operating. However, likelihood of such an event leading to a all spent fuel will be removed from the Oyster Creek permanently shutdown on large radiological release is negligible. SFPs and moved into dry storage at an September 17, 2018, and defueled on The NRC staff’s evaluation of the onsite independent spent fuel storage September 25, 2018. The permanently licensee’s analyses confirms this installation (ISFSI) by the end of March defueled status of the facility results in conclusion. 2024, and the probability of an initiating a significant reduction in the number The NRC staff also finds that the event that would threaten pool integrity and severity of potential accidents, and licensee’s proposed $50 million level of occurring before that time is extremely correspondingly, a significant reduction onsite insurance is consistent with the low, which further supports the in the potential for and severity of bounding cleanup and decontamination conclusion that the zirconium fire risk onsite property damage. The proposed cost, as discussed in SECY–96–256, to is negligible. reduction in the amount of onsite account for the hypothetical rupture of insurance coverage does not impact the a large liquid radiological waste tank at A. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law probability or consequences of potential the Oyster Creek site, should such an The reissued exemption from 10 CFR accidents. The proposed level of event occur. Therefore, the NRC staff 50.54(w)(1) allows Exelon to reduce the insurance coverage is commensurate concludes that the application of the minimum coverage limit for onsite with the reduced consequences of current requirements in 10 CFR property damage insurance no earlier potential nuclear accidents at Oyster 50.54(w)(1) to maintain $1.06 billion in than 9.38 months (285 days) after the Creek. Therefore, the NRC staff onsite insurance coverage is not permanent cessation of power concludes that granting the requested necessary to achieve the underlying operations. As stated above, 10 CFR exemption will not present an undue purpose of the rule for the permanently 50.12 allows the NRC to grant risk to the health and safety of the shutdown and defueled Oyster Creek exemptions from the requirements of 10 public. reactor. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28595 Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii), special determined that reissuing the exemption no earlier than 9.38 months (285 days) circumstances are present whenever involves no significant hazards after the permanent cessation of power compliance would result in undue consideration because reducing the operations. hardship or other costs that are licensee’s onsite property damage The exemption is effective on June 29, significantly in excess of those insurance for Oyster Creek does not (1) 2019 (9.38 months (285 days) after contemplated when the regulation was Involve a significant increase in the Oyster Creek permanently ceased power adopted, or that are significantly in probability or consequences of an operations on September 17, 2019). excess of those incurred by others accident previously evaluated; or (2) Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12 day similarly situated. create the possibility of a new or of June 2019. The NRC staff concludes that if the different kind of accident from any For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. licensee was required to continue to accident previously evaluated; or (3) /RA/ maintain an onsite insurance level of involve a significant reduction in a $1.06 billion, the associated insurance margin of safety. The exempted John R. Tappert, premiums would be in excess of those financial protection regulation is Director, Division of Decommissioning, necessary and commensurate with the unrelated to the operation of Oyster Uranium Recovery and Waste Programs, radiological contamination risks posed Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Creek. Accordingly, there is no Safeguards. by the site. In addition, such insurance significant change in the types or levels would be significantly in excess significant increase in the amounts of [FR Doc. 2019–12997 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] of other decommissioning reactor any effluents that may be released BILLING CODE 7590–01–P facilities that have been granted similar offsite; and no significant increase in exemptions by the NRC. individual or cumulative public or NUCLEAR REGULATORY The NRC staff finds that compliance occupational radiation exposure. COMMISSION with the existing rule would result in an In addition, the exempted regulation undue hardship or other costs that are is not associated with construction, so [Docket No. 50–219; NRC–2018–0288] significantly in excess of those there is no significant construction contemplated when the regulation was impact. The exempted regulation does Exelon Generation Company, LLC; adopted and are significantly in excess not concern the source term (i.e., Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating of those incurred by others similarly potential amount of radiation in an Station situated. accident), nor mitigation. Therefore, AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Therefore, the special circumstances there is no significant increase in the Commission. required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) and potential for, or consequences of, a 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) exist. radiological accident. In addition, there ACTION: Exemption; reissuance. E. Environmental Considerations would be no significant impacts to SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory biota, water resources, historic The NRC approval of the exemption Commission (NRC) is reissuing an properties, cultural resources, or exemption, originally approved on to insurance or indemnity requirements socioeconomic conditions in the region. belongs to a category of actions that the December 19, 2018, that allowed Exelon Moreover, the requirement for onsite to reduce the required level of primary Commission, by rule or regulation, has property damage insurance involves declared to be a categorical exclusion, off-site liability insurance for Oyster surety, insurance, and indemnity Creek Nuclear Generating Station after first finding that the category of matters. Accordingly, the exemption actions does not individually or (Oyster Creek) from $450 million to request meets the eligibility criteria for $100 million and eliminate the cumulatively have a significant effect on categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR the human environment. Specifically, requirement to carry secondary financial 51.22(c)(25). Therefore, pursuant to 10 protection. The December 19, 2018, the exemption is categorically excluded CFR 51.22(b) and 51.22(c)(25), no from further analysis under exemption originally had an effective environmental impact statement or date of 12 months (365 days) from the § 51.22(c)(25). environmental assessment need be Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting certification of permanent cessation of prepared in connection with the reissue power operations. The reissued of an exemption from the requirements of this exemption. of any regulation of Chapter I to 10 CFR exemption has a new effective date of is a categorical exclusion provided that IV. Conclusions 9.38 months (285 days) after the (i) there is no significant hazards Accordingly, the Commission has docketing of the certification of consideration; (ii) there is no significant determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR permanent cessation of power change in the types or significant 50.12(a), reissuing the exemption operations at Oyster Creek. increase in the amounts of any effluents originally granted on December 19, DATES: The exemption was issued on that may be released offsite; (iii) there is 2018, is authorized by law, will not June 12, 2019. no significant increase in individual or present an undue risk to the public ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID cumulative public or occupational health and safety, and is consistent with NRC–2018–0288 when contacting the radiation exposure; (iv) there is no the common defense and security. Also, NRC about the availability of significant construction impact; (v) special circumstances are present as set information regarding this document. there is no significant increase in the forth in 10 CFR 50.12. You may obtain publicly-available potential for or consequences from Therefore, the Commission hereby information related to this document radiological accidents; and (vi) the reissues Exelon an exemption from the using any of the following methods: requirements from which an exemption requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) for • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to is sought involve: Surety, insurance, or Oyster Creek. Exelon certified that it http://www.regulations.gov and search indemnity requirements. permanently ceased power operations at for Docket ID NRC–2018–0288. Address As the Director, Division of Oyster Creek on September 17, 2018. questions about NRC docket IDs in Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, The reissued exemption will permit Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Oyster Creek to lower the minimum telephone: 301–287–9127; email: Material Safety and Safeguards, I have required onsite insurance to $50 million [email protected]. For technical VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28596 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices questions, contact the individual listed indicating that it plans to cease Exelon to deferred premium charges up in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION permanent operation no later than to a maximum total deferred premium CONTACT section of this document. October 31, 2018. By letter dated of $131,056,000 with respect to any • NRC’s Agencywide Documents September 25, 2018 (ADAMS Accession nuclear incident at any operating Access and Management System No. ML18268A258), Exelon submitted nuclear power plant, and up to a (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- to the NRC a certification in accordance maximum annual deferred premium of available documents online in the with 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(ii), stating that $20,496,000 per incident. ADAMS Public Documents collection at Oyster Creek permanently ceased power The licensee states that the risk of an http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ operations on September 17, 2018, and offsite radiological release is adams.html. To begin the search, select that, as of September 25, 2018, all fuel significantly lower at a nuclear power ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For had been permanently removed from reactor that has permanently shut down problems with ADAMS, please contact the Oyster Creek reactor vessel. The and defueled, when compared to an the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) facility consists of a permanently operating power reactor. Similarly, the reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– shutdown and defueled boiling-water associated risk of offsite liability 415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@ reactor located in the town of Forked damages that would require insurance nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number River, Ocean County, New Jersey. or indemnification is commensurately for each document referenced (if it is lower for permanently shut down and II. Request/Action. available in ADAMS) is provided the defueled plants. Therefore, Exelon first time that it is mentioned in this On December 19, 2018, the NRC requested an exemption from 10 CFR document. exempted Exelon from 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4), to permit a reduction in • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and 140.11(a)(4) to allow Exelon to reduce primary offsite liability insurance and to purchase copies of public documents at the required level of primary off-site withdraw from participation in the the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One liability insurance for Oyster Creek from industry retrospective rating plan. $450,000,000 to $100,000,000, and White Flint North, 11555 Rockville III. Discussion. Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. eliminate the requirement for Oyster FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Creek to carry secondary financial Pursuant to 10 CFR 140.8, ‘‘Specific Amy M. Snyder, Office of Nuclear protection (ADAMS Accession Nos. exemptions,’’ the Commission may, Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. ML18229A005 [Cover Letter] and upon application of any interested Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ML18229A006 [Exemption]). The person or upon its own initiative, grant Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: December 19, 2018, exemption such exemptions from the requirements 301–415–6822; e-mail: Amy.Snyder@ originally had an effective date of 12 of the regulations in 10 CFR part 140, when the exemptions are authorized by nrc.gov. months (365 days) from the certification of permanent cessation of power law and are otherwise in the public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of operations under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1). interest. The NRC staff has reviewed the exemption is attached. By letter dated April 4, 2019 (ADAMS Exelon’s request for an exemption from Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day Accession No. ML19094B776), Exelon 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) and has concluded of June, 2019. requested to change the effective date of that the requested exemption is For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. the December 19, 2018, exemption from authorized by law and is otherwise in Bruce A. Watson, 12 months (365 days) to 9.38 months the public interest. Chief, Reactor Decommissioning Branch, (285 days) from the certification of The Price Anderson Act of 1957 Division of Decommissioning, Uranium permanent cessation of power (PAA) requires that nuclear power Recovery and Waste Programs, Office of operations under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1). reactor licensees have insurance to Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Exelon certified that Oyster Creek compensate the public for damages Attachment—Exemption permanently ceased power operations arising from a nuclear incident. on September 17, 2018. Therefore, the Specifically, the PAA requires licensees NUCLEAR REGULATORY revised effective date of the exemption of facilities with a ‘‘rated capacity of COMMISSION would be June 29, 2019. 100,000 electrical kilowatts or more’’ to [Docket No. 50–219] To provide a complete record of the maintain the maximum amount of NRC staff’s review, the NRC is reissuing primary offsite liability insurance Exelon Generation Company, LLC the December 19, 2018, exemption from commercially available (currently $450 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) with a revised million) and a specified amount of Station effective date of 9.38 months (285 days) secondary insurance coverage (currently Exemption from the certification of permanent up to $131,056,000 per reactor). In the cessation of power operations under 10 event of an accident causing offsite I. Background. CFR 50.82(a)(1). This reissued damages in excess of $450 million, each Exelon Generation Company, LLC exemption supersedes the exemption licensee would be assessed a prorated (Exelon, the licensee), is the holder of issued on December 19, 2018. share of the excess damages, up to Renewed Facility Operating License No. The regulation at 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) $131,056,000 per reactor, for a total of DPR-16 for Oyster Creek Nuclear requires each licensee to have and approximately $13 billion per nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek). By maintain primary financial protection in incident. The NRC’s regulations at 10 letter dated February 14, 2018 an amount of $450 million. In addition, CFR 140.11(a)(4) implement these PAA (Agencywide Documents Access and the licensee is required to participate in insurance requirements and set forth the Management System [ADAMS] an industry retrospective rating plan amount of primary and secondary Accession No. ML18045A084), Exelon (secondary financial protection) that insurance each power reactor licensee submitted to the U.S. Nuclear commits each licensee to pay into an must have. Regulatory Commission (NRC) a insurance pool to be used for damages As noted above, the PAA certification in accordance with that may exceed primary insurance requirements with respect to primary Sections 50.82(a)(1)(i) of Title 10 of the coverage. Participation in the industry and secondary insurance, and the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), retrospective rating plan will subject implementing regulations at 10 CFR VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28597 140.11(a)(4), apply to licensees of about 10-16 months of decay time for significant offsite damage has been facilities with a ‘‘rated capacity of the fuel used in the last cycle of power eliminated. 100,000 electrical kilowatts or more.’’ operation. After that time, the offsite The NRC staff performed an When the NRC issues a license consequences of an offsite radiological evaluation of the design-basis accidents amendment to a decommissioning release from a zirconium fire are for Oyster Creek being permanently licensee to reflect the defueled status of negligible for shutdown reactors, but the defueled as part of SECY-18-0062, the facility, the license amendment SFP is still operational and an inventory ‘‘Request by the Exelon Generation includes removal of the rated capacity of radioactive materials still exists Company, LLC for Exemptions from of the reactor from the license. onsite. Therefore, an evaluation of the Certain Emergency Planning Accordingly, a reactor that is potential for offsite damage is necessary Requirements for the Oyster Creek undergoing decommissioning has no to determine the appropriate level of Nuclear Generating Station,’’ dated May ‘‘rated capacity.’’ Removal of the rated offsite insurance post shutdown, in 31, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. capacity from the facility of a accordance with the Commission’s ML18030B340). decommissioning licensee, thus, allows discretionary authority under the PAA The licensee has stated, and the NRC the NRC to take the reactor licensee out to establish an appropriate level of staff agrees, that while spent fuel of the category of reactor licensees that required financial protection for such remains in the SFP, the only postulated are required to maintain the maximum shutdown facilities. design-basis accident that would remain available insurance and to participate in The NRC staff has conducted an applicable to Oyster Creek in the the secondary retrospective insurance evaluation and concluded that, aside permanently defueled condition that pool under the PAA, subject to a from the handling, storage, and could contribute a significant dose will technical finding that lesser potential transportation of spent fuel and be a fuel handling accident (FHA) in the Reactor Building, where the SFP is hazards exist at the facility after radioactive materials for a permanently located. For completeness, the NRC staff termination of operations. shut down and defueled reactor, no The financial protection limits of 10 also evaluated the applicability of other reasonably conceivable potential CFR 140.11(a)(4) were established to design-basis accidents documented in accident exists that could cause require a licensee to maintain sufficient the Oyster Creek Updated Final Safety significant offsite damage. During insurance, as specified under the PAA, Analysis Report (UFSAR) (ADAMS normal power reactor operations, the to satisfy liability claims by members of Accession No. ML15307A558), to forced flow of water through the reactor the public for personal injury, property ensure that these accidents would not coolant system removes heat generated damage, and the legal cost associated have consequences that could by the reactor. The reactor coolant with lawsuits, as the result of a nuclear potentially exceed the 10 CFR 50.67 system transfers this heat away from the accident at an operating reactor with a dose limits and Regulatory Guide 1.183, rated capacity of 100,000 kilowatts reactor core by converting reactor ‘‘Alternative Radiological Source Terms electric (or greater). Thus, the insurance feedwater to steam, which then flows to for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at levels established by this regulation, as the main turbine generator to produce Nuclear Power Reactors,’’ dose required by the PAA, were associated electricity. Most of the accident acceptance criteria or approach the U.S. with the risks and potential scenarios postulated for operating Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) consequences of an accident at an power reactors involve failures or early phase protective action guides operating reactor with a rated capacity malfunctions of systems that could (PAGs). of 100,000 kilowatts electric (or greater). affect the fuel in the reactor core, which In the Oyster Creek UFSAR, the The legal and associated technical in the most severe postulated accidents, licensee has determined that within 33 basis for granting exemptions from 10 would involve the release of large days after shutdown, the FHA doses CFR part 140 is set forth in SECY-93- quantities of fission products. With the would decrease to a level that would not 127, ‘‘Financial Protection Required of permanent cessation of reactor warrant protective actions under the Licensees of Large Nuclear Power Plants operations at Oyster Creek and the EPA early phase PAG framework, During Decommissioning,’’ dated May permanent removal of the fuel from the notwithstanding meeting the dose limit 10, 1993 (ADAMS Accession No. reactor core, such accidents are no requirements under 10 CFR 50.67 and ML12257A628). The legal analysis longer possible. The reactor, reactor dose acceptance criteria under underlying SECY-93-127 concluded coolant system, and supporting systems Regulatory Guide 1.183. that, upon a technical finding that lesser no longer operate and have no function The NRC staff notes that the doses potential hazards exist after termination related to the storage of the irradiated from an FHA are dominated by the of operations (and removal of the rated fuel. Therefore, postulated accidents isotope Iodine-131. The date of capacity), the Commission has the involving failure or malfunction of the cessation of power operations of Oyster discretion under the PAA to reduce the reactor, reactor coolant system, or Creek occurred on September 17, 2018. amount of insurance required of a supporting systems are no longer With 9.38 months of decay, the thyroid licensee undergoing decommissioning. applicable. dose from an FHA would be negligible. As a technical matter, the fact that a During reactor decommissioning, the After 9.38 months of decay, the only reactor has permanently ceased principal radiological risks are isotope remaining in significant operations is not itself determinative as associated with the storage of spent fuel amounts, among those postulated to be to whether a licensee may cease onsite. On a case-by-case basis, released in a design-basis accident FHA, providing the offsite liability coverage licensees undergoing decommissioning would be Krypton-85. Since Krypton-85 required by the PAA and 10 CFR have been granted permission to reduce primarily decays by beta emission, the 140.11(a)(4). In light of the presence of the required amount of primary offsite calculated skin dose from an FHA freshly discharged irradiated fuel in the liability insurance coverage from $450 analysis would make an insignificant spent fuel pool (SFP) at a recently million to $100 million and to withdraw contribution to the total effective dose shutdown reactor, the primary from the secondary insurance pool. One equivalent (TEDE), which is the consideration is the risk of offsite of the technical criteria for granting the parameter of interest in the radiological release from a zirconium exemption is that the possibility of a determination of the EPA early phase fire. That risk generally remains for design-basis event that could cause PAGs for sheltering or evacuation. The VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28598 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices NRC staff concludes that the dose 900 °C is an acceptable temperature to 15638]; and Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear consequence from an FHA for the use for assessing onset of fission Generation Plant, published in the permanently defueled Oyster Creek product release under transient Federal Register on May 6, 2015 [80 FR would not approach the EPA early conditions (to establish the critical 26100]). phase PAGs. Therefore, any offsite decay time for determining availability Additional discussions of other consequence from a design-basis of 10 hours for deployment of mitigation decommissioning reactor licensees that radiological release is unlikely, and a equipment and, if necessary, for offsite have received exemptions to reduce significant amount of offsite liability agencies to take appropriate action to their primary insurance level to $100 insurance coverage is not required. protect the health and safety of the million are provided in SECY-96-256, The only beyond design-basis event public, if fuel and cladding oxidation ‘‘Changes to the Financial Protection that has the potential to lead to a occurs in air). Requirements for Permanently significant radiological release at a The NRC staff reviewed the Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors, 10 permanently shut down and defueled calculation to verify that important CFR 50.54(w) and 10 CFR 140.11,’’ (decommissioning) reactor is a physical properties of materials were dated December 17, 1996 (ADAMS zirconium fire. The zirconium fire within acceptable ranges and the results Accession No. ML15062A483). These scenario is a postulated, but highly were accurate. The NRC staff prior exemptions were based on the unlikely, accident scenario that involves determined that physical properties licensee demonstrating that the SFP the loss of water inventory from the were appropriate. Therefore, the NRC could be air-cooled, consistent with the SFP, resulting in a significant heatup of staff found that after 9.38 months (285 technical criterion discussed above. the spent fuel and culminating in days), more than 10 hours would be The NRC staff has evaluated the issue substantial zirconium cladding available before a significant offsite of zirconium fires in SFPs and oxidation and fuel damage. The release could begin. The NRC staff presented an independent evaluation of probability of a zirconium fire scenario concluded that the adiabatic heatup a SFP subject to a severe earthquake in is related to the decay heat of the calculation provided an acceptable NUREG-2161, ‘‘Consequence Study of a irradiated fuel stored in the SFP. method for determining the minimum Beyond-Design-Basis Earthquake Therefore, the risks from a zirconium time available for deployment of Affecting the Spent Fuel Pool for a U.S. fire scenario continue to decrease as a mitigation equipment and, if necessary, Mark l Boiling Water Reactor,’’ function of the time that Oyster Creek implementing measures under a September 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. has been permanently shut down. comprehensive general emergency plan. ML14255A365). This evaluation In the analysis provided in the In this regard, one technical criterion concluded that, for a representative Attachment to its submittal dated for relieving decommissioning reactor boiling-water reactor, fuel in a dispersed November 6, 2018, as supplemented by licensees from the insurance obligations high-density configuration would be letter dated February 13, 2019, with applicable to an operating reactor is a adequately cooled by natural circulation Attachment 1, Response to NRC’s finding that the heat generated by the air flow within several months after Request for Additional Information and SFP has decayed to the point where the discharge from a reactor if the pool was Attachment 2, Zirconium Fire Analysis possibility of a zirconium fire is highly drained of water. for Drained Spent Fuel Pool, C-1302- unlikely. By letters dated August 22 and 226-E310-457, Revision 2, (ADAMS This was addressed in SECY-93-127, December 6, 2017 (ADAMS Accession Accession Nos. ML18310A306, and where the NRC staff concluded that Nos. ML17234A082 and ML17340A708, ML19044A643, respectively), the there was a low likelihood and reduced respectively), Exelon confirmed that the licensee compared the conditions for short-term public health consequences plant design and fuel storage the hottest fuel assembly stored in the of a zirconium fire once a configuration considered in NUREG- SFP to a criterion proposed in decommissioning plant’s spent fuel has 2161 were consistent with the Oyster SECY-99-168, ‘‘Improving sufficiently decayed. In its Staff Creek plant design and fuel storage Decommissioning Regulations for Requirements Memorandum, ‘‘Financial configurations to be used in the Nuclear Power Plants’’ (ADAMS Protection Required of Licensees of decommissioning of Oyster Creek. The Accession No. ML12265A598), Large Nuclear Power Plants during NRC staff independently confirmed that applicable to offsite emergency response Decommissioning,’’ dated July 13, 1993 the Oyster Creek fuel assembly decay for the unit in the decommissioning (ADAMS Accession No. ML003760936), levels are also consistent with the spent process. This criterion considers the the Commission approved a policy that fuel considered in NUREG-2161. Thus, time for the hottest assembly to heat up authorized, through the exemption the NRC staff has determined that after from 30 degrees Celsius (°C) to 900 °C process, withdrawal from participation 9.38 months (285 days) decay, the fuel adiabatically. If the heatup time is in the secondary insurance layer and a stored in the Oyster Creek SFP will be greater than 10 hours, then offsite reduction in commercial liability able to adequately be cooled by air in emergency preplanning involving the insurance coverage to $100 million, the unlikely event of pool drainage. plant is not necessary. Based on the when a licensee is able to demonstrate In SECY-00-0145, ‘‘Integrated limiting fuel assembly for decay heat that the spent fuel could be air-cooled Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power and adiabatic heatup analysis presented if the SFP was drained of water. Plant Decommissioning,’’ dated June 28, in Attachment 2, at 9.38 months (285 The NRC staff has used this technical 2000, and SECY-01-0100, ‘‘Policy Issues days) after permanent cessation of criterion to grant similar exemptions to Related to Safeguards, Insurance, and power operations (i.e., 9.38 months other decommissioning reactors (e.g., Emergency Preparedness Regulations at decay time), the time for the hottest fuel Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station, Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants assembly to reach 900 °C is 10 hours published in the Federal Register on Storing Fuel in Spent Fuel Pools,’’ dated after the assemblies have been January 19, 1999 [64 FR 2920]; Zion June 4, 2001 (ADAMS Accession Nos. uncovered. As stated in NUREG-1738, Nuclear Power Station, published in the ML003721626 and ML011450420, ‘‘Technical Study of Spent Fuel Pool Federal Register on December 28, 1999 respectively), the NRC staff discussed Accident Risk at Decommissioning [64 FR 72700]; Kewaunee Power additional information concerning SFP Nuclear Power Plants,’’ February 2001 Station, published in the Federal zirconium fire risks at decommissioning (ADAMS Accession No. ML010430066), Register on March 24, 2015 [80 FR reactors and associated implications for VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28599 offsite insurance. Analyzing when the primary offsite liability coverage to a that, after 9.38 months (285 days) decay, spent fuel stored in the SFP is capable level of $100 million, and the licensee’s the fuel stored in the Oyster Creek SFP of adequate air-cooling is one measure proposed withdrawal from participation will be able to adequately be cooled by that demonstrates when the probability in the secondary insurance pool for air in the unlikely event of pool of a zirconium fire would be offsite financial protection, are drainage. Moreover, in the very unlikely exceedingly low. consistent with the policy established in beyond design-basis accident scenario The licensee’s analyses demonstrate SECY-93-127 and subsequent insurance where the SFP coolant inventory is lost that under conditions where the SFP considerations resulting from zirconium in such a manner that all methods of water inventory has drained and only fire risks, as discussed in SECY-00-0145 heat removal from the spent fuel are no air cooling of the stored irradiated fuel and SECY-01-0100. The NRC has longer available, the NRC staff has is available, there is reasonable previously determined in SECY-00-0145 determined that 10 hours would be assurance that 9.38 months (285 days) that the minimum offsite financial available and is sufficient time to after the certification of permanent protection requirement may be reduced support deployment of mitigation cessation of operations that the Oyster to $100 million and that secondary equipment, consistent with plant Creek spent fuel will remain at insurance is not required, once it is conditions, to prevent the zirconium temperatures far below those associated determined that the spent fuel in the cladding from reaching a point of rapid with a significant radiological release. SFP is no longer thermal-hydraulically oxidation. Thus, the NRC staff In addition, the licensee performed capable of sustaining a zirconium fire concludes that the fuel stored in the adiabatic heatup analyses, in which a based on a plant-specific analysis. In Oyster Creek SFP will have decayed complete drainage of the SFP is addition, the NRC staff notes that sufficiently by the requested effective combined with rearrangement of spent similar exemptions from these exemption date of 9.38 months (285 fuel rack geometry and/or the addition insurance requirements, have been days) after the certification of of rubble to the SFP; this type of granted to other permanently shutdown permanent cessation of operations, to analysis postulates that decay heat and defueled power reactors, upon support a reduction in the required transfer from the spent fuel via satisfactory demonstration that insurance consistent with SECY-00- conduction, convection, or radiation zirconium fire risk from the irradiated 0145. would be impeded. The licensee’s fuel stored in the SFP is of negligible The NRC staff has determined that adiabatic heatup analyses demonstrate concern. granting of the licensee’s proposed that 9.38 months (285 days) after the exemption will not result in a violation certification of permanent cessation of A. The Exemption is Authorized by Law of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, operations, there would be at least 10 The PAA, and its implementing Section 170, or other laws, as amended, hours after the loss of all means of regulations in 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4), which require licensees to maintain cooling (both air and/or water), before require licensees of nuclear reactors that adequate financial protection. the spent fuel cladding would reach a have a rated capacity of 100,000 Accordingly, consistent with the legal temperature where the potential for a kilowatts electric or more to have and standard presented in SECY-93-127, significant offsite radiological release maintain $450 million in primary under which decommissioning reactor could occur. financial protection and to participate in licensees may be relieved of the In the NRC staff’s safety evaluation a secondary retrospective insurance requirements to carry the maximum dated June 11, 2019, associated with the pool. In accordance with 10 CFR 140.8, amount of insurance available and to NRC’s reissuance of exemptions from the Commission may grant exemptions participate in the secondary certain emergency planning from the regulations in 10 CFR part 140, retrospective premium pool where there requirements for Oyster Creek, with a as the Commission determines are is sufficient technical justification, the modified effective date of 9.38 months authorized by law. The legal and NRC staff concludes that the requested (285 days) after the permanent cessation associated technical basis for granting exemption is authorized by law. of operations, the NRC staff assessed the exemptions from 10 CFR part 140 are set Exelon accident analyses associated forth in SECY-93-127. The legal analysis B. The Exemption is Otherwise in the with the radiological risks from a underlying SECY-93-127 concluded Public Interest zirconium fire at a permanently shut that, upon a technical finding that lesser The financial protection limits of 10 down and defueled Oyster Creek site. potential hazards exist after termination CFR 140.11 were established to require Based on its evaluation of the licensee’s of operations, the Commission has the licensees to maintain sufficient offsite adiabatic heatup analyses, the NRC staff discretion under the Price-Anderson Act liability insurance to ensure adequate found that, for the very unlikely beyond to reduce the amount of insurance funding for offsite liability claims, design-basis accident scenario where required of a licensee undergoing following an accident at an operating the SFP coolant inventory is lost in such decommissioning. reactor. However, the regulation does a manner that all methods of heat The NRC staff concludes that the not consider the reduced potential for removal from the spent fuel are no technical criteria for relieving Exelon and consequence of nuclear incidents at longer available, there will be a from its existing primary and secondary permanently shutdown and minimum of 10 hours from the insurance obligations have been met. As decommissioning reactors. initiation of the accident until the explained above, the NRC staff has The basis provided in SECY-93-127, cladding reaches a temperature where concluded that no reasonably SECY-00-0145, and SECY-01-0100 offsite radiological release might occur. conceivable design-basis accident exists allows licensees of decommissioning The NRC staff found that 10 hours is that could cause an offsite release plants to reduce their primary offsite sufficient time to support deployment of greater than the EPA PAGs, and liability insurance and to withdraw mitigation equipment, consistent with therefore, that any offsite consequence from participation in the retrospective plant conditions, to prevent the from a design-basis radiological release rating pool for deferred premium zirconium cladding from reaching a is unlikely, and the need for a charges. As discussed in these point of rapid oxidation. significant amount of offsite liability documents, once the zirconium fire The NRC staff has determined that the insurance coverage is unwarranted. concern is determined to be negligible, licensee’s proposed reduction in Additionally, the NRC staff determined possible accident scenario risks at VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28600 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices permanently shutdown and defueled from 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4), which would increase in individual or cumulative reactors are greatly reduced, when permit Exelon to lower the Oyster Creek public or occupational radiation compared to the risks at operating primary insurance levels and to exposure. The exempted regulation is reactors, and the associated potential for withdraw from the secondary not associated with construction, so offsite financial liabilities from an retrospective premium pool at the there is no significant construction accident are commensurately less. The requested effective date of 9.38 months impact. The exempted regulation does licensee has analyzed and the NRC staff (285 days) after the certification of not concern the source term (i.e., has confirmed that the risks of accidents permanent cessation of operations, is in potential amount of radiation in an that could result in an offsite the public interest. accident), nor any activities conducted radiological risk are minimal, thereby C. Environmental Considerations at the site. Therefore, there is no justifying the proposed reductions in significant increase in the potential for, offsite primary liability insurance and The NRC’s approval of an exemption or consequences of, a radiological withdrawal from participation in the from insurance or indemnity accident. In addition, there would be no secondary retrospective rating pool for requirements belongs to a category of significant impacts to biota, water deferred premium charges. actions that the Commission, by rule or resources, historic properties, cultural Additionally, participation in the regulation, has declared to be a resources, or socioeconomic conditions secondary retrospective rating pool categorical exclusion, after first finding in the region resulting from issuance of could potentially have adverse that the category of actions does not the requested exemption. The consequences on the safe and timely individually or cumulatively have a requirement for offsite liability completion of decommissioning. If a significant effect on the human insurance involves surety, insurance, or nuclear incident sufficient to trigger the environment. Specifically, the indemnity matters only. secondary insurance layer occurred at exemption is categorically excluded another nuclear power plant, the from the requirement to prepare an Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR licensee could incur financial liability environmental assessment or 51.22(b) and 51.22(c)(25), no of up to $131,056,000. However, environmental impact statement, in environmental impact statement or because Oyster Creek is permanently accordance with 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25). environmental assessment need be shut down, it cannot produce revenue Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting prepared in connection with the from electricity generation sales to cover of an exemption from the requirements reissuance of this exemption. such a liability. Therefore, such liability of any regulation of Chapter I to 10 CFR IV. Conclusions. if subsequently incurred, could is a categorical exclusion provided that: significantly affect the ability of the (i) There is no significant hazards Accordingly, the Commission has facility to conduct and complete timely consideration; (ii) there is no significant determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR radiological decontamination and change in the types or significant 140.8, reissuing the exemption decommissioning activities. In addition, increase in the amounts of any effluents originally granted on December 19, as SECY-93-127 concluded, the shared that may be released offsite; (iii) there is 2018, is authorized by law and is financial risk exposure to Exelon is no significant increase in individual or otherwise in the public interest. greatly disproportionate to the cumulative public or occupational Therefore, the Commission hereby radiological risk posed by Oyster Creek, radiation exposure; (iv) there is no reissues Exelon an exemption from the when compared to operating reactors. significant construction impact; (v) requirements of 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) for The reduced overall risk to the public at there is no significant increase in the Oyster Creek. Exelon certified that it decommissioning power plants does not potential for or consequences from permanently ceased operation at Oyster warrant that Exelon be required to carry radiological accidents; and (vi) the Creek on September 17, 2018. The full operating reactor insurance requirements from which an exemption exemption from 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) coverage, after the requisite spent fuel is sought involve surety, insurance, or permits Oyster Creek to reduce the cooling period has elapsed following indemnity requirements. required level of primary financial final reactor shutdown. The licensee’s As the Director, Division of protection, from $450 million to $100 proposed financial protection limits will Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, million and to withdraw from maintain a level of liability insurance and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear participation in the secondary layer of coverage commensurate with the risk to Material Safety and Safeguards, I have financial protection 9.38 months (285 the public. These changes are consistent determined that reissuing the exemption days) after the certification of with previous NRC policy as discussed involves no significant hazards permanent cessation of operations. in SECY-00-0145, and exemptions consideration, as defined in 10 CFR Therefore, the exemption is effective approved for other decommissioning 50.92, because reducing a licensee’s on June 29, 2019 (9.38 months (285 reactors. Thus, the underlying purpose offsite liability requirements at Oyster days) after Oyster Creek permanently of the regulations will not be adversely Creek does not: (1) Involve a significant ceased power operations on September affected by the reductions in insurance increase in the probability or 17, 2019) coverage. Accordingly, an exemption consequences of an accident previously from participation in the secondary evaluated; (2) create the possibility of a Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12 day of insurance pool and a reduction in the new or different kind of accident from June 2019. primary insurance to $100 million, a any accident previously evaluated; or For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. value more in line with the potential (3) involve a significant reduction in a consequences of accidents, would be in margin of safety. The exempted RA/ the public interest in that this assures financial protection regulation is John R. Tappert, there will be adequate funds to address unrelated to the operation of Oyster Director, Division of Decommissioning, any of those consequences and helps to Creek or site activities. Accordingly, Uranium Recovery and Waste Programs, assure the safe and timely there is no significant change in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. decommissioning of the reactor. types or significant increase in the Therefore, the NRC staff has amounts of any effluents that may be [FR Doc. 2019–13013 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] concluded that the reissued exemption released offsite, and no significant BILLING CODE 7590–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28601 POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION with the requirements of 39 CFR Agreements in the Mail Classification 3007.301.1 Schedule’s Competitive Products List. [Docket Nos. MC2019–151 and CP2019–168; The Commission invites comments on MC2019–152 and CP2019–169] DATES: Date of required notice: June 19, whether the Postal Service’s request(s) 2019. in the captioned docket(s) are consistent New Postal Products FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with the policies of title 39. For Elizabeth Reed, 202–268–3179. AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. request(s) that the Postal Service states SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ACTION: Notice. concern market dominant product(s), ® applicable statutory and regulatory United States Postal Service hereby SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. recent Postal Service filing for the U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3010, and 39 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on June 14, 2019, Commission’s consideration concerning CFR part 3020, subpart B. For request(s) it filed with the Postal Regulatory negotiated service agreements. This that the Postal Service states concern Commission a USPS Request to Add notice informs the public of the filing, competitive product(s), applicable Priority Mail Contract 534 to invites public comment, and takes other statutory and regulatory requirements Competitive Product List. Documents administrative steps. include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, are available at www.prc.gov, Docket DATES: Comments are due: June 21, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and Nos. MC2019–153, CP2019–170. 2019. 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comment Elizabeth Reed, ADDRESSES: Submit comments deadline(s) for each request appear in Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law. electronically via the Commission’s section II. [FR Doc. 2019–12974 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Filing Online system at http:// II. Docketed Proceeding(s) BILLING CODE 7710–12–P www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact 1. Docket No(s).: MC2019–151 and the person identified in the FOR FURTHER CP2019–168; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 533 to SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE INFORMATION CONTACT section by COMMISSION telephone for advice on filing Competitive Product List and Notice of alternatives. Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing [Release No. 34–86101; File No. SR–FINRA– Acceptance Date: June 13, 2019; Filing 2019–014] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 3020.30 et seq., and 39 CFR 3015.5; Self-Regulatory Organizations; 202–789–6820. Public Representative: Kenneth R. Financial Industry Regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Moeller; Comments Due: June 21, 2019. Authority, Inc.; Notice of Designation Table of Contents 2. Docket No(s).: MC2019–152 and of a Longer Period for Commission CP2019–169; Filing Title: USPS Request Action on a Proposed Rule Change To I. Introduction to Add Priority Mail & First-Class Allow Additional Time for Reporting to II. Docketed Proceeding(s) Package Service Contract 104 to TRACE of Transactions in U.S. I. Introduction Competitive Product List and Notice of Treasury Securities Executed To Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Hedge a Primary Market Transaction The Commission gives notice that the Acceptance Date: June 13, 2019; Filing Postal Service filed request(s) for the Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR June 13, 2019. Commission to consider matters related 3020.30 et seq., and 39 CFR 3015.5; On April 16, 2019, the Financial to negotiated service agreement(s). The Public Representative: Kenneth R. Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. request(s) may propose the addition or Moeller; Comments Due: June 21, 2019. (‘‘FINRA’’) filed with the Securities and removal of a negotiated service This Notice will be published in the Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’), agreement from the market dominant or Federal Register. pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the the competitive product list, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 modification of an existing product Ruth Ann Abrams, (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 a currently appearing on the market Acting Secretary. proposed rule change to amend FINRA dominant or the competitive product [FR Doc. 2019–12973 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Rule 6730 to provide additional time for list. BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P reporting to TRACE of transactions in Section II identifies the docket U.S. Treasury Securities executed to number(s) associated with each Postal hedge a primary market transaction. The Service request, the title of each Postal POSTAL SERVICE proposed rule change was published for Service request, the request’s acceptance comment in the Federal Register on date, and the authority cited by the Product Change—Priority Mail April 30, 2019.3 The Commission Postal Service for each request. For each Negotiated Service Agreement received one comment letter in support request, the Commission appoints an of the proposed rule change.4 AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. officer of the Commission to represent Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 5 provides the interests of the general public in the ACTION: Notice. that, within 45 days of the publication proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 of notice of the filing of a proposed rule (Public Representative). Section II also SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal establishes comment deadline(s) 1 Regulatory Commission to add a 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). pertaining to each request. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. The public portions of the Postal domestic shipping services contract to 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85713 Service’s request(s) can be accessed via the list of Negotiated Service (April 24, 2019), 84 FR 18329. the Commission’s website (http:// 4 See Letter from Robert Toomey, Managing 1 See Docket No. RM2018–3, Order Adopting Director and Associate General Counsel, SIFMA, to www.prc.gov). Non-public portions of Final Rules Relating to Non-Public Information, Robert W. Errett, Deputy Security, Commission, the Postal Service’s request(s), if any, June 27, 2018, Attachment A at 19–22 (Order No. dated May 21, 2019. can be accessed through compliance 4679). 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28602 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices change, or within such longer period up under NYSE Arca Rule 8.600–E. On publishes the reasons for such to 90 days as the Commission may February 1, 2019, pursuant to Section determination. The date of publication designate if it finds such longer period 19(b)(1) of the Act,3 the Commission of notice of filing of the proposed rule to be appropriate and publishes its noticed the proposed rule change and, change was December 21, 2018. June 19, reasons for so finding, or as to which the pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,4 2019, is 180 days from that date, and self-regulatory organization consents, designated a longer period within which August 18, 2019, is 240 days from that the Commission shall either approve the to approve the proposed rule change, date. proposed rule change, disapprove the disapprove the proposed rule change, or proposed rule change, or institute institute proceedings to determine The Commission finds it appropriate proceedings to determine whether the whether to approve or disapprove the to designate a longer period within proposed rule change should be proposed rule change.5 On March 6, which to issue an order approving or disapproved. The 45th day after 2019, the Exchange filed Amendment disapproving the proposed rule change publication of the notice for this No. 1 to the proposed rule change, so that it has sufficient time to consider proposed rule change is June 14, 2019. which replaced and superseded the this proposed rule change. Accordingly, The Commission is extending this 45- proposed rule change as originally the Commission, pursuant to Section day time period. filed.6 On March 14, 2019, the Exchange 19(b)(2) of the Act,12 designates August The Commission finds that it is filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed 18, 2019, as the date by which the appropriate to designate a longer period rule change, which replaced and Commission shall either approve or within which to take action on the superseded the proposed rule change, as disapprove the proposed rule change proposal so that it has sufficient time to modified by Amendment No. 1.7 On (File No. SR–NYSEArca–2018–98). consider certain issues raised by the March 20, 2019, the Commission For the Commission, by the Division of proposed rule change. Accordingly, the instituted proceedings under Section Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Commission, pursuant to Section 8 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to determine authority.13 19(b)(2) of the Act, designates July 29, whether to approve or disapprove the 2019, as the date by which the proposed rule change.9 On March 29, Eduardo A. Aleman, Commission shall either approve or 2019, the Exchange filed Amendment Deputy Secretary. disapprove, or institute proceedings to No. 3 to the proposed rule change, [FR Doc. 2019–12926 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] determine whether to disapprove, the which replaced and superseded the BILLING CODE 8011–01–P proposed rule change (File No. SR– proposed rule change, as modified by FINRA–2019–014). Amendment No. 2.10 The Commission For the Commission, by the Division of has received no comment letters on the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated proposed rule change. COMMISSION authority.6 Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 11 provides Eduardo A. Aleman, that, after initiating disapproval [Release No. 34–86099; File No. SR–DTC– Deputy Secretary. proceedings, the Commission shall issue 2019–002] [FR Doc. 2019–12925 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] an order approving or disapproving the BILLING CODE 8011–01–P proposed rule change not later than 180 Self-Regulatory Organizations; The days after the date of publication of Depository Trust Company; Notice of notice of filing of the proposed rule Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE change. The Commission may extend a Proposed Rule Change To Modify the COMMISSION the period for issuing an order Operational Arrangements and Fee approving or disapproving the proposed Guide Relating to Structured Securities [Release No. 34–86104; File No. SR– rule change, however, by not more than NYSEArca–2018–98] 60 days if the Commission determines June 13, 2019. that a longer period is appropriate and Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Securities Exchange Act of 1934 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Longer Period for Commission Action (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 on Proceedings To Determine Whether 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85033, notice is hereby given that on June 5, To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed 84 FR 2618 (February 7, 2019). 2019, The Depository Trust Company Rule Change, as Modified by 6 Amendment No. 1 is available at: https:// (‘‘DTC’’) filed with the Securities and Amendment No. 3, To List and Trade www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2018-98/ Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) Shares of the iShares Commodity srnysearca201898-5031693-183046.pdf. 7 the proposed rule change as described Multi-Strategy ETF Under NYSE Arca Amendment No. 2 is available at: https:// www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2018-98/ in Items I, II and III below, which Items Rule 8.600–E srnysearca201898-5123714-183326.pdf. have been prepared by the clearing 8 June 13, 2019. 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). agency. DTC filed the proposed rule 9 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85375, On December 21, 2018, NYSE Arca, 84 FR 11375 (March 26, 2019). Specifically, the change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) Inc. (‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) filed Commission instituted proceedings to allow for of the Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) with the Securities and Exchange additional analysis of the proposed rule change’s thereunder.4 The Commission is Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant consistency with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which publishing this notice to solicit requires, among other things, that the rules of a to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities national securities exchange be ‘‘designed to comments on the proposed rule change Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and from interested persons. 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,’’ and ‘‘to protect investors and the public change to list and trade shares of the 12 interest.’’ See id. at 11378 (citing 15 U.S.C. Id. iShares Commodity Multi-Strategy ETF 78f(b)(5)). 13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(57). 10 Amendment No. 3 is available at: https:// 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31). www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2018-98/ 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). srnysearca201898-5271215-183729.pdf. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00144 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28603 I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the (A) Clearing Agency’s Statement of the Fee in the amount of $4,200 per CUSIP Terms of Substance of the Proposed Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the to an Underwriter at the time of a Non- Rule Change Proposed Rule Change Conforming Structured Security becoming eligible for DTC services.12 At The proposed rule change consists of 1. Purpose modifications to (i) the DTC Operational the same time, the OA was amended to The proposed rule change consists of Arrangements (Necessary for Securities add a requirement for Underwriters and proposed modifications to (i) the OA 9 to to Become and Remain Eligible for DTC Paying Agents to submit the eliminate the requirement that a Paying 13 Services) (‘‘OA’’) 5 to eliminate the Attestation to identify Non- Agent, and an Underwriter, for Non- requirement that an Issuer’s paying Conforming Structured Securities as agent (‘‘Paying Agent’’), and a Conforming Structured Securities, they are made eligible for DTC 10 14 Participant that is the managing submit an Attestation relating to the services. In addition, DTC expanded Non-Conforming Structured Securities, the distribution of ‘‘Report Cards’’ to underwriter (‘‘Underwriter’’), for certain 11 issuances of structured securities as described below; (ii) the Fee Guide Paying Agents relating to the tracking (‘‘Structured Securities’’) that have to eliminate the Exception Processing and evaluating of Paying Agent features that may affect the timeliness of Fee; and (iii) the OA to eliminate a performance with regard to timeliness payment of principal and interest provision that excludes Non- and accuracy of payment rate reporting (‘‘Non-Conforming Structured Conforming Structured Securities from on Structured Securities, to make the Securities’’), submit an attestation statistics published by DTC regarding Report Cards available to the public on 15 (‘‘Attestation’’) 6 relating to the Non- the timeliness of submission of rate DTC’s website. Conforming Structured Securities, as information for Structured Securities, as The volume of new issuances of described below; (ii) the Guide to the described below. Structured Securities coming to market, including those relating to mortgages DTC Fee Schedule (‘‘Fee Guide’’) 7 to Background eliminate an exception processing fee and other asset types, have significantly A Structured Security, such as a (‘‘Exception Processing Fee’’) charged to declined since 2007 and the beginnings collateralized mortgage obligation or 16 Underwriters relating to making Non- of the financial crisis. The decline has asset-backed security, is a debt security Conforming Structured Securities been attributed, at least in part, to backed by a pool of underlying financial eligible for DTC services; and (iii) the structural changes made to the assets. The underlying assets generally OA to eliminate a provision that Structured Securities marketplace that excludes Non-Conforming Structured consist of receivables such as mortgages, have occurred since the financial crisis, Securities from statistics published by credit card receivables, student or other including regulatory changes related to DTC regarding the timeliness of bank loans for which the timing of credit-related risk controls for the submission of rate information for principal payments by the underlying underwriting of Structured Securities Structured Securities, as described obligors may be variable and and standards by which loans that below.8 unpredictable. A Structured Security underlie Structured Securities are may also incorporate credit originated.17 At DTC, volumes of II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the enhancements or other rights that affect Structured Securities processed at DTC Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the the amount and timing of payments to ranged from 52,000–55,000 issuances Proposed Rule Change investors. per year from 2004–2008. Since that In its filing with the Commission, the Communication of periodic payment time, due largely to changes in the clearing agency included statements rates of principal and interest to the end marketplace, volumes of Structured concerning the purpose of and basis for investors in Structured Securities Securities issuances have steadily the proposed rule change and discussed depends on information reporting and dropped with average volumes since any comments it received on the significant interdependencies among 2009 falling below 10,000 issuances per proposed rule change. The text of these servicers of the underlying assets, year. Additionally, the number of Non- statements may be examined at the trustees, custodians, Paying Agents, Conforming Structured Securities at places specified in Item IV below. The DTC, and the financial intermediaries DTC has fallen as a percentage of overall clearing agency has prepared that act on behalf of the investors. Structured Securities issuances. summaries, set forth in sections A, B, Historically, given the complexity of Currently 6.4% of the active Structured and C below, of the most significant structure and calculations of cash flow Securities on DTC’s security master file aspects of such statements. from the underlying assets, and the are marked as Non-Conforming interdependencies on timeliness and Structured Securities, but since the 5 Available at http://www.dtcc.com/∼/media/ accuracy of performance throughout the beginning of 2014 less than 1% of newly Files/Downloads/legal/issue-eligibility/eligibility/ chain of servicers and intermediaries, issued Structured Securities have been operational-arrangements.pdf. payment rates for Non-Conforming 6 Available at http://www.dtcc.com/∼/media/ 12 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57193 Files/Downloads/legal/issue-eligibility/special- Structured Securities were often (January 24, 2008), 73 FR 5614 (January 30, 2008). letters/Non-Conforming-Structured-Securities- announced late. Processing 13 Supra note 6. Attestation-Letter.pdf (Non-Conforming Structured inefficiencies and inaccuracies Securities Attestation). A Paying Agent and 14 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57542 Underwriter must provide an Attestation to DTC to associated with late payment rate (March 20, 2008), 73 FR 16403 (March 27, 2008). inform DTC when a Security to be made eligible for reporting led to increased costs for DTC 15 See id. DTC services is a Non-Conforming Structured associated with processing Non- 16 See An He & Bruce Mizrach, FINRA Office of Security. The Attestation also documents the Conforming Structured Securities. the Chief Economist, Analysis of Securitized Asset understanding of the Underwriter that DTC would Liquidity (June 2017) at 5, available at https:// charge the Exception Processing Fee with regard to In 2008, in order to recoup its www.finra.org/sites/default/files/Analysis_of_ the Non-Conforming Structured Security. processing costs relating to Non- Securitized_Asset_Liquidity.pdf. 7 Available at http://www.dtcc.com/∼/media/ Conforming Structured Securities, DTC 17 See S&P Global Ratings, Ten Years after the Files/Downloads/legal/fee-guides/dtcfeeguide.pdf. implemented the Exception Processing Financial Crisis, Global Securitization Lending 8 Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined Transformed by Regulation and Economic Growth in the Rules, By-Laws and Organization Certificate (July 21, 2017) at 1–6, available at https:// 9 of DTC (the ‘‘Rules’’), available at http:// Supra note 5. www.spratings.com/documents/20184/1393097/ www.dtcc.com/∼/media/Files/Downloads/legal/ 10 Supra note 6. SF10Years/b0f1300a-5ed5–407d-8d3b- rules/dtc_rules.pdf, and the OA, supra note 5. 11 Supra note 7. 77fdc3b1f20c. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28604 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices marked as Non-Conforming Structured the due to the small percentage of Non- payment rate reporting for Participants Securities. Conforming Structured Securities issued with respect to all Structured Securities in relation to all other Structured processed at DTC. By providing more Proposed Changes to the OA and the Securities issued, that Non-Conforming complete information with respect to Fee Guide Structured Securities can be included in payment rate reporting for Structured The processing of the Attestation by the Report Cards without materially Securities, the proposed rule change DTC increased the amount of resources impacting results reflected in the Report would allow Report Cards to include necessary for DTC staff to facilitate Non- Cards. information that would facilitate (i) Conforming Structured Securities Participants’ understanding of the Implementation Timeframe becoming eligible for DTC services. timeliness and accuracy of payment rate However, the reduction of new issues of DTC would implement the proposed reporting on Structured Securities and Non-Conforming Structured Securities, changes no earlier than thirty (30) days (ii) decisions they may they might make as described above, has reduced the after the date of filing, or such shorter with respect to transactions in resources required by DTC, including time as the Commission may designate, Structured Securities. Therefore, by manual processing of paperwork and and no later than July 10, 2019. DTC facilitating Participants’ understanding data entries in the DTC system by DTC would announce the implementation of payment rate information in this staff, to efficiently process Non- date of the proposed changes by regard, the proposed rule change would Conforming Structured Securities. In Important Notice, posted to its website. promote the prompt and accurate this regard, DTC would be able to 2. Statutory Basis clearance and settlement of securities balance its costs associated with the transactions consistent with the Act. processing of Non-Conforming Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 19 Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act 20 Structured Securities with its service requires that the rules of the clearing requires that the rules of the clearing fees applicable to securities agency be designed, inter alia, to agency provide for the equitable processing,18 without additionally promote the prompt and accurate allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and charging an Exception Processing Fee. clearance and settlement of securities other charges among its participants. As Therefore, DTC proposes to eliminate transactions. DTC believes that the described above, DTC would eliminate the Exception Processing Fee, which proposed rule change is consistent with the Exception Processing Fee pursuant would facilitate DTC’s ability to balance this provision of the Act because by to the proposed rule change because the its costs with its service fees. Also, amending (i) the OA to eliminate the reduction of new issues of Non- because DTC proposes to eliminate the requirement for the Attestation and (ii) Conforming Structured Securities has Exception Processing Fee, DTC has the Fee Guide to remove the Exception reduced the resources required by DTC determined that it is no longer necessary Processing Fee, the proposed rule to efficiently process Non-Conforming for it to obtain an Attestation from a change would eliminate extra steps Structured Securities. In this regard, Paying Agent and Participant by which necessary for Participants to request DTC would be able to cover its costs they notify DTC that an issue comprises eligibility for Non-Conforming associated with the processing of Non- Non-Conforming Structured Securities Structured Securities that are not Conforming Structured Securities with and the Participant agrees to pay the otherwise required for other Structured its service fees applicable to securities Exception Processing Fee. Securities. By eliminating the processing, without additionally Therefore, pursuant to the proposed requirements as described in (i) and (ii) charging an Exception Processing Fee. rule change, DTC would modify (i) the above, the proposed rule change would Therefore, DTC believes that the OA to eliminate the requirement that a promote the prompt and accurate proposed rule change provides for the Paying Agent, and an Underwriter, for clearance and settlement of securities equitable allocation of reasonable fees Non-Conforming Structured Securities, transactions by facilitating the ability of among its participants by eliminating a submit an Attestation relating to the Participants to make Non-Conforming fee that is no longer necessary for DTC Non-Conforming Structured Securities; Structured Securities eligible for DTC’s to charge to balance its costs associated and (ii) the Fee Guide to eliminate the book-entry settlement services, without with the processing of Non-Conforming Exception Processing Fee. requiring the Participant to take the Structured Securities with its service Since, pursuant to the proposed rule extra step of submitting an Attestation fees applicable to securities change, DTC would no longer receive and incurring the cost associated with processing.21 Attestations from Paying Agents and the Exception Processing Fee as part of Underwriters notifying DTC that the standard eligibility process for such (B) Clearing Agency’s Statement on Structured Securities are non- Securities. Burden on Competition conforming, and therefore would not DTC believes the removal of text from DTC believes that the proposed rule distinguish between Non-Conforming the OA that provides for the exclusion change could impact competition.22 Structured Securities and other of Non-Conforming Structured DTC does not believe the proposed rule Structured Securities for the purposes Securities from the Report Card, as change would impose any burden on described above, DTC would amend the described above, would be consistent competition, because as discussed OA to eliminate a provision that with the above cited provision of the above, the volume of new issuances in excludes Non-Conforming Structured Act. While the inclusion of Non- Non-Conforming Structured Securities Securities from statistics published by Conforming Structured Securities in the is very low compared to Structured DTC regarding the timeliness of Report Cards would not have a material Securities generally, and the proposed submission of rate information for effect on results reflected in Report changes described above would not Structured Securities. In this regard, the Cards, no longer excluding Non- have a material effect with respect to (a) OA would be amended to remove text Conforming Structured Securities the obligations and costs of Participants providing for the exclusion of Non- results would allow Report Cards to utilizing DTC services, or (b) Conforming Structured Securities from provide for a complete overview with the Report Card results. DTC believes respect to timeliness and accuracy of 20 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(D). 21 See Fee Guide, supra note 7. 18 See Fee Guide, supra note 7. 19 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 22 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(I). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28605 information included on Report Cards. Commission, 100 F Street NE, Notice of an application under section DTC believes the proposed rule change Washington, DC 20549. 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of may promote competition, because the All submissions should refer to File 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’) for an exemption from reduced cost to Participants to request Number SR–DTC–2019–002. This file sections 18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) of the eligibility for Non-Conforming Structed number should be included on the Act, under sections 6(c) and 23(c) of the Securities, due to the proposed subject line if email is used. To help the Act for an exemption from rule 23c–3 elimination of the Exception Processing Commission process and review your under the Act, and for an order pursuant Fee, may facilitate a Participant’s ability comments more efficiently, please use to section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d– to request eligibility for such Securities only one method. The Commission will 1 under the Act. at DTC. post all comments on the Commission’s SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants (C) Clearing Agency’s Statement on internet website (http://www.sec.gov/ request an order to permit certain Comments on the Proposed Rule rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the registered closed-end management Change Received From Members, submission, all subsequent investment companies to issue multiple Participants, or Others amendments, all written statements classes of shares and to impose early with respect to the proposed rule withdrawal charges and asset-based DTC has not received or solicited any change that are filed with the written comments relating to this distribution and shareholder service Commission, and all written fees. proposal. DTC will notify the communications relating to the Commission of any written comments proposed rule change between the APPLICANTS: Tortoise Tax-Advantaged received by DTC. Commission and any person, other than Social Infrastructure Fund, Inc. (the ‘‘Initial Fund’’) and Tortoise Credit III. Date of Effectiveness of the those that may be withheld from the Strategies, LLC (the ‘‘Adviser’’). Proposed Rule Change, and Timing for public in accordance with the Commission Action provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be FILING DATES: The application was filed available for website viewing and on December 18, 2017 and amended on Because the foregoing proposed rule printing in the Commission’s Public June 14, 2018, November 5, 2018 and change does not: Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, (i) Significantly affect the protection April 24, 2019. Washington, DC 20549 on official of investors or the public interest; HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An (ii) impose any significant burden on business days between the hours of order granting the requested relief will competition; and 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the be issued unless the Commission orders (iii) become operative for 30 days filing also will be available for a hearing. Interested persons may from the date on which it was filed, or inspection and copying at the principal request a hearing by writing to the office of DTC and on DTCC’s website such shorter time as the Commission Commission’s Secretary and serving (http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule- may designate, it has become effective applicants with a copy of the request, filings.aspx). All comments received pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the personally or by mail. Hearing requests will be posted without change. Persons Act 23 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) should be received by the Commission submitting comments are cautioned that thereunder.24 by 5:30 p.m. on July 8, 2019, and should we do not redact or edit personal At any time within 60 days of the be accompanied by proof of service on identifying information from comment filing of the proposed rule change, the the applicants, in the form of an submissions. You should submit only Commission summarily may affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate of information that you wish to make temporarily suspend such rule change if service. Pursuant to rule 0–5 under the available publicly. All submissions it appears to the Commission that such Act, hearing requests should state the should refer to File Number SR–DTC– action is necessary or appropriate in the nature of the writer’s interest, any facts 2019–002 and should be submitted on public interest, for the protection of bearing upon the desirability of a or before July 10, 2019. investors, or otherwise in furtherance of hearing on the matter, the reason for the the purposes of the Act. For the Commission, by the Division of request, and the issues contested. Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Persons who wish to be notified of a IV. Solicitation of Comments authority.25 hearing may request notification by Interested persons are invited to Eduardo A. Aleman, writing to the Commission’s Secretary. submit written data, views and Deputy Secretary. ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities arguments concerning the foregoing, [FR Doc. 2019–12924 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street including whether the proposed rule BILLING CODE 8011–01–P change is consistent with the Act. NE, Washington, DC 20549–1090; Comments may be submitted by any of Applicants: Jeremy Goff, Tortoise Credit the following methods: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Strategies, LLC, 11550 Ash Street, Suite 300, Leawood, KS 66211. Electronic Comments COMMISSION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: • Use the Commission’s internet [Investment Company Act Release No. 33509; File No. 812–14854] Asen Parachkevov, Senior Counsel, or comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Andrea Ottomanelli Magovern, Branch rules/sro.shtml); or • Tortoise Tax-Advantaged Social Chief, at (202) 551–6821 (Division of Send an email to rule-comments@ Infrastructure Fund, Inc. and Tortoise Investment Management, Chief sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Credit Strategies, LLC Counsel’s Office). DTC–2019–002 on the subject line. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: June 13, 2019. The Paper Comments following is a summary of the AGENCY: Securities and Exchange • Send paper comments in triplicate Commission (‘‘Commission’’). application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission’s to Secretary, Securities and Exchange ACTION: Notice. website by searching for the file 23 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). number, or for an applicant using the 24 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 25 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Company name box, at http:// VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00147 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28606 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by 6. If the requested relief is granted, the fees, expenses and other characteristics calling (202) 551–8090. Initial Fund anticipates it will of each class of shares offered for sale continuously offer additional classes of by the prospectus, as is required for Applicants’ Representations shares, with each class having its own open-end multiple class funds under 1. The Initial Fund is a Maryland fee and expense structure. Because of Form N–1A. As is required for open-end corporation that is registered under the the different distribution and/or funds, each Fund will disclose its Act as a continuously offered, non- shareholder services fees, services and expenses in shareholder reports, and diversified, closed-end management any other class expenses that may be describe any arrangements that result in investment company that operates as an attributable to each class of shares of the breakpoints in or elimination of sales interval fund. The Initial Fund’s Initial Fund, the net income attributable loads in its prospectus.5 In addition, investment objective is to seek to to, and the dividends payable on, each applicants will comply with applicable generate attractive total return with an class of shares may differ from each enhanced fee disclosure requirements emphasis on tax-advantaged income. other. for fund of funds, including registered 2. The Adviser is a Delaware limited 7. Applicants state that shares of a funds of hedge funds.6 liability company and is registered as an Fund may be subject to a repurchase fee 10. Each Fund will comply with any investment adviser under the at a rate no greater than 2% of a requirements that the Commission or Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The shareholder’s repurchase proceeds if the FINRA may adopt regarding disclosure Adviser serves as investment adviser to interval between the date of purchase of at the point of sale and in transaction the Initial Fund. the shares and the valuation date with confirmations about the costs and 3. The applicants seek an order to respect to the repurchase of those shares conflicts of interest arising out of the permit the Funds (as defined below) to is less than one year. To the extent a distribution of open-end investment issue multiple classes of shares and to Fund determines to waive, impose company shares, and regarding impose early withdrawal charges and scheduled variations of, or eliminate a prospectus disclosure of sales loads and asset-based distribution and shareholder repurchase fee, it will do so consistently revenue sharing arrangements, as if service fees with respect to certain with the requirements of rule 22d–1 those requirements applied to each classes. under the Act and as if such fund were Fund. In addition, each Fund will 4. Applicants request that the order an open-end investment company and contractually require that any also apply to any continuously-offered the Fund’s waiver of, scheduled distributor of the Fund’s shares comply registered closed-end management variation in, or elimination of, the with such requirements in connection investment company that has been repurchase fee will apply uniformly to with the distribution of such Fund’s previously organized or that may be all shareholders of such Fund regardless shares. organized in the future for which the of class. Repurchase fees will apply 11. Each Fund will allocate all expenses incurred by it among the Adviser or any entity controlling, equally to all classes of shares of a various classes of shares based on the controlled by, or under common control Fund, consistent with section 18 of the net assets of the Fund attributable to with the Adviser, or any successor in Act and rule 18f–3 thereunder. 1 each class, except that the net asset interest to any such entity, acts as 8. The Initial Fund has adopted a value and expenses of each class will investment adviser, distributor or fundamental policy to offer to reflect the expenses associated with the underwriter and which operates as an repurchase between 5% and 25% of its distribution and/or shareholder services interval fund pursuant to rule 23c–3 outstanding shares at net asset value on plan of that class (if any), shareholder under the Act and/or provides periodic a quarterly basis. Such repurchase offers services fees attributable to that class (if liquidity with respect to its shares will be conducted pursuant to rule 23c– pursuant to rule 13e–4 under the any), including transfer agency fees, and 3 under the Act. Each of the Future any other incremental expenses of that Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Funds will likewise adopt fundamental (‘‘Exchange Act’’) (each, a ‘‘Future class. Expenses of a Fund allocated to a investment policies in compliance with particular class of shares will be borne Fund’’ and together with the Initial rule 23c–3 and make repurchase offers Fund, each a ‘‘Fund’’ and collectively, on a pro rata basis by each outstanding to its shareholders at periodic intervals share of that class. Applicants state that the ‘‘Funds’’).2 and/or provide periodic liquidity with 5. The Initial Fund is currently each Fund will comply with the respect to its shares pursuant to rule provisions of rule 18f-3 under the Act as conducting a continuous offering of its 3 13e–4 under the Exchange Act. Any if it were an open-end investment Institutional Class I common stock (the repurchase offers made by the Funds ‘‘Class I shares’’). Additional offerings company. will be made to all holders of shares of 12. Applicants state that each Fund by the Initial Fund or any Future Fund each such Fund. may impose an early withdrawal charge relying on the order may be on a private 9. Applicants represent that any asset- on shares submitted for repurchase that placement or public offering basis. based service and distribution fees for have been held less than a specified Shares of the Funds will not be listed on each class of shares will comply with any securities exchange nor publicly the provisions of FINRA Rule 2341(d) 5 See Shareholder Reports and Quarterly Portfolio traded. There is currently no secondary (‘‘FINRA Sales Charge Rule’’).4 Disclosure of Registered Management Investment market for the shares and the Funds Applicants also represent that each Companies, Investment Company Act Release No. expect that no secondary market will 26372 (Feb. 27, 2004) (adopting release) (requiring Fund will disclose in its prospectus the open-end investment companies to disclose fund develop. expenses in shareholder reports); and Disclosure of 3 Applicants submit that rule 23c–3 and Breakpoint Discounts by Mutual Funds, Investment 1 A successor in interest is limited to an entity Regulation M under the Exchange Act permit an Company Act Release No. 26464 (June 7, 2004) that results from a reorganization into another interval fund to make repurchase offers to (adopting release) (requiring open-end investment jurisdiction or a change in the type of business repurchase its shares while engaging in a companies to provide prospectus disclosure of organization. continuous offering of its shares pursuant to Rule certain sales load information). 2 Any Fund relying on this relief in the future will 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. 6 Fund of Funds Investments, Investment do so in compliance with the terms and conditions 4 All references in the application to the FINRA Company Act Rel. Nos. 26198 (Oct. 1, 2003) of the application. Applicants represent that each Sales Charge Rule include any Financial Industry (proposing release) and 27399 (June 20, 2006) entity presently intending to rely on the requested Regulatory Authority successor or replacement rule (adopting release). See also Rules 12d1–1, et seq. of relief is listed as an applicant. to the FINRA Sales Charge Rule. the Act. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28607 period and may waive the early 3. Section 18(i) of the Act provides asset value at periodic intervals withdrawal charge for certain categories that each share of stock issued by a pursuant to a fundamental policy of the of shareholders or transactions to be registered management investment interval fund. Rule 23c–3(b)(1) under established from time to time. company will be a voting stock and the Act permits an interval fund to Applicants state that each Fund will have equal voting rights with every deduct from repurchase proceeds only a apply the early withdrawal charge (and other outstanding voting stock. repurchase fee, not to exceed two any waivers or scheduled variations of Applicants state that multiple classes of percent of the proceeds, that is paid to the early withdrawal charge) uniformly shares of the Funds may violate section the interval fund and is reasonably to all shareholders in a given class and 18(i) of the Act because each class intended to compensate the fund for consistently with the requirements of would be entitled to exclusive voting expenses directly related to the rule 22d–1 under the Act as if the Funds rights with respect to matters solely repurchase. were open-end investment companies. related to that class. 3. Section 23(c)(3) provides that the 13. Each Fund operating as an interval 4. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that Commission may issue an order that fund pursuant to rule 23c–3 under the the Commission may exempt any would permit a closed-end investment Act may offer its shareholders an person, security or transaction or any company to repurchase its shares in exchange feature under which the class or classes of persons, securities or circumstances in which the repurchase shareholders of the Fund may, in transactions from any provision of the is made in a manner or on a basis that connection with the Fund’s periodic Act, or from any rule or regulation does not unfairly discriminate against repurchase offers, exchange their shares under the Act, if and to the extent such any holders of the class or classes of of the Fund for shares of the same class exemption is necessary or appropriate securities to be purchased. of (i) registered open-end investment in the public interest and consistent 4. Applicants request relief under companies or (ii) other registered with the protection of investors and the section 6(c), discussed above, and closed-end investment companies that purposes fairly intended by the policy section 23(c)(3) from rule 23c–3 to the comply with rule 23c–3 under the Act and provisions of the Act. Applicants extent necessary for the Funds to and continuously offer their shares at request an exemption under section 6(c) impose early withdrawal charges on net asset value, that are in the Fund’s from sections 18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) to shares of the Funds submitted for group of investment companies permit the Funds to issue multiple repurchase that have been held for less (collectively, ‘‘Other Funds’’). Shares of classes of shares. than a specified period. a Fund operating pursuant to rule 23c– 5. Applicants submit that the 5. Applicants state that the early 3 that are exchanged for shares of Other proposed allocation of expenses relating withdrawal charges they intend to Funds will be included as part of the to distribution and voting rights among impose are functionally similar to contingent deferred sales loads imposed amount of the repurchase offer amount multiple classes is equitable and will by open-end investment companies for such Fund as specified in rule 23c– not discriminate against any group or under rule 6c–10 under the Act. Rule 3 under the Act. Any exchange option class of shareholders. Applicants submit 6c–10 permits open-end investment will comply with rule 11a–3 under the that the proposed arrangements would companies to impose contingent Act, as if the Fund were an open-end permit a Fund to facilitate the deferred sales loads, subject to certain investment company subject to rule distribution of its securities and provide conditions. Applicants note that rule 11a–3. In complying with rule 11a–3, investors with a broader choice of shareholder services. Applicants assert 6c–10 is grounded in policy each Fund will treat an early that the proposed closed-end considerations supporting the withdrawal charge as if it were a investment company multiple class employment of contingent deferred contingent deferred sales load. structure does not raise the concerns sales loads where there are adequate Applicants’ Legal Analysis underlying section 18 of the Act to any safeguards for the investor and state that greater degree than open-end the same policy considerations support Multiple Classes of Shares investment companies’ multiple class imposition of early withdrawal charges 1. Section 18(a)(2) of the Act provides structures that are permitted by rule in the interval fund context. In addition, that a closed-end investment company 18f–3 under the Act. Applicants state applicants state that early withdrawal may not issue or sell a senior security that each Fund will comply with the charges may be necessary for the that is a stock unless certain provisions of rule 18f–3 as if it were an distributor to recover distribution costs. requirements are met. Applicants state open-end investment company. Applicants represent that any early that the creation of multiple classes of withdrawal charge imposed by the shares of the Funds may violate section Early Withdrawal Charges Funds will comply with rule 6c–10 18(a)(2) because the Funds may not 1. Section 23(c) of the Act provides, under the Act as if the rule were meet such requirements with respect to in relevant part, that no registered applicable to closed-end investment a class of shares that may be a senior closed-end investment company shall companies. The Funds will disclose security. purchase securities of which it is the early withdrawal charges in accordance 2. Section 18(c) of the Act provides, issuer, except: (a) On a securities with the requirements of Form N–1A in relevant part, that a closed-end exchange or other open market; (b) concerning contingent deferred sales investment company may not issue or pursuant to tenders, after reasonable loads. sell any senior security if, immediately opportunity to submit tenders given to thereafter, the company has outstanding all holders of securities of the class to Asset-Based Distribution and more than one class of senior security. be purchased; or (c) under other Shareholder Service Fees Applicants state that the creation of circumstances as the Commission may 1. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule multiple classes of shares of the Funds permit by rules and regulations or 17d–1 under the Act prohibit an may be prohibited by section 18(c), as orders for the protection of investors. affiliated person of a registered a class may have priority over another 2. Rule 23c–3 under the Act permits investment company, or an affiliated class as to payment of dividends an ‘‘interval fund’’ to make repurchase person of such person, acting as because shareholders of different classes offers of between five and twenty-five principal, from participating in or would pay different fees and expenses. percent of its outstanding shares at net effecting any transaction in connection VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00149 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28608 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices with any joint enterprise or joint time, as if that rule applied to all closed- McLeod, Mower, Murray, Nicollet, arrangement in which the investment end management investment Nobles, Norman, Olmsted, company participates unless the companies. Pennington, Pipestone, Polk, Commission issues an order permitting For the Commission, by the Division of Ramsey, Red Lake, Redwood, the transaction. In reviewing Investment Management, under delegated Renville, Rock, Roseau, Scott, applications submitted under section authority. Sibley, Steele, Stevens, Swift, 17(d) and rule 17d–1, the Commission Eduardo A. Aleman, Traverse, Wabasha, Waseca, considers whether the participation of Deputy Secretary. Washington, Watonwan, Wilkin, the investment company in a joint Winona, Yellow Medicine, and the [FR Doc. 2019–12905 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] enterprise or joint arrangement is Prairie Island Indian Community, consistent with the provisions, policies BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Red Lake Band of Chippewa, Upper and purposes of the Act, and the extent Sioux Community, and the White to which the participation is on a basis Earth Nation. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION different from or less advantageous than The Interest Rates are: that of other participants. [Disaster Declaration #15988 and #15989; 2. Rule 17d–3 under the Act provides Minnesota Disaster Number MN–00068] Percent an exemption from section 17(d) and rule 17d–1 to permit open-end Presidential Declaration of a Major For Physical Damage: investment companies to enter into Disaster for Public Assistance Only for Non-Profit Organizations with distribution arrangements pursuant to the State of Minnesota Credit Available Elsewhere ... 2.750 rule 12b–1 under the Act. Applicants Non-Profit Organizations with- request an order under section 17(d) and AGENCY: U.S. Small Business out Credit Available Else- where ...... 2.750 rule 17d–1 under the Act to the extent Administration. ACTION: Notice. For Economic Injury: necessary to permit the Fund to impose Non-Profit Organizations with- asset-based distribution and shareholder SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the out Credit Available Else- service fees. Applicants have agreed to where ...... 2.750 comply with rules 12b–1 and 17d–3 as Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for if those rules applied to closed-end The number assigned to this disaster investment companies, which they the State of MINNESOTA (FEMA–4442– DR), dated 06/12/2019. for physical damage is 15988B and for believe will resolve any concerns that economic injury is 159890. might arise in connection with a Fund Incident: Severe Winter Storm, Straight-line Winds, and Flooding. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance financing the distribution of its shares Number 59008) through asset-based distribution fees. Incident Period: 03/12/2019 through For the reasons stated above, 04/28/2019. Cynthia Pitts, applicants submit that the exemptions DATES: Issued on 06/12/2019. Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster requested under section 6(c) are Physical Loan Application Deadline Assistance. necessary and appropriate in the public Date: 08/12/2019. [FR Doc. 2019–12929 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] interest and are consistent with the Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan BILLING CODE 8206–03–P protection of investors and the purposes Application Deadline Date: 03/12/2020. fairly intended by the policy and ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan provisions of the Act. Applicants further applications to: U.S. Small Business SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION submit that the relief requested Administration, Processing and [Disaster Declaration #15990 and #15991; pursuant to section 23(c)(3) will be Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Idaho Disaster Number ID–00078] consistent with the protection of Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. investors and will insure that applicants FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Presidential Declaration of a Major do not unfairly discriminate against any Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, Disaster for Public Assistance Only for holders of the class of securities to be U.S. Small Business Administration, the State of Idaho purchased. Finally, applicants state that 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, AGENCY: U.S. Small Business the Funds’ imposition of asset-based Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205–6734. distribution and shareholder service Administration. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is fees is consistent with the provisions, ACTION: Notice. hereby given that as a result of the policies and purposes of the Act and President’s major disaster declaration on SUMMARY: does not involve participation on a basis This is a Notice of the 06/12/2019, Private Non-Profit different from or less advantageous than Presidential declaration of a major organizations that provide essential that of other participants. disaster for Public Assistance Only for services of a governmental nature may the State of Idaho (FEMA—4443—DR), Applicants’ Condition file disaster loan applications at the dated 06/12/2019. Applicants agree that any order address listed above or other locally Incident: Severe Storms, Flooding, granting the requested relief will be announced locations. Landslides, and Mudslides. subject to the following condition: The following areas have been Incident Period: 04/07/2019 through Each Fund relying on the order will determined to be adversely affected by 04/13/2019. comply with the provisions of rules 6c– the disaster: DATES: Issued on 06/12/2019. 10, 12b–1, 17d–3, 18f–3, 22d–1, and, Primary Counties: Big Stone, Blue Earth, Physical Loan Application Deadline where applicable, 11a–3 under the Act, Brown, Chippewa, Clay, Date: 08/12/2019. as amended from time to time, as if Cottonwood, Dodge, Faribault, Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan those rules applied to closed-end Fillmore, Freeborn, Goodhue, Application Deadline Date: 03/12/2020. management investment companies, Grant, Houston, Jackson, Kittson, ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan and will comply with the FINRA Sales Lac Qui Parle, Le Sueur, Lincoln, applications to: U.S. Small Business Charge Rule, as amended from time to Lyon, Mahnomen, Marshall, Martin, Administration, Processing and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00150 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28609 Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport DATES: Issued on 06/11/2019. Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. Physical Loan Application Deadline Application Deadline Date: 01/06/2020. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Date: 07/31/2019. ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan applications to: U.S. Small Business U.S. Small Business Administration, Application Deadline Date: 03/02/2020. Administration, Processing and 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205–6734. applications to: U.S. Small Business Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Administration, Processing and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. hereby given that as a result of the Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, President’s major disaster declaration on Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. U.S. Small Business Administration, 06/12/2019, Private Non-Profit FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, organizations that provide essential Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205–6734. services of a governmental nature may U.S. Small Business Administration, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice file disaster loan applications at the 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, of the President’s major disaster address listed above or other locally Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205–6734. declaration for Private Non-Profit announced locations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice organizations in the State of IOWA, The following areas have been of the President’s major disaster dated 04/05/2019, is hereby amended to determined to be adversely affected by declaration for the State of include the following areas as adversely the disaster: OKLAHOMA, dated 06/01/2019, is affected by the disaster. Primary Counties: Adams, Idaho, Latah, hereby amended to include the Primary Counties: Buchanan, Clayton, Lewis, Valley and the Nez Perce following areas as adversely affected by Clinton, Des Moines, Jackson, Jones, Tribe. the disaster: Lee, Louisa, Mitchell, Muscatine, The Interest Rates are: Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Ringgold, Scott, Winnebago, Worth. Economic Injury Loans): Delaware, All other information in the original Percent Kay, Mayes, Okmulgee, Payne, declaration remains unchanged. Pottawatomie, Sequoyah. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance For Physical Damage: Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Non-Profit Organizations with Number 59008) Credit Available Elsewhere ... 2.750 Loans Only): Cynthia Pitts, Non-Profit Organizations with- OKLAHOMA: Adair, Grant, Le Flore, out Credit Available Else- Pontotoc, Seminole. Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster where ...... 2.750 ARKANSAS: Benton, Crawford, Assistance. For Economic Injury: Sebastian. [FR Doc. 2019–12912 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] Non-Profit Organizations with- KANSAS: Sumner. BILLING CODE 8206–03–P out Credit Available Else- All other information in the original where ...... 2.750 declaration remains unchanged. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION The number assigned to this disaster (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance for physical damage is 159906 and for Number 59008) [Disaster Declaration #15992 and #15993; North Dakota Disaster Number ND–00069] economic injury is 159910. Cynthia Pitts, (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Presidential Declaration of a Major Number 59008) Assistance. Disaster for Public Assistance Only for Cynthia Pitts, [FR Doc. 2019–12911 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] the State of NORTH DAKOTA BILLING CODE 8206–03–P Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Assistance. Administration. [FR Doc. 2019–12930 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION ACTION: Notice. BILLING CODE 8206–03–P [Disaster Declaration #15929 and #15930; SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the IOWA Disaster Number IA–00087] Presidential declaration of a major SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION disaster for Public Assistance Only for Presidential Declaration Amendment of the State of NORTH DAKOTA (FEMA– [Disaster Declaration #15973 and #15974; a Major Disaster for Public Assistance Oklahoma Disaster Number OK–00130] 4444–DR), dated 06/12/2019. Only for the State of Iowa Incident: Flooding. Presidential Declaration Amendment of AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Incident Period: 03/21/2019 through a Major Disaster for the State of Administration. 04/28/2019. DATES: Oklahoma ACTION: Amendment 5. Issued on 06/12/2019. Physical Loan Application Deadline AGENCY: U.S. Small Business SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Date: 08/12/2019. Administration. Presidential declaration of a major Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan ACTION: Amendment 2. disaster for Public Assistance Only for Application Deadline Date: 03/12/2020. SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the the State of Iowa (FEMA–4421–DR), ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan Presidential declaration of a major dated 04/05/2019. applications to: U.S. Small Business disaster for the State of OKLAHOMA Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding. Administration, Processing and (FEMA–4438–DR), dated 06/01/2019. Incident Period: 03/12/2019 through Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Incident: Severe Storms, Straight-line 05/16/2019. Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. Winds, Tornadoes, and Flooding. DATES: Issued on 06/11/2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Incident Period: 05/07/2019 and Physical Loan Application Deadline Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, continuing. Date: 06/04/2019. U.S. Small Business Administration, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28610 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Museum of the Holocaust, Los Angeles, the Search field. Then click the Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205–6734. California, from on or about July 2, ‘‘Comment Now’’ button and complete SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 2019, until on or about June 16, 2022, the comment form. • _ hereby given that as a result of the and at possible additional exhibitions or Email: PRA BurdenComments@ President’s major disaster declaration on venues yet to be determined, is in the state.gov. 06/12/2019, Private Non-Profit national interest. I have ordered that You must include the DS form organizations that provide essential Public Notice of these determinations be number (if applicable), information services of a governmental nature may published in the Federal Register. collection title, and the OMB control file disaster loan applications at the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: number in any correspondence. address listed above or other locally Elliot Chiu, Attorney-Adviser, Office of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: announced locations. the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of • Title of Information Collection: The following areas have been State (telephone: 202–632–6471; email: Application for A, G, or NATO Visa. determined to be adversely affected by [email protected]). The mailing • OMB Control Number: 1405–0100. • the disaster: address is U.S. Department of State, L/ Type of Request: Extension of a PD, SA–5, Suite 5H03, Washington, DC Currently Approved Collection. Primary Counties: Adams, Barnes, Cass, • 20522–0505. Originating Office: CA/VO/L/R. Dickey, Emmons, Grand Forks, • Form Number: DS–1648. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Grant, Hettinger, LaMoure, Logan, The • Respondents: Foreign Government McKenzie, Morton, Pembina, foregoing determinations were made Officials. Ransom, Richland, Sargent, Steele, pursuant to the authority vested in me • Estimated Number of Respondents: Traill, Walsh. by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 30,000. The Interest Rates are: 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order • Estimated Number of Responses: 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign 30,000. Percent Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of • Average Time per Response: 15 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. Minutes. As the form is relatively short, For Physical Damage: 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 15 minutes is the most recent average Non-Profit Organizations with Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Credit Available Elsewhere ... 2.750 time per response calculated. and Delegation of Authority No. 236–3 • Total Estimated Burden Time: 7,500 Non-Profit Organizations with- of August 28, 2000. out Credit Available Else- Hours. where ...... 2.750 • Frequency: On Occasion. Marie Therese Porter Royce, • For Economic Injury: Assistant Secretary, Educational and Cultural Obligation to Respond: Required to Non-Profit Organizations with- Affairs, Department of State. Obtain a Benefit. out Credit Available Else- We are soliciting public comments to [FR Doc. 2019–12952 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] where ...... 2.750 permit the Department to: BILLING CODE 4710–05–P • Evaluate whether the proposed The number assigned to this disaster information collection is necessary for for physical damage is 159926 and for DEPARTMENT OF STATE the proper functions of the Department. economic injury is 159930. • Evaluate the accuracy of our (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance [Public Notice: 10796] estimate of the time and cost burden for Number 59008) this proposed collection, including the 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information validity of the methodology and Cynthia Pitts, Collection: Application for A, G, or assumptions used. Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster NATO Visa • Enhance the quality, utility, and Assistance. clarity of the information to be [FR Doc. 2019–12931 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] ACTION: Notice of request for public collected. BILLING CODE 8206–03–P comment. • Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the SUMMARY: The Department of State (Department) is seeking Office of use of automated collection techniques DEPARTMENT OF STATE Management and Budget (OMB) or other forms of information [Public Notice: 10800] approval for the information collection technology. Please note that comments submitted described below. In accordance with the in response to this Notice are public Notice of Determinations; Culturally Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we record. Before including any detailed Significant Objects Imported for are requesting comments on this personal information, you should be Exhibition—Determinations: collection from all interested aware that your comments as submitted, ‘‘Auschwitz-Birkenau Artifacts’’ individuals and organizations. The including your personal information, Exhibition purpose of this notice is to allow 60 will be available for public review. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the days for public comment preceding following determinations: I hereby submission of the collection to OMB. Abstract of Proposed Collection determine that certain objects to be DATES: The Department will accept The Department of State will use included in the exhibition ‘‘Auschwitz- comments from the public up to August Form DS–1648 to elicit information Birkenau Artifacts,’’ imported from 19, 2019. from applicants who are applying for an abroad for temporary exhibition within ADDRESSES: You may submit comments A, G, or NATO visa in the United States, the United States, are of cultural by any of the following methods: excluding applicants for an A–3, G–5 or significance. The objects are imported • Web: Persons with access to the NATO–7 visa. Sections 101(a)(15)(A) pursuant to a loan agreement with the internet may comment on this notice by and (G) of the Immigration and foreign owner or custodian. I also going to www.Regulations.gov. You can Nationality Act (INA), and 22 CFR determine that the exhibition or display search for the document by entering 41.25, describe the criteria for these of the exhibit objects at the Los Angeles ‘‘Docket Number: DOS–2019–0021’’ in nonimmigrant visa classifications. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28611 Methodology DEPARTMENT OF STATE impacts; therefore, the Board’s Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) has The DS–1648 will be submitted [Delegation of Authority No. 472] electronically to the Department. The determined that the preparation of an applicant will be instructed to print a Delegation of Authority to the Director EIS is appropriate pursuant to the confirmation page containing a bar of the Foreign Service Institute National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended. The purpose coded record locator, which will be Administration of the Advisory of this notice is to inform stakeholders— scanned at the time of processing. Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation (Foreign Relations of including members of the public; tribes; Edward J. Ramotowski, the United States Series) federal, state, and local agencies; Deputy Assistant Secretary. environmental groups; and potential [FR Doc. 2019–12950 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] By virtue of the authority vested in shippers—interested in or potentially BILLING CODE 4710–06–P the Secretary of State, including Section affected by the proposed project. OEA 1 of the Department of State Basic will hold public scoping meetings as Authorities Act, as amended (22 U.S.C. part of the NEPA process. Comments DEPARTMENT OF STATE 2651a), and to the extent authorized by submitted during scoping will assist law, I hereby delegate to the Director, OEA in defining the range of [Public Notice: 10797] Foreign Service Institute, the authorities alternatives and potential impacts to be and functions related to the considered in the EIS. OEA has Notice of Determinations; Culturally administration of the Advisory developed a Draft Scope of Study for the Significant Objects Imported for Committee on Historical Diplomatic EIS for stakeholder review and Exhibition—Determinations: ‘‘Finding Documentation, including submission comment. Public meeting dates and Light in the Darkness’’ Exhibition of the Foreign Relations of the United locations, along with the Draft Scope of SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the States series, pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 4351 Study, are provided below. following determinations: I hereby et seq. DATES: Comments on the Draft Scope of determine that certain objects to be The Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, Study for the EIS are due by August 3, included in the exhibition ‘‘Finding and the Under Secretary and Deputy 2019. See the SUPPLEMENTARY Light in the Darkness,’’ imported from Under Secretary for Management may at INFORMATION section for meeting dates. abroad for temporary exhibition within any time exercise any authority or ADDRESSES: See the SUPPLEMENTARY the United States, are of cultural function delegated herein. INFORMATION section for meeting significance. The objects are imported Section 5 of Delegation of Authority addresses. Scoping comments submitted pursuant to a loan agreement with the 193, dated January 7, 1992, is hereby by mail should be addressed to Joshua foreign owner or custodian. I also rescinded. Wayland, Surface Transportation Board, determine that the exhibition or display This delegation of authority shall be c/o 9300 Lee Highway, Fairfax, VA of the exhibit objects at the Holocaust published in the Federal Register. 22031, Attention: Environmental filing, Center for Humanity, Seattle, Dated: June 10, 2019. Docket No. FD 36284. Scoping Washington, from on or about June 24, Michael R. Pompeo, comments may also be filed 2019, until on or about June 16, 2022, Secretary of State, Department of State. electronically on the Board’s website, https://www.stb.gov, by clicking on the and at possible additional exhibitions or [FR Doc. 2019–13037 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] ‘‘E–FILING’’ link or on the Board- venues yet to be determined, is in the BILLING CODE 4710–20–P national interest. I have ordered that sponsored project website at Public Notice of these determinations be www.uintabasinrailwayeis.com. Please refer to Docket No. FD 36284 in all published in the Federal Register. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: correspondence, including e-filings, Elliot Chiu, Attorney-Adviser, Office of [Docket No. FD 36284] addressed to the Board. the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seven County Infrastructure Joshua Wayland, Office of State (telephone: 202–632–6471; email: Coalition—Rail Construction & [email protected]). The mailing Environmental Analysis, Surface Operation—in Utah, Carbon, Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, address is U.S. Department of State, L/ Duchesne, and Uintah Counties, Utah PD, SA–5, Suite 5H03, Washington, DC Washington, DC 20423, or call the 20522–0505. AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. OEA’s toll-free number for the project at 855–826–7596. Assistance for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an foregoing determinations were made environmental impact statement (EIS), hearing impaired is available through pursuant to the authority vested in me availability of the draft scope of study the Federal Information Relay Service at by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. for the EIS, scoping meetings, and 1–800–877–8339. The website for the 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order request for comments. Board is https://www.stb.gov. For 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign further information about the Board’s Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of SUMMARY: The Seven County environmental review process and the 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. Infrastructure Coalition (Coalition) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of plans to file a request with the Surface you may also visit the Board-sponsored Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Transportation Board (Board) for project website at and Delegation of Authority No. 236–3 authority to construct and operate an www.uintabasinrailwayeis.com. of August 28, 2000. approximately 80-mile rail line between SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: two terminus points in the Uinta Basin Marie Therese Porter Royce, near Myton, Utah, and Leland Bench, Background Assistant Secretary, Educational and Cultural Utah, and the interstate rail network. The Coalition proposes to construct Affairs, Department of State. The construction and operation of the and operate an approximately 80-mile [FR Doc. 2019–12951 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] proposed rail line has the potential to rail line between two terminus points in BILLING CODE 4710–05–P result in significant environmental the Uinta Basin near Myton, Utah, and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28612 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Leland Bench, Utah, and the interstate Salt Lake Field Offices intend to • Apache Tribe of Oklahoma rail network. The Coalition anticipates participate as a cooperating agency on • Eastern Shoshone Tribe of the Wind that shippers would use the proposed this EIS with the Board. Construction River Reservation, Wyoming rail line to transport crude oil, gilsonite, and operation of the Indian Canyon • Confederated Tribes of the Goshute coal, and other mineral and agricultural Route or the Wells Draw Route would Reservation, Nevada and Utah products out of the Uinta Basin to require an issuance of a right-of-way • Fort Belknap Indian Community of markets across the United States. The across BLM-managed lands and could the Fort Belknap Reservation of proposed rail line could also be used to require amendments to the Vernal, Montana move products and commodities, such Price, and Salt Lake Field Offices • Hopi Tribe of Arizona as fracturing sand, proppant, steel, and Resource Management Plans (RMPs). • Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico, machinery, to markets in the Uinta Construction and operation of the Craig and Utah Basin. Based on current market Route would also require issuance of a • conditions, the Coalition estimates that right-of-way across BLM-managed lands Northwestern Band of the Shoshone approximately 7 trains would move and could require amendments to the Nation, Utah • along the proposed rail line per day, on Little Snake and White River RMPs. Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah (Cedar average, including loaded and unloaded Therefore, if the Indian Canyon, Wells Band of Paiutes, Kanosh Band of trains, or 3.5 trains per day in each Draw, and Craig Routes are carried Paiutes, Koosharem Band of Paiutes, direction. Because the construction and forward for analysis in the EIS, the EIS Indian Peaks Band of Paiutes, and operation of the proposed rail line could will include analysis of the potential Shivwits Band of Paiutes) result in significant environmental RMP amendments. • Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort impacts, OEA is hereby notifying In compliance with NEPA and the Hall Reservation, Idaho interested stakeholders—including U.S. Forest Service’s (Forest Service’s) • Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians federal, state, and local agencies; tribes; 2012 Planning Rule, the Forest Service’s • White Mesa/Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, environmental groups; potential Ashley National Forest also intends to Utah and Colorado shippers; and the public—that OEA participate as a cooperating agency on Additional cooperating agencies and intends to prepare an EIS to analyze the this EIS with the Board. Because the interested tribes may be identified Coalition’s proposal, pursuant to NEPA Indian Canyon Route would cross during the scoping process. National Forest System (NFS) lands, (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Interested parties are invited to The Coalition’s preferred route would Forest Service approval for permitting submit written comments on the Draft extend generally southwest from the rail line right-of-way may be Scope of Study, potential alternative terminus points near Myton, Utah, and required. The Forest Service decision routes for the proposed rail line, and Leland Bench, Utah, to a connection may also include amending the Ashley other environmental issues and with an existing rail line owned by Forest Land and Resource Management Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) Plan (Ashley Forest Plan). Therefore, the concerns during the 45-day public near Kyune, Utah. It would generally EIS will include analysis of that comment period, which ends on August parallel U.S. Route 191 through Indian potential plan amendment. 3, 2019, to assure full consideration Canyon and would be located within during the scoping process. OEA will Environmental Review Process Utah, Carbon, Duchesne, and Uintah issue a Final Scope of Study after the Counties in Utah (Indian Canyon This notice initiates the public close of the scoping comment period. Route). The Coalition has also identified scoping period for the EIS. To begin the After issuing the Final Scope of Study, two potential alternatives to the Indian scoping process, OEA has developed a OEA will prepare a Draft EIS for the Canyon Route that the Coalition Draft Scope of Study that OEA is project. The Draft EIS will address the believes would be economically and making available for public review and environmental issues and concerns technically feasible. One of those comment. Oral and written comments identified during the scoping process proposed alternatives would connect submitted during scoping will assist and assess and compare potential the terminus points near Myton and OEA in identifying other agencies with alternatives. It will also contain OEA’s Leland Bench to the UP rail line near an interest or expertise in the project preliminary recommendations for Kyune by following Wells Draw and and defining the range of alternatives environmental mitigation measures. The Argyle Canyon, crossing Utah, Carbon, and potential impacts on the human and Draft EIS will be made available upon Duchesne, and Uintah Counties in Utah natural environment to be considered in its completion for review and comment (Wells Draw Route). The other proposed the EIS. Public meeting dates and by the public, government agencies, and alternative would extend eastward from locations, as well as instructions for other interested parties. OEA will the terminus points near Myton and submitting written comments are prepare a Final EIS that considers Leland Bench to a connection with a UP provided below. comments on the Draft EIS. In reaching rail line near Craig, Colorado, and To date, OEA has invited several its decision in this case, the Board will would cross Uintah and Duchesne agencies to participate in this EIS take into account the Draft EIS, the Final Counties in Utah, as well as Moffat and process as cooperating agencies on the EIS, and all environmental comments Rio Blanco Counties in Colorado (Craig basis of their special expertise or that are received. jurisdiction by law. These agencies are Route). Additional information Public Scoping Meetings regarding the proposed project, the BLM, the Forest Service, the U.S. including detailed descriptions of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of OEA will hold six public scoping Indian Canyon, Wells Draw, and Craig Indian Affairs, and the State of Utah meetings in communities in the project Routes, are set forth in the Draft Scope Public Lands Policy Coordinating area during the public comment period. of Study below. Office. OEA is also initiating The public scoping meetings will be In compliance with NEPA and the government-to-government consultation held at the following locations on the Federal Land Policy and Management with the following potentially affected dates listed. Act of 1976, as amended, the Bureau of tribes. • Monday July 15, 2019, 3–5 p.m. at Land Management’s (BLM’s) Little • Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and the Ute Tribal Auditorium, 910 South Snake, White River, Vernal, Price, and Ouray Reservation, Utah 7500 East, Fort Duchesne, Utah. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00154 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28613 • Tuesday July 16, 2019, 5–7 p.m. at require amendments to BLM RMPs. network, which includes one north- the Moffat County Fairgrounds Pavilion, Additional information regarding the south two-lane highway (U.S. Highway 640 E Victory Way, Craig, Colorado. plan amendment process can be found 191) and one east-west two-lane • Wednesday July 17, 2019, 5–7 p.m. in the BLM’s Land Use Planning highway (U.S. Highway 40). The at the Carbon County Event Center, 450 Handbook (https://www.blm.gov/policy/ proposed project would provide a new, S Fairgrounds Road, Price, Utah. handbooks). cost-effective surface transportation • Thursday July 18, 2019, 11 a.m.–1 option for shippers seeking to transport p.m. at the Grace Event Center, 1024 W Possible Forest Land Management Plan products and commodities into and out Highway 40, Roosevelt, Utah. Amendment of the Uinta Basin. • Thursday July 18, 2019, 5–7 p.m. at The proposed rail line could The proposed transaction involves a the Uintah Conference Center, 313 East potentially cross NFS lands request from the Coalition for Board 200 South, Vernal, Utah. administered by the Ashley National authority to construct and operate the • Friday July 19, 2019, 10 a.m.–12 Forest in Utah. Depending on which proposed rail line. The proposed p.m. at Radisson Hotel Salt Lake City alternative is selected and the final transaction is not a federal government- Downtown, 215 West South Temple, engineering of that alternative, Forest proposed or sponsored project. Thus, Salt Lake City, Utah. Service approval for permitting the rail the project’s purpose and need should The scoping meetings will be held in line right-of-way and associated be informed by both the private an open house format for the first half construction and operation on NFS applicant’s goals and the agency’s hour, followed by a brief presentation lands may be required. The Forest enabling statute—the Interstate by OEA and an opportunity to provide Service decision may also include Commerce Act as amended by the ICC public comments. A court reporter will amending the Ashley Forest Plan to Termination Act, Public Law 104–188, be present to record the oral comments ensure that approval of permitting the 109 Stat. 803 (1996), which provides made during the meeting. We ask that rail line right-of-way would be that the Board must approve a public demonstrations—either in consistent with the Ashley Forest Plan. construction application unless it finds support of or opposed to the The Forest Service will use the EIS to that the construction is ‘‘inconsistent proposals—including signage, posters, inform the decision on the necessary with the public convenience and and demonstrations, occur outside the approvals and, if needed, the Ashley necessity.’’ meeting room. The meeting locations Forest Plan amendment. In the event Proposed Action and Alternatives comply with the Americans with that the Forest Service determines that Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 it intends to amend the Ashley Forest The proposed rail line would extend et seq.). Persons that need special Plan, the Forest Service hereby gives from a connection with an existing UP accommodations should telephone notice that the scope is expected to be rail line near Kyune, Utah to two OEA’s toll-free number for the project at limited to the project only, and the scale termini within the Uinta Basin near 855–826–7596. of the amendment is the project area Myton, Utah and Leland Bench, Utah. It would consist of a single track Possible Resource Management Plan that occurs on NFS lands. The Forest constructed of continuous-welded rail Amendments Service also hereby gives notice that the and would require a right-of-way substantive requirements of the 2012 The proposed rail line could approximately 100 feet wide along Planning Rule (36 CFR part 219) likely potentially cross BLM-administered much of its length, although the right- to be directly related and, therefore, lands for which a rail right-of-way may of-way could be substantially wider in applicable to the Ashley Forest Plan not currently be in conformance with some locations. The proposed project amendments are 36 CFR 219.8(b)(1) and the applicable RMPs. Therefore, the would include significant regrading and (2) (specifically scenic character), BLM may need to consider amending cut-and-fill to traverse the rugged regarding social and economic one or more RMPs to permit the rail line topography of the project area; new sustainability, and 36 CFR 219.10(a)(1) right-of-way. If so, the BLM intends to access roads for construction and right- (specifically scenery) and (3) use the EIS to support decision-making of-way maintenance; several railroad (specifically transportation), regarding regarding the issuance of a right-of-way tunnels; and crossings of local roads, integrated resource management for and to consider amending the current streams, trails, and utility corridors. Little Snake RMP (2011), White River multiple use. The Forest Service Based on current market conditions, RMP (1997), Price RMP (2008), Vernal responsible official is the Ashley Forest the Coalition estimates that RMP (2008), and the Salt Lake Pony Supervisor. approximately 7 trains would move Express RMP (1990), which may be Draft Scope of Study for the EIS along the proposed rail line per day, on necessary for railroad construction and average, including loaded and unloaded operation, depending on which, if any, Purpose and Need trains, or 3.5 trains per day in each alternative route is ultimately approved As described by the Coalition, the direction. Rail traffic entering the Uinta by the Board. Plan amendments (see 43 purpose of the proposed rail line is to Basin would likely move such products CFR 1610.5–5) change one or more of provide common-carrier rail service and commodities as fracturing sand, the terms, conditions, or decisions of an connecting the Uinta Basin in proppant, tubular steel, and oil industry approved land use plan. These northeastern Utah to the interstate machinery from the Midwest, Texas, the decisions may include those relating to common-carrier rail network using a Southeast, and ports on the Pacific and desired outcomes; measures to achieve route that would allow the Coalition to Gulf coasts. Outbound trains would desired outcomes, including resource attract shippers with a cost-effective rail likely carry crude oil, gilsonite, coal, restrictions; or land tenure decisions. alternative to trucking. Because the and other mineral and agricultural Plan amendments are required to Uinta Basin is surrounded by high products to markets across the United consider any proposal or action that mountains and plateaus, the area has States. does not conform to the current plan. limited transportation options at The EIS will analyze and compare the BLM will hold a protest period present. Currently, all freight moving potential impacts of (1) construction following the publication of the Final into and out of the basin is transported and operation of the proposed rail line, EIS if the authorized alternative would by trucks on the area’s limited road (2) all reasonable and feasible VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00155 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28614 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices alternative routes, and (3) the no-action terminus points would meet at a to physical changes in the environment, alternative (denial of construction and junction approximately 6.5 miles south cultural and historic resources, operation authority). Information of South Myton Bench. From the aesthetics, and environmental justice. provided by the Coalition includes three junction, the Wells Draw Route would Other categories of impact areas may proposed routes, as described below. run southward, generally following also be included as a result of comments • Indian Canyon Route. This 80-mile Wells Draw towards its headwaters. received during the scoping process or route would connect an existing UP rail After reaching the headwaters of Wells on the Draft EIS. The EIS will include line owned by UP near Kyune, Utah to Draw, the route would turn westward a discussion of each impact area a terminus points in the Uinta Basin and enter Argyle Canyon. It would assessed as it currently exists in the near Myton and Leland Bench. Starting remain on the north wall of Argyle project area and will address the at Leland Bench, approximately 9.5 Canyon for approximately 25 miles, potential direct, indirect impacts, and miles south of Fort Duchesne, Utah, this eventually reaching the floor of the cumulative impacts of the Coalition’s route would proceed westward, past the canyon near the headwaters of Argyle preferred route and each reasonable and South Myton Bench area, until Creek. The route would then enter a feasible alternative on each impact area intersecting Indian Canyon summit tunnel through the West as described below. approximately two miles south of Tavaputs Plateau and, after emerging Duchesne, Utah. After entering Indian from the tunnel, would descend the 1. Safety Canyon, the route would turn southwest Roan Cliffs to reach Emma Park. The If the proposed project would and follow Indian Creek upstream route would run westward through adversely or beneficially affect public toward its headwaters below Indian Emma Park and connect to the UP Provo safety, the EIS will: Creek Pass, paralleling U.S. Highway Subdivision near the railroad timetable a. Analyze the potential for an 191 for approximately 21 miles. The station at Kyune. increase in accidents related to the Indian Canyon Route would use a Currently, the Coalition’s preferred proposed new rail operations, as summit tunnel to pass through the West route is the Indian Canyon Route. Maps appropriate. Tavaputs Plateau and, after emerging of that proposed route and the proposed b. Analyze the potential for increased from the tunnel, would descend the alternatives described above are probability of train accidents, as Roan Cliffs to reach Emma Park, an available on the Board-sponsored appropriate. open grassy area at the base of the Roan project website at c. Evaluate the potential for Cliffs. The route would then run www.uintabasinrailwayeis.com. OEA is disruption and delays to the movement westward through Emma Park and interested in scoping comments on of emergency vehicles. connect to the UP Provo Subdivision potential alternatives to the Coalition’s d. Propose mitigative measures to near the railroad timetable station at proposed routes and will determine the minimize or eliminate potential project Kyune. At this time, the Coalition has final set of alternatives to be analyzed in impacts on safety, as appropriate. identified the Indian Canyon Route as the EIS during the scoping process. its preferred alternative. 2. Transportation Systems • Craig Route. This route would be Environmental Impact Analysis Because the proposed project would approximately 185 miles long and Proposed New Construction and affect transportation systems, the EIS would connect an existing UP rail line Operation will: near Axial, Colorado to two terminus a. Evaluate the potential impacts Analysis in the EIS will address the points in the Uinta Basin near Myton resulting from the Coalition’s proposed proposed activities associated with the and Leland Bench. The lines from those route and each alternative on the construction and operation of the two terminus points would meet at a existing transportation network in the proposed rail line and its potential junction approximately four miles north project area. of Leland Bench. From the junction, the environmental impacts, as appropriate. b. Propose mitigative measures to Craig Route would proceed generally Impact Categories minimize or eliminate potential adverse northward for approximately seven The EIS will analyze potential direct, project impacts on transportation miles, then turn and proceed generally indirect, and cumulative impacts 1 for systems, as appropriate. eastward, crossing the Green River the Coalition’s proposed construction approximately five miles south of 3. Land Use and operation and each reasonable and Jensen, Utah. The route would then Because the proposed project would feasible alternative on the human and proceed southeasterly, entering affect land use, the EIS will: natural environment, or in the case of Colorado approximately three miles a. Assess potential impacts of the the no-action alternative, the lack of northwest of Dinosaur, Colorado and proposed project on public lands, these activities. Impact areas addressed would connect to the Deseret Power including lands administered by the will include the categories of safety, Railroad (DPR) south of Dinosaur. The BLM and Forest Service. transportation systems, land use, parks Craig Route would utilize b. Analyze potential plan and recreation, biological resources, approximately 13 miles of the DPR to amendments that may be required to proceed eastward and would depart the water resources including wetlands and permit the rail right-of-way on public DPR approximately two miles west of other waters of the U.S., geology and lands. the Deserado Mine. It would then soils, air quality, noise, energy c. Evaluate potential impacts of the proceed generally eastward to connect resources, socioeconomics as they relate proposed project to the roadless character of Ashley National Forest. to the UP Craig Subdivision near the 1 railroad timetable station at Axial. NEPA requires the Board to consider direct, d. Evaluate potential impacts of the • indirect, and cumulative impacts. Direct and Wells Draw Route. This route would indirect impacts are both caused by the action. 40 Coalition’s preferred route and each be approximately 105 miles long and CFR 1508.8(a) and (b). A cumulative impact is the alternative on existing land use patterns would connect an existing UP rail line ‘‘incremental impact of the action when added to within the project area and identify other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable near Kyune to two terminus points in future actions regardless of what agency (federal or those land uses that would be the Uinta Basin near Myton Bench and non-federal) or person undertakes such other potentially impacted by the proposed Leland Bench. The lines from those two actions.’’ 40 CFR 1508.7. new rail line construction. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28615 e. Analyze the potential impacts 7. Geology and Soils pipelines and overhead electric associated with each alternative on land If the proposed project would transmission lines. b. Propose mitigative measures to uses identified within the project area. adversely or beneficially affect geology minimize or eliminate potential project Such potential impacts may include and soils, the EIS will: incompatibility with existing land use impacts on energy resources, as a. Describe the geology, soils, and and conversion of land to railroad use. appropriate. seismic conditions found within the f. Propose mitigative measures to c. minimize or eliminate potential impacts project area, including unique or 11. Socioeconomics on land use, as appropriate. problematic geologic formations or soils, prime farmland, and hydric soils, and If the proposed project would result 4. Parks and Recreation analyze the potential impacts on these in adverse or beneficial socioeconomic If the proposed project would resources resulting from the Coalition’s impacts, the EIS will: adversely or beneficially affect parks proposed route and each alternative. a. Analyze the effects of a potential and recreational areas, the EIS will: b. Evaluate potential measures influx of construction workers to the a. Evaluate existing conditions and employed to avoid or construct through project area and the potential increase the potential impacts of the Coalition’s unique or problematic geologic in demand for local services interrelated preferred route and each alternative, formations or soils. with natural or physical environmental and their operation, on parks, c. Propose mitigative measures to effects. recreational trails, and other minimize or eliminate potential project b. Propose mitigative measures to recreational opportunities provided in impacts on geology and soils, as minimize or eliminate potential project- the project area. appropriate. related adverse impacts on social and b. Propose mitigative measures to 8. Air Quality economic resources, as appropriate. minimize or eliminate potential project impacts on recreational opportunities, If the proposed project would 12. Cultural and Historic Resources as appropriate. adversely or beneficially affect air If the proposed project would quality, the EIS will: 5. Biological Resources adversely or beneficially affect cultural a. Evaluate the air emissions from the and historic resources, the EIS will: If the proposed project would potential operation of trains on the a. Identify historic buildings, adversely or beneficially affect Uinta Basin Railway, including structures, sites, objects, or districts biological resources, the EIS will: potential greenhouse gas emissions, as eligible for listing on or listed on the a. Evaluate the existing biological appropriate. National Register of Historic Places resources within the project area, b. Evaluate the potential emissions within the area of potential effects for including vegetative communities, from the freighted product, as the Coalition’s preferred route and each wildlife, fisheries, and federal and state appropriate. alternative (built-environment historic threatened or endangered species, and c. Evaluate the potential air quality properties) and analyze potential project analyze the potential impacts on these impacts resulting from new rail line impacts on them. resources resulting from each construction activities. b. Identify properties of traditional alternative. d. Propose mitigative measures to religious and cultural importance to b. Describe any wildlife sanctuaries, minimize or eliminate potential project Indian tribes (Traditional Cultural refuges, national or state parks, forests, impacts on air quality, as appropriate. Properties) and prehistoric or historic or grasslands, and evaluate the potential impacts on these resources resulting 9. Noise and Vibration archaeological sites evaluated as from the Coalition’s preferred route and potentially eligible, eligible, or listed on If the proposed project would result the National Register of Historic Places each alternative. in noise and vibration impacts, the EIS c. Propose mitigative measures to (archaeological historic properties) will: avoid, minimize, or compensate for within the area of potential effects for a. Describe the potential noise and potential impacts on biological the Coalition’s preferred route and each vibration impacts during new rail line resources, as appropriate. alternative, and analyze potential construction resulting from the project impacts on them. 6. Water Resources Coalition’s preferred route and each c. Propose measures to avoid, If the proposed project would alternative. minimize, or mitigate potentially adversely or beneficially affect water b. Describe the potential noise and adverse project impacts on Traditional resources, the EIS will: vibration impacts of new rail line Cultural Properties and built- a. Describe the existing surface water operation resulting from each environment historic properties, and groundwater resources within the alternative. archaeological historic properties, and project area, including lakes, rivers, c. Propose mitigative measures to cultural and historic resources, as streams, stock ponds, wetlands, and minimize or eliminate potential project appropriate. floodplains, and analyze the potential impacts on sensitive noise receptors, as 13. Aesthetics impacts on these resources resulting appropriate. If the proposed project would have from the Coalition’s preferred route and 10. Energy Resources each alternative. adverse or beneficial aesthetic impacts, b. Describe the permitting If the proposed project would the EIS will: requirements for the various alternatives adversely or beneficially affect energy a. Describe the potential impacts of with regard to wetlands, stream and resources, the EIS will: the proposed project on any areas river crossings, water quality, a. Describe and evaluate the potential identified or determined to be of high floodplains, and erosion control. impact of the proposed project on the visual quality. c. Propose mitigative measures to distribution of energy resources in the b. Analyze visual impacts associated avoid, minimize, or compensate for project area resulting from the with the project and conformance with potential project impacts on water Coalition’s preferred route and each Forest Service and BLM visual resource resources, as appropriate. alternative, including petroleum and gas classifications. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28616 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices c. Describe the potential impacts of Applicants state that the purpose of By the Board, Allison C. Davis, the proposed project on any waterways the temporary trackage rights is to Director, Office of Proceedings. considered for or designated as wild and accommodate their emergency detour Aretha Laws-Byrum, scenic. operations between Kansas City and St. d. Propose mitigative measures to Louis on account of severe flooding in Clearance Clerk. minimize or eliminate potential project Missouri and thus permit continued rail [FR Doc. 2019–12966 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] impacts on aesthetics, as appropriate. service for both carriers while the BILLING CODE 4915–01–P impacts of flooding continue and during 14. Environmental Justice recovery. They state that the temporary If the proposed project would trackage rights will expire on August 31, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION adversely or beneficially affect 2019. environmental justice communities, the Applicants concurrently filed a Federal Motor Carrier Safety EIS will: petition for waiver of the 30-day period Administration a. Evaluate the potential impacts under 49 CFR 1180.4(g) to allow the [Docket No. FMCSA–2019–0023] resulting from the Coalition’s preferred proposed temporary trackage rights to route and each alternative on local and become effective immediately. By Agency Information Collection regional minority and low-income decision served June 13, 2019, the Board Activities; Renewal and Revision of an populations. granted Applicants’ request. As a result, Approved Information Collection: b. Propose mitigative measures to these exemptions are now effective and Hours of Service (HOS) of Drivers minimize or eliminate potential project will expire on August 31, 2019. Regulations As a condition to these exemptions, impacts on environmental justice AGENCY: FMCSA, DOT. populations, as appropriate. any employees affected by the acquisition of the temporary trackage ACTION: Notice and request for By the Board, Victoria Rutson, Director, rights will be protected by the comments. Office of Environmental Analysis. conditions imposed in Norfolk & Jeffrey Herzig, SUMMARY: In accordance with the Western Railway—Trackage Rights— Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Clearance Clerk. Burlington Northern, Inc., 354 I.C.C. 605 [FR Doc. 2019–12836 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] FMCSA announces its plan to submit (1978), as modified in Mendocino Coast the Information Collection Request (ICR) BILLING CODE 4915–01–P Railway—Lease & Operate—California described below to the Office of Western Railroad, 360 I.C.C. 653 (1980), Management and Budget (OMB) for its and any employees affected by the SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD review and approval and invites public discontinuance of those trackage rights comment. The FMCSA requests [Docket No. FD 36314] will be protected by the conditions set approval to renew an ICR titled, ‘‘Hours [Docket No. FD 36315] out in Oregon Short Line Railroad— of Service (HOS) of Drivers Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Regulations.’’ With some exceptions, the The Kansas City Southern Railway Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham & Company—Temporary Trackage HOS regulations require a motor carrier Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. to install and require each of its drivers Rights Exemption—Norfolk Southern 91 (1979). Railway Company subject to the record of duty status If the verified notice contains false or (RODS) rule to use an electronic logging misleading information, the exemptions device (ELD) to report the driver’s Norfolk Southern Railway Company— are void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the Temporary Trackage Rights RODS. The RODS is critical to FMCSA’s exemptions under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) safety mission because it helps Exemption—The Kansas City Southern may be filed at any time. The filing of Railway Company enforcement officials determine if CMV a petition to revoke will not drivers are complying with the HOS automatically stay the effectiveness of The Kansas City Southern Railway rules limiting driver on-duty and the exemptions. driving time and requiring periodic off- Company (KCS) and Norfolk Southern All pleadings, referring to Docket Nos. duty time. Railway Company (NSR) (collectively, FD 36314 and FD 36315, must be filed Applicants), Class I rail carriers, have with the Surface Transportation Board DATES: Please send your comments by filed a joint verified notice of either via e-filing or in writing July 19, 2019. OMB must receive your exemptions under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(8) addressed to 395 E Street SW, comments by this date in order to act on for the acquisition of temporary Washington, DC 20423–0001. In the ICR. overhead trackage rights (1) by KCS over addition, a copy of each pleading must ADDRESSES: All comments should an approximately 105.2-mile rail line of be served on Applicants’ reference Federal Docket Management NSR between St. Louis, Mo. (NSR representatives: William A. Mullins, System Docket Number FMCSA–2019– milepost S5.0), and Mexico, Mo. (NSR Baker & Miller PLLC, 2401 Pennsylvania 0023. Interested persons are invited to milepost S110.2), and (2) by NSR over Avenue NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC submit written comments on the an approximately 156.3-mile rail line of 20037 (for KCS) and Garrett D. Urban, proposed information collection to the KCS between Mexico, Mo. (KCS Norfolk Southern Corporation, Three Office of Information and Regulatory milepost 325.7), and Rock Creek Commercial Place, Norfolk, VA 23510 Affairs, Office of Management and Junction in Kansas City, Mo. (KCS (for NSR). Budget. Comments should be addressed milepost 482.0), pursuant to the terms of According to Applicants, this action to the attention of the Desk Officer, a Temporary Trackage Rights Agreement is categorically excluded from Department of Transportation/Federal 1 dated June 7, 2019 (Agreement). environmental review under 49 CFR Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1105.6(c) and historic reporting under and sent via electronic mail to oira_ 1 A redacted copy of the Agreement is attached to 49 CFR 1105.8(b)(3). [email protected], faxed to (202) the verified notice. An unredacted copy has been filed under seal along with a motion for protective Board decisions and notices are 395–6974, or mailed to the Office of order pursuant to 49 CFR 1104.14. That motion is available at www.stb.gov. Information and Regulatory Affairs, addressed in a separate decision. Decided: June 13, 2019. Office of Management and Budget, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28617 Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th investigations of motor carriers. And hours and costs of complying with the Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Federal and State courts rely upon the HOS reporting and recordkeeping FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. RODS as evidence of driver and motor requirements. Mr. Smith stated that the Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver and carrier violations of the HOS 2-minute response time is not sufficient Carrier Operations Division Department regulations. This information collection to account for the time to audit and file of Transportation, FMCSA, West supports the DOT’s Strategic Goal of RODS and supporting documents. Building 6th Floor, 1200 New Jersey Safety because the information helps the Agency ensure the safe operation of TruckerNation submitted the results Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. of a survey in which 62 percent of Telephone: 202–366–4325. Email: CMVs in interstate commerce on our Nation’s highways. respondents indicated it takes more [email protected]. than 6.5 minutes to input daily duty SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Renewal of This IC status to complete electronic RODS. The Title: Hours of Service (HOS) of The current IC burden estimate of the Agency finds that TruckerNation did Drivers Regulations. HOS rules, approved by OMB on June not provide a discussion of the survey OMB Control Number: 2126–0001. 13, 2016, is 99.46 million hours. The methods, the margin of error, or a mean Type of Request: Renewal and expiration date of the current ICR is response time that is statistically revision of an information collection. June 30, 2019. Through this ICR, significant and different from a 2- Respondents: Motor Carriers of FMCSA requests a renewal and revision minute response time. Property and Passengers, Drivers of of the paperwork burden of 2126–0001. CMVs. The Agency requests a reduction in the The Agency finds that the 2-minute Estimated Number of Respondents: burden hours from 99.46 million hours response time in the supporting 3.42 million CMV drivers; 540,000 to 41.03 million hours. The reduction is statement is applied to driver burden Motor Carriers. the result of amendments of the HOS hours to monetize the cost of drivers’ Estimated Time per Response: CMV rules in which the burden estimate for time on task to prepare daily RODS. It drivers using technology: 2 minutes. most drivers and motor carriers is based is not applicable to administrative time Estimated Time per Response: Motor on compliance with the ELD final rule incurred by motor carrier staff to audit Carriers reviewing 50 percent of RODS: during the three-year ICR period. Two and file RODS. The Agency finds that 2 minutes. types of information are collected under these are usual and customary costs that Frequency of Response: Drivers: 240 this IC: (1) Drivers’ RODS (electronic motor carriers would incur in the days per year; Motor carriers 240 days records or, in some cases, paper absence of the HOS reporting and per year. logbooks), and (2) supporting recordkeeping requirements. For Driver Burden Hours: 27.36 million = documents, such as fuel and toll example, motor carriers might collect 3.42 million RODS × 2 minutes/60 × 240 receipts, that motor carriers use to verify and audit RODS and certain supporting days. accuracy of RODS and for other documents for other business uses to Motor Carrier Burden Hours: 13.68 business purposes. The use of ELDs estimate deductible expenses for income million = 27.36 million × 50%. reduces the driver’s time to input duty tax purposes. Estimated Total Annual Burden: status from 6.5 minutes to 2 minutes. 41.04 million hours. = 27.36 million + Because motor carriers use supporting Public Comments Invited: You are 13.68 million. documents that drivers are required to asked to comment on any aspect of this Expiration Date: June 30, 2019. maintain for other business purposes, information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is Background the Agency excludes this task because it is a usual and customary activity. necessary for the performance of On December 16, 2015, the final rule On March 8, 2019, FMCSA published FMCSA’s functions; (2) the accuracy of titled ‘‘Electronic Logging Devices and a Federal Register notice allowing for a the estimated burden; (3) ways for the Hours of Service Supporting 60-day comment period on this ICR. The FMCSA to enhance the quality, Documents’’ was published and became agency received three comments in usefulness, and clarity of the collected effective February 16, 2016 (80 FR response to that notice. One commenter, information; and (4) ways that the 78292). The FMCSA established Aaron Pettigrew, expressed concern that burden could be minimized without minimum performance and design the ELDs and vendor fees for data reducing the quality of the information standards for ELDs and the mandatory management service vendors are collected. The Agency will summarize use of these devices by drivers who are burdensome to small companies. Mr. or include your comments in the request subject to the HOS reporting Pettigrew did not comment on the for OMB’s clearance of this ICR. requirements. Drivers who have reasonableness of these estimated costs. continuously used compliant automatic The Agency finds that the benefits Issued under the authority delegated in 49 on-board recorders (AOBRDs) since and costs of complying with the ELD CFR 1.87 on: June 11, 2019. December 17, 2017, have until rule are outside the scope of a request Kenneth Riddle, December 16, 2019, to replace the for approval of this information Director, Office of Registration and Safety devices with ELDs. The number of collection request. The Agency’s Information. AOBRDs still in use is unknown. As a supporting statement includes an [FR Doc. 2019–13015 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] condition of receiving certain federal estimate of the cost of ELDs and data BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P grants, States agree to adopt and enforce management fees used to estimate non- the Federal Motor Carrier Safety labor related costs of the ICR. The Regulations, including the HOS rules, as supporting statement included State law. As a result, State enforcement equipment costs and data management inspectors use the RODS and supporting fees posted on vendors’ websites. documents to determine whether CMV Two commenters, Toni Smith and drivers are complying with the HOS TruckerNation, stated that the 2-minute rules. In addition, FMCSA uses the response time for collecting and filing RODS during on-site and offsite records underestimates the burden VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28618 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION this notice. Note that DOT posts all are submitting your comment as an comments received without change to individual or on behalf of a third party Federal Motor Carrier Safety www.regulations.gov, including any and then submit. If you submit your Administration personal information included in a comments by mail or hand delivery, comment. Please see the Privacy Act submit them in an unbound format, no [Docket No. FMCSA–2018–0347] heading below. larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for Commercial Driver’s License Docket: For access to the docket to copying and electronic filing. If you Standards: Application for read background documents or submit comments by mail and would Exemptions; Navistar, Inc. (Navistar) comments, go to www.regulations.gov at like to know that they reached the any time or visit Room W12–140 on the facility, please enclose a stamped, self- AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety ground level of the West Building, 1200 addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA Administration (FMCSA), DOT. New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, will consider all comments and material ACTION: Notice of application for DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, received during the comment period exemption; request for comments. Monday through Friday, except Federal and may grant or not grant this holidays. The on-line FDMS is available application based on your comments. SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. II. Legal Basis Navistar, Inc. (Navistar) has requested Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 an exemption from the Federal U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. requirement to hold a U.S. commercial from the public to better inform its 31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions driver’s license (CDL) for two rulemaking process. DOT posts these from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety commercial motor vehicle (CMV) comments, without edit, including any Regulations. FMCSA must publish a drivers, Mr. Thomas Nickels, Senior personal information the commenter notice of each exemption request in the Vice President, Engineering provides, to www.regulations.gov, as Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). Optimization with MAN Truck & Bus described in the system of records The Agency must provide the public an SE in Munich, Germany (MAN), and Mr. notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can opportunity to inspect the information Lukas Walter, Senior Vice President, be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. relevant to the application, including any safety analyses that have been Engineering Powertrain for MAN, both FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. of whom hold a valid German conducted. The Agency must provide an Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver and opportunity for public comment on the commercial license. MAN is partnering Carrier Operations Division; Office of with Navistar to develop technological request. Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety The Agency reviews the safety advancements in fuel economy and Standards; Telephone: 202–366–4325. emissions reductions. Mr. Nickels and analyses and the public comments and Email: [email protected]. If you have determines whether granting the Mr. Walter need to test drive Navistar questions on viewing or submitting vehicles on U.S. roads to better exemption would likely achieve a level material to the docket, contact Docket of safety equivalent to or greater than understand product requirements in Services at (202) 366–9826. ‘‘real world’’ environments and verify the level that would be achieved by the results. Navistar believes that the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). requirements for a German commercial I. Public Participation and Request for The Agency’s decision must be license ensure that operations under the Comments published in the Federal Register (49 exemption would likely achieve a level CFR 381.315(b)) with the reason for the FMCSA encourages you to participate of safety equivalent to or greater than granting or denial, and, if granted, the by submitting comments and related the level that would be obtained in the specific person or class of persons materials. absence of the exemption. FMCSA receiving the exemption, and the requests public comments on Navistar’s Submitting Comments regulatory provision or provisions from application for exemption. which exemption is granted. The notice If you submit a comment, please must also specify the effective period of DATES: Comments must be received on include the docket number for this the exemption (up to 5 years), and or before July 19, 2019. notice (FMCSA–2018–0347), indicate explain the terms and conditions of the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the specific section of this document to exemption. The exemption may be bearing the Federal Docket Management which the comment applies, and renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)). System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA– provide a reason for suggestions or 2018–0347 using any of the following recommendations. You may submit III. Request for Exemption methods: your comments and material online or Navistar has applied for an exemption • Federal eRulemaking Portal: by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but for Mr. Thomas Nickels and Mr. Lukas www.regulations.gov. Follow the online please use only one of these means. Walter from 49 CFR 383.23, which instructions for submitting comments. FMCSA recommends that you include prescribes licensing requirements for • Mail: Docket Management Facility, your name and a mailing address, an drivers operating CMVs in interstate or U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 email address, or a phone number in the intrastate commerce. Both drivers are New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, body of your document so the Agency unable to obtain a CDL due to their lack Ground Floor, Room W12–140, can contact you if it has questions of residency in the United States. Copies Washington, DC 20590–0001. regarding your submission. of the exemption applications are • Hand Delivery or Courier: West To submit your comment online, go to included in the docket referenced at the Building, Ground Floor, Room W12– www.regulations.gov and put the docket beginning of this notice. 140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, number, ‘‘FMCSA–2018–0347’’ in the The exemption would allow these between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ drivers to operate CMVs in interstate or through Friday, except Federal holidays. When the new screen appears, click on intrastate commerce to help develop • Fax: 1–202–493–2251 ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type your technology advancements in fuel Each submission must include the comment into the text box in the economy and emissions reductions. Mr. Agency name and the docket number for following screen. Choose whether you Nickels and Mr. Walter need to drive VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28619 Navistar vehicles on public roads to Issued on: June 12, 2019. Monday through Friday, except Federal better understand product requirements Larry W. Minor, holidays. If you have questions for these systems in ‘‘real world’’ Associate Administrator for Policy. regarding viewing or submitting environments in the U.S. market. [FR Doc. 2019–13011 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] material to the docket, contact Docket According to Navistar, both drivers will BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P Services, telephone (202) 366–9826. drive typically for no more than 8 hours SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: per day for 2 consecutive days with 50 I. Public Participation percent of the test driving on two-lane DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION State highways and 50 percent on A. Submitting Comments Interstate highways. The driving will Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration If you submit a comment, please consist of no more than 600 miles include the docket number for this during a two-day period, at 300 miles [Docket No. FMCSA–2019–0010] notice (Docket No. FMCSA–2019–0010), per day. In all cases, drivers will be indicate the specific section of this accompanied by a U.S. CDL holder Qualification of Drivers; Exemption document to which each comment familiar with the routes to be traveled. Applications; Vision applies, and provide a reason for each Mr. Nickels and Mr. Walter hold valid AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety suggestion or recommendation. You German commercial licenses and, as Administration (FMCSA), DOT. may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand explained by Navistar in its exemption ACTION: Notice of applications for delivery, but please use only one of request, the requirements for that exemption; request for comments. license ensure that, operating under the these means. FMCSA recommends that exemption, these drivers would likely SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of you include your name and a mailing achieve a level of safety equivalent to or applications from ten individuals for an address, an email address, or a phone greater than the level that would be exemption from the vision requirement number in the body of your document achieved by the current regulation. in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety so that FMCSA can contact you if there are questions regarding your Furthermore, according to Navistar, Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in submission. both drivers are familiar with the To submit your comment online, go to operation of CMVs worldwide. Navistar interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions will enable these http://www.regulations.gov, put the requests that the exemption cover the individuals to operate CMVs in docket number, FMCSA–2019–0010, in maximum allowable duration of 5 years. interstate commerce without meeting the keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or the vision requirement in one eye. When the new screen appears, click on the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type Greater Level of Safety DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 19, 2019. your comment into the text box on the Navistar notes that the Agency has following screen. Choose whether you ADDRESSES: previously determined, through the You may submit comments are submitting your comment as an identified by the Federal Docket review of multiple CDL exemptions individual or on behalf of a third party Management System (FDMS) Docket No. applications for German-domiciled and then submit. FMCSA–2019–0010 using any of the drivers, that the process for obtaining a If you submit your comments by mail following methods: German commercial license is or hand delivery, submit them in an • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to comparable to, or as effective as, the unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 11 inches, suitable for copying and requirements of part 383, and online instructions for submitting adequately assesses the driver’s ability electronic filing. If you submit comments. comments by mail and would like to to operate CMVs in the U.S. The Agency • Mail: Docket Management Facility; recently granted one of Navistar’s know that they reached the facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 please enclose a stamped, self-addressed drivers a similar exemption [April 15, New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building 2019 (84 FR 15283)]. Since 2015, the postcard or envelope. Ground Floor, Room W12–140, FMCSA will consider all comments Agency has granted Daimler drivers Washington, DC 20590–0001. similar exemptions: [March 27, 2015 (80 • and material received during the Hand Delivery: West Building comment period. FR 16511); October 5, 2015 (80 FR Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 60220); December 7, 2015 (80 FR New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, B. Viewing Documents and Comments 76059); December 21, 2015 (80 FR DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, To view comments, as well as any 79410)]; July 12, 2016 (81 FR 45217); Monday through Friday, except Federal documents mentioned in this notice as July 25, 2016 (81 FR 48496); August 17, Holidays. being available in the docket, go to 2017 (82 FR 39151); September 10, 2018 • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. http://www.regulations.gov. Insert the (83 FR 45742)]. The Agency has not To avoid duplication, please use only docket number, FMCSA–2019–0010, in received any information or reports one of these four methods. See the the keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ indicating there have been safety ‘‘Public Participation’’ portion of the Next, click the ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ performance problems with individuals SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for button and choose the document to holding German commercial licenses instructions on submitting comments. review. If you do not have access to the and operating CMVs on public roads in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. internet, you may view the docket the United States. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical online by visiting the Docket Notwithstanding the previous Programs Division, (202) 366–4001, Management Facility in Room W12–140 decisions, the Agency requests public [email protected], FMCSA, on the ground floor of the DOT West comments concerning Mr. Nickels and Department of Transportation, 1200 Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Mr. Walter and whether exemptions New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64–224, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. should be granted to enable them to Washington, DC 20590–0001. Office and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, operate CMVs in the United States. hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., ET, except Federal holidays. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28620 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices C. Privacy Act procedures established in 49 CFR part predictor for both concurrent and In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), 381 subpart C, on a case-by-case basis nonconcurrent events is the number of DOT solicits comments from the public upon application by CMV drivers who single convictions. This study used to better inform its rulemaking process. do not meet the vision standards of 49 three consecutive years of data, DOT posts these comments, without CFR 391.41(b)(10). comparing the experiences of drivers in To qualify for an exemption from the edit, including any personal information the first two years with their vision requirement, FMCSA requires a the commenter provides, to experiences in the final year. person to present verifiable evidence www.regulations.gov, as described in that he/she has driven a commercial III. Qualifications of Applicants the system of records notice (DOT/ALL– vehicle safely with the vision deficiency Joseph A. Cardazone 14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at for the past three years. Recent driving www.dot.gov/privacy. Mr. Cardazone, 63, has had amblyopia performance is especially important in in his left eye since childhood. The II. Background evaluating future safety, according to visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, several research studies designed to Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, and in his left eye, 20/100. Following an correlate past and future driving FMCSA may grant an exemption from examination in 2019, his performance. Results of these studies the FMCSRs for a five-year period if it ophthalmologist stated, ‘‘Mr. Cardazone support the principle that the best finds such exemption would likely has sufficient vision to operate a predictor of future performance by a achieve a level of safety that is commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. Cardazone driver is his/her past record of crashes equivalent to, or greater than, the level reported that he has driven straight and traffic violations. Copies of the that would be achieved absent such trucks for 35 years, accumulating 1.4 studies may be found at Docket Number exemption. The statute also allows the million miles. He holds an operator’s FMCSA–1998–3637. license from New Jersey. His driving Agency to renew exemptions at the end FMCSA believes it can properly apply record for the last three years shows no of the five-year period. FMCSA grants the principle to monocular drivers, crashes and one conviction for a moving exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two- because data from the Federal Highway violation in a CMV; failure to observe year period to align with the maximum Administration’s (FHWA) former waiver traffic control device. duration of a driver’s medical study program clearly demonstrated the certification. driving performance of experienced Daniel R. Cope, Sr. The ten individuals listed in this monocular drivers in the program is Mr. Cope, 63, has a hyphema in his notice have requested an exemption better than that of all CMV drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR left eye due to a traumatic incident in collectively (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, childhood. The visual acuity in his right 391.41(b)(10). Accordingly, the Agency March 26, 1996). The fact that will evaluate the qualifications of each eye is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light experienced monocular drivers perception. Following an examination applicant to determine whether granting demonstrated safe driving records in the an exemption will achieve the required in 2018, his optometrist stated, ‘‘In my waiver program supports a conclusion opinion, Daniel is visually capable of level of safety mandated by statute. that other monocular drivers, meeting The physical qualification standard driving a commercial vehicle with the same qualifying conditions as those corrective lenses.’’ Mr. Cope reported for drivers regarding vision found in 49 required by the waiver program, are also CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is that he has driven straight trucks for 42 likely to have adapted to their vision years, accumulating 8,400 miles, and physically qualified to drive a CMV if deficiency and will continue to operate tractor-trailer combinations for 42 years, that person has distant visual acuity of safely. accumulating 84,000 miles. He holds a at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye The first major research correlating Class A CDL from Iowa. His driving without corrective lenses or visual past and future performance was done record for the last three years shows no acuity separately corrected to 20/40 in England by Greenwood and Yule in crashes and no convictions for moving (Snellen) or better with corrective 1920. Subsequent studies, building on violations in a CMV. lenses, distant binocular acuity of at that model, concluded that crash rates least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with for the same individual exposed to Timothy E. Coultas or without corrective lenses, field of certain risks for two different time Mr. Coultas, 51, has had amblyopia in ° vision of at least 70 in the horizontal periods vary only slightly (See Bates his right eye since childhood. The Meridian in each eye, and the ability to and Neyman, University of California visual acuity in his right eye is 20/70, recognize the colors of traffic signals Publications in Statistics, April 1952). and in his left eye, 20/20. Following an and devices showing standard red, Other studies demonstrated theories of examination in 2019, his optometrist green, and amber. predicting crash proneness from crash stated, ‘‘In my professional opinion this In July 1992, the Agency first history coupled with other factors. applicant has sufficient vision to published the criteria for the Vision These factors—such as age, sex, perform driving tasks required to Waiver Program, which listed the geographic location, mileage driven and operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. conditions and reporting standards that conviction history—are used every day Coultas reported that he has driven CMV drivers approved for participation by insurance companies and motor tractor-trailer combinations for 29 years, would need to meet (Qualification of vehicle bureaus to predict the accumulating 2.9 million miles. He Drivers; Vision Waivers, 57 FR 31458, probability of an individual holds a Class AM CDL from Illinois. His July 16, 1992). The current Vision experiencing future crashes (See Weber, driving record for the last three years Exemption Program was established in Donald C., ‘‘Accident Rate Potential: An shows no crashes and no convictions for 1998, following the enactment of Application of Multiple Regression moving violations in a CMV. amendments to the statutes governing Analysis of a Poisson Process,’’ Journal exemptions made by § 4007 of the of American Statistical Association, Edwin Figueroa Transportation Equity Act for the 21st June 1971). A 1964 California Driver Mr. Figueroa, 47, has had amblyopia Century (TEA–21), Public Law 105–178, Record Study prepared by the California in his right eye since birth. The visual 112 Stat. 107, 401 (June 9, 1998). Vision Department of Motor Vehicles acuity in his right eye is 20/400, and in exemptions are considered under the concluded that the best overall crash his left eye, 20/20. Following an VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28621 examination in 2019, his Jeffrey A. Sherman Issued on: June 7, 2019. ophthalmologist stated, ‘‘His vision is Larry W. Minor, currently stable. Based on his Mr. Sherman, 64, has had macular Associate Administrator for Policy. ischemia in his right eye since 2013. examination I feel that he is capable of [FR Doc. 2019–13009 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/ driving commercial vehicles.’’ Mr. BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P Figueroa reported that he has driven 100, and in his left eye, 20/20. straight trucks for 12 years, Following an examination in 2018, his accumulating 600,000 miles. He holds ophthalmologist stated, ‘‘In my opinion, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION an operator’s license from Illinois. His Mr. Sherman has sufficient vision to driving record for the last three years perform the driving tasks required to Federal Motor Carrier Safety shows no crashes and no convictions for operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. Administration moving violations in a CMV. Sherman reported that he has driven straight trucks for 22 years, [Docket No. FMCSA–2019–0093] Robert F. LaMark accumulating 220,000 miles, and Hours of Service of Drivers: Turfgrass Mr. LaMark, 51, has an enucleated tractor-trailer combinations for 37 years, Producers International; Application right eye due to a traumatic incident in accumulating 888,000 miles. He holds a for Exemption 2015. The visual acuity in his right eye Class A CDL from Ohio. His driving is no light perception, and in his left record for the last three years shows no AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety eye, 20/20. Following an examination in crashes and no convictions for moving Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 2019, his optometrist stated, ‘‘In my violations in a CMV. ACTION: Notice of application for opinion, Robery [sic] has sufficient exemption; request for comments. vision to perform his driving tasks to Chadwick L. St. John operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. SUMMARY: FMCSA has received an LaMark reported that he has driven Mr. St. John, 35, has a retinal detachment in his left eye due to a application from Turfgrass Producers straight trucks for 32 years, International (TPI) asking the agency to accumulating 320,000 miles, and traumatic incident in childhood. The visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, extend the hours-of-service (HOS) tractor-trailer combinations for 21 years, exemption for agricultural operations to and in his left eye, light perception. accumulating 21,000 miles. He holds a drivers transporting turfgrass sod for its Following an examination in 2018, his Class BM CDL from Pennsylvania. His business operations. FMCSA requests ophthalmologist stated, ‘‘In my medical driving record for the last three years public comment on TPI’s application for opinion, the patient has sufficient vision shows no crashes and no convictions for exemption. moving violations in a CMV. to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. St. DATES: Comments must be received on Con May John reported that he has driven straight or before July 19, 2019. Mr. May, 50, has had amblyopia in his trucks for ten years, accumulating ADDRESSES: You may submit comments left eye since childhood. The visual 600,000 miles. He holds an operator’s identified by Federal Docket acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in license from Alabama. His driving Management System Number FMCSA– his left eye, 20/400. Following an record for the last three years shows no 2019–0093 by any of the following examination in 2019, his optometrist crashes and no convictions for moving methods: stated, ‘‘In my opinion, he does have the violations in a CMV. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: visual skills needed to operate a www.regulations.gov. See the Public commercial vehicle.’’ Mr. May reported Clinton A. Vandervoort Participation and Request for Comments section below for further information. that he has driven straight trucks for Mr. Vandervoort, 63, has a subluxed • Mail: Docket Management Facility, four years, accumulating 240,000 miles. lens in his left eye due to a traumatic U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 He holds a Class B CDL from Indiana. incident in childhood. The visual acuity New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, His driving record for the last three in his right eye is 20/20, and in his left Ground Floor, Room W12–140, years shows no crashes and no eye, 20/50. Following an examination in Washington, DC 20590–0001. convictions for moving violations in a 2019, his ophthalmologist stated, ‘‘In • Hand Delivery or Courier: West CMV. my opinion, the vision is sufficient to Building, Ground Floor, Room W12– perform driving tasks for a commercial Justin E. Schwada 140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, vehicle.’’ Mr. Vandervoort reported that Mr. Schwada, 40, has had amblyopia between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. E.T., Monday in his left eye since childhood. The he has driven straight trucks for 39 through Friday, except Federal holidays. visual acuity in his right eye is 20/30, years, accumulating 374,400 miles. He • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. and in his left eye, 20/100. Following an holds a Class AM CDL from Texas. His Each submission must include the examination in 2018, his optometrist driving record for the last three years Agency name and the docket number for stated, ‘‘In my medical assessment, Mr. shows no crashes and no convictions for this notice. Note that DOT posts all Justin Schwada has sufficient vision to moving violations in a CMV. comments received without change to perform the driving tasks required to IV. Request for Comments www.regulations.gov, including any operate a commercial motor vehicle.’’ personal information included in a Mr. Schwada reported that he has In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) comment. Please see the Privacy Act driven straight trucks for 24 years, and 31315, FMCSA requests public heading below. accumulating 180,000 miles, tractor- comment from all interested persons on Docket: For access to the docket to trailer combinations for 19 years, the exemption petitions described in read background documents or accumulating 190,000 miles. He holds a this notice. We will consider all comments, go to www.regulations.gov at Class A CDL from Missouri. His driving comments and material received before any time or visit Room W12–140 on the record for the last three years shows no the close of business on the closing date ground level of the West Building, 1200 crashes and no convictions for moving indicated in the dates section of the New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, violations in a CMV. notice. DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28622 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Monday through Friday, except Federal II. Legal Basis commodity that is recognized by the holidays. The on-line FDMS is available FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. U.S. Department of Agriculture and, like 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions many other agricultural commodities, is Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 from certain Federal Motor Carrier planted and harvested annually. Sod is U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments Safety Regulations. FMCSA must cultivated and managed with techniques from the public to better inform its publish a notice of each exemption and equipment similar to those used for rulemaking process. DOT posts these request in the Federal Register (49 CFR other crops and is subject to the same comments, without edit, including any 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide impacts of weather, weed infestations, personal information the commenter the public an opportunity to inspect the insect pests, and plant disease factors provides, to www.regulations.gov, as information relevant to the application, that impact other agricultural crops. described in the system of records including any safety analyses that have Similarly, once harvested for sale it is notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can been conducted and provide an also subject to perishing in transport. be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. opportunity for public comment on the Specifically, sod often loses its color, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. request. moisture, and vigor due to transplant Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver and The Agency preforms a review of shock and can die if palleted too long. Carrier Operations Division; Office of safety analyses and public comments Sod’s perishability depends on many of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety submitted and determines whether the same factors that impact the Standards; Telephone: (202) 366–4325; granting the exemption would likely transportation of other agricultural Email: [email protected]. If you have achieve a level of safety equivalent to or commodities including temperature, questions on viewing or submitting greater than the level that would be desiccation, oxygen and light material to the docket, contact Docket achieved by the current regulation (49 deprivation, increased respiration, Services, telephone (202) 366–9826. CFR 381.305). The Agency will publish carbon starvation, etc., all of which SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: its decision in the Federal Register (49 negatively impact the quality of CFR 381.315(b)) with the reasons for turfgrass sod. I. Public Participation and Request for denying or granting the application and, TPI asserts that the lack of an HOS Comments if granted, the name of the person or exemption granted to other agricultural FMCSA encourages you to participate class of persons receiving the exemption commodities by 49 CFR 395.1(k)(1) will by submitting comments and related and the regulatory provision from which impact sod haulers’ business heavily. materials. the exemption is granted. The notice Their inability to deliver their perishable product to market in a timely Submitting Comments must specify the effective period (up to 5 years) and explain the terms and manner will result in a decrease in the If you submit a comment, please conditions of the exemption. The amount of product they can ship and an include the docket number for this exemption may be renewed (49 CFR increase in the amount of product that notice (FMCSA–2019–0093), indicate 381.300(b)). either perishes in transport or is the specific section of this document to damaged in transport, resulting in which the comment applies, and III. Request for Exemption customers who refuse delivery or are provide a reason for suggestions or Turfgrass Producers International otherwise not satisfied with sod quality recommendations. You may submit (TPI) represents natural grass seed and at delivery. If granted, TPI estimates that your comments and material online or sod farmers throughout the United the exemption would cover between by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but States and abroad. TPI has promoted the 2,400 drivers (400 farm baseline) and please use only one of these means. benefits of natural grass for 51 years and 10,428 drivers (1,738 farm maximum). FMCSA recommends that you include has members in over 46 States and 25 IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or your name and a mailing address, an nations who produce natural grass seed Greater Level of Safety email address, or a phone number in the and sod to service customers and body of your document so the Agency consumers in the green industry. The TPI essentially argues that the can contact you if it has questions natural grass product that farming exemption would achieve a level of regarding your submission. members produce is delivered to urban safety equivalent to that of others To submit your comment online, go to and suburban areas where it is used for transporting agricultural commodities www.regulations.gov and put the docket landscape services, home construction, within 150 air miles of the source of the number, ‘‘FMCSA–2019–0093’’ in the and recreational industries, among agricultural commodity. TPI is ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ others. requesting that the Agency exercise its When the new screen appears, click on TPI requests that all transporters of statutory authority to extend to the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type your turfgrass sod be eligible for the HOS transporters of turfgrass sod the same comment into the text box in the exception for agricultural commodities HOS relief provided by Congress to following screen. Choose whether you provided in 49 CFR 395.1(k)(1). TPI transporters of specified agricultural are submitting your comment as an asserts that sod producing members are commodities. TPI states that it will work individual or on behalf of a third party concerned that sod is not included in with natural grass sod haulers to ensure and then submit. If you submit your the definition of an agricultural they understand existing safety comments by mail or hand delivery, commodity in 49 CFR 395.2. TPI regulations regarding the operation of submit them in an unbound format, no believes that the failure to define sod as commercial motor vehicles. TPI larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for an agricultural commodity is contends that nothing about weight, copying and electronic filing. If you inconsistent with other Federal and stacking configuration, etc., makes submit comments by mail and would State regulations and creates an natural grass sod any less safe to haul like to know that they reached the unnecessary economic burden for sod than other agricultural commodities, as facility, please enclose a stamped, self- farmers when transporting their product demonstrated by the proven track record addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA to market. that natural grass sod farmers have had will consider all comments and material According to TPI’s application, for many years while hauling sod as an received during the comment period. turfgrass sod is a perishable agricultural agricultural commodity. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28623 A copy of TPI’s application for comments received without change to individual or on behalf of a third party exemption is available for review in the www.regulations.gov, including any and then submit. If you submit your docket for this notice. personal information included in a comments by mail or hand delivery, Issued on: June 12, 2019. comment. Please see the Privacy Act submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for Larry W. Minor, heading below. Docket: For access to the docket to copying and electronic filing. If you Associate Administrator for Policy. read background documents or submit comments by mail and would [FR Doc. 2019–13016 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] comments, go to www.regulations.gov at like to know that they reached the BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P any time or visit Room W12–140 on the facility, please enclose a stamped, self- ground level of the West Building, 1200 addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, will consider all comments and material DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, received during the comment period Federal Motor Carrier Safety Monday through Friday, except Federal and may grant or not grant this Administration holidays. The online FDMS is available application based on your comments. 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. II. Legal Basis [Docket No. FMCSA–2019–0139] Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. Entry-Level Driver Training: United from the public to better inform its 31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS); Application rulemaking process. DOT posts these from certain Federal Motor Carrier for Exemption comments, without edit, including any Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety personal information the commenter request in the Federal Register (49 CFR Administration (FMCSA), DOT. provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide ACTION: Notice of application for the public an opportunity to inspect the exemption; request for comments. notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. information relevant to the application, including any safety analyses that have SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that it has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. received an application for exemption been conducted. The Agency must Richard Clemente, Driver and Carrier provide an opportunity for public from United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) Operations Division; Office of Carrier, from two provisions in the entry-level comment on the request. Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards, The Agency reviews safety analyses driver training (ELDT) final rule FMCSA, at 202–366–4325 or by email at and public comments submitted and published on December 8, 2016. These [email protected]. If you have questions determines whether granting the provisions are the following: (1) The on viewing or submitting material to the exemption would likely achieve a level requirement that a driver training docket, contact Docket Services at (202) of safety equivalent to, or greater than, instructor have two years’ experience 366–9826. the level that would be achieved by the and have held a Commercial Driver’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). License (CDL) for two years as set forth The Agency must publish its decision in in the definitions of behind-the-wheel I. Public Participation and Request for the Federal Register (49 CFR (BTW) instructor and theory instructor; Comments 381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying and (2) the requirement to register each FMCSA encourages you to participate or granting the application and, if training location for a unique Training by submitting comments and related granted, the name of the person or class Provider Registry (TPR) number. materials. of persons receiving the exemption and FMCSA requests public comment on the the regulatory provision from which the applicant’s request for exemption. Submitting Comments exemption is granted. The notice must DATES: Comments must be received on If you submit a comment, please specify the effective period and explain or before July 19, 2019. include the docket number for this the terms and conditions of the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments notice (FMCSA–2019–0139), indicate exemption. The exemption may be identified by Federal Docket the specific section of this document to renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)). Management System (FDMS) Number which the comment applies, and FMCSA–2019–0139 by any of the provide a reason for suggestions or III. Request for Exemption following methods: recommendations. You may submit An exemption application has been • Federal eRulemaking Portal: your comments and material online or submitted by United Parcel Service, Inc. www.regulations.gov. See the Public by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but (UPS). The applicant seeks an Participation and Request for Comments please use only one of these means. exemption from the following two section below for further information. FMCSA recommends that you include provisions in the entry-level driver • Mail: Docket Management Facility, your name and a mailing address, an training (ELDT) final rule: (1) The U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 email address, or a phone number in the requirement in 49 CFR 380.713 that a New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, body of your document so the Agency driver training instructor have two Ground Floor, Room W12–140, can contact you if it has questions years’ experience and have held a Washington, DC 20590–0001. regarding your submission. commercial driver’s license (CDL) for • Hand Delivery or Courier: West To submit your comment online, go to two years as set forth in the definitions Building, Ground Floor, Room W12– www.regulations.gov and put the docket of behind-the-wheel (BTW) instructor 140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, number, ‘‘FMCSA–2019–0139’’ in the and theory instructor in 49 CFR between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. E.T., Monday ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ 380.605(b); and (2) the requirement in through Friday, except Federal holidays. When the new screen appears, click on 49 CFR 380.703(a)(7) to register each • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type your training location for a unique Training Each submission must include the comment into the text box in the Provider Registry (TPR) number. Agency name and the docket number for following screen. Choose whether you According to UPS, it has a driver this notice. Note that DOT posts all are submitting your comment as an training school (DTS) that trains its VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28624 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices employees to become driver instructors. The second part of UPS’s application Issued on: June 12, 2019. UPS describes its DTS as a success, as for exemption requests an exemption Larry W. Minor, the school has trained hundreds of from the requirement in 49 CFR Associate Administrator of Policy. driver instructors, many of whom did 380.703(a)(7), to register each training [FR Doc. 2019–13014 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] not have previous CDL experience. UPS location for a unique Training Provider BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P DTS instructors have, on average, 20 Registry (TPR) number. According to years of UPS experience, hold a CDL of UPS, training for new drivers takes the same (or higher) class and with all place in many locations. In each DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION endorsements necessary to operate a location, instructors who have been CMV for which training is provided, trained in the same way pursuant to Maritime Administration have completed the DTS program, have UPS’ DTS program will use a common maintained their DTS certification FMCSR-compliant curriculum Notice of Funding Opportunity for through quarterly additional training, developed at a corporate level. UPS’s America’s Marine Highway Projects; and are employed by UPS as supervisors Director of Driver Training is Corrections or managers. The DTS conducts an 8- responsible for UPS’s firm-wide training AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT. week program designed to train program. UPS is operating a single ACTION: Correcting amendments. supervisors and managers in UPS’ long- training program in multiple locations. haul operations to deliver driver UPS states that it needs this exemption SUMMARY: On June 14, 2019, the training to drivers at their ‘‘home’’ due to the significant administrative Maritime Administration announced the worksites. The curriculum covers all the burden that would result if it had to availability of funding for the Short Sea topics set forth in Part 380 Appendix A register every UPS location at which a Transportation Program, commonly for the new ELDT rule. The UPS new driver could be trained. In referred to as the America’s Marine instructor trainees are assessed in addition, having separate TPR numbers Highway Program (AMHP). The progress reviews at days 5, 10, and 15, for multiple locations offering document inadvertently provided a and a current DTS instructor monitors essentially the same training could deadline of June 14, 2019 for the quality of the training and trainee create internal confusion for UPS, applications to be received. This progress. According to UPS, the DTS drivers, and the Agency. UPS new document corrects the previous notice program produces highly qualified driver training may occur at as many as by stating that the deadline for driver instructors. Additionally, all UPS 1,800 separate locations a year. UPS applications to be received by MARAD driver instructors are required to be estimates that the cost to register all of is instead 5 p.m. EDT on August 15, recertified every 90 days to demonstrate these locations would be substantial, 2019. and that it would incur additional costs the same skill level shown for their DATES: Applicable June 19, 2019. to keep track of the various registrations, original DTS certification. UPS further FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred performs internal quality assessments to file updates, and new driver registrations. Jones, Office of Ports & Waterways validate that instructor skillsets are Planning, Room W21–311, Maritime maintained throughout the organization. IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or Administration, U.S. Department of UPS requests that it be exempted from Greater Level of Safety Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. the ELDT driver instructor qualification UPS offers its ‘‘train the trainer’’ SE, Washington, DC 20590, phone 202– requirements. According to UPS, under program within its DTS to assure an 366–1123, or email [email protected]. the new ELDT regulations no one could equivalent level of safety. According to Persons who use a telecommunications be an instructor at the time these UPS, its DTS produces highly skilled device for the deaf (TDD) may call the regulations go into effect unless he/she instructors who know how to drive Federal Information Relay Service had obtained a CDL and had begun tractor-trailers and how to teach others (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 to contact the driving by February 7, 2018. UPS states to operate tractor-trailers in a safe above individual during business hours. that if it must comply with the manner. UPS believes that graduates of The FIRS is available twenty-four hours instructor qualification requirements in its DTS training program are better a day, seven days a week, to leave a the ELDT rule, it would not be able to prepared to impart knowledge and skills message or question with the above use 25% of its current certified driver on new drivers than someone who has individual. You will receive a reply instructors, at minimum. Looking ahead had two years of driving experience. during normal business hours. two more years, that number would According to UPS, experience over time SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. likely increase to 50% due to its has shown that their instructors produce 2019–12580 appearing on page 27838 in changing workforce. UPS sees an expertly trained, safe entry-level drivers. the Federal Register on Friday, June 14, increase in growth through volume All DTS certified driver instructors are 2019, the following corrections are demand, as well as an aging workforce re-certified every 90 days and UPS made: that will lead to retiring CDL drivers conducts periodic (minimum annual) 1. On page 27838, under ‘‘DATES: and certified driver instructors. Without internal quality assessments of the DTS Applications must be received by the an exemption from the [ELDT] trainer program. In regards to the registration Maritime Administration by 5 p.m. EDT requirements, UPS’s inability to use its requirements, UPS assures that the on June 14, 2019.’’ is corrected to read current driver instructors will impede registration requirements will be ‘‘DATES: Applications must be received substantially its ability to meet the fulfilled by a single registration for UPS’ by the Maritime Administration by 5 demand for new drivers. UPS adds that driver training program managed by p.m. EDT on August 15, 2019.’’ the exemption is needed to meet Union UPS, if the exemption granted. UPS’ 2. On page 27842, the first sentence contractual requirements, as under its requested exemption is for 5 years from beginning under ‘‘Submission Dates and collective bargaining agreement with the the ELDT provisions 49 CFR 380.713 Times Applications must be received by International Brotherhood of Teamsters and 49 CFR 380.703(a)(7). 5 p.m. EDT on June 14, 2019. Late (Teamsters), six current UPS employees A copy of UPS’s application for applications that are the result of failure must be provided with a promotion exemption is available for review in the to register or comply with Grants.gov opportunity for every new hire. docket for this notice. application requirements in a timely VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28625 manner will not be considered.’’ is • Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th impaired, TTY, (202) 649–5597. Upon corrected to read ‘‘Submission Dates Street SW, Suite 3E–218, Washington, arrival, visitors will be required to and Times Applications must be DC 20219. present valid government-issued photo received by 5 p.m. EDT on August 15, • Fax: (571) 465–4326. identification and submit to security 2019. Late applications that are the Instructions: You must include screening in order to inspect comments. result of failure to register or comply ‘‘OCC’’ as the agency name and ‘‘1557– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with Grants.gov application 0246’’ in your comment. In general, the Shaquita Merritt, Clearance Officer, requirements in a timely manner will OCC will publish comments on (202) 649–5490 or, for persons who are not be considered.’’ www.reginfo.gov without change, deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202) * * * * * including any business or personal 649–5597, Chief Counsel’s Office, Office information provided, such as name and Dated: June 14, 2019. of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 address information, email addresses, or 7th Street SW, Suite 3E–218, By Order of the Maritime Administrator. phone numbers. Comments received, Washington, DC 20219. T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr., including attachments and other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Secretary, Maritime Administration. supporting materials, are part of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), federal [FR Doc. 2019–12971 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] public record and subject to public agencies must obtain approval from the BILLING CODE 4910–81–P disclosure. Do not include any OMB for each collection of information information in your comment or that they conduct or sponsor. supporting materials that you consider ‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined confidential or inappropriate for public DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR disclosure. 1320.3(c) to include agency requests or Office of the Comptroller of the Additionally, please send a copy of requirements that members of the public Currency your comments by mail to: OCC Desk submit reports, keep records, or provide Officer, 1557–0246, U.S. Office of information to a third party. The OCC Agency Information Collection Management and Budget, 725 17th asks that OMB extend its approval of the Activities: Information Collection Street NW, #10235, Washington, DC collection. Renewal; Submission for OMB Review 20503 or by email to oira_submission@ Description: The OCC, Federal Reverse Mortgage Products: Guidance omb.eop.gov. Deposit Insurance Corporation, Board of for Managing Compliance and You may review comments and other Governors of the Federal Reserve Reputation Risks related materials that pertain to this System, and the National Credit Union information collection 1 following the AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the Administration issued final guidance close of the 30-day comment period for Currency, Treasury (OCC). entitled ‘‘Reverse Mortgage Products: this notice by any of the following ACTION: Guidance for Managing Compliance and Notice and request for comment. methods: • Reputation Risk’’ on August 17, 2010.2 SUMMARY: The OCC, as part of its Viewing Comments Electronically: Go to www.reginfo.gov. Click on the The guidance focuses on the need to continuing effort to reduce paperwork provide adequate information to and respondent burden, invites the ‘‘Information Collection Review’’ tab. Underneath the ‘‘Currently under consumers about reverse mortgage general public and other federal products, to provide qualified agencies to take this opportunity to Review’’ section heading, from the drop- down menu select ‘‘Department of independent counseling to consumers comment on the renewal of an considering these products, and to avoid information collection, as required by Treasury’’ and then click ‘‘submit.’’ This information collection can be located by potential conflicts of interest. The the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 guidance also addresses related policies, (PRA). searching by OMB control number ‘‘1557–0246’’ or ‘‘Reverse Mortgage procedures, internal controls, and third An agency may not conduct or party risk management. sponsor, and respondents are not Products: Guidance for Managing Compliance and Reputation Risks.’’ The information collection required to respond to, an information requirements contained in the guidance collection unless it displays a currently Upon finding the appropriate information collection, click on the address the implementation of policies valid Office of Management and Budget and procedures, training, and program (OMB) control number. related ‘‘ICR Reference Number.’’ On the next screen, select ‘‘View Supporting maintenance. The guidance provides The OCC is soliciting comment that institutions offering reverse concerning renewal of its information Statement and Other Documents’’ and then click on the link to any comment mortgages should have written policies collection titled ‘‘Reverse Mortgage and procedures that prohibit the Products: Guidance for Managing listed at the bottom of the screen. • For assistance in navigating practice of directing a consumer to a Compliance and Reputation Risks’’ particular counseling agency or (Guidance). The OCC also is giving www.reginfo.gov, please contact the Regulatory Information Service Center contacting a counselor on the notice that it has sent the collection to consumer’s behalf. OMB for review. at (202) 482–7340. • Viewing Comments Personally: You Title of Information Collection: DATES: Comments must be submitted on may personally inspect comments at the Reverse Mortgage Products: Guidance or before July 19, 2019. OCC, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, for Managing Compliance and ADDRESSES: Commenters are encouraged DC. For security reasons, the OCC Reputation Risks. to submit comments by email, if requires that visitors make an OMB Control No.: 1557–0246. possible. You may submit comments by appointment to inspect comments. You Affected Public: National banks, any of the following methods: federal savings associations, • may do so by calling (202) 649–6700 or, Email: [email protected]. for persons who are deaf or hearing subsidiaries of national banks and • Mail: Chief Counsel’s Office, Office federal savings associations, and federal of the Comptroller of the Currency, 1 On February 5, 2019, the OCC published a 60- branches or agencies of foreign banks. Attention: 1557–246, 400 7th Street SW, day notice for this information collection, 84 FR Suite 3E–218, Washington, DC 20219. 1822. 2 75 FR 50801. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28626 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Type of Review: Regular. The OCC is soliciting comment information collection, click on the Estimated number of respondents: 15. concerning the renewal of its related ‘‘ICR Reference Number.’’ On the Total estimated annual burden: 160 information collection titled next screen, select ‘‘View Supporting hours. ‘‘Interagency Guidance on Asset Statement and Other Documents’’ and Frequency of Response: On occasion. Securitization Activities.’’ The OCC also then click on the link to any comment On February 5, 2019, the OCC issued is giving notice that it has sent the listed at the bottom of the screen. a notice for 60 days of comment collection to OMB for review. • For assistance in navigating concerning the collection, 84 FR 1822. DATES: Comments must be submitted on www.reginfo.gov, please contact the No comments were received. Comments or before July 19, 2019. Regulatory Information Service Center continue to be invited on: ADDRESSES: Commenters are encouraged at (202) 482–7340. (a) Whether the collection of • Viewing Comments Personally: You to submit comments by email, if information is necessary for the proper may personally inspect comments at the possible. You may submit comments by performance of the OCC’s functions, OCC, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, including whether the information has any of the following methods: • Email: [email protected]. DC. For security reasons, the OCC practical utility; • requires that visitors make an (b) The accuracy of the estimates of Mail: Chief Counsel’s Office, Attention: Comment Processing, 1557– appointment to inspect comments. You the burden of the information may do so by calling (202) 649–6700 or, collection, including the validity of the 0217, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E– for persons who are deaf or hearing methodology and assumptions used; impaired, TTY, (202) 649–5597. Upon (c) Ways to enhance the quality, 218, Washington, DC 20219. • arrival, visitors will be required to utility, and clarity of the information to Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E–218, Washington, present valid government-issued photo be collected; identification and submit to security (d) Ways to minimize the burden of DC 20219. • screening in order to inspect comments. the information collection on Fax: (571) 465–4326. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: respondents, including the use of Instructions: You must include automated collection techniques or ‘‘OCC’’ as the agency name and ‘‘1557– Shaquita Merritt, OCC Clearance other forms of information technology; 0217’’ in your comment. In general, the Officer, (202) 649–5490 or, for persons and OCC will publish comments on who are deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (e) Estimates of capital or start up www.reginfo.gov without change, (202) 649–5597, Chief Counsel’s Office, costs and costs of operation, including any business or personal Office of the Comptroller of the maintenance, and purchase of services information provided, such as name and Currency, 400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E– to provide information. address information, email addresses, or 218, Washington, DC 20219. phone numbers. Comments received, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Dated: June 13, 2019. including attachments and other PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), federal Theodore J. Dowd, supporting materials, are part of the agencies must obtain approval from Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the public record and subject to public OMB for each collection of information Comptroller of the Currency. disclosure. Do not include any that they conduct or sponsor. [FR Doc. 2019–13007 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] information in your comment or ‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined BILLING CODE 4810–33–P supporting materials that you consider in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR confidential or inappropriate for public 1320.3(c) to include agency requests or disclosure. requirements that members of the public DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Additionally, please send a copy of submit reports, keep records, or provide Office of the Comptroller of the your comments by mail to: OCC Desk information to a third party. OCC is Currency Officer, 1557–0217, U.S. Office of requesting that OMB extend its approval Management and Budget, 725 17th of this information collection. Agency Information Collection Street NW, #10235, Washington, DC Title: Interagency Guidance on Asset Activities: Information Collection 20503 or by email to oira_submission@ Securitization Activities. Renewal; Submission for OMB Review; omb.eop.gov. OMB Control No.: 1557–0217. Interagency Guidance on Asset You may review comments and other Description: In 1999, the OCC issued Securitization Activities related materials that pertain to this the Interagency Guidance on Asset information collection 1 following the Securitization Activities 2 (guidance) in AGENCY: Office of the Comptroller of the close of the 30-day comment period for response to a determination that some Currency (OCC), Treasury. this notice by any of the following institutions involved in asset ACTION: Notice and request for comment. methods: securitization activities had significant • Viewing Comments Electronically: weaknesses in their asset securitization SUMMARY: The OCC, as part of its Go to www.reginfo.gov. Click on the practices. The information collection continuing effort to reduce paperwork ‘‘Information Collection Review’’ tab. contained in the guidance applies to and respondent burden, invites the Underneath the ‘‘Currently under financial institutions engaged in asset general public and other federal Review’’ section heading, from the drop- securitization activities and provides agencies to take this opportunity to down menu select ‘‘Department of that any institution engaged in these comment on a continuing information Treasury’’ and then click ‘‘submit.’’ This activities should maintain a written collection as required by the Paperwork information collection can be located by asset securitization policy, document Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). searching by OMB control number the fair value of retained interests, and In accordance with the requirements ‘‘1557–0217’’ or ‘‘Interagency Guidance maintain a management information of the PRA, the OCC may not conduct on Asset Securitization Activities.’’ system to monitor asset securitization or sponsor, and respondents are not Upon finding the appropriate activities. Financial institution required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently 1 On February 5, 2019, the OCC published a 60- 2 OCC Bulletin 1999–46, December 13, 1999, valid Office of Management and Budget day notice for this information collection, 84 FR https://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/bulletins/ (OMB) control number. 1824. 1999/bulletin-1999-46a.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00168 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28627 management uses the information 1995, Federal agencies are required to Estimated Annual Burden: 1,250 collected to ensure the safe and sound publish notice in the Federal Register hours. operation of the institution’s asset concerning each proposed collection of Estimated Average Burden per securitization activities. The OCC uses information, including each proposed Respondent: 15 minutes. the information to evaluate the quality extension of a currently approved Frequency of Response: One-time. of an institution’s risk management collection, and allow 60 days for public Estimated Number of Respondents: practices. comment in response to the notice. 5,000. Affected Public: Businesses or other DATES: Written comments and By direction of the Secretary. for-profit. recommendations on the proposed Danny S. Green, Type of Review: Regular. collection of information should be Estimated Number of Respondents: received on or before August 19, 2019. VA Interim Clearance Officer, Office of Quality, Performance and Risk, Department 35. ADDRESSES: Submit written comments Estimated Annual Burden: 1,828 of Veterans Affairs. on the collection of information through [FR Doc. 2019–12946 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] hours. (Previously, 1,827. Increased to Federal Docket Management System BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 1,828 due to rounding in calculation.) (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov or to Frequency of Response: On occasion. Nancy J. Kessinger, Veterans Benefits On February 5, 2019, the OCC issued Administration (20M33), Department of a notice for 60 days of comment DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue AFFAIRS regarding this collection, 84 FR 1824. NW, Washington, DC 20420 or email to No comments were received. Comments [email protected]. Please refer to [OMB Control No. 2900–0270] continue to be invited on: ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900–0849’’ in any (a) Whether the collection of correspondence. During the comment Agency Information Collection information is necessary for the proper period, comments may be viewed online Activity: Financial Counseling performance of the functions of the through FDMS. Statement OCC, including whether the information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: has practical utility; AGENCY: Veterans Benefits (b) The accuracy of the OCC’s Danny S. Green at (202) 421–1354. Administration, Department of Veterans estimate of the information collection SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Affairs. burden; PRA of 1995, Federal agencies must ACTION: Notice. (c) Ways to enhance the quality, obtain approval from the Office of SUMMARY: utility, and clarity of the information to Management and Budget (OMB) for each Veterans Benefits be collected; collection of information they conduct Administrations, Department of (d) Ways to minimize the burden of or sponsor. This request for comment is Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an the collection on respondents, including being made pursuant to Section opportunity for public comment on the through the use of automated collection 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. proposed collection of certain techniques or other forms of information With respect to the following information by the agency. Under the technology; and collection of information, VBA invites Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of (e) Estimates of capital or start-up comments on: (1) Whether the proposed 1995, Federal agencies are required to costs and costs of operation, collection of information is necessary publish notice in the Federal Register maintenance, and purchase of services for the proper performance of VBA’s concerning each proposed collection of to provide information. functions, including whether the information, including each proposed information will have practical utility; reinstatement of a collection, and allow Dated: June 13, 2019. (2) the accuracy of VBA’s estimate of the 60 days for public comment in response Theodore J. Dowd, burden of the proposed collection of to the notice. Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of the information; (3) ways to enhance the DATES: Written comments and Comptroller of the Currency. quality, utility, and clarity of the recommendations on the proposed [FR Doc. 2019–13006 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] information to be collected; and (4) collection of information should be BILLING CODE 4810–33–P ways to minimize the burden of the received on or before August 19, 2019. collection of information on ADDRESSES: Submit written comments respondents, including through the use on the collection of information through DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS of automated collection techniques or Federal Docket Management System AFFAIRS the use of other forms of information (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov or to [OMB Control No. 2900–0849] technology. Nancy J. Kessinger, Veterans Benefits Authority: Public Law 104–13; 44 Administration (20M33), Department of Agency Information Collection U.S.C. 3501–21. Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue Activity: Alternate Signer Certification Title: Alternate Signer Certification. NW, Washington, DC 20420 or email to OMB Control Number: 2900–0849. [email protected]. Please refer to AGENCY: Veterans Benefits Type of Review: Extension of a ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900–0270’’ in any Administration, Department of Veterans currently approved collection. correspondence. During the comment Affairs. Abstract: The VA Form 21–0972 is period, comments may be viewed online ACTION: Notice. used to collect the alternate signer information necessary for VA to accept through FDMS. SUMMARY: Veterans Benefits benefit application forms signed by the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administration, Department of Veterans individuals on behalf of veterans and Danny Green at (202) 421–1354. Affairs (VA), is announcing an claimants. The information collected SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the opportunity for public comment on the will be used to contact the alternate PRA of 1995, Federal agencies must proposed collection of certain signer for verification purposes. obtain approval from the Office of information by the agency. Under the Affected Public: Individuals and Management and Budget (OMB) for each Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of households. collection of information they conduct VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00169 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 28628 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices or sponsor. This request for comment is of automated collection techniques or repayment agreement on the defaulted being made pursuant to Section the use of other forms of information loan. 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. technology. Affected Public: Individuals and Authority: Public Law 104–13; 44 With respect to the following households. U.S.C. 3501–3521. Estimated Annual Burden: 3,750 collection of information, VBA invites Title: Financial Counseling Statement. comments on: (1) Whether the proposed hours. OMB Control Number: 2900–0270. Estimated Average Burden per collection of information is necessary Type of Review: Reinstatement for the proper performance of VBA’s Respondent: 45 minutes. without change of a collection. Frequency of Response: One time. functions, including whether the Abstract: This form was developed Estimated Number of Respondents: information will have practical utility; under 38 U.S.C. 3732. VA Form 26– 5,000. (2) the accuracy of VBA’s estimate of the 8844 provides for recording burden of the proposed collection of comprehensive financial information By direction of the Secretary. information; (3) ways to enhance the concerning the borrower’s net income, Danny S. Green, quality, utility, and clarity of the total expenditures, net worth, suggested VA Interim Clearance Officer, Office of information to be collected; and (4) areas for which expenses can be Quality, Performance and Risk, Department ways to minimize the burden of the reduced or income increased, the of Veterans Affairs. collection of information on arrangement of a family budget and [FR Doc. 2019–12947 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] respondents, including through the use recommendations for the terms of any BILLING CODE 8320–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:06 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00170 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN1.SGM 19JNN1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 118 June 19, 2019 Part II Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Act Listing Determination for Alewife and Blueback Herring; Notice VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28630 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (collectively, ‘‘river herring’’): As taxonomic species (DPS Policy; 61 FR threatened or endangered under the 4722). Under the DPS Policy, we National Oceanic and Atmospheric Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 consider the following when identifying Administration U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) was not warranted a DPS: (1) The discreteness of the (78 FR 48943). However, we also noted population segment in relation to the [Docket No. 170718681–9471–01] that there were significant data remainder of the species or subspecies RIN 0648–XF575 deficiencies. In that determination, we to which it belongs; and (2) the committed to revisiting the status of significance of the population segment Endangered and Threatened Wildlife both species in three to five years, a to the species or subspecies to which it and Plants; Endangered Species Act period after which ongoing scientific belongs. Listing Determination for Alewife and studies, including a river herring stock Section 3 of the ESA further defines Blueback Herring assessment update by the Atlantic States an endangered species as any species Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which is in danger of extinction AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries would be completed. throughout all or a significant portion of Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and The Natural Resources Defense its range and a threatened species as one Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Council and Earthjustice (the Plaintiffs) which is likely to become an Commerce. filed suit against NMFS on February 10, endangered species within the ACTION: Notice; 12-month finding and 2015, in the U.S. District Court in foreseeable future throughout all or a availability of status review document. Washington, DC, challenging our significant portion of its range. Thus, we decision not to list blueback herring as interpret an ‘‘endangered species’’ to be SUMMARY: We, NMFS, have completed a threatened or endangered. The Plaintiffs one that is presently in danger of comprehensive status review under the also challenged our determination that extinction. A ‘‘threatened species,’’ on Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the Mid-Atlantic stock complex of the other hand, is not presently in alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) and blueback herring is not a DPS. On danger of extinction, but is likely to blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis). The March 25, 2017, the court vacated the become so in the foreseeable future. In status review identified four alewife blueback herring listing determination other words, the primary statutory distinct population segments (DPSs): and remanded the listing determination difference between a threatened and Canada, Northern New England, to us (Natural Resources Defense endangered species is the timing of Southern New England, and Mid- Council, Inc., et al. v. Samuel D. Rauch, when a species may be in danger of Atlantic. Based on the best scientific National Marine Fisheries Services, extinction, either presently and commercial data available 1:15–cv–00198 (D.D.C.)). As part of a (endangered) or in the foreseeable future including the Status Review Report, we negotiated agreement with the Plaintiffs, (threatened). have determined that listing the alewife we committed to publishing a revised Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA also rangewide or as any of the identified listing determination for blueback requires us to determine whether any DPSs as threatened or endangered under herring by January 31, 2019; the species is endangered or threatened as the ESA is not warranted at this time. publication date was extended by the a result of any of the following five The status review also identified three court to June 19, 2019. factors: The present or threatened blueback herring DPSs: Canada/ We announced the initiation of an destruction, modification, or Northern New England, Mid-Atlantic, alewife and blueback herring status curtailment of its habitat or range; and Southern Atlantic. Based on the review in the Federal Register on overutilization for commercial, best scientific and commercial data August 15, 2017 (82 FR 38672). At that recreational, scientific, or educational available, we have determined that time, we also opened a 60-day purposes; disease or predation; the listing blueback herring rangewide or as solicitation period for new scientific inadequacy of existing regulatory any of the identified DPSs as threatened and commercial data on alewife and mechanisms; or other natural or or endangered under the ESA is not blueback herring to help ensure that we manmade factors affecting its continued warranted at this time. were informed by the best available existence (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)(A)–(E)). DATES: This finding was made on June scientific and commercial information. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires us to make listing determinations based 19, 2019. Listing Species Under the ESA ADDRESSES: The status review document solely on the best scientific and We are responsible for determining for alewife and blueback herring is commercial data available after whether species are threatened or available electronically at: conducting a review of the status of the endangered under the ESA (16 U.S.C. www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/ species and after taking into account 1531 et seq.). To make this notwarranted.htm. You may also obtain efforts being made by any state or determination, we first consider a copy by submitting a request to the foreign nation or political subdivision whether a group of organisms Protected Resources Division, NMFS thereof to protect the species. In constitutes a ‘‘species’’ under section 3 GARFO, 55 Great Republic Drive, evaluating the efficacy of formalized of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532), and then Gloucester, MA 01930, Attention: domestic conservation efforts that have consider whether the status of the Alewife and Blueback Herring 12-month yet to be implemented or demonstrate species qualifies it for listing as either Finding. effectiveness, we rely on the Services’ threatened or endangered. Section 3 of joint Policy on Evaluation of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean the ESA defines species to include any Conservation Efforts When Making Higgins, NMFS Greater Atlantic subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, Listing Decisions (PECE; 68 FR 15100; Regional Fisheries Office, 978–281– and any distinct population segment of March 28, 2003). 9345. any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: which interbreeds when mature. On Status Review February 7, 1996, NMFS and the U.S. As noted above, we had committed to Background Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS; revisiting the listing determination for On August 12, 2013, we determined together, the Services) adopted a policy alewife and blueback herring in the that listing alewife and blueback herring describing what constitutes a DPS of a 2013 listing determination; accordingly, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28631 although the Plaintiffs only challenged review report is available electronically Labrador and Newfoundland south to our findings related to blueback herring, at the website listed in ADDRESSES. North Carolina, though their occurrence we did a comprehensive status review The status review report underwent in the extreme southern range is less of alewife and blueback herring. As part independent peer review as required by common (Collette and Klein-MacPhee of the status review, we formed a status the Office of Management and Budget 2002, ASMFC 2009a). In Canada, river review team (SRT) composed of Final Information Quality Bulletin for herring (often referred to as gaspereau) scientists from NMFS’ Northeast Peer Review (M–05–03; December 16, have been monitored at varying Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC), 2004). The status review report was peer frequencies in the St. Croix, St. John, USFWS, NMFS’ Greater Atlantic reviewed by three independent Gaspereau, Tusket, Margaree and Regional Fisheries Office, Delaware specialists selected from government, Miramichi River (J. Gibson, pers. comm) Division of Fish and Wildlife, academic, and scientific communities, and are reportedly most abundant in the Massachusetts Division of Marine with expertise in biology, conservation Miramichi, Margaree, LaHave, Tusket, Fisheries, New York Department of and management, and specific Shubenacadie and Saint John Rivers Environmental Conservation, and South knowledge of river herring and similar (DFO 2001). River herring are Carolina Department of Natural species. The peer reviewers were asked proportionally less abundant in smaller Resources. SRT members had scientific to evaluate the adequacy, quality, and coastal rivers and streams (DFO 2001). expertise in river herring biology/ completeness of the data considered and Generally, blueback herring in Canada ecology and/or expertise in population whether uncertainties in these data were occur in fewer rivers than alewives and ecology or fisheries management. We identified and characterized in the are less abundant in rivers where both tasked the SRT with multiple status review report, as well as to species coexist (DFO 2001). assessments for both species including evaluate the findings made in the River herring are anadromous, the requests from the 2011 petition that ‘‘Assessment of Extinction Risk’’ section meaning that they mature in the marine NMFS list blueback herring rangewide of the report. Peer Reviewers were also environment and then migrate up or alternatively, as DPSs, and to provide asked to identify any information coastal rivers to estuaries and into a thorough status review for both missing or lacking justification, or freshwater rivers, ponds, and lake species. First, the SRT was asked to whether information was applied habitats to spawn (Collette and Klein- compile and review the best available incorrectly in reaching conclusions. The MacPhee 2002, ASMFC 2009a). In information and to assess the overall SRT addressed peer reviewer comments general, adult river herring are found at risk of extinction facing alewife and prior to finalizing the status review depths less than 328 feet (ft) (100 meters blueback herring rangewide now and in report. Comments received are posted (m)) in waters along the continental the foreseeable future. Second, the SRT online at www.cio.noaa.gov/services_ shelf (Neves 1981, ASMFC 2009a, was tasked with identifying any DPSs programs/prplans/IDXXX.html. Schultz et al. 2009). within these populations and asked to We subsequently reviewed the status River herring are highly migratory, assess the risk of extinction facing each review report, the cited references, and pelagic, schooling species with seasonal identified DPS of alewife and blueback the peer review comments, and believe spawning migrations cued by water herring now and in the foreseeable the status review report, upon which temperature (Collette and Klein- future. Third, the SRT was asked to this 12-month finding is based, provides MacPhee 2002, Schultz et al. 2009). The consider whether, within the species the best available scientific and spawning migration for alewives rangewide or within any identified commercial information on alewife and typically occurs when water DPSs, a significant portion of the range temperatures range from 50–64 °F (10– blueback herring. Much of the ° may exist, and if so, whether the portion information discussed below on alewife 18 C) and for blueback herring when is at risk of extinction now or in the temperatures range from 57–77 °F (14– and blueback herring biology, genetic ° foreseeable future. diversity, distribution, abundance, 25 C; Klauda et al. 1991). Due to this In order to complete the status review, threats, and extinction risk is temperature-dependent spawning, river the SRT considered a variety of attributable to the status review report. herring may return to rivers to spawn as early as December or January in the scientific information from the However, in making the 12-month southern portions and as late as July and literature, unpublished documents, and finding determination, we have August in the northern portions of their direct communications with researchers independently applied the statutory ranges (ASMFC 2009a; DFO 2001). working on alewife and blueback provisions of the ESA, including herring, as well as technical information Blueback herring and alewives evaluation of the factors set forth in consume a variety of zooplankton. submitted to NMFS. Information that section 4(a)(1)(A)–(E) and our was not previously peer-reviewed was Blueback herring subsist chiefly on regulations regarding listing ctenophores, calanoid copepods, formally reviewed by the SRT. The SRT determinations (50 CFR part 424). evaluated all factors highlighted by the amphipods, mysids and other pelagic petitioners as well as additional factors Description, Life History, and Ecology shrimps, and small fishes while at sea that may contribute to alewife and of the Petitioned Species (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953, Brooks blueback herring vulnerability. and Dodson 1965, Neves 1981, Stone The Status Review Report for alewife Distribution and Habitat Use 1986, Stone and Daborn 1987, Scott and and blueback herring (NMFS 2019), Collectively, blueback herring and Scott 1988, Bowman et al. 2000). summarized in sections below, compiles alewives are known as river herring. Alewives consume euphausiids, the best available information on the River herring are found along the calanoid copepods, mysids, hyrperiid status of the species as required by the Atlantic coast of North America, from amphipods, chaetognaths, pteropods, ESA, provides an evaluation of the the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence, decapod larvae, and salps (Edwards and discreteness and significance of these Canada to the southeastern United Bowman, 1979, Neves 1981, Vinogradov populations in terms of the DPS Policy, States (Mullen et al. 1986, Schultz et al. 1984, Stone and Daborn 1987, Bowman and assesses the extinction risk of the 2009). The coastal ranges of the two et al. 2000). species and any DPS, focusing primarily species overlap. Blueback herring range Little is known about their habitat on threats related to the five statutory from Nova Scotia south to the St. Johns preference in the marine environment; factors set forth above. The status River, Florida, and alewives range from however, marine distributions of fish VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28632 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices are often linked to environmental at that time to confirm any one theory. base for game fish species (Palkovacs et variables, such as prey availability and The working group from the 2012 al. 2007). predation, along with seascape features. workshop was not able to determine the Recent efforts to assess the Studies have shown that alewife and migration patterns and mixing patterns evolutionary origins of landlocked blueback herring distribution is linked of alewife and blueback herring in the alewives indicate that they rapidly to bottom temperature, salinity, and ocean, though they strongly suspected diverged from their anadromous cousins depth (Neves 1981, Bethoney et al. regional stock mixing (NMFS 2012a). between 300 and 5,000 years ago and 2014, Lynch et al. 2015). Recent papers Therefore, the conclusion that came out now represent a discrete life history described marine co-occurrences of of the 2012 Stock Structure workshop variant of the species, Alosa alewife and blueback herring with was that, based on available data, the pseudoharengus (Palkovacs et al. 2007). Atlantic herring and mackerel (Turner et ocean phase of alewife and blueback Given their relatively recent divergence al. 2016, Turner et al. 2017), providing herring was of mixed stocks. from anadromous populations, one further evidence, in addition to Sparse tagging data is available to plausible explanation for the existence observed ‘‘bycatch’’ estimates (Bethoney help elucidate these marine migrations of landlocked populations may be the et al. 2014), that river herring school of alewife and blueback herring. In construction of dams by either Native with Atlantic herring and mackerel. 1985–1986, approximately 19,000 river Americans or early colonial settlers that Turner et al. (2016) modeled herring were tagged and released in the precluded the downstream migration of associations of alewife and blueback upper Bay of Fundy, Nova Scotia juvenile herring (Palkovacs et al. 2007). herring, finding that alewife and (Rulifson et al. 1987). With an overall Since their divergence, landlocked blueback herring distributions recapture rate of 0.39, Rulifson et al. alewives evolved to possess overlapped with Atlantic herring (68–72 (1987) received returns of alewife tags significantly different mouthparts than percent correct predictions) and from freshwater locations in Nova their anadromous cousins, including Atlantic mackerel (57–69 percent Scotia, and marine locations in Nova narrower gapes and smaller gill raker spacings to take advantage of year round correct predictions). Scotia and Massachusetts; whereas, Cieri (2012) analyzed NMFS bottom availability of smaller prey in freshwater blueback herring tags were returned trawl survey data to identify seasonal lakes and ponds (Palkovacs et al. 2007). from freshwater locations in Maryland population clusters of river herring Furthermore, the landlocked alewife, and North Carolina, and marine along the East Coast of the United States compared to its anadromous cousin, locations in Nova Scotia. The authors (N Carolina to Maine; covering the matures earlier, has a smaller adult body suspected from this recapture data that continental shelf and the U.S. Exclusive size, and reduced fecundity (Palkovacs alewives and blueback herring tagged in Economic Zone (EEZ)). The spring trawl et al. 2007). At this time, there is no the Bay of Fundy were of different survey (1968–2008 NMFS Spring substantive information that would origins, hypothesizing that alewives Bottom Trawl Survey) indicates that suggest that landlocked populations can were likely regional fish from as far river herring are widespread across the or would revert back to an anadromous survey area (sampling locations vary by away as New England, while the life history if they had the opportunity year; the spring trawl occurs from North blueback herring recaptures were likely to do so. Carolina to Nova Scotia; sampling not regional fish, but those of U.S. origin The discrete life history and occurs at depths ∼18 m to ∼300 m (∼60 from the mid-Atlantic region. However, morphological differences between the ft to 984 ft)). Highest occurrences during the low tag return numbers from outside two life history variants (anadromous the spring were off Maine’s Downeast of Nova Scotia (n=2) made it difficult to and landlocked) provide substantial coast (roughly from Penobscot Bay generalize about the natal rivers of evidence that upon evolving to north-eastwards to the Canadian border) blueback herring caught in the Bay of landlocked, landlocked populations and areas offshore, near Cape Ann and Fundy. More recent work with acoustic become largely independent and Cape Cod in Massachusetts, and a large tags (n=13 alewives and n=12 blueback separate from anadromous populations area between Block Island, Rhode herring) in the Hudson River by Eakin and occupy largely separate ecological Island, and Long Island Sound. During (2017) demonstrated in-river residence niches (Palkovacs and Post 2008). There the summer (1948–1995 NMFS Bottom times ranged from two to three weeks, is the possibility that landlocked alewife Trawl Survey), river herring occurred with fish exiting the system three to six and blueback herring may have the less frequently across the survey area, days post-spawn. Marine migration was opportunity to mix with anadromous with most river herring along the New also detected from four blueback herring river herring during high discharge England coast north of Rhode Island, (2 male, 2 female) showing coastal years and through dam removals that and the highest occurrences off movements over a six-month period could provide passage over dams and Downeast, Maine and south of Cape (June to November) from the Hudson access to historic spawning habitats Cod, Massachusetts. During the fall River to Penobscot Bay off the coast of restored for anadromous populations, survey (1963–2008 NMFS bottom trawl Maine. The study also demonstrates the where it did not previously exist. surveys), the occurrence of river herring potential of using acoustic tagging to A Memorandum of Understanding shifted northward, with highest tease out marine movements of alewife (MOU) between the Services regarding occurrences north of Cape Cod, along and blueback herring in future studies. jurisdictional responsibilities and listing the Maine Coast to the Bay of Fundy, Landlocked Populations procedures under the ESA was signed and another cluster off the eastern shore August 28, 1974. This MOU states that of Nova Scotia. Landlocked populations of alewives NMFS shall have jurisdiction over Seasonal migrations have been and blueback herring also exist. species ‘‘which either (1) reside the observed in the marine environment as Landlocked alewife populations occur major portion of their lifetimes in described above but are not well in many freshwater lakes and ponds marine waters; or (2) are species which understood (NMFS 2012a). from Canada to North Carolina as well spend part of their lifetimes in estuarine Hypothesized overwintering areas and as the Great Lakes (Rothschild 1966, waters, if the major portion of the migration pathways were presented at Boaze and Lackey 1974). Many remaining time (the time which is not the NMFS 2012 Stock Structure landlocked alewife populations occur as spent in estuarine waters) is spent in workshop, but little tagging data existed a result of stocking to provide a forage marine waters.’’ VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28633 Given that landlocked populations of alewives takes between two to six days SNP markers developed by Baetcher et river herring remain in freshwater depending on temperature (Mansueti al. (2017). A STRUCTURE analysis of throughout their life history and are 1956, Jones et al. 1978). the genetic data supported four distinct genetically divergent from the geographic groupings for alewife and Population Structure anadromous species, pursuant to the five for blueback herring (STRUCTURE aforementioned MOU, NMFS did not The population structure of these refers to software that is one of the most include the landlocked populations of species has been examined using widely used population analysis tools alewife and blueback herring in the various tools, including otolith for assessing patterns of genetic review of the status of the species in chemistry and genetics (see Population structure in samples). The study 2013 (78 FR 48943) and did not include Structure section of the Status Review identified the following four regional landlocked populations in this status Report for additional information, groupings for alewife: (1) Canada, review. NMFS 2019). While otolith chemistry including: Garnish River and Otter studies focused largely on assigning fish Reproduction and Growth Pond, Newfoundland to Saint John to rivers of natal origin with some River, New Brunswick; (2) Northern Overall, alewife and blueback herring success (Gahagan et al. 2012, Turner et New England, including: St. Croix are habitat generalists found over a wide al. 2015), genetic analyses found River, ME to Merrimack River, NH; (3) variety of substrates, depths, and evidence for regional structure within Southern New England, including: temperatures in freshwater lakes and each species (McBride et al. 2014, Parker River, MA to Carll’s River, NY; ponds, river, estuaries, and the Atlantic Palkovacs et al. 2014, Hasselman et al. and (4) Mid Atlantic, including: Hudson Ocean. The substrate preferred for 2014; Hasselman et al. 2016; Ogburn et River, NY to Alligator River, NC. The spawning varies greatly and can include al. 2017, Baetscher et al. 2017, Reid et study also identified the following five gravel, detritus, and submerged aquatic al. 2018). Early genetic studies relied regional groupings for blueback herring: vegetation. Alewives prefer spawning largely on microsatellite markers and (1) Canada/Northern New England, over sand or gravel bottoms (Galligan were limited in geographic scope (see including: Margaree River, Nova Scotia 1962), usually in quiet waters of ponds Genetic Studies section of NMFS 2019 to Kennebec River, ME; (2) Mid New and coves (Marcy 1967, Loesch and for a detailed account); however, recent England, including: Oyster River, NH to Lund 1977). Blueback herring prefer studies using single nucleotide Parker River, MA; (3) Southern New spawning over hard substrates, where polymorphisms (SNP) have expanded England, including: Mystic River, MA to the flow is relatively swift (Loesch and the evaluation of population structure Gilbert-Stuart Pond, RI; (4) Mid Lund 1977). Nursery areas include for these species across most of their Atlantic, including: Connecticut River, freshwater and semi-brackish waters to ranges. CT to Neuse River, NC; and (5) Southern fully saline waters for both species SNPs are small genetic variations that Atlantic, including: Cape Fear River, NC (Gahagan 2012, Turner et al. 2014, occur in a genome. These variations are to St. Johns River, FL. Payne Wynne et al. 2015). used as molecular markers in genetic Alewife and blueback herring are fast research and help to overcome Because the similarity in geographic growing, quick to mature species with a limitations associated with naming of these stock complexes may high fecundity rate. Estimates of microsatellite analyses when applied to make them difficult to distinguish fecundity for alewife range from 45,800 fisheries management, which includes a between species, hereafter, we preface to 400,000 eggs (Foster and Goodbred lack of portability across laboratories alewife regional groupings with Aw- 1978, Klauda et al. 1991, Loesch and and instruments (Reid et al. 2018). and blueback herring regional groupings Lund 1977). Estimates of fecundity for SNPs were developed using 96 with Bb-. For example, the Mid Atlantic blueback herring range from 30,000 to individual loci for alewife and for regional groupings of these two species 400,000 eggs (Loesch 1981, Jessop blueback herring by Baetscher et al. would be referred to as Aw-Mid Atlantic 1993). Fecundity estimates range widely (2017). This study evaluated river and Bb-Mid Atlantic. We refer the based on the length and weight of the herring samples across portions of the reader to Figures 1 and 2 below for females (Schmidt and Limburg 1989) U.S. range for self-assignment to maps distinguishing the boundaries and geographic recruitment (Gainias et populations of origin and to three between stock complexes. al. 2015). Both species spawn three to alewife and four blueback herring Self-assignment tests to these regional four times throughout the spawning regional groupings identified by groups ranged from 86–92 percent for season (McBride et al. 2010, Gainias et Palkovacs et al. (2014). While self- alewives and 76–95 percent for al. 2015). Recent literature has shown assignments to population of origin blueback herring (Reid et al. 2018). that some Alosa species, including were lower (at around 67 percent), However, self-assignment to individual alewife, are indeterminate spawners assignment to regional groupings was 93 rivers was low. These results indicate (Hyle et al. 2014, Gainas et al. 2015, percent for alewives and 96 percent for that at larger spatial scales, there are McBride et al. 2016). For indeterminate blueback herring. Structure cluster regions of restricted gene flow within spawners, the potential annual analysis showed similar results to the range-wide populations; Reid et al. fecundity is not fixed before the onset previous regional stock structure (2018) noted that this could be driven of spawning. In these species, eggs can groupings, with the addition of two by environmental and habitat develop at any time during the additional blueback herring populations differences. However, the results also spawning season. This is likely the case (Peticodiac and Margaree). indicate that the extent of gene flow for blueback herring but more research Recent work by Reid et al. (2018) built across regional groupings was higher is needed. on Baetscher et al.’s work by increasing than previously reported by Palkovacs Incubation time depends on the geographic range and number of et al. (2014), especially at the borders, temperature (i.e., low water rivers sampled for each species, and that proximate rivers are usually temperatures results in slow sampling across almost the entire range not demographically independent due development) and is estimated to take of these species. This study included to straying behaviors. Reid et al. (2018) two to four days after deposit for river herring from 108 locations noted transitional populations present blueback herring (Klauda et al. 1991, (genotyping over 8,000 fish) ranging between regions, with rivers such as the Jones et al. 1978). Incubation time for from Florida to Newfoundland using Hudson and the Connecticut Rivers VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28634 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices acting as transition zones for alewife subject to considerable within-basin and diversity, and stocking history should and blueback herring, respectively. out-of-basin stocking for the purpose of be taken into account when interpreting Genetic studies also demonstrate that enhancement, recolonization of genetic groupings (Atkins and Goode stocking practices influence genetic extirpated populations, and stock 1887, McBride et al. 2014, McBride et differentiation among populations introduction. Alewife stocking in Maine al. 2015). (McBride et al. 2014, McBride et al. dates back at least to 1803 when In summary, the best available genetic 2015). McBride et al. (2015) used 12 alewives were reportedly moved from data suggest that alewife and blueback microsatellite loci to evaluate the the Pemaquid and St. George Rivers to herring may be distinguished by genetic structure of 16 alewife create a run of alewives in the regional groupings. Recent studies show populations in Maine to determine Damariscotta River (Atkins and Goode a minimum of four stock complexes of whether past stocking influenced 1887). These efforts were largely alewife and five stock complexes of current populations and the genetic responsive to considerable declines in blueback herring. Transfer of river composition of alewives. Results alewife populations following the herring within-basin and out-of-basin showed a highly significant relationship construction of dams, over exploitation, has likely altered the genetic diversity of between genetic differentiation and and pollution. Although there has been alewife and blueback herring observed geographic distance among non-stocked considerable alewife stocking and today in several ways. First, stocked populations, but a non-significant relocation throughout Maine, there are areas are most likely to have had already relationship among stocked populations very few records documenting these low populations (or local extirpation), (McBride et al. 2015). efforts. In contrast, considerably less and second, this reduced population is The unusual genetic groupings of stocking of alewives has occurred in then stocked with a likely different river herring in Maine are likely a result Maritime Canada. This information genetic stock, further masking the of Maine’s complex stocking history. further demonstrates that past stocking previous population’s genetics. Alewife populations in Maine have been patterns influence contemporary genetic BILLING CODE 3510–22–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 EN19JN19.001 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28635 BILLING CODE 3510–22–C likely to happen with nearest-neighbor Abundance and Trends rivers over such distances as 100–200 Straying United States Waters kilometers (km) (62–124 miles (mi)). River herring conform to a Straying has also been reported in other A 2017 alewife and blueback herring metapopulation paradigm (i.e., a group anadromous fishes, such as American stock assessment update was prepared of spatially separated populations of the shad (Jolly et al. 2012) and striped bass and compiled by the River Herring same species that interact at some level) (Gauthier et al. 2013). Pess et al. (2014) Stock Assessment Subcommittee, with adults frequently returning to their reviewed basic life history traits of hereafter referred to as the natal rivers for spawning with straying ‘subcommittee,’ of the ASMFC Shad and diadromous fish and hypothesized occurring between rivers (Jones 2006; River Herring Technical Committee. recolonization rates. Alewife and ASMFC 2009a). There have been very Data and reports used for this blueback herring were considered to few studies to quantify straying rates, assessment were obtained from Federal despite evidence of straying in the have a moderate to strong tendency to and state resource agencies, power literature (Jessop 1994, Palkovacs et al. colonize new streams (Pess et al. 2014). generating companies, and universities. 2014, McBride et al. 2014, Turner and Both species were considered to have The 2017 stock assessment followed Limburg 2014, McBride et al. 2015, the highest tendencies to colonize new the same methods and analyses outlined Ogburn et al. 2017). Jessop (1994) streams of all the east coast diadromous in the 2012 benchmark report (ASMFC reported straying rates of 3–37 percent fish, with blueback herring scoring 2012a) and updated the existing time in the St. John River, New Brunswick. slightly higher than alewife. Alewife series by adding data when available for McBride et al. (2014) and Palkovacs et and blueback herring were also the years 2011–2015. The subcommittee al. (2014) reported greater isolation by considered to have strong tendencies to assessed the coastal stocks of alewife distance for alewives than for blueback expand into habitat within existing and blueback herring by individual herring, suggesting higher overall streams; scoring higher than all other rivers as well as coast-wide based on straying rates for blueback herring. diadromous fish, except for sea lamprey. available data. As this assessment Additionally, isolation by distance provides the most up-to-date abundance evidence from Palkovacs et al. (2014) and trends data of river herring, the and McBride et al. (2015), suggest that Status Review Report includes many genetic exchange (straying) is more excerpts from the 2017 ASMFC stock VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 EN19JN19.002 28636 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices assessment (see sections on Commercial Canadian Waters Distinct Population Segment Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE), Run The Department of Fisheries and Determination Counts, Young-Of-The-Year Seine Oceans (DFO) monitors and manages In addition to evaluating whether Surveys, Juvenile-Adult river herring runs in Canada. River each species is at risk of extinction, the Fisheries-Independent Seine, Gillnet herring monitoring in the Maritime SRT was asked to identify any DPSs of and Electrofishing Surveys, Juvenile and region falls into two categories, rivers these species and evaluate whether such Adult Trawl Surveys, Mean Length, where abundances can be directly DPSs may be at risk of extinction Maximum Age, Mean Length-at-Age, estimated (e.g., monitoring at fishways), throughout all or a significant portion of Repeat Spawner Frequency, Total and rivers where information is its range. As described above, the ESA’s Mortality (Z) Estimates, and available from the commercial fishery definition of ‘‘species’’ includes ‘‘any Exploitation Rates) (NMFS 2019). For (Gibson et al. 2017). River herring runs subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, the full ASMFC stock assessment in the Miramichi River in New and any distinct population segment of (including additional tables and Brunswick and the Margaree River in any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife figures), see River Herring Stock Cape Breton, Nova Scotia were which interbreeds when mature.’’ The Assessment Update Volume I monitored intensively from 1983 to DPS Policy requires the consideration of (www.asmfc.org/uploads/file/ 2000 (DFO 2001). More recently (1997 two elements: (1) The discreteness of 59b1b81bRiverHerringStockAssessmen _ to 2017), the Gaspereau River alewife the population segment in relation to tUpdate Aug2017.pdf). Of the 54 in- run and harvest has been intensively the remainder of the species to which it river stocks of river herring for which monitored and managed partially in belongs, and (2) the significance of the data were available, the 2017 ASMFC response to a 2002 fisheries population segment to the species to Stock Assessment indicates that from management plan that had a goal of which it belongs. 2006 through 2015, 16 experienced increasing spawning escapement to A population segment of a vertebrate increasing trends, two experienced 400,000 adults (DFO 2007). During the species may be considered discrete if it decreasing trends, eight were identified period of 1970 to 2017, Billard (2017) satisfies either one of the following two as stable by the ASMFC working group, estimated run size of alewife in the conditions. The first condition is if the 10 experienced no discernible trend/ Gaspereau from 265,000 to 1.2 million. species is markedly separated from high variability, and 18 did not have The exploitation rate for this same other populations of the same taxon as enough data to assess recent trends, period ranged from 33 percent to 89 a consequence of physical, including one that had no returning fish percent. Billard (2017) classified the physiological, ecological, or behavioral (see Table 2 in NMFS 2019; ASMFC most recent years 2015 and 2016 as factors. Quantitative measures of genetic 2017a). The coastwide meta-complex of having healthy escapement rates, but or morphological discontinuity may river herring stocks on the U.S. Atlantic overexploited as a fishery. Elsewhere, provide evidence of this separation. The coast remains depleted to near historic river herring runs have been monitored second condition is if the species is lows. A depleted status indicates that less intensively, though harvest rates are delimited by international governmental there was evidence for declines in monitored throughout Atlantic Canada boundaries within which differences in abundance due to a number of factors, through license sales, reporting control of exploitation, management of but the relative importance of these requirements, and a logbook system that habitat, conservation status, or factors in reducing river herring stocks was enacted in 1992 (DFO 2001). At the regulatory mechanisms exist that are could not be determined. time DFO conducted their last stock significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) Commercial landings of river herring assessment in 2001, they identified river of the ESA. If a population segment is peaked in the late 1960s, declined herring harvest levels as being low found to be discrete under one or both rapidly through the 1970s and 1980s, (relative to historical levels) and stable of the above conditions, its biological and have remained at levels less than 3 to low and decreasing across most rivers and ecological significance to the taxon percent of the peak over the past where data were available (DFO 2001). to which it belongs is evaluated. Factors decade. Fisheries-independent surveys With respect to the commercial that can be considered in evaluating did not show consistent trends and were harvest of river herring, reported significance may include, but are not quite variable both within and among landings of river herring peaked in 1980 limited to: (1) Persistence of the discrete surveys. Those surveys that showed at slightly less than 25.5 million lbs population segment in an ecological declines tended to be from areas south (11,600 metric tons (mt) and declined to setting unusual or unique for the taxon; of Long Island. A problem with the less than 11 million lbs (5,000 mt) in (2) evidence that the loss of the discrete majority of fisheries-independent 1996. Landings data reported through population segment would result in a surveys is that the length of their time DFO indicate that river herring harvests significant gap in the range of a taxon; series did not overlap with the period of have continued to decline through 2010. (3) evidence that the discrete population peak commercial landings (i.e., prior to segment represents the only surviving Species Finding 1970); therefore, there is no accurate natural occurrence of a taxon that may way of comparing historical landings to Based on the best available scientific be more abundant elsewhere as an fisheries-independent surveys. There and commercial data summarized introduced population outside its appears to be a consensus among above, we find that the alewife and historic range; or (4) evidence that the various assessment methodologies that blueback herring are currently discrete population segment differs exploitation has decreased. The decline considered as two taxonomically- markedly from other populations of the in exploitation over the past decade is distinct species (see Taxonomy and species in its genetic characteristics. not surprising because river herring Distinctive Characteristics of NMFS populations are at low levels and more 2019) and, therefore, meet the definition Evaluation of Discreteness restrictive regulations or moratoria have of ‘‘species’’ pursuant to section 3 of the The SRT evaluated whether any been enacted by states (See Directed ESA. Below, we evaluate whether each alewife or blueback herring DPSs, Commercial Harvest below and State species warrants listing as endangered including those identified by the Regulations in the Status Review or threatened under the ESA throughout petitioner in 2011, exist. The Status Report, NMFS 2019, for further detail). all or a significant portion of its range. Review Report, in particular the section VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28637 on Population Structure, provides a transitions zones, makes separation both the Aw-Northern New England and summary of information they reviewed, between stocks unclear at finer spatial Aw-Canada stock complexes. including tagging and genetics data, as scales. Also spatial gaps exist where Additionally, the Northern Piedmont well as fisheries management samples were not obtained or tested and North Atlantic Coastal ecoregions information (NMFS 2019). As (e.g., between the Aw-Southern New extended through the Bb-Mid-New highlighted in the DPS Policy, England and Aw-Mid Atlantic stock England, Bb-Southern New England and quantitative measures of morphological complexes, and between the Bb- into the Bb-Mid-Atlantic stock discontinuity or differentiation can Southern New England and Bb-Atlantic complexes. For ecoregions that existed serve as evidence of marked separation stock complexes) making the accuracy entirely within one stock complex, the of populations. After review of the best of these boundaries uncertain. SRT found that the ecoregions appeared available information, the SRT found Additionally, the SRT noted that there to have no unique or unusual bearing on that genetic studies provide evidence of is some uncertainty surrounding these the discrete grouping’s biology, as the regional differentiation in both alewife groupings due to the methodology used range of the group included more than and blueback herring by demonstrating by Reid et al. (2018) in the rangewide one ecoregion. For example, the discrete groupings at a large geographic analysis where STRUCTURE was run on Chesapeake Bay Lowlands exist entirely scale. In particular, the SRT found that collection sites without binning into within the range of the Aw-Mid-Atlantic the study by Reid et al. (2018), which larger spawning habitats. For example, stock complex; however, this range also includes a large number of rivers across Black Creek, a tributary of the Hudson, contains a portion of the North Atlantic the species’ ranges, provides the most was considered separate from the coast ecoregion (which spans three comprehensive evidence of regional Hudson in the analysis even though stock complexes). The SRT also differentiation for these species, because these rivers share an estuary. considered whether other ecological STRUCTURE analyses demonstrate Additionally, a number of small factors, such as ocean currents or support for regional groupings, and tributaries of the Connecticut River (e.g., thermal regimes, existed within the because the self-assignment tests to Wethersfield Cove, Mill Creek, and Mill boundaries of these complexes, and regional groupings have high values Brook) were considered as separate might point to persistence in a unique ranging from 86–92 percent for alewife independent populations. ecological setting. However, the SRT did and 76–95 percent for blueback herring. Overall, the SRT relied upon the best not find that any of these stock The SRT found the following regional available genetic information (see NMFS complexes persist in a unique terrestrial stock complexes for alewife represent 2019 for complete discussion) to ecoregions or other ‘‘ecological discrete groupings: (1) Aw-Canada determine discreteness for the alewife settings,’’ instead they noted that some (Garnish River, Newfoundland to Saint and blueback herring. The SRT of these stock complexes may share discussed but did not find evidence of John River, New Brunswick); (2) Aw- marine environments where oceanic physiological, ecological, behavioral Northern New England (St. Croix River, features appear unique, and that factors or life history differences that ME to Merrimack River, NH); (3) Aw- terrestrial ecoregions do not align with would aid in further delineating discrete Southern New England (Parker River, the identified discrete stock complex populations. In addition, the SRT MA to Carlls River, NY) and; (4) Aw- boundaries. discussed combining and/or further Mid Atlantic (Hudson River, NY to Next, the SRT considered whether the separating the genetic groupings Alligator River, NC). These four discrete loss of the population segments would outlined above, but did not find result in significant gaps in the range of groupings correspond to the stock evidence to support modifying the the taxa. The SRT agreed that the length complexes in Figure 1. In addition the genetic groups, despite the study of coastline or overall size of the habitat SRT found the following regional stock limitations discussed (see above). that the discrete grouping inhabited complexes for blueback represent would be the greatest factor in discrete groupings: (1) Bb-Canada/ Evaluation of Significance determining whether a gap, or loss in Northern New England (Margaree River, As noted above, the DPS Policy the range, was significant to a taxon as Nova Scotia to Kennebec River, ME); (2) instructs that significance is evaluated a whole. Specifically, large gaps in the Bb-Mid New England (Oyster River, NH in terms of the ecological and biological range across widespread watersheds to Parker River, MA); (3) Bb-Southern importance of the population segment to might be difficult for either species to New England (Mystic River, MA to the species. The SRT considered the refill naturally (i.e., through straying) Gilbert-Stuart Pond, RI); (4) Bb-Mid significance of each of the regional and would be extremely difficult to fill Atlantic (Connecticut River, CT to groupings (i.e., stock complexes) found through management efforts (e.g., Neuse River, NC), and; (5) Bb-Southern to be discrete. In reviewing the factors stocking). Atlantic (Cape Fear River, NC to St. that support a finding of significance Large gaps in the range may interfere Johns River, FL). These five discrete outlined above, the SRT found that the with connectivity between populations, groupings correspond to the stock discrete groupings identified for both resulting in isolated populations that are complexes shown in Figure 2. species are not found in areas that more vulnerable to the impacts of large While the SRT found that genetic appear to have unique or unusual threats or catastrophic events (e.g., information provides evidence for ecological settings. Although the storms, regional drought). Connectivity, regional population separation and petitioner suggested that the terrestrial population resilience and diversity are discreteness for these stock complexes ecoregions identified by The Nature important when determining what (depicted in Figures 1 and 2), especially Conservancy (Anderson 2003) may constitutes a significant portion of the at a large spatial scale, the SRT noted represent unique or unusual ecological species’ range (Waples et al. 2007). some uncertainty associated with the settings for the species, the SRT found Maintaining connectivity between level of discreteness of these groupings. several ecoregions were not unique or genetic groups supports proper Specifically, the high degree of unusual because they could be found metapopulation function, in this case, admixture (mixture of two or more within the range of more than one anadromy. Ensuring that river herring genetically differentiated populations) discrete group. For example, the populations are well represented across at the boundaries of each of these stock Northern Appalachian/Acadian diverse habitats helps to maintain and complexes, referred to earlier as terrestrial ecoregion extends throughout enhance genetic variability and VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28638 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices population resilience (McElhany et al. fashion with fish moving in from the of around 1,000 spawning fish annually 2000). Additionally, ensuring wide borders of the nearest stock complexes, in currently occupied rivers within the geographic distribution across diverse but that some straying may occur mid- area; a number close to the population climate and geographic regions helps to range as well. Because river herring of some smaller river systems where minimize risk from catastrophes (e.g., exhibit straying both from nearby rivers populations are able to maintain returns droughts, floods, hurricanes, etc.; and over larger distances (Gardner et al. (e.g., Little River, MA). This metric of McElhany et al. 2000). Furthermore, 2011, Hogg 2012, sensu Reid et al. 1,000 fish is close to, but greater than preventing isolation of genetic groups 2018), the SRT noted that the the ‘‘500 rule’’ introduced by Franklin protects against population divergence significance of any particular gap will (1980) for indicating when a population (Allendorf and Luikart, 2007). Further, a be primarily a factor of the geographic may be at risk of losing genetic large gap on the periphery of the range scope (or size of the gap). variability. would limit the distribution of the The SRT noted that the life history, The SRT reviewed each of the discrete species, similarly reducing resiliency. fecundity, and straying behavior of stock complexes for both species and For example, wide distributions may these species could lead to having river considered the overall size of the gap provide a diversity of habitats and herring within individual rivers once that would exist as well as the buffer species against widespread occupied by the ‘‘lost’’ stock (i.e., fish likelihood that the area would be filled threats such as changing temperatures recolonizing the gap in the range) rather in by neighboring stock complexes. The by providing more opportunities for quickly, but perhaps at low or less than SRT noted that the nearest neighboring habitat refugia. Although there is no sustainable levels. For the purposes of stock complex would be most likely to evidence currently available to suggest considering the loss of each discrete colonize in a step-wise fashion at the that genetic differences between these stock complex, the SRT defined a borders of any gap. The SRT also stock complexes represent adaptive significant gap to be a large geographic acknowledged that strays may colonize traits (only neutral genetic markers have area of the range (considering the length from any stock complex, as isolation by been used in the current population of coastline or size of the watershed) distance evidence from Palkovacs et al. structure analyses), the SRT also noted that was unlikely to be recolonized with (2014) and McBride et al. (2015) that significant gaps could represent a self-sustaining populations within at suggests that genetic exchange (straying) loss of genetic adaptation if these least 10 generations (40–60 years); the currently happens over such distances regional groupings are also linked to upper limit of time the SRT believed as 100–200 km (62–124 mi). However, adaptive traits (NMFS 2019). that the taxon could sustain without while this is possible, this scenario was As noted in the Status Review Report detrimental effects from loss of less likely than strays colonizing from river herring discrete stock complexes connectivity. the closest stock complex. could re-colonize spatial gaps in the There is debate in the literature The loss of discrete stock complexes range. Genetic studies provide evidence regarding the application of assigning a that were large in geographic scope and, of straying (see Straying above) and general number to represent when therefore, unlikely to be filled in by suggest transition zones between populations are sufficiently large neighboring stock complexes were populations (NMFS 2019). The SRT enough to maintain genetic variation considered likely to leave a significant noted that gaps in the population would (Allendorf and Luikart 2007). The SRT gap in the species’ range. These findings most likely be filled in a step-wise settled on a self-sustaining population are summarized below in Table 1. TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT GAP DISCUSSION FOR ALEWIFE AND BLUEBACK HERRING STOCK COMPLEXES Estimates of geographic scope of the stock complex (watershed size Loss of the stock 2 Discrete stock complex (square kilometers (km ) (square Likelihood of recolonization complex would result miles mi2)); coastline distance (km) in a significant gap (mi); degrees latitude; percent of (yes or no) rangewide watershed area) Alewife Canada ...... 169,000 km2 (65,251 mi2); 15,200 km Recolonization is unlikely due to the large size of the gap Yes. (9,444 mi); 7.5 degrees latitude; 35 and with only one neighboring complex to the south. percent. Alewife Northern New England ...... 74,000 km2 (28,572 mi2); 5,800 km Recolonization across this range is unlikely due to the Yes. (3,604 mi); 2.5 degrees latitude,15 large size of the gap despite having neighboring com- percent. plexes to the south and north beginning to recolonize bordering areas. Alewife Southern New England ...... 35,500 km2 (13,707 mi2); 7400 km Recolonization is unlikely due to the large size of the gap Yes. (4,598 mi); 2.5 degrees latitude; 7 and with only one neighboring complex to the north. percent. Alewife Mid-Atlantic ...... 211,500 km2 (81,661 mi2); 19,600 km Recolonization is unlikely due to the large size of the gap Yes. (12,179 mi); 9 degrees latitude; 43 and with only one neighboring complex to the north. percent. Blueback Herring Canada/Northern 137,000 km2 (52,896 mi2); 11,100 km Recolonization is unlikely due to the large size of the gap Yes. New England. (6,897 mi); 4 degrees of latitude; 26 and with only one neighboring complex to the south. percent. Blueback Herring Mid New England .... 12,000 km2 (4,633 mi2); 311 km (193 Recolonization across this range is likely given the small No. mi); 0.5 degrees of latitude; <3 per- size of the gap and because neighboring complexes cent. can recolonize step-wise from the south and north. Blueback Herring Southern New Eng- 9,000 km2 (3,475 mi2); 2,900 km Recolonization across this range is likely given the small No. land. (1,802 mi); 1.5 degrees of latitude; size of the gap and because neighboring complexes <2 percent. can recolonize step-wise from the south and north. Ad- ditionally, proximity to known river herring overwin- tering grounds might support further recolonization. Blueback Herring Mid Atlantic ...... 211,000 km2 (81,468 mi2); 24,800 km Recolonization across this range is unlikely due to the Yes. (15,410 mi); 9 degrees of latitude; large size of the gap despite neighboring complexes to 40 percent. the south and north beginning to recolonize bordering areas. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28639 TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT GAP DISCUSSION FOR ALEWIFE AND BLUEBACK HERRING STOCK COMPLEXES— Continued Estimates of geographic scope of the stock complex (watershed size Loss of the stock 2) (square complex would result Discrete stock complex (square kilometers (km Likelihood of recolonization miles mi2)); coastline distance (km) in a significant gap (mi); degrees latitude; percent of (yes or no) rangewide watershed area) Blueback Herring Southern Atlantic ..... 140,000 km2 (54,054 mi2); 18,300 km Recolonization is unlikely due to the large size of the gap Yes. (11,371 mi); 7 degrees of latitude, and with only one neighboring complex to the north. 26 percent. The SRT did not find evidence that setting or that they differ markedly from neighboring stock complexes. discrete population segments outlined one another in their genetic Accordingly, based on these previously represent the only surviving characteristics. The SRT did find considerations, we agree with the SRT’s natural occurrence of a taxon that may evidence that loss of the population findings that the loss of the Aw Canada; be more abundant elsewhere as an segment would result in a significant Aw-Northern New England; Aw- introduced population outside its gap in the range of the taxon for all four Southern New England, or; Aw-Mid- historic range. The SRT identified four discrete stock complexes of alewife: Atlantic stock complex or the Bb- alewife DPSs and three blueback herring Aw-Canada; Aw-Northern New Canada/Northern New England, Bb- DPSs. Therefore, none of the DPSs England; Aw-Southern New England, Mid-Atlantic, or Bb-Southern Atlantic represent the only surviving natural and; Aw-Mid-Atlantic. In addition, the stock complex would create a occurrence of either alewife or blueback SRT also found evidence that loss of the significant gap in the range of these herring. population segment would result in a species. Finally, the SRT considered evidence significant gap in the range of the taxon The SRT relied on the best available to determine whether any of the discrete for three of the five discrete stock information throughout this analysis, population segments differ markedly complexes of blueback herring: Bb- but noted that future information on from other populations of the species Canada/Northern New England, Bb- behavior, ecology, and genetic (i.e., the other identified stock Mid-Atlantic, and bb-Southern Atlantic. characteristics may reveal differences complexes) in its genetic characteristics. However, due to the small size of the significant enough to show fish to be The SRT discussed the methodology in Bb-Mid-New England and Bb-Southern uniquely adapted to each stock the Reid et al. (2018) paper and inquired New England stock complexes and complex. with one of the lead authors about because this habitat is likely to be information on the genetic diversity (e.g. recolonized by blueback herring stock Because the following stock heterozygosity among stock complexes) complexes to the north and to the south, complexes meet both the discreteness results from the study. The SNP markers the loss of one of these two discrete and significance prongs, the SRT in the Reid et al. (2018) paper used stock complexes did not represent a identified, and we agree with, the neutral genetic markers which do not significant gap in the range of the taxon following DPSs for alewife (Figure 3): convey adaptive traits, so the SRT was (which includes five discrete stock • Aw-Canada DPS the range includes unable to find evidence that the discrete complexes across the range). Garnish River, Newfoundland to Saint stock complexes differ markedly from While the SRT applied the ‘‘10 John River, New Brunswick; other populations of the species in its generations for recolonization’’ formula • Aw-Northern New England DPS— genetic characteristics. The SRT also (described above), we do not find that the range includes St. Croix River, ME considered spawning timing, which has the use of such a formula is necessary to Merrimack River, NH; been shown to be heritable in steelhead given the large geographic scope (see • and presumably could be heritable in Table 1 column 2) of the potential gaps Aw-Southern New England DPS— other anadromous fish, including caused by the loss of the Aw-Canada; the range includes Parker River, MA to alewife or blueback herring. The SRT Aw-Northern New England; Aw- Carll’s River, NY; and examined rangewide spawning Southern New England, or; Aw-Mid- • Aw-Mid Atlantic DPS—the range strategies, and was not aware of Atlantic stock complex or the Bb- includes Hudson River, NY to Alligator differing life history strategies, such as Canada/Northern New England, Bb- River, NC. winter and fall spawning timing in the Mid-Atlantic, or Bb-Southern Atlantic Because the three blueback herring species (as exhibited in steelhead). stock complex. The potential loss of any stock complexes meet both the Alewives and blueback herring use of these stock complexes would create discreteness and significance prongs, thermal cues for spawning timing; a large gap in the range of these species the SRT recommends, and we agree, however, this appears to be due to clinal creating issues with connectivity with the following DPSs for blueback patterns, with rivers in the southern between populations, lowering the herring (Figure 4): diversity of habitats that these species portion of the range beginning spawning • Bb-Canada-Northern New England span, and reducing the species’ ability earliest in the year and the rivers at DPS—the range includes Margaree to overcome large threats or catastrophic highest latitudes spawning latest in the River, Nova Scotia to Kennebec River, events. In contrast, a small gap in the year. Overall, the SRT did not find ME; range, such as either the potential loss existing evidence to support heritable • spawning timing in alewife or blueback of the Bb-Mid New England or Bb- Bb-Mid Atlantic DPS—the range herring. Southern New England stock complex, includes Connecticut River, CT to Neuse After reviewing the significance may be less important to these species River, NC; and criteria, the SRT did not find evidence because their straying behavior and • Bb-Southern Atlantic DPS—the to demonstrate these discrete stock fecundity may allow them to regain or range includes Cape Fear River, NC. complexes persist in a unique ecological even maintain connectivity between BILLING CODE 3510–22–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:43 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28640 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Alewife DPS Aw-Canada Figure 3. Map of Alewife Distinct Populations Segments (DPS): Aw-Canada DPS, Aw-Northern New England DPS, Aw-Southern New England DPS, and Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 EN19JN19.003 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28641 BILLING CODE 3510–22–C the threats and the particular species’ generations could lead to considerable Assessment of Extinction Risk responses to those threats are likely. uncertainty in predicting the response Because a species may be susceptible to to threats for each species. Foreseeable Future a variety of threats for which different As described below, the SRT data are available, or which operate The ESA defines an endangered determined that dams, water across different time scales, the species as any species which is in withdrawal, poor water quality, foreseeable future is not necessarily danger of extinction throughout all or a incidental catch, inadequacy of reducible to a particular number of significant portion of its range and a regulations, and climate change years. threatened species as any species which vulnerability are the main threats to is likely to become an endangered Highly productive species with short both species. The SRT determined, and species within the foreseeable future generation times (e.g., river herring) are we agree, the foreseeable future is best throughout all or a significant portion of more resilient than less productive, defined by a 12 to 18 year time frame its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(6) and (20)). long-lived species, as they are quickly (i.e., out to 2030–2036), or a three- The term ‘‘foreseeable future’’ is not able to take advantage of available generation time period, for each species further defined or described within the habitats for reproduction (Mace et al. for both alewife and blueback herring. ESA. However, consistent with our past 2002). Species with shorter generation This is a period in which impacts of practice, we describe the ‘‘foreseeable times, such as river herring (4 to 6 present threats to the species could be future’’ on a case-by-case basis, using years), experience greater population realized in the form of noticeable variability than species with long the best available data for the particular population declines, as demonstrated in generation times, because they maintain species, and taking into consideration the available survey and fisheries data. factors such as the species’ life history the capacity to replenish themselves This timeframe would allow for reliable characteristics, threat projection time more quickly following a period of low predictions regarding the impact of frames, and environmental variability. survival (Mace et al. 2002). We interpret the foreseeable future as Consequently, given the high current levels of mortality on the extending only so far into the future as population variability among clupeids, biological status of the two species. we can reasonably determine that both projecting out further than a few VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 EN19JN19.004 28642 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Evaluation of Demographic Risks very high risk if this descriptor by itself (2006–2015) and reported that no run In determining the extinction risk of indicated danger of extinction in the counts reflect declining trends with 11 a species, it is important to consider near future. of 29 showing increasing trends, 14 both the demographic risks facing the Each SRT member scored each showing no trend, and four not being species as well as current and potential demographic factor individually. Each updated (two due to discontinuation threats that may affect the species’ SRT member identified other and two due to agency recommendation status. To this end, a qualitative demographic factors and/or threats that to remove the rivers based on data demographic analysis was conducted would work in combination with factors discrepancies between observed river for the alewife and blueback herring. A ranked in the higher categories to herring presences and fishway counts) demographic risk analysis is an increase risk to the species. SRT (ASMFC 2017a and b). Because assessment of the manifestation of past members provided their expert opinions abundance is known to be highly variable from year to year for these threats that have contributed to the for each of the demographic risks, species, in addition to the trend species’ current status, and it informs including considerations outlined in information, the SRT reviewed annual the consideration of the biological McElhany et al. (2000) and the run count numbers and escapement response of the species to present and supporting data on which it was based, information, when available, as part of future threats. and discussed their opinions with the The approach of considering other SRT members. SRT members were its consideration of information that demographic risk factors to help frame then given the opportunity to adjust may inform the abundance estimates of these populations. Given the substantial the consideration of extinction risk has their individual scores, if desired. These number of runs with increasing trends been used in many of our status reviews adjusted scores were tallied, reviewed, and relatively large run counts reported (see http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ and then combined for an overall in various portions of the range in species for links to these reviews). In extinction risk determination (see recent years (in the hundreds of this approach, the collective condition below). This scoring was carried out for thousands throughout various regions) of individual populations is considered both species rangewide and for each (ASMFC 2017a), there do not appear to at the species level according to four DPS, and the demographic scoring be depensatory processes rangewide demographic viability factors: summary is presented below. Here the that result in low abundances such that Abundance, growth rate/productivity, SRT’s qualitative ranking for each the populations may be insufficient to spatial structure/connectivity, and demographic factor is identified by rounding the mean ranking score, which support mate choice, sex-ratios, diversity. These viability factors reflect fertilization and recruitment success, concepts that are well founded in is provided in parentheses. For example, a demographic factor falling reproductive or courting behaviors, conservation biology and that foraging success, and predator individually and collectively provide between the low (2) and moderate (3) risk rankings with a mean ranking score avoidance behaviors. The SRT reviewed strong indicators of extinction risk. available abundance indices for each Using these concepts, the SRT of 2.1 will be identified as low (2.1), while a factor with a mean ranking score DPS (see NMFS 2019 for complete evaluated demographic risks by summary). The mean score calculated individually assigning a risk score to of 2.5 will be identified as moderate (2.5). As noted throughout this section based on the SRT’s scores for alewife each of the four demographic criteria rangewide (2.0), the Aw-Canada (2.0) (abundance, growth rate/productivity, and in the Threats Assessments section and in the corresponding sections of the DPS, the Aw-Northern New England spatial structure/connectivity, (2.0) DPS, and the Aw-Southern New diversity). Qualitative reference levels Status Review Report, many of the mean ranking scores fall between low (2), and England DPS (2.1) all correspond to a with ranking scores of whole numbers low ranking, because the SRT found this from 1–5 of ‘‘very low,’’ ‘‘low,’’ moderate (3). Only a few scores were found to be 3 or higher. As more fully factor is unlikely to contribute ‘‘moderate,’’ ‘‘high,’’ and ‘‘very high’’ significantly to the risk of alewife were used to describe the risk of explained in the Status Review Report, the SRT used a scale of whole numbers extinction. demographic criteria. A factor (or viable While abundance information is from 1 to 5 (NMFS, 2019). population descriptor) was ranked (1) limited for alewife in the Aw-Canada very low if it was unlikely that this Alewife DPS, data provide some indicators of descriptor contributed significantly to Abundance population size in several rivers. risk of extinction, either by itself or in Examples of data reviewed by the SRT combination with other viable The SRT members individually included (but were not limited to): population descriptors. A factor was evaluated the available alewife Gaspereau River, Nova Scotia time ranked (2) low risk if it was unlikely that abundance information, which is series (1970 to 2017) estimates that this descriptor contributed significantly summarized in the Abundance and ranged from a low of 265,208 (1983) to to long-term or near future risk of Trends section of this listing 1.2 million (2016), (Billard 2017); St. extinction by itself, but there was some determination and additional detail can John River, New Brunswick fixed concern that it may, in combination be found in the Status Review Report escapement policy of 800,000 alewife with other viable population (NMFS 2019). Alewife abundance has released above the dam annually; and descriptors. A factor was ranked (3) declined significantly from historical Tusket River in Nova Scotia estimated moderate risk if this descriptor levels throughout its range (ASMFC escapement for this stock in 2014–1015 contributed significantly to long-term 2017a, ASMFC 2012a, Limburg and in the range of 1.6 million to 2.3 million risk of extinction, but did not in itself Waldman (2009). alewife. constitute a danger of extinction in the While abundance is at or near For populations in the United States, near future. A factor was ranked (4) high historical lows, the recent stock comprehensive summaries of data that risk if this descriptor contributed assessment update reported few inform abundance reviewed by the SRT significantly to long-term risk of declining abundance trends by dataset are available in the ASMFC State- extinction and was likely to contribute in recent years (ASMFC 2017a). The Specific Reports (2017b). to short-term risk of extinction in the ASMFC River Herring Stock Assessment The ASMFC Stock Assessment reports near future, and a factor was ranked (5) assessed data from the last ten years trends from select rivers along the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28643 Atlantic Coast (see Table 1 of ASMFC Status Review Report (NMFS 2019). section in the Status Review Report 2017a); depending on sampling Data are limited on growth rate/ (NMFS 2019). Alewife range from North methods, these may be reported by productivity, and there is little effort to Carolina to Newfoundland, Canada. species or in combination (i.e., reported systematically collect and standardize While the species exhibits homing, rates as just river herring). Within the Aw- this type of data in most of the range of of straying and therefore dispersal help Northern New England DPS, updated the species. The SRT considered to buffer the species from threats related recent trends (2006–2015) for alewife previously discussed trends in to loss of habitat and loss of spatial were reported as increasing for the abundance and reviewed trends in connectivity. The mean score calculated Androscoggin, Damariscotta, and maximum age, average size-at-age, based on SRT members’ scores Cocheco rivers. The ASMFC reported repeat spawners, and modeling results corresponds to a moderate (2.6) ranking increasing trends for river herring as a for the qualitative ranking of growth rate rangewide and for all DPSs (2.7–2.9), as whole from the Kennebec, Sebasticook, and productivity. ASMFC (2017a) this factor contributes significantly to and Lamprey Rivers. The ASMFC also reported alewife maximum age data long-term risk of extinction, but does reported no trend for alewife in the indicate most runs had stable ages, and not in itself constitute a danger of Union River, stable river herring trends no trends appear reversed relative to the extinction in the near future. SRT in the Exeter River, decreasing alewife 2012 benchmark. Specifically, members noted that habitat degradation trends in the Oyster River, no returns of maximum age results showed no trends and destruction threats related to river herring in the Taylor River, and in the Androscoggin, Exeter, Cocheco, human population growth will unknown trends for the Winnicut River Monument, and Gilbert-Stuart Rivers; presumably continue to increase, and throughout this period (ASMFC 2017a). increasing trends in the Lamprey River the cumulative effects will influence the Within the Aw-Southern New (NH); and decreasing tends in the species range wide. Reduced, restricted, England DPS, updated recent trends Nanticoke River (MD) and Chowan and impacted spawning and nursery (2006–2015) for alewife were reported River (NC). Size at age results showed habitat will likely remain a limiting as increasing for the Mattapoisett, no trend in the Androscoggin, Cocheco factor to population growth in many Monument, Nemasket, Buckeye, and (female), Lamprey, Winnicut, and river systems. Bride Brook Rivers. The ASMFC Hudson Rivers; and decreasing trends in Diversity reported stable river herring trends in the Exeter (male), Monument, and the Parker and Gilbert Rivers; Nanticoke Rivers. Additionally, for the The SRT evaluated the available decreasing alewife trends in the Stony Status Review Report, a population information on alewife diversity Brook and Nonquit Rivers; and no growth model (MARSS) was used for summarized in the Population Structure trends for alewife in the Mianus and alewife rangewide. The MARSS model section in the Status Review Report Shetucket Rivers; and unknown trends results show a population growth rate (NMFS 2019). The available genetics in the Farmington and Naugatuck Rivers point estimate of 0.038, with the studies indicate that there are a (ASMFC 2017a). associated 95 percent confidence minimum of four genetic stock The Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS abundance interval ranging from (0.005–0.071) complexes rangewide and there is risk mean score corresponded to a (NMFS 2019). reproductive connectivity along a moderate (2.7) ranking. Within the Aw- The mean score calculated for this continuum rangewide. SRT members Mid-Atlantic DPS, updated recent demographic factor based on SRT noted that, due to declines in trends (2006–2015) for alewife were members’ scores corresponds to a low abundance over the last several hundred reported as increasing for river herring ranking rangewide (2.1), and in each years, the species has likely lost some in the Hudson River, no tend for alewife DPS (Aw-Canada DPS (2.0), Aw- genetic diversity, and therefore has lost in the Delaware and Rappahannock Northern New England DPS (2.0), Aw- some adaptive potential. This loss of Rivers, stable for alewife in the Southern New England DPS (2.1), and diversity affects resilience, especially in Nanticoke and Potomac Rivers, and the Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS (2.3)), as this the face of climate change. Additionally, unknown for alewife in the James, York, factor is unlikely to contribute SRT members determined that human and Alligator Rivers (ASMFC 2017a). significantly to the risk of extinction for activities of stocking and propagation SRT members noted uncertainty about alewife. SRT members noted that rates have also contributed to reduced genetic abundance in the Mid-Atlantic DPS, due of population growth for many rivers diversity. Further, the SRT noted that to minimal available abundance have shown growth in the past 5–10 stocking activities, coupled with habitat information (with the exception of the years. Where mean age has been alterations (e.g., in-river obstructions Hudson, several rivers in Chesapeake reduced, it is often in conjunction with like dams), and reduced access to Bay, and a few ASMFC time series). recruitment of strong year classes as the spawning and nursery habitat, may even However, preliminary results from the populations rebuild. Some systems are result in the selection of characteristics Chesapeake Bay (Ogburn unpublished beginning to have increases in age in these fish that are conducive to data) appear favorable, with abundance structure as older individuals persist. survival in modified and dammed river estimates in surveyed rivers in the The SRT noted some runs in the systems. 100,000s of fish. Recent estimates of southernmost portion of the range have The mean score calculated based on alewife absolute abundance using not shown as strong or consistent SRT members’ scores corresponds to a hydroacoustics for the Roanoke River improvement; this was reflected in the moderate ranking rangewide (2.6) and during 2008–2015 have ranged from slightly higher numeric score and in each of the DPSs (Aw-Canada (2.7), 32,000 to 419,000 (Waine 2010, Hughes variability of the qualitative ranking for Aw-Northern New England (2.7), Aw- and Hightower 2015; McCargo 2018). the growth rate of the Mid-Atlantic DPS Southern New England (2.9) and Aw- (NMFS 2019). Mid-Atlantic (2.9) DPS), as this Growth Rate/Productivity descriptor contributes significantly to The SRT evaluated the available Spatial Structure/Connectivity long-term risk of extinction, but does information on life history traits for The SRT evaluated the available not in itself constitute a danger of alewife as they relate to this factor, as information on alewife spatial structure extinction in the near future. Although summarized in the Reproduction, (tagging and genetics information) still receiving a moderate ranking, SRT Growth, and Demography section in the summarized in the Population Structure members noted that the Aw-Canada DPS VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28644 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices may have a slightly lower risk in reports trends from select rivers along (2007; ASMFC 2017b). The most recent comparison to other areas, as this DPS the Atlantic Coast (see Table 1 of estimate of blueback herring abundance has a very large range and access to a ASMFC 2017a); depending on sampling in the Chowan River was 5,160,983 wide variety of stream size and methods these may be reported by (2015). Commercial CPUE estimates for temperature regimes. Additionally, the species or in combination (i.e., reported blueback herring in the Chowan River SRT noted the Aw-Canada DPS likely as just river herring). There is little stock have declined since the 1980s. experiences less active stocking (which specific information on blueback The ASMFC (2017a) reported no trend has been suggested to negatively affect herring in Maine. Within the U.S for blueback herring in the Santee genetic diversity); therefore, the risk to portion of the Bb-Canada/Northern New Cooper River and unknown trends for genetic diversity in this DPS was ranked England DPS, the ASMFC (2017a) the St. Johns River. Due to limited trend slightly lower. reported trends over 2006–2015 as information, the SRT reviewed available increasing for river herring in the abundance data for the Bb-Southern Blueback Herring Kennebec and Sebasticook Rivers. Data Atlantic DPS, including young-of-the- Abundance reported from rivers throughout this year push trawl estimates from Florida (2007 to 2016); CPUE estimates from The SRT individually evaluated the range were also reviewed, and numbers Santee-Cooper River (1969 to 2015), and available blueback herring abundance varied widely from year to year, as minimum population size estimates information, which is summarized in expected for this species. According to from the Santee-Cooper River (1990 to the Description of Population the most recent stock assessment report 2015) (ASMFC 2017b). Minimum Abundance and Trends section of the (ASMFC 2017b), blueback herring population size estimates from the Status Review Report (NMFS 2019). estimates for the Kennebec and Santee Cooper River ranged from 8,503 SRT members noted that the available Sebasticook Rivers in Maine were over 1 million fish (reported as combined (1990) to 3.4 million (1996); the information indicated blueback herring minimum population size was abundance had declined significantly species). The state of Maine conducts an annual young-of-the-year survey for six estimated at 410,000 in 2015. The SRT from historical levels throughout its noted increased uncertainty for Bb- range. The SRT reviewed the recent Maine rivers (1979 to 2015). Relative abundance was near zero from 1979 to Southern Atlantic abundance risk due to ASMFC stock assessment update and the small number of available indices. available abundance indices for each 1991, and increased gradually through DPS (NMFS 2019; ASMFC 2017a). 2004 before declining in recent years Growth Rate/Productivity (ASMFC 2017a). Blueback herring abundance estimates The SRT evaluated the available data were lower than available estimates for The SRT reviewed available for blueback herring as they relate to alewife, but recent run count estimates abundance data for the Bb-Mid-Atlantic this factor, as summarized in the documented hundreds of thousands of DPS, which ranges from Connecticut to Reproduction, Growth, and Demography fish in the Chowan River, Chesapeake North Carolina. The ASMFC (2017a) section in the Status Review Report Bay (Ogburn unpublished data), reported increasing blueback herring (NMFS 2019). Data are limited on Connecticut River, various trends for the Mianus and growth rate/productivity, and there has Massachusetts rivers, and rivers in Rappahannock Rivers; stable trends for been limited effort to systematically Maine (ASMFC 2017b) and New the Connecticut River, Shetucket River, collect and standardize this type of data Brunswick (Gibson et al. 2017). The and Chowan River; no trends for the in most of the range of the species. SRT mean score calculated based on the Delaware and Nanticoke Rivers; and members noted that in some SRT’s scores corresponds to a moderate unknown trends for the Farmington, populations the maximum age appears ranking rangewide (3.0) and in each Naugatuck, Potomac, James, York, to be trending upward, and blueback DPS (Bb-Canada/Northern New England Alligator, Scuppernog, and St. Johns herring maximum age data indicate (3.0), Bb-Mid-Atlantic (3.0), and Bb- Rivers. Additionally, trends for river most runs had stable ages (ASMFC Southern Atlantic (3.0) DPSs), as this herring were reported as increasing in 2017a). On a rangewide basis, the factor is contributing significantly to the the Hudson (ASMFC 2017a). Data MARSS model (NMFS 2019) showed blueback herring’s risk of extinction, but reported from rivers throughout this blueback herring population growth does not in itself constitute a danger of range were also reviewed, and numbers rates of 0.05 with a 95 percent extinction in the near future. varied widely from year to year as confidence interval (¥0.03 to 0.13). The SRT reviewed the best available expected for this species. The SRT Also, while recent abundance trends data on blueback herring abundance in noted blueback herring abundance have indicated positive growth rates, the Bb-Canada/Northern New England estimates ranging from 500,000–700,000 trends in demographic (maximum age) DPS. The SRT noted that blueback during 2013–2016 in the Choptank and reproductive rates (repeat herring in the St. John River, New River; 18,000–54,000 during 2016–2017 spawners) are largely negative or stable; Brunswick are managed using a fixed in the Patapsco River; and 500,000– the combination of these two trends is escapement policy of 200,000 blueback 950,000 during 2013–2014 in the an indicator of a potentially declining herring moved above the dam each year; Marshyhope River (Ogburn unpublished growth rate, given the paucity of high this number is not indicative of data). Additionally, absolute abundance accuracy abundance data for blueback abundance, but can be viewed as a estimates of blueback herring in the herring. minimum when escapement targets are Roanoake River using hydroacoustics The mean score calculated based on met. The Mactaquac time series (1999 to ranged from 100,000–478,000 (Waine SRT member’s scores corresponds to a 2017) ranged from 192,000 to 515,000, 2010, Hughes and Hightower 2015, moderate ranking rangewide (2.75) and with over 489,000 blueback herring McCargo 2018) across studies conducted in all DPSs (Bb-Canada/Northern New passed upstream in 2017. Escapement in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2015, England DPS (2.75), Bb-Mid-Atlantic estimates for the Tusket River in Nova with the high reported in 2015. Total DPS (2.88) and Bb-Southern Atlantic Scotia during the period of 2014 to 2015 blueback herring population estimates DPS (3.0)) as this factor is contributing ranged from 200,000 to 600,000 (for age 3+) in the Chowan River time significantly to the blueback herring’s blueback herring. As noted above for series (1972 to 2015) ranged from a high risk of extinction, but does not in itself alewife, the ASMFC Stock Assessment of 157 million (1976) to a low of 593,693 constitute a danger of extinction in the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28645 near future. The lack of available data Diversity (international, Federal and state), contributed to higher uncertainty The SRT evaluated the available competition, artificial propagation, around the growth rate for blueback information on blueback herring hybrids, and landlocked populations. herring. diversity summarized in the Population The SRT conducted a qualitative ranking of the severity of each of these Spatial Structure/Connectivity Structure section in the Status Review Report (NMFS 2019). The available threats to alewife and blueback herring The SRT evaluated the available genetics studies indicate that there are rangewide and for each identified DPS. information on blueback herring spatial a minimum of five genetic stock SRT members ranked the threats for the structure (tagging and genetics complexes rangewide and there is alewife and blueback herring at a rangewide scale and then by each DPS. information), summarized in the evidence of reproductive connectivity The SRT members used the along a continuum rangewide. However, Population Structure section in the ‘‘likelihood point’’ (Forest Ecosystem Status Review Report (NMFS 2019). blueback herring exhibit larger distances Management Assessment Team or Blueback herring range from Florida to between populations when compared to FEMAT) method to allow individuals to Nova Scotia, spanning 20 degrees alewives (ASMFC 2017a,b), thus in express uncertainty in determining the latitude and ranging thousands of comparison, alewife may be better contribution to extinction risk of each kilometers along the Atlantic Coast. positioned to maintain genetic diversity threat to the species (see Status Review While the species exhibits homing, rates (through mixing with bordering Report, NMFS 2019). Each SRT member of straying and the resulting dispersal populations). The SRT noted that due to was allotted five likelihood points to help to buffer the species from threats declines in abundance over the last rank each threat. SRT members related to loss of habitat and loss of several hundred years, the species has individually ranked the severity of each spatial connectivity. The SRT noted, likely lost genetic diversity and threat through the allocation of these however, that blueback herring likely therefore has lost some amount of five likelihood points across five have longer distances between adaptive potential. This loss of diversity ranking criteria ranging from a score of populations in comparison to alewife affects resiliency, especially in the face ‘‘very low contribution’’ to ‘‘very high populations (AMFC 2017a,b), which of climate change. Additionally, SRT contribution.’’ A threat was given a rank could result in less resiliency in members felt that human activities of of very low if it is unlikely that the comparison to alewife. Additionally, stocking and propagation have also threat contributes significantly to risk of depending on natal river, some blueback contributed to reduced genetic diversity. extinction, either by itself or in herring have longer migratory distances The mean score calculated based on combination with other threats. That is, from overwintering areas, thereby SRT member’s scores correspond to a it is unlikely that the threat will have exposing them to a longer duration of moderate ranking rangewide (3.1) and population-level impacts that reduce the threats in the marine environment in in each DPS (Bb-Canada/Northern New viability of the species. A threat was comparison to alewife. England DPS (3.14), Bb-Mid-Atlantic ranked as low contribution if it is DPS (3.0), and Bb-Southern Atlantic Maintaining connectivity between unlikely that the threat contributes DPS (3.14)), as this descriptor genetic groups supports proper significantly to long-term or near future contributes significantly to long-term metapopulation function. Ensuring that risk of extinction by itself, but there is risk of extinction, but does not in itself populations are well represented across some concern that it may do so, in constitute a danger of extinction in the a variety of river systems help to combination with other threats. A threat near future. maintain and enhance population was ranked as medium contribution if resilience and genetic variability Evaluation of Threats the threat contributes significantly to (McElhany et al. 2000). Blueback long-term risk of extinction, but does Next the SRT considered whether any not in itself constitute a danger of herring appear to have connected of the five factors (specified in section populations and genetic exchange with extinction in the near future. A threat 4(a)(1) of the ESA) are contributing to was ranked high contribution if the bordering populations. However, Reid et the extinction risk of alewife or al. (2018) noted that the Bb-Southern threat contributes significantly to long- blueback herring. Threats considered term risk of extinction and is likely to Atlantic population appears to be the included habitat destruction, most distinct genetically from other contribute to short-term risk of modification, or curtailment; extinction in the near future. Finally, a populations, suggesting that gene flow overutilization; disease or predation; and connectivity may be more limited threat was ranked very high contribution inadequacy of existing regulatory if the threat by itself indicates a danger in this DPS compared to other DPSs. mechanisms; and other natural or of extinction in the near future. Detailed Still the range of the Bb-Southern manmade threats, because these are the definitions of the risk scores can be Atlantic population stretches over a five factors identified in section 4(a)(1) found in the Status Review Report wide area, and the SRT noted of the ESA. (NMFS 2019). obstructions were more likely found The SRT identified the following The SRT also considered the ranking farther up river in this region, providing threats falling under the five factors with respect to the interactions with more accessible habitat for the species. reviewed for listing determinations (see other factors and threats. For example, The mean score calculated based on section 4 of the Status Review Report, the SRT found that threats due to the SRT member’s scores rangewide (2.87) NMFS 2019): Climate change and inadequacy of existing regulatory and in each DPS (Bb-Canada/Northern variability, climate change and mechanisms may interact with the New England DPS (2.86), Bb-Mid- vulnerability, dams and other barriers, threat of overutilization and slow Atlantic DPS (2.88), and Bb-Southern dredging/channelization, water quality, population growth rates (a demographic Atlantic DPS (2.71)) corresponds to a water withdrawal, directed commercial factor) to increase the risk extinction. moderate ranking rangewide, as this harvest, retained and discarded SRT members were asked to rank the factor is contributing significantly to the incidental catch (including slippage), effect that the threat was currently blueback herring’s risk of extinction, but recreational harvest, scientific research, having on the extinction risk of the does not in itself constitute a danger of educational use, disease, predation, species. Each SRT member could extinction in the near future. inadequacy of existing regulations allocate all five likelihood points to one VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28646 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices ranking criterion or distribute the blueback herring threats in this having a larger impact on the species’ likelihood points across several ranking category. extinction risk. criteria to account for any uncertainty. Climate Change and Variability Alewife Each individual SRT member distributed the likelihood points as she/ Climate change and variability are The SRT ranked climate change he deemed appropriate, with the discussed in section 4.1.1 of the Status variability as low (2.4) rangewide and condition that all five likelihood points Review Report (NMFS 2019); below we medium (2.5–2.7) in each DPS. The SRT had to be used for each threat. SRT provide a summary. The SRT evaluated noted uncertainty makes it difficult to members also had the option of ranking the available information on climate determine the degree to which current the threat as ‘‘0’’ to indicate that, in change and climate variability as limitations in predicting the specific their opinion, there was insufficient summarized in the status review (NMFS changes that will occur within river data to assign a score, or ‘‘N/A’’ if in 2019). River herring range from Canada herring habitat across the range may their opinion the threat was not relevant through Florida in both marine and impact river herring in the foreseeable to the species either throughout its freshwater environments, and, in many future. While mean rankings scores range or for individual stock complexes. of these areas, there has been reported were close rangewide and across the When a SRT member chose either N/A environmental change. For example, the DPSs, the SRT ranked the Aw-Southern (Not Applicable) or 0 (Unknown) for a climate of the Northeast U.S. New England (medium, 2.6) and the threat, all five likelihood points had to continental shelf (U.S. Northeast Shelf) Aw-Mid-Atlantic (medium, 2.7) DPSs be assigned to that category only. is changing both as a result of threat score for climate variability anthropogenic climate change and slightly higher. The SRT noted the large During the group discussion, the SRT natural climate variability (Hare et al. estuary ecosystems within the Aw- members were asked to identify other 2016a, Hare et al. 2016b). Ocean Southern New England DPS could be threat(s) or demographic factor(s) that temperature over the last decade in the severely impacted by river/ocean were interacting with the threats or U.S. Northeast Shelf and surrounding warming and sea level rise. demographic factors to increase the Northwest Atlantic waters have warmed Additionally, rivers in this DPS are species’ extinction risk. As scores were faster than the global average (Pershing situated in areas with high population provided by individual SRT members, et al. 2015). New projections also densities and with predicted population each individual stated his or her expert suggest that this region will warm two growth, which will likely decrease the opinion regarding each of the threats, to three times faster than the global amount of water available for river and the supporting data on which it was average from a predicted northward herring and lead to juveniles being based. shift in the Gulf Stream (Saba et al. unable to emigrate from nursery We summarize the threats to alewife 2016). Hare et al. (2016a) provides a habitats. Increased impervious surfaces, and blueback herring below. The SRT’s literature summary of how the climate as well as anthropogenic responses to qualitative ranking is identified by system is changing on the U.S. rising sea levels are likely to increase rounding the mean ranking score, which Northeast Shelf; changes include a high flow variability in this DPS. The Aw- is provided in parentheses. For rate of sea-level rise, as well as increases Mid-Atlantic DPS constitutes the example, a threat falling between the in annual precipitation and river flow, southern edge of the range. It will likely low (2) and medium (3) rankings with a magnitude of extreme precipitation be the first to see extreme riverine mean ranking score of 2.1 will be events, and magnitude and frequency of temperatures during spawning and identified as low (2.1), while a threat floods. NMFS (2017a) provides a juvenile phases. In addition, many of with a mean score of 2.5 will be literature summary of climate change the known runs in this DPS are in larger identified as medium (2.5). As noted drivers in the South Atlantic, which river systems, and spawning success throughout this section and in the include warming ocean temperatures will likely be negatively impacted by Threats Assessments sections of the and sea level rise. The combination of the extreme spring flows as well as the Status Review Report, many of the mean increases in water temperature, coupled increased summertime salt intrusions ranking scores fall between very low (1), with associated changes in water predicted to occur due to climate low (2), and medium (3); only a few composition, is believed to be one of the change. scores were found to be 3 or higher. A most significant risk drivers in the Blueback Herring detailed account of the rankings is oceans and freshwater habitats in provided in section 6 of the Status Canada (DFO 2012). Both natural The overall mean blueback herring Review Report (NMFS 2019). climate variability and anthropogenic- rangewide score for climate change variability corresponded to a low (2.1) A. Habitat Destruction, Modification, or forced climate change will affect river ranking rangewide and in the Bb- Curtailment herring. For example, the species is likely to be impacted by climate change Canada/Northern New England DPS The SRT assessed six different factors through changes in the amount of (low, 2.2) and Bb-Mid-Atlantic DPS that may contribute to destruction, preferred marine habitat (Lynch et al. (low, 2.1). The Bb-Southern Atlantic modification or curtailment of habitat: 2015). DPS score for climate change and Climate change and variability, climate Changes to riverine flows and habitat variability corresponded to a medium change and vulnerability, dams and due to extreme events will impact both (2.6) ranking. The Bb-Southern Atlantic other barriers, dredging/channelization, spawning and early life stages of fish DPS constitutes the southern edge of the water quality, and water withdrawal. (Tommasi et al. 2015), while migratory range and will be the first to experience All threats listed in this category scored patterns and food availability will be extreme riverine temperatures during in the low or medium contribution to two of many impacts of a changing spawning and juvenile phases. In extinction risk categories. Dams and climate on the ocean stages. As water addition, many of the known runs in other barriers and water withdrawal temperatures continue to increase, river this DPS are in larger river systems, and were the highest ranked alewife threats herring’s coastal ranges may shrink and spawning success will likely be in this category. Dams and other shift northward. A contraction of their negatively impacted by the extreme barriers, water quality, and water range could result in natural or spring flows as well as the increased withdrawal were the highest ranked anthropogenic catastrophic events summertime salt intrusions predicted to VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28647 occur due to climate change. The (medium, 2.9) because this region will percent of river habitat remains interacting effects of climate change be the first to experience extreme accessible for river herring (Hall et al. with anthropogenic changes, especially temperatures during spawning and 2010). Mattocks et al. (2017) estimated in relation to temperature and flow, juvenile phases. Numerous shifts in that, due to damming, only 6.7 percent carry a potentially significant threat. range and other signs of thermal stress and 7.9 percent of stream habitat in the have been observed in fish species in Connecticut and Merrimack Rivers, Climate Change and Vulnerability this region, and the same can be respectively, is accessible. The Climate change and vulnerability is expected for blueback herring. Being at Merrimack and Thames-Pawtucket discussed in section 4.1.2 of the Status the southern end of the species’ range, watersheds had the greatest losses in Review (NMFS 2019), and below we one would expect that they are already lake habitat due to damming, with 2.8 provide a summary. at the maximum tolerance for percent and 6.4 percent, respectively, of Alewife temperature effects. Additionally, available habitat in 1900. Total biomass anthropogenic responses to climate lost due to damming from 1630 to 2014 The mean scores for climate change change may include construction of was estimated to be 7 million mt and vulnerability for alewife rangewide floodgates, berms around cities, and (freshwater) and 2.4 million mt (marine; corresponded to a medium (2.6) ranking changes in water structures, which may Mattocks et al. 2017). rangewide and in each DPS (2.7–2.8). further reduce access to spawning Dams prevent access to historical While mean ranking scores were close habitat. This threat is magnified because spawning habitat (e.g., Hall et al. 2012, rangewide and across the DPSs, the SRT there will be minimal opportunity to Mattocks et al. 2016), and also alter predicted that alewives in more control negative climatic effects as they stream continuity and impair water southern portions of the range were at become more apparent. quality on a number of levels. Dams and a slightly higher risk from climate other barriers often affect migration change and vulnerability due to the Dams and Other Barriers rates, influencing both upstream and reduced timeline of predicted impacts Dams and other barriers are discussed downstream migration of adults and from this threat. in section 4.1.3 of the Status Review downstream migration of juveniles. Alewife in the Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS Report (NMFS 2019), and below we Delayed migration can have serious (medium, 2.8) will likely be the first to provide a summary. Dams and other impacts at both life stages, including see extreme riverine temperatures barriers to upstream and downstream impacts on the timing of forage during spawning and juvenile phases. passage (e.g., culverts, tidal and amenity (zooplankton availability) as well as on Additionally, fish at the edges of the barrages) can block or impede access to predator avoidance for juveniles, and range will be most impacted by changes habitats necessary for spawning and preferred spawning temperatures for in ocean currents due to climate change, rearing; can cause direct and indirect adults (McCord 2005). Finally, dams as these fish have the longest ocean mortality from injuries incurred while often have detrimental nutrient and migrations to known overwintering passing over dams, through downstream temperature impacts on downstream areas. Alewife populations could passage facilities, or through river communities affecting both adult expand northward, however it is hydropower turbines; and can degrade and early life stages (MEOEA 2005). unknown if expansion could occur fast habitat features necessary to support The passage solutions to get fish enough to preserve genetic integrity of essential river herring life history above dams can have a wide range of this DPS. This threat is magnified functions. As described in more detail efficacy, and in some instances can be because there will be minimal in the Status Review Report (NMFS quite ineffective. Constructed fish opportunity to control negative climatic 2019), dams are also known to impact passage also does not restore full effects as they become more apparent. river herring through various riverine continuity or address water mechanisms, such as habitat alteration, Blueback Herring quality concerns. Further, both nature- fish passage delays, and entrainment like and technical fishways are The overall mean score for climate (injury from transport along with the engineered and built to function on change and vulnerability corresponded flow of water) and impingement (injury flows modeled from historical records. to a medium (2.5) ranking rangewide related to colliding with any part of a Deviations in future flow patterns due to and in each DPS (2.5–2.9). The SRT dam; Ruggles 1980, NRC 2004). River climate change could greatly reduce noted that blueback herring currently herring can experience delayed fishway efficacy. persist in warmer habitats than alewives mortality from injuries such as scale Alewife and therefore may be more resilient to loss, lacerations, bruising, eye or fin warmer temperatures. However, the damage, or internal hemorrhaging when Because dams and other man-made largest populations of blueback herring passing through turbines, over barriers may result in a variety of appear to be concentrated farther south spillways, and through bypasses impacts (discussed above), the overall (Mid-Atlantic) than alewives, therefore (Amaral et al. 2012). Man-made barriers mean score corresponded to a medium the SRT expected the threats from that block or impede access to rivers (2.9) threat for alewife rangewide climate change vulnerability to be throughout the entire historical range of ranking and in each of the DPSs (3.1– greater for blueback herring than that river herring have resulted in significant 3.4). While the SRT noted that risks to experienced by alewives. Early life stage losses of historical spawning habitat for the two species are similar in nature, growth/survival and successful river herring. there is some evidence, that, of the two spawning events are temperature Dams and other man-made barriers river herring species, alewife are better dependent. Increasing and irregular have contributed to the historical and adapted to navigating fishways (K. water temperature regimes will have current declines in abundance of both Sullivan, pers. comm; B.Gahagan, large impacts at these stages. While blueback herring and alewife unpublished). Specific barriers vary mean ranking scores were close populations. While estimates of habitat across the range, and threats related to rangewide and across the DPSs, the SRT loss over the entire range of river the Aw- Canada DPS include (1) head- predicted that climate change and herring are not available, estimates from of-tide dams that block access to vulnerability threats would be greatest studies in Maine show that less than 5 freshwater habitat and (2) increased in the Bb-Southern Atlantic DPS percent of lake spawning habitat and 20 prevalence of dams and tidal barrages in VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28648 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices the Bay of Fundy, Minas Basin, and the more spawning habitat to increase In New Jersey, restoration programs St. Croix River. The SRT noted that production. Since 1990, 11 dams have for river herring have been limited to there were limited data on barriers in been removed and 53 fishways have the installation of fish ladders and this region to be able to assess the threat been constructed throughout the state, occasional minor trap and transport on alewife. A majority of SRT members with more projects being completed programs or dam removal. Fish ladders spread their ranking scores to reflect each year. have also been installed in Delaware to greater uncertainty regarding the In Rhode Island, the Division of Fish restore river herring runs. Twelve tidal severity of this threat across this region. and Wildlife is partnering with streams located within the Delaware The SRT determined that threats to government agencies, NGOs, and private River/Bay watershed have fish ladders alewife posed by dams and other entities on a variety of anadromous installed (eight in Delaware and four in barriers within the range of the Aw- habitat restoration projects throughout New Jersey) at the first upstream dam to Northern New England (medium, 3.3) the state. Projects include constructing allow for river herring passage into the and the Aw-Southern New England new fishways, culvert modifications, non-tidal impoundments above the (medium, 3.4) DPS are more severe and dam removals to enhance spawning dams. compared to those on a rangewide scale. and nursery habitat (ASFMC 2017b). In addition to fish passage The SRT took into account that these Gilbert Stuart and Nonquit Rivers river installations, dam removal has been the regions were the epicenters of colonial herring stocks are predominantly focus of restoration effort is some states. and industrial era dam building, and alewives. At Gilbert Stuart River, the In May 2016, the first dam upstream of many of these structures remain in this Alaskan steeppass has been the primary the confluence with the Hudson River area. survey site for monitoring adult river was removed from the Wynants Kill, a In the Aw-Northern New England herring since 1981. Edwards (2015) relatively small tributary in Troy, NY, DPS, the ASFMC (2017b) reports dam reported that the fishway passed over downstream of the Federal Dam. construction in Maine during the last 290,000 fish in 2000, and in recent years According to ASMFC (2017b) within century isolated many of the inland estimates of one thousand fish per hour days of the removal, hundreds of river waters currently stocked with alewives. have been observed. The Denil fishway herring moved past the former dam The historical significance of at Nonquit River has been the primary location into upstream habitat. anadromous fish to these waters was survey site for monitoring adult river Subsequent sampling efforts yielded eventually lost, and freshwater fish herring since 1999. In 1999, the fishway river herring eggs, providing evidence communities, especially recreationally passed over 230,000 fish (Edwards that river herring were actively important game fish, began dominating 2015). Buckeye Brook (RI) is a spawning in the newly available habitat. these habitats. Access to much of the free-flowing system, and river herring This dam removal will provide an river herring habitat in Maine is still migrate to Warwick Pond without additional half km (0.3 mi) of spawning blocked by dams (without upstream fish obstruction (ASFMC 2017b). habitat for river herring that has not passage) and other impediments Despite the aforementioned state-run been available for 85 years (ASMFC (ASFMC 2017b). fish passage solutions, the SRT 2017b). Similarly, Maryland DNR’s Fish According to ASFMC (2017b), determined that dams and other barriers Passage program has completed 79 resource agencies in Maine are making are a more pertinent threat to the projects, reopening a total 735.5 km (457 progress by installing upstream and species in this DPS because alewife are mi) of upstream spawning habitat in downstream fish passage facilities, typically more reliant on habitats Maryland since 2005. especially in the Sebasticook River upstream of dams for reproductive In Pennsylvania, dam removals along watershed and smaller coastal success. The SRT noted that the Aw- with installation of fish passage have watersheds. In recent years, rock-ramp Southern New England DPS, like the opened up 100 river miles to migratory or nature-like fishways have become Aw-Northern New England DPS, has fish. In 2000 and 2001, river herring increasingly popular for passing river many more dams located closer to the were transported to the Conestoga River, herring in Maine. In New Hampshire, head of tide compared to the other a tributary of the Susquehanna River in restoration of diadromous fish DPSs. As a result, there is limited Pennsylvania. The transported river populations began with construction of spawning habitat below these dams, and herring left the Conestoga River, moved fishways in the late 1950s and spawning runs are heavily influenced up the mainstem Susquehanna River, continued through the early 1970s by by management practices (e.g. truck and and were observed at the Safe Harbor the New Hampshire Fish and Game transport, fish lifts, fishway Dam. Transports to the Conestoga River Department (NHFGD) in the Exeter, maintenance). included 1,820 alewives in 2000. Lamprey, Winnicut, Oyster, and The average score for dams and other Several states within the range of this Cocheco Rivers in the Great Bay Estuary barriers in the Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS DPS have implemented restoration and the Taylor River in the Hampton- (medium, 3.1) was slightly lower than programs focused on a range of Seabrook Estuary. These fishways re- the two northern DPSs’ scores. Specific solutions to fish passage. These opened acres of freshwater spawning barrier threats related to this DPS solutions include fish passage and nursery habitat for river herring include the presence of man-made installation, dam removal, and trap-and- (ASFMC 2017b). barriers within the historic range of transport initiatives. An abundance of The SRT determined that threats river herring. While dams and other available coastal and estuarine habitat posed by dams and other barriers within barriers to fish migration are widely and the presence of long undammed the range of the Aw-Southern New distributed throughout this DPS, the sections of major rivers within the range England DPS are more severe compared SRT noted that the existing dams are of this DPS led the SRT to determine to those on a rangewide scale. generally further upstream, leaving that the threat of dams was slightly According to ASMFC (2017b), there are relatively more habitat below the dams. reduced in this region compared to over 500 dams within the historic range As such, the SRT determined that other DPSs. of river herring in Connecticut. Access barrier threats related to the Aw-Mid- to habitat previously blocked has been Atlantic DPS are similar (and possibly Blueback Herring restored through construction of less severe) compared to those The overall mean score for dams and fishways and dam removal, providing considered in the rangewide analysis. other barriers corresponded to a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28649 medium (3.1) threat ranking rangewide the dams. As such, the SRT determined of the Wilson Dam for flood control on and in each DPS (2.6–3.3). that barrier threats related to the Bb- Santee River at km 143, which created The SRT ranked the Bb-Canada/ Mid-Atlantic DPS are similar (and Lake Marion, and the construction of Northern New England slightly elevated possibly less severe) compared to those Pinopolis Dam at km 77 on the Cooper (medium, 3.3) compared to the considered in the rangewide analysis. River, which is a hydroelectric facility rangewide score. Specific barrier threats Several states within the range of this with a navigation lock. According to related to the Bb-Canada/Northern New DPS have implemented restoration Cooke and Coale (1996), large numbers England DPS include (1) head-of-tide programs focused on a range of of blueback herring that utilized the dams that block access to freshwater solutions to fish passage. These Cooper River before rediversion, habitat, and (2) increased prevalence of solutions include fish passage switched to the Santee River after dams and tidal barrages in the Bay of installation, dam removal, and trap-and- rediversion. Fundy, Minas Basin, and St. Croix transport initiatives. River. The SRT took into account that In Connecticut, the largest blueback Dredging and Habitat Alteration the region was one of the epicenters of herring run has historically been found Dredging and habitat alteration are colonial and industrial era dam building in the Connecticut River. Between 1849 discussed in section 4.1.4 of the Status and that many of these structures and 1955, anadromous fish had no Review Report (NMFS 2019), and below remain in this area. According to access above the Holyoke Dam, in we provide a summary. ASFMC (2017a), dam construction in Holyoke, Massachusetts. Today, the Wetlands provide migratory corridors Maine during the last century isolated Connecticut River blueback herring and spawning habitat for river herring. many of the inland waters. The population size below the Holyoke Dam The combination of incremental losses historical significance of anadromous is unknown, and there are insufficient of wetland habitat, changes in fish to these waters was eventually lost, historical data to make an estimate. hydrology, and inputs of nutrients and However, according to ASFMC (2017a), and freshwater fish communities, chemicals over time, can be extremely there continues to be stable juvenile especially recreationally important harmful, resulting in diseases and blueback herring production in recent game fish, began dominating these declines in the abundance and quality years with index values comparable to habitats. of habitat. Wetland loss is a cumulative Access to much of river herring values produced with passage of several impact that results from activities habitat in Maine is still blocked by dams hundred thousand of fish at the lift related to dredging/dredge spoil without upstream fish passage and other despite the lack of adults passed at the placement, port development, marinas, impediments (ASFMC 2017a). The SRT Holyoke Dam. It is unknown as to solid waste disposal, ocean disposal, took into account high mortality whether or not the peak values of and marine mining. In the late 1970s associated with the tidal barrages passage at the Holyoke Dam are a present in the Canadian portion of the sustainable population for the and early 1980s, the United States was range. The SRT noted that, compared to Connecticut River above the Holyoke losing wetlands at an estimated rate of 300,000 acres (1,214 square kilometer other DPSs, there are many more dams Dam, since there is not enough 2 closer to the head of tide in this region. historical population data. (km )) per year. The Clean Water Act As a result, there is limited spawning The SRT ranked the threat of dams in and state wetland protection programs habitat below these dams, and spawning Bb-Southern Atlantic DPS as a medium helped decrease wetland losses to 2 runs are heavily influenced by (2.6), with a slightly lower score than 117,000 acres (473 km ) per year management practices (e.g., truck and the rangewide and other DPS scores. An between 1985 and 1995. Estimates of transport, fish lifts, fishway abundance of available coastal and total wetland loss vary according to the maintenance). estuarine habitat and the presence of different agencies. The U.S. Department According to ASFMC (2017a), long undammed sections of major rivers of Agriculture attributes 57 percent of resource agencies in Maine are making within the range of this DPS led the SRT wetland loss to development, 20 percent progress by installing upstream and to rank the mean score lower. Specific to agriculture, 13 percent to creation of downstream fish passage facilities, barrier threats related to this DPS deepwater habitat, and 10 percent to especially in the Sebasticook River include habitat loss and alterations forest land, rangeland, and other uses. watershed and smaller coastal occurring in tributaries of Winyah Bay, Of the wetlands lost between 1985 and watersheds. In recent years, rock-ramp the Santee-Cooper River system, and the 1995, the USFWS estimates that 79 or nature-like fishways have become Savannah River. The SRT noted that percent of wetlands were lost to upland increasingly popular for passing river dams in this region are often very high agriculture. Urban development and herring in Maine. In Maine, blueback in river systems and in many cases are other types of land use activities were herring populations appear to be not likely to block an abundance of responsible for 6 percent and 15 percent increasing in the upper regions of the blueback herring habitat. The SRT also of wetland loss, respectively. state’s watersheds (ASFMC 2017a). considered this threat somewhat Similar to dams, dredging has affected The overall mean score for dams and mitigated in this DPS by the ability of historical spawning and nursery other barriers corresponded to a blueback herring to use successfully habitats. Maintenance dredging medium (3.0) threat ranking in the Bb- lotic spawning habitats such as those continues to reduce available habitat, Mid-Atlantic DPS, slightly lower than found below dams. The SRT added that negatively affect water quality, and s the rangewide score. Specific barrier alterations to flow regimes and thermal change river flows. Although regulated threats related to this DPS include the effects of dams are still of concern, and through Federal and state permitting, presence of man-made barriers within these concerns may grow in importance dredging and shoreline hardening the historic range of river herring. While with climate change. associated with estuary/coastline dams and other barriers to fish Documented impacts of past flow development are not likely to decrease migration continue to be present in manipulations support the SRT’s in spatial extent or scope through the states within the range of this DPS, the assessment. In 1938, a large diversion next century. Both practices reduce SRT noted that the dams that do exist project to move water from the Santee wetland and nearshore habitats, in the region are further upriver, leaving River to the Cooper River was initiated. impacting nursery habitats for river a lot of blueback herring habitat below The project resulted in the construction herring, including the macrophytes and VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28650 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices natural streamflow important to mostly to non-point source pollution Blueback Herring nearshore ecosystem health. (e.g., industrial fertilizers used in The overall mean score for water Alewife agriculture) and point source pollution quality corresponded to a medium (2.9) (e.g., urban sewage). In addition to the The SRT ranked the threat of ranking rangewide and in each DPS direct cumulative effects incurred by (2.9–3.2). For the same reasons stated dredging/channelization rangewide and development activities, inshore and in each DPS as low (1.5–1.7). The SRT above for the Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS, the coastal habitats are also threatened by threat of water quality was slightly ranked the threat of dredging in the Aw- persistent increases in certain chemical Mid-Atlantic DPS (low, 1.7) to be at elevated in the Bb-Mid-Atlantic DPS discharges. The combination of slightly higher risk compared to other (medium, 3.2) compared to the incremental losses of wetland habitat, DPSs. The increased volume of rangewide ranking. changes in hydrology from dams and industrial activity and growing number Water Withdrawal/Outfall (Physical) of dredge projects in the Aw-Mid- other barriers, and nutrient and Water withdrawal facilities and toxic Atlantic DPS may pose a greater risk to chemical inputs produced over time can and thermal discharges have also been alewife compared to other regions. This be extremely harmful to marine and identified as a threat that is impacting DPS encompasses several hundred estuarine biota, including river herring, river herring. This threat is discussed in miles of dredged river channels, as well and can result in diseases and declines section 4.1.6 of the Status Review as the ports of New York and New in the abundance and quality of the Report (NMFS 2019), and below we Jersey, Baltimore Harbor, the Hudson affected resources. provide a summary of impacts to river and Delaware Rivers, and the Poor water quality is an important herring. Chesapeake Bay, all of which are subject threat in some parts of the species’ Water withdrawal facilities impact to regular dredging. range. While the large scale acute water natural streamflow and result in Blueback Herring quality issues that fueled the creation of impingement/entrainment mortality of the EPA and enactment Clean Water Act The SRT ranked the threat of river herring. Disrupting streamflow can have, in many areas, been remedied, the influence migratory timing as well as dredging/channelization as low (2.0–2.3) wide impacts of increasing urbanization rangewide and in each DPS. For the water quality downstream of the facility. on the eastern coast of the United States same reasons stated above for the Aw- Additionally, water withdrawal (for has led to widespread deleterious Mid-Atlantic DPS, the SRT ranked the agriculture or other human activities) conditions (e.g., perennial hypoxic and threat of dredging slightly higher in the degrades or destroys habitat for river Bb-Mid-Atlantic DPS (low, 2.3) anoxic areas in estuaries and nurseries, herring and poses a significant threat to compared to the blueback herring eutrophication of freshwater systems, their survival, especially when coupled rangewide and other DPS scores. invasive plants and eutrophication with other threats. The threat is likely altering spawning habitat). Siltation— to increase alongside coastal population Water Quality resulting from erosional land use growth, which, in conjunction with Risks associated with changes to practices as well as natural disturbances climate change effects, will likely result water quality are discussed in section such as hurricanes and/or flood events in reduced base flows. Water 4.1.5 of the Status Review (NMFS 2019), reduces survival of aquatic vegetation withdrawals and reduced flows can and below we provide a summary. and impacts streamflow. Additionally, disrupt connectivity between habitats Nutrient enrichment has become a climate variability may increase and cause ontogenetic shifts in life major cumulative problem for many sedimentation in natal rivers, history. For alewives and blueback coastal waters. Nutrient loading results contributing to poorer water quality. herring to be successful, adults must be from the individual activities of coastal These types of effects, often from non- able to immigrate to nursery areas, development, marinas and recreational point sources, occur over entire spawn, and then emigrate. Juveniles boating, sewage treatment and disposal, landscapes and are often more difficult should have adequate flow to emigrate industrial wastewater and solid waste to detect, measure, test, and remedy. volitionally. In this way, withdrawals disposal, ocean disposal, agriculture, act much like dams and other barriers, and aquaculture. Excess nutrients from Alewife even though their effects are less land-based activities accumulate in the obviously visible. The overall mean score for water soil, pollute the atmosphere, and quality corresponded to a medium (2.8) Alewife groundwater, and move into streams and coastal waters. Nutrient inputs have ranking rangewide and in each DPS The overall mean score for water a direct effect on water quality. For (2.7–3.2). The threat from poor water withdrawal corresponded to a medium example, nutrient enrichment can quality was slightly elevated in the Aw- (3.2) ranking for alewife rangewide and stimulate growth of phytoplankton that Mid-Atlantic DPS (medium 3.2) in each DPS (2.8–3.3). The threat of consumes oxygen when they decay, compared to the rangewide ranking. water withdrawal was slightly reduced which can lead to low dissolved oxygen Many of the major estuaries in the Aw- in the Aw-Canada DPS (medium, 2.8) that may result in fish kills (Correll Mid-Atlantic DPS have documented compared to the rangewide ranking. 1987, Tuttle et al.1987, Klauda et al. water quality issues. This DPS also has Human population density and the 1991b); this condition is known as many growing population centers, and resulting anthropogenic effects on water eutrophication. anthropogenic threats are predicted to quality (including animal husbandry From the 1950s to the present, increase in the foreseeable future. and agriculture) and the demands for increased nutrient loading has made Similar to climate change and water withdrawals/diversions are likely hypoxic conditions more prevalent variability, the interactions between less of a threat to the species in this DPS (Officer et al. 1984, Mackiernan 1987, anthropogenic change and climate compared to rangewide average. Jordan et al. 1992, Kemp et al. 1992, change are likely to have severe Because of the lower human Cooper and Brush 1993, Secor and detrimental effects on water quality, population density in the Aw-Northern Gunderson 1998). Hypoxia is most especially water temperature, in regions New England DPS (medium, 3.0) and likely caused by eutrophication, due at the edge of the species’ tolerance. corresponding demands on water VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28651 resources, there is a diminished risk of the species’ range where water During 1887 to 1938, reported related to water withdrawals for the quality is already impaired. The threat commercial landings of river herring species in this region compared to the ranking for water withdrawal in the Bb- along the Atlantic Coast averaged rangewide average. However, the Southern DPS (medium, 2.9) was approximately 30.5 million lbs (13,835 presence of numerous head-of-tide- similar to the rangewide score. The SRT mt) per year. The majority of river dams, where emigration is related to fall noted that utility water intake may be a herring landed by commercial fisheries flows/water levels from head ponds, larger issue in the Bb-Southern Atlantic in these early years are attributed to the remains a threat. DPS compared to water withdrawals mid-Atlantic region (NY to VA). The The threat of water withdrawal was rangewide. dominance of the mid-Atlantic region is, slightly elevated in the Aw-Southern in part, due to the apparent bias in the B. Overutilization New England (medium, 3.3) DPS spatial coverage of the reported compared to the rangewide ranking. The SRT assessed five different landings. During this early period, Water withdrawal may be higher in the factors that may contribute to the landings were predominately from Aw-Southern New England DPS than in overutilization of alewife: Directed Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, and other areas due to high population commercial harvest, retained and Massachusetts (overall, harvest is likely density. Water withdrawal can lead to discarded incidental catch (including underestimated because landings were reduced stream flow, and the water slippage), recreational harvest, scientific not recorded consistently during this storage capacities of impoundments can research and educational harvest. time.) Virginia made up approximately further affect temporal variability of Although ranked separately, the SRT’s half of the commercial landings from stream flow. Similar to populations assessments for scientific research and 1929 until the 1970s, and the majority further north, populations here face an educational harvest are discussed in of Virginia’s landings came from the increased risk from artificially combination below due to the limited Chesapeake Bay, the Potomac River, the manipulated water levels in head information and similarity in overall York River, and offshore harvest. ponds, where summer and fall rankings for these factors. Severe declines in landings began emigration is dependent on adequate Directed Commercial Harvest coast-wide in the early 1970s and, stream flows. As water transfers/ where still allowed, domestic landings withdrawals increase in the future, this This threat is discussed in sections are now a fraction of what they were at threat will increase. 4.2.1 of the Status Review Report their peak, having remained at The threat of water withdrawal in the (NMFS 2019). Below, we provide a persistently low levels since the mid- Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS (medium, 3.2) summary of impacts on river herring. 1990s. Moratoria were enacted in was similar to the rangewide score for Information on river herring fisheries Massachusetts (commercial and alewife. The SRT noted predicted high in the United States was gathered recreational in 2005), Rhode Island population growth rate in this region. largely from the ASMFC’s benchmark (commercial and recreational in 2006), Demand for water and anthropogenic assessment of river herring stocks of the Connecticut (commercial and pressures will likely increase, resulting U.S. Atlantic Coast from Maine through recreational in 2002), Virginia (for in reduced stream flows, which affect Florida (ASMFC 2012) and the River waters flowing into North Carolina in juvenile emigration and survival. Herring Stock Assessment update 2007), and North Carolina (commercial (ASMFC 2017a). The ASMFC (2017a) Blueback Herring and recreational in 2007). As of January report provides an update to the 2012 1, 2012, river herring fisheries in states The overall mean score for water benchmark assessment of river herring. or jurisdictions without an approved quality corresponded to a medium (2.9) Both documents were prepared by the sustainable fisheries management plan, ranking for blueback herring rangewide River Herring Stock Assessment as required under ASMFC Amendment and in each DPS (2.8–2.9). Because of Subcommittee (SAS) of the ASMFC’s 2 to the Shad and River Herring Fishery the lower human population density in Shad and Herring Technical Committee Management Plan, were closed. (Note as the Bb-Canada/Northern New England (TC). anadromous alosines of the east coast, DPS (medium, 2.8) and corresponding Domestic commercial landings of shad, alewife, and blueback herring are demands on water resources, there is a river herring were presented in the stock managed under the same Fisheries diminished risk to the species as assessment update by state and by gear Management Plan; ASMFC 1987). As a compared to the rangewide average. from 1887 to 2015 where available result, prohibitions on harvest Human population density and the (ASMFC 2017a). Landings of alewife (commercial or recreational) were resulting anthropogenic effects on water and blueback herring were collectively extended to New Jersey, Delaware, quality (including animal husbandry classified as ‘‘river herring’’ by most Pennsylvania, Maryland, DC, Virginia, and agriculture) and the demands and states. Only a few states had species- Georgia and Florida (ASMFC 2012, for water withdrawals/diversions are specific information recorded for a ASMFC 2017a,b). likely less of a threat to the species in limited range of years. Commercial The ASMFC stock assessment this DPS compared to the rangewide landings records were available for each committee calculated in-river average. The threat ranking for water state since 1887, except for Florida and exploitation rates of the spawning runs withdrawal in the Bb-Mid-Atlantic DPS the Potomac River Fisheries for five rivers (Damariscotta River (ME— (medium, 2.9) was similar to the Commission (PRFC), which began alewife), Union River (ME—alewife), rangewide score. The SRT noted that recording landings in 1929 and 1960, Monument River (MA—both species predicted population growth rate in this respectively. It is important to note that combined), Mattapoisett River (MA— region will drive future demand for historical landings presented in the alewife), and Nemasket River (MA— water. As anthropogenic pressures stock assessment do not include all alewife)) by dividing in-river harvest by increase, it will negatively affect water landings for all states over the entire total run size (escapement plus harvest) quality (hypoxia, eutrophication) in period and are likely underestimates, for a given year (ASMFC 2012). most major estuaries. Further, the particularly for the first third of the time Exploitation rates were highest (range: interactions between anthropogenic series, because not all river landings 0.53 to 0.98) in the Damariscotta River change and climate change are likely to were reported (ASMFC 2012, ASMFC and Union River prior to 1985, while severely affect water quality in portions 2017a). the exploitation was lowest (range: 0.26 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28652 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices to 0.68) in the Monument River. In (11,577 mt) in 1980, 23.1 million lbs Directed harvest does still occur in Massachusetts, exploitation rates of both (10,487 mt) in 1988, and 11 million lbs several states (see State Regulations in species in the Monument River and of (4,994 mt) in 1996 (DFO 2001). The the Status Review Report for Maine, alewives in the Mattapoisett River and largest river herring fisheries in New Hampshire, New York, the Nemasket River were variable (average = Canadian waters occur in the Bay of Potomac River Fisheries Commission/ 0.16) and, except for the Nemasket Fundy, southern Gulf of Maine, New District of Columbia, North Carolina, River, declined generally through 2005 Brunswick, and in the Saint John and and South Carolina (NMFS 2019), and until the moratorium was imposed. Miramichi Rivers where annual harvest the fishing occurs during migration to Exploitation rates of alewives in the estimates often exceed 2.2 million lbs spawning grounds. Amendment 2 to the Damariscotta River were low (<0.05) (1,000 mt) (DFO 2001). ASMFC Shad and River Herring during the period from 1993 to 2000, There is little directed effort on river Interstate Fishery Management Plan but they increased steadily through herring across the Northwest Atlantic. requires states to have a sustainable 2004 and remained greater than 0.34 Foreign fleet landings of river herring fishery management plan (SFMP) for through 2008. Exploitation in the (reported as alewife and blueback shad) each river with a river herring fishery Damariscotta River dropped to 0.15 in are available through the Northwest (beginning in 2012). SFMPs must be 2009 to 2010. In-river exploitation of Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO). reviewed by the ASMFC Shad and River alewives has continued to decline in the Offshore exploitation of river herring Herring Technical Committee for Damariscotta River, with the lowest and shad (generally <190 millimeters adequate sustainability measures and levels occurring in the last five years (mm) (7.5 inches) in length) by foreign approved by the ASMFC Management (2011–2015), with the exception of very fleets began in the late 1960s and Board. Monitoring is required on all low values that occurred in the 1990s landings peaked at about 80 million lbs harvested runs in the U.S. Overall, SRT (due to lack of harvest) (ASMFC 2017a). (36,320 mt) in 1969 (ASMFC 2017a). members found that the current directed Exploitation rates of alewives in the After the Fishery Conservation and harvest was well regulated and occurred Union River declined through 2005 but Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. only on stocks that have demonstrated have remained above 0.50 since 2007 1801 et seq.), later retitled the sustainability. (ASMFC 2012). In-river exploitation of Magnuson Fishery and Conservation The threat ranking for directed alewives has remained relatively stable and Management Act, and the formation commercial harvest was higher in the in the Union River, but it did decline to of the Fishery Conservation Zone in Aw-Canada DPS (low, 2.1) compared to the lowest level of the time series 1977, foreign allocation of river herring the rangewide ranking and other DPSs (2010–2015) in the terminal year of the (to both foreign vessels and joint (1.2–1.7). SRT members noted increased update. Exploitation has essentially venture vessels) between 1977 and 1980 uncertainty related to directed harvest ceased on other rivers assessed during was 1.1 million lbs (499 mt). The foreign levels within Canada. Gibson et al. the benchmark due to moratoria (MA allocation was reduced to 220,000 lbs (2017) indicated high annual removal rivers) (ASMFC 2017a). (100 mt) in 1981 because of the rates where recorded or reported. The coastwide index of relative condition of the river herring resource. Additionally, Gibson et al. (2017) exploitation also declined following a In 1985, a bycatch cap of no more than indicated that previous reporting and peak in the late 1980s and has remained 0.25 percent of total catch was enacted collection methods do not provide fairly stable over the past decade. In all for the foreign fishery. The cap was consistent and accurate information, model runs except for one, exploitation exceeded once in 1987, and this shut increasing concern and uncertainty for rates coastwide declined. Exploitation down the foreign mackerel fishery. In this threat. Finally, the Department of rates estimated from the statistical 1991, amendment 4 to the Atlantic Fisheries and Oceans still allows some catch-at-age model for blueback herring Mackerel, squid and butterfish fisheries fishing on mixed stocks in Canadian in the Chowan River (see Status of River management plan added area waters, which makes managing impacts Herring in North Carolina in the ASMFC restrictions to exclude foreign vessels to individual populations more difficult. 2017b stock assessment) also showed a from within 20 miles (32.2 km) of shore The threat ranking for directed slight declining trend from 1999 to for two reasons: (1) In response to the commercial harvest was slightly higher 2007, at which time a moratorium was increased occurrence of river herring in the Aw-Northern New England DPS instituted. bycatch closer to shore and (2) to (low, 1.7) compared to the rangewide There appears to be a consensus that promote increased fishing opportunities ranking. Maine and New Hampshire exploitation has decreased in recent for the domestic mackerel fleet (50 CFR currently have approved ASMFC times. The stock assessment indicates part 611.50; ASMFC 2012). There have sustainable fishing management plans that the decline in exploitation over the been no reported landings by foreign within this DPS. The SRT noted past decade is not surprising because fleets since 1990 (ASMFC 2012, ASMFC uncertainty related to lack of publicly river herring populations are at low 2017). From 1991 to 2015, the only available commercial harvest data for levels and more restrictive regulations reported catch in Areas 5 and 6 was Maine due to confidentiality; therefore, or moratoria have been enacted by states from the United States. the total removals and removal rates by (ASMFC 2017a). river system are largely unknown. Fisheries in Canada for river herring Alewife The threat ranking for directed are regulated through limited seasons, The overall mean score for alewife commercial harvest was lower in the gears, and licenses. Licenses may cover directed harvest corresponded to a low Aw-Southern New England DPS (low, different gear types; however, few new (1.7) ranking rangewide and for all DPS 1.2) compared to the rangewide ranking. licenses have been issued since 1993 (1.2–2.1). Overutilization for There is currently no directed (DFO 2001). River-specific management commercial purposes was once commercial harvest conducted within plans include closures and restrictions. considered one of the primary threats to the Aw-Southern New England DPS. River herring used locally for bait in alewife and blueback herring The Nemasket River, in southern other fisheries are not accounted for in populations. Significant declines have Massachusetts, has an ASMFC approved river-specific management plans (DFO been documented throughout much of SFMP, but no harvest has occurred to 2001). DFO estimated river herring the range for both species due to historic date, largely due to variability in run landings at just under 25.5 million lbs fishing pressure and other threats. strength. SRT members noted VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28653 uncertainty related to whether further overall population or segments of it Lessard and Bryan (2011) estimated directed harvest of alewife would be (ASMFC 2017a). an average incidental catch of river permitted within the Aw-Southern New Because bycatch occurs in marine herring and American shad of 3.3 England DPS in the foreseeable future. waters, and alewife and blueback million lbs (1,498 mt)/yr from 2000– The threat ranking for directed herring stock complexes overlap in their 2008. Lessard and Bryan (2011) commercial harvest was lower in the distribution in the ocean, the retained analyzed NEFOP data at the haul level; Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS (low, 1.6) and discarded incidental catch occurs however, the sampling unit for the compared to the rangewide ranking. on a mixed stock complex fishery (that NEFOP database is at the trip level. New York is the only state to have an is, there is no ‘‘oceanic’’ stock of alewife Within each gear and region, all data, approved ASMFC sustainable fishing or blueback herring, the alewife and including those from high volume management plan within this DPS. blueback herring in the ocean come fisheries, appeared to be aggregated Blueback Herring from all of the stock complexes across years from 2000 through 2008. described herein). Recent studies have However, substantial changes in NEFOP For the same reasons stated above for also shown that alewife and blueback sampling methodology for high volume alewife, the overall mean score for herring incidentally caught in a number fisheries were implemented in 2005, blueback herring directed harvest of statistical areas were from several limiting the interpretability of estimates corresponded to a low (1.8) ranking genetic stock complexes (Hasselman et from these fleets in prior years. The total rangewide and for all DPS (1.5–1.9). The al. 2016, Palkovacs unpublished). This number of tows from the fishing vessel threat ranking for directed commercial finding increases the probability that trip report (VTR) database was used as harvest was slightly higher in the Bb- alewife and blueback herring are being the raising factor to estimate total Canada/Northern New England DPS exploited from populations that do not incidental catch. The use of effort (low, 1.9) compared to the rangewide without standardization makes the ranking, for the same reasons stated meet sustainable harvest requirements approved through the ASMFC. implicit assumption that effort is above for the Aw-Canada and the Aw- constant across all tows within a gear Northern New England DPSs including Several studies estimated river herring retained and discarded type, potentially resulting in a biased the lack of publicly available effort metric. In contrast, the total kept incidental catch (Cieri et al. 2008, commercial harvest data for Maine. weight of all species is used as the Wigley et al. 2009, Lessard and Bryan Likewise, for the same reason stated raising factor in standardized bycatch 2011). The discard and incidental catch above for the Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS reporting methodology (SBRM). SBRM estimates from these studies cannot be ranking, this threat ranked in the low is a methodology to assess the amount directly compared, as they used (1.6) category for the Bb-Mid-Atlantic and type of bycatch in a fishery. When different ratio estimators based on data DPS. quantifying incidental catch across from the Northeast Fishery Observer multiple fleets, total kept weight of all Retained and Discarded Incidental Program (NEFOP), as well as different species is an appropriate surrogate for Catch (Including Slippage) information to quantity total catch effective fishing power because it is River herring are caught incidentally estimates. Cieri et al. (2008) estimated likely that no trips will exhibit the same at sea in Federal fisheries targeting other the kept (i.e., landed) portion of river attributes. Lessard and Bryan (2011) also species such as Atlantic herring, squid, herring incidental catch in the Atlantic did not provide precision estimates, and mackerel. In this section, we refer herring fishery with an estimated which are imperative for estimation of to several terms: Retained incidental average annual landed river herring incidental catch. catch, discarded incidental catch, catch of approximately 71,290 lbs (32.4 The stock assessment update (ASMFC slippage and bycatch. Retained mt) for 2005–2007, and the 2017a, b) presents the total incidental incidental catch is the capture and corresponding coefficient of variation catch of river herring updated through mortality of a non-targeted species. (CV) was 0.56. Cournane et al. (2012) 2015 following methods described in Discarded incidental catch is the extended this analysis with additional the benchmark assessment. These portion of the non-targeted catch years of data. Further work is needed to methods were developed during brought on board and then returned to elucidate how the incidental catch of Amendment 14 to the Atlantic sea. Slippage is a term used to describe river herring in the directed Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and Butterfish (MSB) a process in which a boat does not bring herring fishery compares to total Fishery Management Plan, which the entire catch on board and releases incidental catch across all fisheries. includes measures to address incidental part of the catch into the water, thereby Since this analysis only quantified kept catch of river herring and shads potentially biasing estimates of retained river herring in the Atlantic herring (ASMFC 2017a). The stock assessment and discarded incidental catch. Bycatch, fishery, it underestimates the total catch update presents the total incidental under National Standard 9, refers to fish (kept and discarded) of river herring catch estimates by species. that are harvested in a fishery, but that across all fishing fleets. Wigley et al. From 2005 to 2015, the total annual are not sold or kept for personal use (50 (2009) quantified river herring discards incidental catch of alewife ranged from CFR part 600). across fishing fleets that had sufficient 36.5–531.7 m (80,469–1,172,198 lbs) in The magnitude of this ocean catch is observer coverage from July 2007– New England and 10.9–295.0 mt highly uncertain because of the short August 2008 with an estimated (24,030–650,364 lbs) in the Mid-Atlantic time series of incidental data, approximately 105,820 lbs (48 mt) region (ASMFC 2017a). The dominant underreporting, and a lack of observer discarded during the 12 months (July gear varied across years between paired coverage. In addition, there are limited 2007 to August 2008); the estimated midwater trawls and bottom trawls data on the stock composition of the precision was low (149 percent CV). (ASMFC 2017a). Corresponding incidentally caught fish and, thus, no This analysis estimated only river estimates of precision exhibited way to partition estimates of bycatch herring discards (in contrast to total substantial inter-annual variation and among river systems. With no estimates incidental catch), and noted that ranged from 0–10.6 across gears and of coastwide or regional stock complex midwater trawl fleets generally retained regions. Between 2005 and 2015, total abundances, it is also difficult to assess river herring while otter trawls typically annual blueback herring incidental the significance of these removals on the discarded river herring. catch ranged from 8.2–186.6 mt VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28654 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices (18,078–411,383 lbs) in New England areas sampled during 2012–2013, Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS. SRT members and 1.4–388.3 mt (3,086–856,055 lbs) in though the authors noted extreme inter- noted that the results presented by the Mid-Atlantic region (ASMFC 2017a). annual variability in both the magnitude Palkovacs are representative of the Across years, paired and single and composition of incidental catch, bycatch samples in the Atlantic herring midwater trawls exhibited the greatest demonstrating that marine distributions and mackerel fisheries, which are blueback herring incidental catches for both species are highly dynamic concentrated generally in the Mid- (ASMFC 2017a). Corresponding from year to year. Atlantic and Northeast. precision estimates ranged from 0–3.6. Retained and discarded incidental Hasselman et al. (2016) estimated that The temporal distribution of catch (including slippage) is likely incidental catch from rivers south of the incidental catch was summarized by negatively affecting some river herring Hudson River ranged from 400,000 in quarter and fishing region for the most populations. Slippage was defined as 2012 to 1.3 million in 2013. However, recent 10-year period (2005 to 2015). catch that is discarded prior to it being these previous estimates assumed that River herring catches occurred primarily brought aboard a vessel and/or prior to the Hudson River grouped with the Aw- in midwater trawls (62 percent, of making it available for sampling and Southern New England DPS, rather than which 48 percent were from paired inspection by a NOAA-approved the Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS, where it is midwater trawls and the rest from single observer. The SRT noted that historical now grouped. Therefore, if the analysis midwater trawls), followed by small declines in river herring abundance were rerun with the new boundaries, mesh bottom trawls (24 percent). were not likely driven by incidental the estimates of incidental catch would Catches of river herring in gillnets were catch, but because of current depleted be greater for this DPS. The study did negligible. Across gear types, catches of abundances, incidental catch may not collect samples from other small- river herring were greater in New impede population growth. As with all mesh coastal fisheries in this DPS, England (56 percent) than in the Mid- of the threats, the true magnitude of which may also catch alewife. Atlantic (37 percent). The percentages of incidental catch remains largely midwater trawl catches of river herring unknown because there is no estimate of Blueback Herring were similar between New England rangewide abundance. While some Based on the best available (31.3 percent) and the Mid-Atlantic monitoring of incidental catch does information, as noted above, the SRT region (30.5 percent). However, catches occur in the Atlantic herring and concluded that the threat from in New England small mesh bottom mackerel fisheries, it has been estimated incidental catch rangewide (2.4) and for trawls were almost three times higher that monitored fisheries may only the Bb-Southern Atlantic DPS (1.7) (27 percent) than those from the Mid- constitute half the discards in a given corresponded to a low ranking. The Atlantic (10 percent). Overall, the year (Wigley 2009). Further, the mean score for the Bb-Canada/Northern highest quarterly catches of river herring contribution of slippage also remains New England DPS and the Bb-Mid- occurred in midwater trawls during unknown because it is not currently Atlantic DPS corresponded to medium Quarter 1 in the Mid-Atlantic (28 reported. (2.6 for each). Again, the SRT noted percent), followed by catches in New Alewife uncertainty in assessing incidental catch England during Quarter 4 (12 percent) because of the uncertainty in estimating (ASMFC 2017). Quarterly catches in Based on the best available exploitation, future monitoring small mesh bottom trawls were highest information, noted above, the SRT coverage, and future use of bycatch in New England during Quarter 1 (9 concluded that the threat from avoidance programs. percent) and totaled 5 to 7 percent incidental catch corresponded to a during each of the other three quarters medium (2.5) contribution to extinction Limited information is available to (ASMFC 2017a). The New England and risk to alewife rangewide and in the estimate the impacts of incidental catch Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Aw-Canada DPS (2.7), the Aw-Northern in the Bb-Canada/Northern New Councils have adopted measures for the New England DPS (2.4), the Aw- England DPS. Though fewer fish from Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries Southern New England DPS (2.7), and this Bb-Canada/Northern New England intended to decrease incidental catch the Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPS (2.5). DPS are reported in the Atlantic and bycatch of alewife and blueback However, the SRT noted the highest herring/mackerel fisheries (Palkovacs, herring. uncertainty around the contribution of unpublished data), other small mesh Partitioning incidental bycatch in U.S. incidental catch to extinction (expressed fisheries in this region may incidentally waters to river of origin or proposed in variability and range of scores; see catch river herring. stock complex is an ongoing area of NMFS 2019), due to uncertainties Data available from the herring and research. Using the 15 microsatellites around the estimates of exploitation, mackerel fisheries for the years 2012– previously identified (Palkovacs et al. future monitoring coverage, and future 2015 (Palkovacs, unpublished) suggest 2014), Hasselman et al. (2016) applied use of bycatch avoidance programs. that blueback herring from the Bb-Mid- genetic stock identification (GSI) to Incidental catch data available from Atlantic DPS are also caught as bycatch determine potential regional stock the herring and mackerel fisheries for in the Atlantic herring fishery. SRT composition of river herring bycatch the years 2012–2015 (Palkovacs, members noted uncertainty due to from the New England Atlantic herring unpublished) showed large proportions limited information regarding the fishery (2012–2013). GSI is a biological of Aw-Mid-Atlantic and Aw-Southern magnitude of small mesh coastal tool to determine the composition of New England alewife captured by mid- fisheries. Additional uncertainty comes mixed stocks and the origin of water trawl and small mesh bottom from the limited sample area (Atlantic individual fish. Results showed trawl in the Atlantic herring/mackerel Herring Management Area 2 fisheries). assignment of over 70 percent to the fisheries compared to other DPSs. Aw- Numerous small mesh fisheries exist in Aw-Southern New England stock Northern New England alewife made up Atlantic Herring Management Areas 1 complex for alewife and 78 percent a minimal amount of indirect catch and 2, and new information regarding assignment to the Bb-Mid-Atlantic stock (Palkovacs, unpublished). Much of the bycatch in those fisheries would be very complex for blueback herring. The study incidental catch from these fisheries beneficial to understanding the level of also gives a marine spatial snapshot of was concentrated around Block Island impact on river herring populations in stock complexes in the NOAA statistical Sound, which is located closest to the this DPS. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28655 Recreational Harvest monitoring and reporting of recreational Disease Section 4.2.3 of the Status Review fisheries in Canada. Little information exists on diseases Report provides a state-by-state Scientific Research and Educational that may affect river herring; however, summary of recreational landing Harvest there are reports of a variety of parasites information for river herring. that have been found in both alewife Recreational fishing in Canada for river The states of Maine, New Hampshire, and blueback herring. The most herring is limited by regulations Massachusetts, and Rhode Island comprehensive report is that of Landry providing for area, gear, and seasonal estimate run sizes using electronic et al. (1992) in which 13 species of closures, and limits on the number of counters or visual methods. In parasites were identified in blueback fish that can be harvested per day. Massachusetts, various counting herring and 12 species in alewives from However, information on recreational methods are used at the Holyoke Dam the Miramichi River, New Brunswick, catch is limited. Licenses and reporting fish lift and fish ways on the Canada. The parasites found included are not required by Canadian Connecticut River. Young-of-the-Year one monogenetic trematode, four regulations for recreational fisheries, (YOY) surveys are conducted through digenetic trematodes, one cestode, three and harvest is not well documented. fixed seine surveys capturing YOY nematodes, one acanthocephalan, one alewife and blueback herring generally annelid, one copepod and one mollusk. Alewife during the summer and fall in Maine, The same species were found in both The SRT noted recreational harvest Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, alewife and blueback herring with the has largely been eliminated in the U.S. New Jersey, Maryland, District of exception of the acanthocephalan, range, and where it does exist, it is well Columbia, Virginia, and North Carolina. which was absent from alewives. regulated. Amendment 2 to the ASMFC Rhode Island conducts surveys for In other studies, Sherburne (1977) Shad and River Herring Interstate juvenile and adult river herring at large reported piscine erythrocytic necrosis Fishery Management Plan requires fixed seine stations. Virginia samples (PEN) in the blood of 56 percent of pre- states to have a sustainable fishery river herring using a multi-panel gill net spawning and 10 percent of post- management plan for each river with a survey and electroshocking surveys. spawning alewives in Maine coastal river herring fishery (beginning in Florida conducts electroshocking streams. PEN was not found in juvenile 2012). Plans must be reviewed by the surveys to sample river herring. Maine, alewives from the same locations. ASMFC Shad and River Herring New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Coccidian parasites were found in the technical committee for adequate Island, Maryland, and North Carolina livers of alewives and other finfish off sustainability measures and must be collect age data from both commercial the coast of Nova Scotia (Morrison and approved by the ASMFC management and fisheries-independent sampling Marryatt 1990). Marcogliese and board (see Directed Commercial Harvest programs, and length-at-age data. All of Compagna (1999) reported that most above). Historical rangewide these scientific monitoring efforts are fish species, including alewife, in the St. recreational catch is largely unknown, believed to have minimal impacts on Lawrence River become infected with and the recent ASMFC assessment river herring populations. trematode metacercariae during the first (2017a) deemed recreational catch As noted previously, there is years of life. Examination of Great Lakes estimates unreliable. insufficient information available on fishes in Canadian waters showed larval Based on the best available river herring in many areas. Research Diplostomum (trematode) commonly in information, the SRT concluded that the needs were recently identified in the the eyes of alewife in Lake Superior threat from recreational harvest ASMFC River Herring Stock Assessment (Dechtiar and Lawrie 1988) and Lake corresponded to a low (1.5) contribution Reports (ASMFC 2012, 2017); NMFS Ontario (Dechtiar and Christie, 1988), to extinction risk rangewide and in all Stock Structure, Climate Change and though intensity of infections was low DPSs (1.3–2.1). However, the SRT noted Extinction Risk Workshop/Working (<9/host). that illegal and unmonitored Group Reports (NMFS a, b, c 2012) and Heavy infections of Saprolegnia, a recreational harvest could have associated peer reviews; and New fresh and brackish water fungus, were significant local impacts for individual England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery found in 25 percent of Lake Superior rivers with extremely low abundance. Management Council documents alewife examined, and light infections The SRT also noted higher uncertainty (NEFMC 2012, MAFMC 2012). were found in 33 percent of Lake in the Aw-Canada DPS in comparison to Ontario alewife (Dechtiar and Lawrie the rangewide score due to uncertainty Alewife and Blueback Herring 1988). Larval acanthocephala were also surrounding monitoring and reporting Rangewide and All DPSs found in the guts of alewife from both of recreational fisheries in Canada. lakes. Saprolegnia typically is a There is little information linking secondary infection, invading open Blueback Herring scientific and educational use to sores and wounds, and eggs in poor For the same reasons stated above for declines in alewife or blueback herring environmental conditions, but under the alewife rangewide, the SRT concluded populations. Therefore, based on the right conditions, it can become a that the threat from recreational harvest best available information, the SRT primary pathogen. Saprolegnia corresponded to a low (1.5) contribution concluded that neither scientific use nor infections usually are lethal to the host. to extinction risk rangewide and in all educational use is contributing to the More recently, alewives were found DPSs (1.3–1.8) for blueback herring. species’ risk of extinction. Both threats positive for Cryptosporidium for the However, as noted above, the SRT noted ranked in the very low (1.0) category. first time on record by Ziegler et al. that illegal and unmonitored C. Disease or Predation (2007). Mycobacteria, which can result recreational harvest could have in ulcers, emaciation, and sometimes significant local impacts for individual The SRT (section 4.3.2) assessed the death, have been found in many rivers with extremely low abundance. available information on disease and Chesapeake Bay fish, including The SRT noted increased uncertainty in predation of alewife and blueback blueback herring (Stine et al. 2010). the Bb-Canada/Northern New England herring summarized in the Status Lovy and Friend (2015) characterized DPS due to uncertainties surrounding Review Report (NMFS 2019). two intestinal coccidians, Goussia VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28656 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices ameliae and G. alosii in alewives of the in the Connecticut River spring Alewife and Blueback Herring Maurice River, New Jersey. G. ameliae migration. In this study, striped bass Rangewide and All DPSs infected both landlocked and were found in the rivers during the While alewife and blueback herring anadromous alewives. The parasites spring spawning migrations of blueback are important forage species, predators were prevalent in both juveniles and herring and had generally left the on the Northeast U.S. shelf are generally adult fish. While significant mortality system by mid-June (Davis et al. 2012). opportunistic (versus specialized) and seemed not to occur, researchers suggest Ferry and Mather (2012) discuss the will consume prey species in relation to that the energetic costs of these parasites results of a study conducted in their abundance in the environment. At should be considered when estimating Massachusetts watersheds with high population levels, predation is impacts of climate change and habitat drastically different findings for striped likely not an issue; however, as loss. bass predation. Striped bass were populations decline, predation can Another parasite recently discovered collected and stomach contents become a larger threat, especially in New Jersey, Myxobolus mauriensis, analyzed during three seasons from May locally. Recent papers focus on the attacks the ribs of juvenile river herring through October (Ferry and Mather, predation impacts of striped bass; and can spread to other tissues (Lovy 2012). The stomach contents of striped however, the predatory impact by and Hutcheson 2016). This new species bass from the survey were examined striped bass is likely localized to areas/ of Myxobolus was found mostly in the and less than 5 percent of the clupeid times of overlap (Davis et al. 2012, Ferry Maurice River (20 percent), but was also category (from 12 categories identified and Mather 2012, Overton et al. 2008). present in two other New Jersey river to summarize prey) consisted of The overall mean score for predation systems. anadromous alosines (Ferry and Mather corresponded to a low ranking for both 2012). Overall, the Ferry and Mather Alewife and Blueback Herring species rangewide and in all DPSs. The (2012) study observed few anadromous Rangewide and all DPSs SRT noted uncertainty surrounding alosines in the striped bass stomach The overall mean score for disease contents during the study period. The introduced or invasive piscivores such corresponded to a low (alewife 1.5, contradictory findings of these two 2012 as snakeheads or blue catfish, which blueback 1.7) ranking rangewide and in studies echo the findings of previous could have larger impacts if they all DPSs for both alewife and blueback studies showing a wide variation in dramatically expand their ranges. herring. The SRT could find little predation by striped bass with spatial Alterations to fish behavior were also information linking disease to declines and temporal effects. noted as components of predation that in alewife and blueback herring The diets of other predators, have not been well described in the populations in any specific areas of the including other fish (e.g., bluefish, spiny literature to date. For example, little is range. SRT members noted disease is of dogfish), along with marine mammals known about how increased predator biggest concern at low population (e.g., seals) and birds (e.g., double- abundance (including an abundance of levels; however, warmer summer crested cormorant), have not been introduced predators) may influence temperatures, changing fish quantified as extensively, making it anadromous fish species’ ability to communities, and changing migratory more difficult to assess the importance access fish passage. Additionally, the patterns due to climate change may of river herring in both the freshwater effects of predation can be highly make alewife and blueback herring and marine food webs. As a result, some localized, as noted in the striped bass populations more susceptible to disease models found a significant negative predation examples provided above in the future. effect from predation (Hartman 2003, (Davis et al. 2012, Ferry and Mather 2012, Overton et al. 2008); therefore, Predation Heimbuch 2008), while other studies did not find an effect (Tuomikoski et al. while the SRT characterized the While alewife and blueback herring 2008, Dalton et al. 2009). rangewide and DPS threat risk as low are an important forage species, In addition to predators native to the (alewife 1.7–1.8, blueback herring 1.8– predators on the Northeast U.S. shelf are Atlantic coast, river herring are 2.0), individual river populations may generally opportunistic (versus vulnerable to invasive species such as experience greatly increased threat specialized) and will consume prey the blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus) and levels. species in relation to their abundance in the flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris). D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory the environment. At high population These catfish are large, opportunistic Mechanisms levels, predation is likely not an issue; predators native to the Mississippi River however, as populations decline drainage system that were introduced The ESA requires an evaluation of predation can become a larger threat, into rivers on the Atlantic coast. They existing regulatory mechanisms to especially locally. Recent papers focus consume a wide range of species, determine whether they may be on the predation impacts of striped bass; including alosines, and ecological inadequate to address threats to river however, the predatory impact by modeling on flathead catfish suggests herring. Numerous Federal (U.S. and striped bass is likely localized to areas they may have a large impact on their Canadian), state and provincial, tribal, and times of overlap (Davis et al. 2012, prey species (Pine 2003, Schloesser et and inter-jurisdictional laws, Ferry and Mather 2012, Overton et al. al. 2011). In August 2011, ASMFC regulations, and agency activities 2008). approved a resolution calling for efforts regulate impacts to alewife and Two recent papers with contradictory to reduce the population size and blueback herring as wide-ranging conclusions discussed striped bass ecological impacts of invasive species, anadromous species. The status review predation on river herring in and named blue and flathead catfish as SRT assessed the adequacy of regulatory Massachusetts and Connecticut species of concern due to their mechanisms by examining regulations estuaries and rivers, showing temporal increasing abundance and potential at three different governmental levels: and spatial patterns in predation (Davis impacts on native anadromous species. international regulations, Federal et al. 2012; Ferry and Mather 2012). Non-native species are a particular regulations, and state regulations. Davis et al. (2012) estimated that concern because of the lack of native Section 4.4 of the Status Review Report approximately 400,000 blueback herring predators, parasites, and competitors to provides a summary of how these are consumed annually by striped bass keep their populations in check. regulatory mechanisms—international VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28657 regulations, Federal regulations, and Fisheries Management Plans (IFMPs) to Interstate Fisheries Management state regulations—may provide guide the conservation and sustainable Program (ISFMP) by the ASMFC; and (2) protections for river herring populations use of marine resources (DFO 2010). An consistent with the national standards (NMFS 2019). IFMP managed a fishery in a given set forth in section 301 of the MSA. region by combining the best available The MSA is the primary law International Regulations science on the species with industry governing marine fisheries management The Canadian Department of Fisheries data on capacity and methods for in Federal waters. The MSA was first and Oceans (DFO) manages alewife and harvesting (DFO 2010). The 6-year enacted in 1976 and amended in 1996 blueback herring fisheries that occur in management plan (2007–2012) for river and 2007. Most notably, the MSA aided the rivers of the Canadian Maritimes herring for Eastern New Brunswick was in the development of the domestic under the Fisheries Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. implemented in conjunction with fishing industry by phasing out foreign F–14). The Maritime Provinces Fishery annual updates to specific fishery fishing. To manage the fisheries and Regulations include requirements when management measures (e.g., seasons). It promote conservation, the MSA created fishing for or catching and retaining is unclear if this management plan has eight regional fishery management river herring in recreational and been updated or discontinued. councils. The 1996 amendment focused commercial fisheries (DFO, 2006; http:// on rebuilding overfished fisheries, laws-lois.justice.gc.ca). Alewife and Blueback Herring protecting essential fish habitat, and Commercial and recreational river Rangewide and All DPSs reducing bycatch. The 2007 amendment herring fisheries in the Canadian The inadequacy of regulatory mandated the use of annual catch limits Maritimes are regulated by license, mechanisms to control the harvests of and accountability measures to end fishing gear, season, and/or other alewife and blueback herring was once overfishing, provided for widespread measures (DFO 2001). Since 1993, DFO considered a significant threat to their market-based fishery management has issued few new licenses for river populations. The best available through limited access privilege herring (DFO 2001). River herring are information indicates limited fishing is programs, and called for increased harvested by various gear types (e.g., permitted in Canada, though international cooperation. gillnet, dip nets, trap), and the uncertainties remain about the efficacy The MSA requires that Federal FMPs regulations depend upon the river and of international fishing regulations. The contain conservation and management associated location (DFO 2001). The inadequacy of international regulations measures that are consistent with the primary management measures are was ranked rangewide as low (alewife ten National Standards. National weekly closed periods and limitations 2.1, blueback herring 2.0) contribution Standard 9 states that conservation and on the total number of licenses (DFO to extinction risk category. The threat management measures shall, to the 2001). Logbooks are issued to was also ranked as low for the Aw- extent practicable, (A) minimize bycatch commercial anglers in some areas as a Northern New England (2.3), Aw- and (B) to the extent bycatch cannot be condition of the license, and pilot Southern New England (2.1), Aw-Mid avoided, minimize the mortality of such programs are being considered in other Atlantic (2.0), Bb-Canada/Northern New bycatch. The MSA defines bycatch as areas (DFO 2001). The management England (2.3), and Bb-Mid Atlantic fish that are harvested in a fishery, but objective is to maintain harvest near (2.0). SRT members ranked the threat of which are not sold or kept for personal long-term mean levels when no specific international regulations as a slightly use. This includes economic discards biological and fisheries information is higher risk with a medium ranking (2.7) and regulatory discards. Alewife and available (DFO 2001). within the Aw-Canada DPS. This DPS is blueback herring are encountered as DFO stated that additional located entirely within Canada; both bycatch and incidental catch in management measures may be required therefore, international regulations are Federal fisheries. While there is no if increased effort occurs in response to predicted to directly affect this DPS directed fishery for alewife or blueback stock conditions or favorable markets, more than the other DPSs. Canada does herring in Federal waters, they co-occur and noted that fishery exploitation rates not routinely separate river herring with other species that have directed have been above reference levels, while species and less reported monitoring fisheries (Atlantic mackerel, Atlantic fewer licenses are fished than have been compared to the United States. herring, whiting) and are either issued (DFO 2001). In 2001, DFO discarded or retained in those fisheries. reported that in some rivers river Federal Regulations Commercial fisheries that incidentally herring were being harvested at or above River herring stocks are managed catch river herring in Federal waters are reference levels (e.g., Miramichi), while under the authority of section 803(b) of managed by the New England Fisheries in other rivers river herring were being the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Management Council (NEFMC), the harvested at or below the reference Cooperative Management Act (Atlantic Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management point (e.g., St. John River at Mactaquac Coastal Act, 16 U.S.C 5101 et seq.), Council (MAFMC), and NMFS. Several Dam). The DFO (2001) believed which states that, in the absence of an management measures intended to precautionary management involving no approved and implemented Fishery reduce commercial fisheries interactions increase or decrease in exploitation was Management Plan (FMP) under the with river herring and shad in Federal important for Maritime river herring Magnuson-Stevens Fishery waters are currently in place. These fisheries, given that biological and Conservation and Management Act management measures have been harvest data were not widely available. (MSA, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and, after developed by the NEFMC, the MAFMC, DFO (2001) added that river-specific consultation with the appropriate the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries management plans based on stock Fishery Management Council(s), the Office, and the Northeast Fisheries assessments should be prioritized over Secretary of Commerce may implement Science Center (NEFSC) and general management initiatives. regulations to govern fishing in the EEZ, promulgated through Federal fishery Eastern New Brunswick appeared to i.e., from 3 to 200 nautical mi (nm) management plans (FMP) for Atlantic be the only area in the Canadian (∼5.6–370 km) offshore. The regulations Herring and Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, Maritimes with a river herring must be: (1) Compatible with the and Butterfish. integrated fishery management plan effective implementation of an The types of management measures (DFO 2012). The DFO used Integrated American Shad and River Herring currently in place or being considered VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28658 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices fall into several general categories: A bottom trawl cap for Southern New full life cycle (62 FR 19723; April 23, Limitations on total river herring and England Catch Cap Area (122.3 mt) 1997 and 67 FR 2343; January 17, 2002). shad catch; improvements to at-sea (269,625 lbs). EFH has not been designated for sampling by fisheries observers; river The river herring and shad catch cap alewife or blueback herring, though EFH herring avoidance program; increased for the mackerel fishery is set through has been designated for numerous other monitoring of the Atlantic herring annual specifications. NMFS set the species in the Northwest Atlantic. fishery; and including river herring in a 2018 river herring and shad cap for the Measures to improve habitats and Federal FMP. mackerel fishery at 82 mt (180,779 lbs) reduce impacts resulting from those Vessels fishing for Atlantic mackerel as part of a final rule to implement the EFH designations may benefit river and Atlantic herring can encounter river 2016 through 2018 Atlantic mackerel herring either directly or indirectly. herring and shad. The MAFMC and specifications (81 FR 24504, April 4, Conservation measures implemented in NEFMC recommended river herring and 2016). The 2018 Atlantic mackerel response to the designation of Atlantic shad catch caps for these fisheries, and specifications, including the river salmon EFH and Atlantic herring EFH NMFS implemented catch caps for these herring and shad catch cap, apply to likely provide the most conservation fisheries beginning in 2014 to minimize 2019 until Framework 13 to the Atlantic benefit to river herring over any other bycatch and incidental catch. Managers mackerel, squid, and butterfish FMP is EFH designation. Habitat features used do not currently have enough data to finalized (84 FR 26634, June 7, 2019). for spawning, breeding, feeding, growth, determine biologically based river Catch of river herring and shad on and maturity by these two species herring and shad catch caps or to assess fishing trips that land greater than encompasses many of the habitat the potential effects of such catch caps 20,000 lbs of mackerel count towards features necessary for river herring on river herring and shad populations the cap. If NMFS determines that 95 throughout their life history. The coastwide. However, the Councils and percent of the river herring and shad geographic range in which river herring NMFS find that river herring and shad cap has been harvested, a 20,000-lb may benefit from the designation of catch caps provide a strong incentive for mackerel possession limit will become Atlantic salmon EFH extends from the mackerel and herring fleets to effective for the remainder of the fishing Connecticut to the Maine/Canada continue avoiding river herring and year. In 2019, the river herring and shad border. The geographic range in which shad. These catch caps are intended to cap was met in March, and the Atlantic river herring may benefit from the allow for the full harvest of the mackerel mackerel possession limit was reduced designation of Atlantic herring EFH and herring annual catch limits while starting on March 12, 2019 (84 FR 8999; designation extends from the Maine/ reducing river herring and shad March 13, 2019). The 2019 river herring Canada border to Cape Hatteras. The Atlantic salmon EFH includes incidental catch and bycatch. and shad catch cap will be adjusted in the final rule implementing Framework most freshwater, estuary and bay In December 2014, NMFS Adjustment 13 to the Atlantic Mackerel, habitats historically accessible to implemented river herring and shad Squid, and Butterfish Fishery Atlantic salmon from Connecticut to the catch caps for the Atlantic herring Management Plan. Framework 13 Maine/Canada border (NEFMC 2006). fishery for 2014–2015, and allowed the proposes an initial 89-mt (196,211 lbs) Many of the estuary, bay and freshwater NEFMC to set river herring and shad catch cap. The cap could be increased habitats within the current and catch caps and associated measures in to 129 mt (284,396 lbs) if commercial historical range of Atlantic salmon future years though specifications or mackerel landings exceed 10,000 mt incorporate habitats used by river frameworks, as appropriate (79 FR (22,046,200 lbs). The increased cap herring for spawning, migration, and 71960, December 4, 2014). Catch of river reflects a proportional increase to the juvenile rearing. Among Atlantic herring and shad on fishing trips that proposed increase in the Atlantic herring EFHs are the pelagic waters in landed more than 6,600 lbs (3 mt) of mackerel commercial landings limit. the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, Atlantic herring counted towards the Framework 13 will be in place by fall Southern New England, and mid- caps. Caps were area- and gear-specific. of 2019. Atlantic south to Cape Hatteras out to Upon a NMFS determination that 95 Under the MSA, there is a the offshore U.S. boundary of the EEZ percent of a river herring and shad cap requirement to describe and identify (NEFMC 1998). These areas incorporate has been harvested, a 2,000-lb Atlantic Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) in each nearly all of the U.S. marine areas most herring possession limit for that area Federal FMP. EFH is defined as those frequently used by river herring for and gear would become effective for the waters and substrate necessary to fish growth and maturity. Accordingly, remainder of the fishing year. This for spawning, breeding, feeding, or conservation measures aimed at possession limit has been imposed growth to maturity. The rules improving or minimizing impacts to twice due to achieving the river herring promulgated by the NMFS in 1997 and habitats in these areas for the benefit of and shad catch caps (both for midwater 2002 further clarify EFH with the Atlantic salmon or Atlantic herring may trawl vessels in 2018) since the catch following definitions: (1) Waters— provide similar benefits to river herring. caps were implemented in 2014. The aquatic areas and their associated A number of other Federal laws river herring and shad catch caps for the physical, chemical, and biological provide habitat-related protections that Atlantic herring fishery for 2019 (set in properties that are used by fish and may may benefit river herring. Further the 2019 Adjustment to the Atlantic include aquatic areas historically used information on the protections Herring Specifications; 84 FR 2760, by fish where appropriate; (2) associated with these laws is February 8, 2019) are as follows: substrate—sediment, hard bottom, summarized in section 4.4.2 of the A midwater trawl cap for the Gulf of structures underlying the waters, and Status Review Report (NMFS 2019). Maine Catch Cap Area (76.7 mt) associated biological communities; (3) (169,094 lbs); necessary—the habitat required to Alewife and Blueback Herring A midwater trawl cap for Cape Cod support a sustainable fishery and the Rangewide and All DPSs Catch Cap Area (32.4 mt) (71,430 lbs); managed species’ contribution to a The inadequacy of regulatory A midwater trawl cap for Southern healthy ecosystem; and (4) spawning, mechanisms to control the harvests of New England Mid-Atlantic Catch Cap breeding, feeding, or growth to alewife and blueback herring was once Area (129.6 mt) (285,719 lbs); and maturity—stages representing a species’ considered a significant threat to their VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28659 populations. However, the best available structure for protection of river herring required at this dam, but fish are information indicates an adequate through ASMFC. However, like Federal transported around the dam to regulatory framework now exists within regulations (discussed above), state spawning habitat in two lakes. Since ASMFC to effectively manage alewife regulations related to habitat loss 2015, the annual adult stocking rate has and blueback herring directed harvest, remain a large concern for the future of been 315,000 fish. Adult river herring and there are multiple forms of habitat- the species with the predicted effects of are trapped at commercial harvest sites related regulatory protections for these climate change, especially since below the dam and trucked to waters fish. The SRT ranked Federal spawning and nursery habitats are upstream of the dam. The highest regulations in the medium category found in state waters. number of stocked fish in the Union rangewide (2.6) and for most DPSs (2.7– The SRT expressed uncertainty about River was 1,238,790 in 1986. In the 2.8). The Aw-Canada DPS was ranked as the effectiveness of state regulations Penobscot River watershed, over 48,000 low (2.3), because this DPS fell entirely related to the reliability of enforcement adult fish were stocked into lakes in within Canada where U.S. Federal of existing state laws and concerns for 2012 using fish collected from the regulations may have slightly less non-fishing regulations that authorize Kennebec (39,650) and Union Rivers influence in comparison to other areas modifications to coastal and riverine (8,998). overlapping or within the United States. habitat in the face of increasing In New Hampshire, from 1984 to SRT members noted that in the populations and coastal development. 2015, approximately 55,600 adult river framework of inter-jurisdictional State regulations were ranked in the herring have been stocked in coastal management, these fish may not receive medium (alewife, 1.6–2.7; blueback rivers (Cocheco, Winnicut, Exeter, as much protection as more herring 2.5–2.7) contribution to Lamprey, and Salmon Falls) (ASMFC commercially valuable species. The SRT extinction risk category, with state 2017b). The transfers that occurred were noted uncertainty around future catch regulations having the lowest impact on either in-basin transfers to previously caps (catch caps are scheduled to be the Aw-Canada DPS (1.6). unoccupied habitat or out-of-basin transfers to help supplement spawning recalculated in 2019) monitoring E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors runs in rivers with lower return coverage, and the use of bycatch Affecting the Species’ Continued numbers. Fish were stocked from avoidance programs. Existence The SRT also considered other various rivers including the Federal non-fishery regulations such as The Status Review identifies four Connecticut, Cocheco, Lamprey, the Clean Water Act and the Federal different threats that may contribute to Kennebec, and Androscoggin Rivers. Power Act. Despite current regulations, other natural or manmade factors The Massachusetts Division of Marine habitat alterations, such as dams and affecting the alewife and blueback Fisheries (DMF) conducts a trap and culverts, excess nutrient loading and herring continued existence: artificial transport-stocking program for alewife sedimentation due to poor land use propagation/stocking, competition, and blueback herring in Massachusetts. practices, dredging, and coastal hybrids, and landlocked populations. The three major objectives are to: (1) development, continue to affect both Artificial Propagation Maintain and enhance existing marine and freshwater habitats, populations, (2) restore historically potentially limiting population growth. Genetics data have shown that important populations and (3) create The SRT also noted that habitat stocking alewife and blueback herring new populations where feasible. improvements related to long-term within and out of basin in Maine has Stocking of gravid river herring where regulatory processes, such as relicensing had an impact on the genetic groupings river access has been provided or of hydropower facilities through the within Maine (McBride et al. 2014); improved is generally conducted for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission however, the extent to which this poses three or more consecutive years per that may result in dam removal or fish a threat to river herring locally or coast- system. Prior to the moratorium in 2012, passage facilities, would not be wide is unknown. Stocking river herring the program transported between 30,000 immediately realized. directly affects a specific river/ and 50,000 fish per year into 10–15 In tandem with the predicted effects watershed system for river herring in different systems. Since the moratorium, of climate change, such as increased that it can result in passing fish above a DMF stocking protocol was developed precipitation and warming ocean barriers into suitable and new spawning and implemented in 2013 that provided temperatures, the importance of Federal and rearing habitat and in expanding criteria for stocking decisions and a regulations to alewife and blueback populations into other watersheds. focus to allow remnant populations herring sustainability will likely The alewife restoration program in present at restoration sites to naturally increase in the future. Maine focuses primarily on stocking in recolonize habitat prior to the Androscoggin and Kennebec introduction of donor stock genetics. State Regulations watersheds. The highest number of The protocol has reduced stocking A historical review of state stocked fish was 2,211,658 in 2009 in activity, with most recent efforts regulations was compiled and published the Sebasticook River and 93,775 in occurring within drainage, moving fish in Volume I of the stock assessment 2008 in the Kennebec River. In 2017, the upstream past multiple obstructions to (ASMFC 2012, 2017b); an excerpt has majority of fish were stocked in the the headwater-spawning habitat been added to section 4.4.3 of the Status Kennebec (150,121), Androscoggin (ASMFC 2017b). Review Report, which provides an (97,083), and Sebasticook (50,450) Rhode Island’s Department of overview of state regulations that may watersheds. An additional 23,784 adult Environmental Management (DEM) provide protections to river herring fish were stocked into locations out of conducts trap and transport utilizing (NMFS 2019). basin, using fish collected from the out-of-state and in-state broodstock Androscoggin (16,584) or Kennebec sources to supplement existing runs or Alewife and Blueback Herring (7,200) Rivers. The Union River fishery restore extirpated systems where Rangewide and All DPSs in Ellsworth, Maine, is sustained habitats have been restored. Gilbert SRT members noted that, as with through the stocking of adult alewives Stuart River was Rhode Island’s only Federal regulations, existing state above the hydropower dam at the head- broodstock source for river herring regulations related to fisheries provide of-tide. Fish passage is not currently between 1966 and 1972, and today it is VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28660 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices still an important source. Nonquit River uncertainty associated with this area. relatively uncommon, it does has not been utilized as a broodstock However, there is no information to occasionally occur (Levin 2002) and has source, but was considered in 2001, suggest that these stocking efforts would been reported at rates of 1.8 to 2.4 prior to the drastic decrease in be discontinued, as these efforts are percent (Hasselman et al. 2014, spawning stock size. Between 1990 and economically and recreationally Hasselman et al. 2016). Most often, 1993, both Gilbert Stuart and Nonquit important to these areas. The intensive different reproductive strategies, home Rivers received supplemental stockings stocking in this region has likely ranges, and habitat differences of closely from the Agwam and Bourne rivers reduced genetic variability in the U.S. related species prevent interbreeding or located in Massachusetts. Since 2001, it portion of this DPS. keep interbreeding at very low levels. In has become increasingly difficult to circumstances where interbreeding does Competition obtain available out-of-state and in-state occur, natural selection often keeps broodstock sources, due to the declines Intra- and inter-specific competition hybrids in check because hybrids are in river herring run sizes. In 2015, the were considered as potential natural typically less fit in terms of survival or following locations were stocked: threats to alewife and blueback herring. their ability to breed successfully (Levin Kickemuit, Turner Reservoir, The earlier spawning time of alewife 2002). Other times, environmental Woonsquatucket, Potowamut, and may lead to differences from blueback conditions can provide an environment Watchaug with 1,000 fish each, and herring in prey selection, given that where hybrids can thrive. Though Pawtucket with 2,000 fish. these fish become more omnivorous available evidence indicates that some The Edenton National Fish Hatchery with increasing size (Klauda et al. alewife and blueback herring hybrids (NFH) in North Carolina and the 1991a). This could lead to differences in are found in the wild (Hasselman et al. Harrison Lake NFH in Virginia have prey selection given that juvenile 2014, Hasselman et al. 2016) there is not propagated blueback herring for alewife would achieve a greater age and enough evidence to conclude whether restoration purposes. Edenton NFH is size earlier than blueback herring. or not hybridization poses a threat to currently rearing blueback herring for Juvenile American shad are reported to one or both species of river herring. stocking in Indian Creek and Bennett’s focus on different prey than blueback Creek in the Chowan River watershed in herring (Klauda et al. 1991b). However, Alewife and Blueback Herring Virginia. Smith and Link (2010) found few Rangewide and All DPSs differences between American shad and Hybrids have likely been a natural Alewife and Blueback Herring blueback herring diets across geographic occurrence throughout the history of Rangewide and DPSs areas and size categories; therefore, alewife and blueback herring. In most Artificial propagation ranked as a very competition between these two species cases, they occur at low to very low low threat to alewife and blueback may be occurring. Cannibalism has been rates in natural and impacted systems rangewide (alewife, 1.2; blueback observed (rarely) in landlocked systems (McBride et al. 2014, Hasselman et al. herring, 1.3) and in all DPSs (alewife, with alewife. Additionally, evidence of 2014). The SRT ranked hybrids in the 1.2–1.3; blueback herring, 1.2), except hybridization exists between alewife very low category rangewide and for all for the Aw-Northern New England DPS and blueback herring, but the DPSs (1.0–1.1). (1.7) and Bb-Canada/Northern New implications of this are unknown. Landlocked Populations England DPS (1.8) where artificial Competition for habitat or resources has propagation was ranked as a low threat. not been documented with alewife/ Alewives and blueback herring SRT members noted that artificial blueback herring hybrids, as there is maintain two life history variants: propagation/stocking has detrimental little documentation of hybridization in anadromous and landlocked. It is effects on river herring populations. published literature, but given the thought that they diverged relatively First, hatchery efforts often take focus unknowns about their life history, it is recently (300 to 5,000 years ago) and are and importance away from on-the- possible that competition between non- now discrete from each other. ground issues with a fish and its habitat, hybrids and hybrids could be occurring. Landlocked alewife populations occur which would be harmful in the long in many freshwater lakes and ponds term. Second, artificial propagation Alewife and Blueback Herring from Canada to North Carolina as well would almost certainly lead to a Rangewide and All DPSs as the Great Lakes (Rothschild 1966, significant loss of genetic diversity, Competition among fish species is Boaze and Lackey 1974). Landlocked which is already likely substantially difficult to determine because it requires blueback herring occur mostly in the lower than most times in the past. demonstration of a limiting resource(s). southeastern United States and the The SRT ranked the threat of artificial Given the diet and generalist nature of Hudson River drainage. At this time, propagation/stocking slightly higher in alewife and blueback herring, prey are there is no substantive information that the alewife Aw-Northern New England likely not limiting. However, there is would suggest that landlocked DPS and the Bb-Canada/Northern New some possibility that space could be populations can or would revert to an England DPS compared to the limiting for these species (e.g. dams, anadromous life history if they had the rangewide and other DPS’ risk scores. poor fish passage, etc.). Competition opportunity to do so. As noted in the abundance discussion of ranking fell between very low to low The discrete life history and the Extinction Risk Assessment within rangewide and for all DPSs (alewife, morphological differences between the the Status Review Report (NMFS 2019), 1.4–1.5; blueback herring, 1.4–1.6). two life history variants provide the persistence of many populations in substantial evidence that upon Maine are reliant on active management Hybrids becoming landlocked, landlocked strategies (e.g. truck and transport, fish Genetic studies indicate that herring populations become largely lifts, fishway maintenance) rather than interbreeding, or hybridization, between independent and separate from on volitional passage. Therefore, a alewife and blueback herring may be anadromous populations. Landlocked change in management strategy, occurring in some instances where populations and anadromous especially related to stocking/truck and populations overlap (see for example, populations occupy largely separate transport would have dramatic impacts NMFS 2012a). Though interbreeding ecological niches, especially as related on these runs, and therefore raises among closely related species is to their contribution to freshwater, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28661 estuary and marine food webs endangered species within the SRT members also applied the same (Palkovacs and Post 2008). Thus, the foreseeable future throughout all or a likelihood point method to each alewife existence of landlocked life forms does significant portion of its range.’’ We DPS. The mean overall risk scores for not appear to pose a significant threat to reviewed the results of the SRT and alewife in the Aw-Canada DPS the anadromous forms. concurred with the SRT’s findings correspond to a 77 percent likelihood of a low risk and 23 percent moderate risk Alewife and Blueback Herring regarding extinction risk. We then of extinction. The mean overall risk Rangewide and All DPSs applied the statutory definitions of ‘‘threatened species’’ and ‘‘endangered scores for alewife in the Aw-Northern Landlocked populations are discrete species’’ to the SRT findings and other New England DPS correspond to a 74 from anadromous blueback herring, available information to determine if percent likelihood of a low risk and 26 occupy different ecological niches, and listing alewife or blueback herring percent moderate risk of extinction. The have differing morphological features. rangewide or in any of their respective mean overall risk scores for alewife in The SRT ranked landlocked populations DPSs was warranted. the Aw-Southern New England DPS as a very low contribution to extinction correspond to a 69 percent likelihood of risk rangewide and for all DPSs. Alewife a low risk and 31 percent moderate risk Overall Risk Summary The mean scores based on the SRT of extinction. The mean overall risk members’ individual scores indicate scores for alewife in the Aw-Mid- Guided by the results from the Atlantic DPS correspond to a 70 percent demographics risk analysis as well as that the level of extinction risk to the alewife rangewide is low, with 75 likelihood of a low risk and 30 percent threats assessment, the SRT members moderate risk of extinction. used their informed professional percent of the SRT members’ likelihood points allocated to the low risk category. Given this level of extinction risk for judgment to make an overall extinction all alewife DPSs, which is based on an risk determination for each species, now The SRT allocated 22 percent of their likelihood points to the moderate evaluation of the contribution of and in the foreseeable future. The SRT demographic parameters and threats to used a ‘‘likelihood analysis’’ to evaluate extinction risk category. The SRT allocated 3 percent of their likelihood extinction risk, we have determined that the overall risk of extinction. Each SRT the Canada, Aw-Northern New England, member had 10 likelihood points to points to the high extinction risk category. SRT members attributed the Aw-Southern New England and Aw- distribute among the following overall Mid-Atlantic DPSs do not meet the extinction risk categories: low risk, high extinction risk points to concerns associated with the species’ complex definition of an endangered or moderate risk, or high risk. These threatened species and, as such, listing categories are described in Section 6.1.4 anadromous fish life history, uncertainty in climate change and under the ESA is not warranted at this Overall Level of Extinction Risk time. Analysis of the Status Review Report vulnerability, incidental catch, potential (NMFS 2019). As noted earlier, the team habitat modification (e.g. increased Blueback Herring was asked to review the demographic coastal development and water use), For blueback herring rangewide, SRT risks and threats to the species, and to and concern about the adequacy of members indicated that there was a 66 consider and discuss how these threats, current and future regulatory percent low risk of extinction, a 30 acting in combination, may increase risk mechanisms, including fisheries percent moderate risk of extinction, and to the species. For example, the SRT rangewide. As noted throughout the a 4 percent high risk of extinction. SRT noted how climate variability may Extinction Risk Analysis section, the members attributed the high extinction enhance sedimentation in river systems, SRT expressed considerable uncertainty points to concerns associated with the increasing the threat associated with about the demographics risk to the complex anadromous fish life history, poor water quality, and how climate species and the threats, with a majority uncertainty in climate change and change effects may enhance the threat of of the mean scores for ranking threats vulnerability, incidental catch, potential water withdrawal in regions. The SRT falling between the very low (1) to habitat modification (e.g. increased noted higher uncertainty around how medium (3) categories. Overall the SRT coastal development and water use), the combination of such threats may acknowledged that alewife are at and concern about the adequacy of impact the two species, and this historical low levels, but noted that current and future regulatory uncertainty is reflected in a wider range improved fisheries management efforts mechanisms, including fisheries in their distribution of likelihood points in recent years have reduced fishing rangewide. As noted throughout the for these threats (largely those mortality rates in alewife stocks and that Extinction Risk Analysis section, the associated with habitat-related threats). hundreds of habitat improvement SRT expressed considerable uncertainty The SRT’s uncertainty about how the projects have been completed in the about the demographics risk to the demographic risks and the combination past 20 years. Many relatively robust species and the threats, with a majority of threats may impact the species (or populations of alewife exist, and genetic of the mean scores for ranking threats DPSs) is also reflected in a wider data show connectivity among falling between the very low (1) to distribution of likelihood points for the populations (genetic continuum along medium (3) categories. The SRT noted overall risk to the species. the coastline) despite regional blueback herring have been subjected to We have independently reviewed the groupings. habitat impacts for centuries and to best available scientific and commercial Given this level of extinction risk, considerable fishing pressure for many information, including the status review which is based on an evaluation of the decades. The SRT also acknowledged report (NMFS 2019), and other contribution of alewife’s demographic that blueback herring are at historically published and unpublished information parameters and threats to extinction low levels, but noted that improved reviewed by the SRT. As described risk, we have determined that the fisheries management efforts in recent earlier, an endangered species is ‘‘any alewife rangewide does not meet the years have reduced fishing mortality species which is in danger of extinction definition of an endangered or rates for blueback herring stocks and throughout all or a significant portion of threatened species and, as such, listing that hundreds of habitat improvement its range’’ and a threatened species is under the ESA is not warranted at this projects have been completed in the one ‘‘which is likely to become an time. past 20 years. While over one third of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28662 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices the SRT’s allocation points were in the low risk of extinction rangewide and in question is asked first, an affirmative moderate/high categories, indicating each DPS, we asked the SRT to also answer is required to proceed to the that blueback herring are at a greater consider whether a significant portion second question. (79 FR 37587). If we risk of extinction compared to alewives of the range may exist in either species determine that a portion of the range is due to lower overall abundances, and whether the species in those not ‘‘significant,’’ we will not need to increased vulnerability to anthropogenic portions are in danger of extinction now determine whether the species is disturbances in combination with or in the foreseeable future (79 FR endangered or threatened there; if we climate change, greater distances 37578; July 1, 2014). determine that the species is not between populations, poorer In 2014, the Services adopted a joint endangered or threatened in a portion of performance at fishways, and SPR Policy that outlines a step-wise its range, we will not need to determine uncertainties surrounding accurate analysis to be used to determine if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’ Thus, if distribution information rangewide, a whether a portion of the range is the answer to the first question is majority of the points were still ‘‘significant.’’ (79 FR 37578; July 1, negative—whether it addresses the allocated to the low risk category based 2014). The SRT followed the process significance question or the status on resilient life history traits and outlined in the policy when it question—then the analysis concludes, current abundance information. considered whether any portions of the and listing is not warranted. Given this level of extinction risk, ranges of alewife and blue back herring In making a determination of which is based on an evaluation of the are significant. ‘‘significance,’’ we consider the contribution of blueback herring’s Consistent with the policy, when we contribution of the individuals in that demographic parameters and threats to conduct an SPR analysis, we first portion to the viability of the species. extinction risk, we have determined that identify any portions of the range that The SPR Policy established a threshold the blueback herring rangewide does not warrant further consideration. The range for ‘‘significance’’ (i.e., the portion’s meet the definition of an endangered or of a species can theoretically be divided contribution to the viability is so threatened species and, as such, listing into portions in an infinite number of important that, without the members in under the ESA is not warranted at this ways. However, as noted in the policy, that portion, the species would be in time. there is no purpose to analyzing danger of extinction or likely to become SRT members also applied the same portions of the range that are not so in the foreseeable future). In two likelihood point method to each reasonably likely to be significant or in recent District Court cases challenging blueback herring DPS. The mean overall which a species may not be endangered listing decisions made by the USFWS, risk scores for blueback herring in the or threatened. To identify only those the definition for ‘‘significant’’ in the Bb-Canada/Northern New England DPS portions that warrant further SPR Policy was invalidated. The courts correspond to a 67 percent low risk of consideration we consider whether held that the threshold component of extinction, a 30 percent moderate risk of there is substantial information the definition was ‘‘impermissible,’’ extinction, and a 3 percent high risk of indicating that (1) the portions may be because it set too high a standard. extinction. The mean overall risk scores significant, and (2) the species may be Specifically, the courts held that under for blueback herring in the Bb-Mid- in danger of extinction in those portions the threshold in the policy, a species Atlantic DPS correspond to a 69 percent or is likely to become so within the would never be listed based on the low risk of extinction, a 30 percent foreseeable future. We emphasize that status of the portion, because in order moderate risk of extinction, and a 1 answering these questions in the for a portion to meet the threshold, the percent high risk of extinction. The affirmative is not a determination that species would be threatened or mean overall risk scores for blueback the species is endangered or threatened endangered rangewide. Center for herring in the Bb-Southern Atlantic DPS throughout a significant portion of its Biological Diversity, et al. v. Jewell, 248 correspond to a 69 percent low risk of range; rather, it is a step in determining F. Supp. 3d 946, 958 (D. Ariz. 2017); extinction, a 30 percent moderate risk of whether a more detailed analysis of the Desert Survivors v. DOI 321 F. Supp. 3d. extinction, and a 1 percent high risk of issue is required (79 FR 37578; July 1, 1011 (N.D. Cal., 2018). Accordingly, extinction. 2014). Making this preliminary while the SRT used the threshold Given this level of extinction risk for determination triggers a need for further identified in the policy, which was all blueback herring DPSs, which is review, but does not prejudge whether effective at the time the SRT met, our based on an evaluation of the the portion actually meets these analysis does not rely on the definition contribution of blueback herring’s standards such that the species should in the policy, but instead responds to demographic parameters and threats to be listed. the second Desert Survivors case (336 F. extinction risk, we have determined that If this preliminary determination Supp. 3d 1131, 1134–1136; N.D. CA the Bb-Canada/Northern New England, identifies a particular portion or August, 2018), in which the Court stated Bb-Mid-Atlantic and Bb-Southern portions for potential listing, those that there is no geographic limitation to Atlantic DPSs do not meet the definition portions are then fully evaluated under the holding that the definition of of an endangered or threatened species the ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ ‘‘significant’’ is impermissible. As such, and, as such, listing under the ESA is authority to determine whether the our analysis independently construes not warranted at this time. portion in question is biologically and applies a biological significance significant to the species and whether standard, drawing from the record Significant Portion of Its Range the species is endangered or threatened developed by the SRT with respect to As the definitions of ‘‘endangered in that portion. viability characteristics (i.e., abundance, species’’ and ‘‘threatened species’’ make The SPR Policy further provides that, productivity, spatial distribution, and clear, the determination of extinction depending on the particular facts of genetic diversity) of the members of the risk can be based on either assessment each situation, we may find it is more portions, in determining if a portion is of the rangewide status of the species, efficient to address the significance a significant portion of a species’ range. or the status of the species in a issue first, but in other cases, it will As described previously, based on ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ (SPR). make more sense to examine the status abundance estimates in the recent stock Because the SRT determined that of the species in the potentially assessment update (ASMFC 2017a) and alewife and blueback herring are at a significant portions first. Whichever the SRT’s extinction risk results, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28663 SRT determined that alewife are at low ranked slightly higher numerically in for blueback herring on the same scale. risk of extinction rangewide and in each the Mid-Atlantic compared to other Over the full time series (2006–2015) in of the four DPSs. Applying the SPR areas (including, but not limited to the most recent ASMFC assessment, run Policy to the alewife, the SRT first water quality and water withdrawal), trends for blueback herring have evaluated whether there is substantial the scoring varied from other areas only decreased in the Monument River, were information indicating that any portions by tenths of a point. Accordingly, the variable in the Connecticut River, and of the species’ range are threatened or identified qualitative rankings (i.e., very were stable in the Shetucket River and endangered. In light of the earlier low to medium) always matched at least Mianus Rivers (ASMFC 2017a). findings that all four DPSs, which span one or more other areas for the When considering spatial distribution the range of this species, are at low risk particular threat category. Additionally, of blueback herring in this portion, the of extinction, and finding no other the SRT completed an overall extinction SRT noted that although the abundances evidence of areas within the species risk assessment for the Bb-Mid-Atlantic are low, blueback herring were range where there is a concentration of portion of the range (see previous distributed through this entire portion threats, the SRT did not identify Overall Risk Summary section). The and appear to be reasonably well portions of the alewife range that were SRT allocated a 69 percent low risk of connected with rivers to the south of the at a high risk of extinction, nor could extinction, a 30 percent moderate risk of Connecticut and rivers to the north, the SRT identify threats that extinction and a 1 percent high risk of which also have blueback herring significantly affected one portion of the extinction. Overall, the best available populations. Recent genetic work by range. data indicate blueback herring in the Reid et al. (2018) places river The SRT then applied the SPR Policy Bb-Mid-Atlantic stock complex are not populations from this portion into at to each alewife DPS. In other words, the at risk of extinction now or in the least two separate genetic groups. The SRT evaluated whether there is foreseeable future. Therefore, the SRT Connecticut River and Mianus Rivers substantial information indicating that did not proceed to consider the were assigned to the Mid Atlantic stock any portions of any singular DPS may biological significance of the Bb-Mid- complex, and the Gilbert-Stuart and have a concentration of threats and Atlantic stock to the species. Monument Rivers were assigned to the should be further evaluated under the Additionally, because in 2011 the Southern New England stock complex SPR Policy. After reviewing the best petitioner identified the Long Island (Reid et al. 2018). The most recent available data, the SRT found no Sound portion of the range as a genetic studies do not indicate that this information to suggest that any portion potential DPS, the SRT considered if portion is unique in its genetic of the Aw-Canada, Aw-Northern New this portion of the Bb-Southern New diversity. England, Aw-Southern New England, or England stock complex would be Finally, the SRT completed an overall Aw-Mid-Atlantic DPSs stood out as considered ‘‘significant’’ under the SPR extinction risk assessment for the Long having a heightened risk of extinction Policy. The petitioners considered this Island portion identified by the now or in the foreseeable future, and the area to consist of the Monument, petitioners. Overall, the SRT concluded SRT found no reason to further evaluate Namasket, Mattapoiset, Gilbert-Stuart, that there is a low risk of extinction in areas of any particular DPS under the Shetucket, Farmington, Connecticut, the Long Island Sound portion currently SPR Policy. Naugatuck and Mianus Rivers. and in the foreseeable future. The Long After reviewing the SRT’s findings, The SRT considered the threats Island Sound population is not we agree that there is no evidence to affecting the Long Island Sound area, threatened or endangered, nor is it suggest that alewife are at heightened including habitat loss due to dams and likely to become so in the foreseeable risk of extinction, now or in the other barriers, water withdrawal due to future. Therefore, the SRT did not foreseeable future, in any particular area high population densities, and bycatch. proceed to consider whether the portion rangewide or in a DPS. Thus, we find no Notably, this area is found within the may be biologically significant to the evidence that a significant portion of Mid-Atlantic DPS (discussed above and species rangewide. this species or one the DPSs is reviewed in Evaluation of Threats), and After reviewing the SRT’s findings for threatened or endangered. much of the information that may differ the Bb-Mid-Atlantic stock and the Long As discussed in the Assessment of in the Long Island portion of the range Island Sound portion of the range, we Extinction Risk section previously, the is expressed in the above descriptions agree that there is no evidence to SRT determined that rangewide with additional detail provided in the suggest that blueback herring in these blueback herring have a 66 percent low Status Review Report (NMFS 2019). areas are at heightened risk of risk of extinction, a 30 percent moderate The SRT analyzed the available run extinction. Thus, we find that the Mid- risk of extinction and a 4 percent high data for the time series for the Long Atlantic stock and the Long Island risk of extinction. Applying the SPR Island trawl survey, Connecticut Sound portion are not significant Policy to the blueback herring, the SRT juvenile seine survey, and Monument portions of the blueback herring range first identified geographic areas where River run counts. Overall blueback because they are not in danger of there may be a concentration of threats. herring abundance for this portion is extinction or likely to become so in the The SRT then evaluated whether there difficult to estimate accurately and foreseeable future. is substantial information indicating managers have reported a mismatch of Next, the SRT considered the that any of these portions of the species’ river wide trend in abundance in this extinction risk of blueback herring in range may be facing a risk of extinction region when comparing juvenile seine the Bb-Mid-New England stock complex now or in the foreseeable future. survey data from the Connecticut River (see Figure 2) due to recent concerns The SRT specifically considered and Holyoke fishway counts (ASMFC related to very low run counts in New whether recent information about the 2017b). While the Connecticut River Hampshire rivers. The SRT considered Bb-Mid-Atlantic stock complex of watershed may act or has acted as a the best available information on blueback herring suggested this region source for blueback herring in this abundance, growth rates/productivity, of the range may constitute an SPR. The region, many other rivers in this portion spatial distribution, and diversity SRT considered threats to this region of the range are smaller coastal runs that contained in the recent stock assessment (see previous Evaluation of Threats drain directly into the ocean and are not update (ASMFC 2017a, b). The SRT section). While some threats were expected to be large production rivers examined trends for the Oyster, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28664 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices Winnicut, Taylor, Lamprey, and they considered the questions outlined portion would not cause the species as Cocheco Rivers in New Hampshire and in the Status Review Guidance (NMFS a whole to be below replacement rate. discussed threats in this region. For a 2017) to determine if the Bb-Mid-New Loss of the Bb-Mid-New England more detailed description of population England stock complex might be portion could potentially disrupt trends see the Status Review Report considered biologically ‘‘significant’’ connectivity in the very short term. (NMFS 2019). The SRT questioned i.e., whether the portion’s contribution However, the SRT noted that straying whether the fisheries-independent to the viability of the species is so rates would allow for recolonization of surveys that are currently conducted by important that, without the members in the rivers in the foreseeable future and the state adequately target blueback that portion, the species would be in therefore maintain overall spatial herring, but the reported indices in the danger of extinction or likely to become diversity. Populations from the north most recent stock assessment (ASMFC so in the foreseeable future. Specifically, (Bb-Canada/Northern New England 2017b) are the best available the SRT considered a number of DPS) and south (Bb-Mid-Atlantic DPS) information. The best available data questions that inform the viability contain hundreds of thousands of show low blueback herring run count characteristics: Abundance, blueback herring and would likely be estimates for rivers in this portion, and productivity, spatial distribution, and the first recolonizers of this 311 km (193 the SRT noted that recent sampling in genetic diversity. The SRT considered mi) stretch of coastline. the Lamprey River resulted in zero how the loss of the portion, given the If the Bb-Mid-New England portion blueback herring counted at the current available information on was lost, blueback herring rangewide fishway. SRT members noted that there abundance levels, would affect the would lose one of five known regional is likely some blueback herring species rangewide in a variety of ways. stock complexes and potential genetic spawning below the fishway, but the The SRT also considered how the loss adaptation. However, four stock monitoring design only counts fish of the portion would affect the spatial complexes would remain providing which ascend the fishway. However, distribution of the species (i.e., would genetic diversity to the species as this issue is not unique to this river there be a loss of connectivity, would whole. Further, there is no evidence to system. there be a loss of genetic diversity, or indicate that the loss of genetic diversity The most recent genetic information would there be an impact on the from the Bb-Mid-New England stock classified blueback herring in this population growth rate of the remainder complex would result in the remaining portion of the species’ range as of the species). populations lacking enough genetic belonging to the Bb-Mid New England diversity to allow for adaptations to stock complex (Reid et al. 2018) (see The SRT found that the Bb-Mid-New changing environmental conditions. In Figure 2). The Bb-Mid New England England portion of blueback herring was considering this portion of the range, portion is adjacent to stock complexes unlikely to contribute in such a way as the SRT was unaware of any particular in the north (Bb-Canada/Northern New to be considered significant to the habitat types that the species occupies England) and south (Bb-Mid Atlantic), blueback herring rangewide. More that are found only in the Bb-Mid-New though the precise boundaries and specifically, the Bb-Mid-New England England portion (see Distinct distribution of this stock complex are portion is very small compared to the Population Segment, significance not fully understood due to the rest of the range, spanning discussion). In conclusion, the SRT unsampled blueback herring approximately 311 km (193 mi) of determined that the Bb-Mid-New populations located between the Oyster coastline and encompassing less than 3 England stock is not a significant River and the Sebasticook River. percent of the estimated watershed area portion of the range because the loss of The SRT considered the threats of the species (see Table 1). the members in the portion would not affecting the Bb-Mid New England area, Additionally, the current run sizes in render the species in danger of including habitat loss due to dams and this portion in the last decade have extinction, nor make the species likely other barriers, threats to water quality, numbered in the 10,000s and more to become so in the foreseeable future. incidental catch, and inadequacies of recently in the 1,000’s and are estimated In light of these recent court decisions state and Federal regulations. Notably, at less than 1 percent of overall noted above that invalidated the this area overlaps with the southern rangewide abundance. The historical threshold for ‘‘significant’’ in the SPR portion of the Aw-Northern New contribution of the Mid-New England Policy that the SRT applied, we have England (noted above and reviewed in portion to the rangewide abundance is independently reviewed and have Evaluation of Threats), and additional assumed to be a similar proportion, as considered the biological importance or detail can be found in the Assessment historical declines were noted across the value that this stock complex provides of the ESA Section 4(a)(1) Factors of the blueback herring’s range. However, the to the conservation of the species Status Review Report, which reviews historical contribution may have been rangewide to determine if this portion information for each threat along the slightly higher than one percent due to may be ‘‘significant’’ as contemplated by coastline (NMFS 2019). the intense current and historic the ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ The SRT completed an overall industrial development (e.g., dam phrase in the ESA. The foundation of extinction risk estimate for the Bb-Mid- construction near head of tide for mills) the policy of defining ‘‘significant’’ in New England stock complex of blueback in this region (see Evaluation of terms of biological significance to the herring and allocated 51 percent of the Threats). Additional uncertainty exists species has not been invalidated by any likelihood points to the high risk of as unsampled adjacent rivers may be court, and we continue to rely on the extinction, 39 percent to moderate risk attributed to this stock complex (see principles of biological significance as of extinction and 10 percent to low risk Figure 2). The SRT noted that due to the the corner stone of this SPR analysis. of extinction. The allocation of small abundance in the Bb-Mid-New Specifically, we consider how this likelihood points in the high risk England portion and its small portion contributes to the conservation category was primarily due to declining contribution to the overall population of the species by analyzing the run trends and poor population metrics. size, they would not expect deleterious abundance, spatial distribution, genetic Because the SRT found the Bb-Mid- effects to the remainder of the species diversity and productivity of the New England stock complex of blueback from its loss. The SRT also noted that members in the portion and the value herring to be at a high risk of extinction, the loss of the Bb-Mid-New England these factors and other relevant factors VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices 28665 contribute to the conservation of the contributes genetic diversity to the Final Determination species overall. species; however, the importance of that Section 4(b)(1) of the ESA requires Regarding abundance estimates from diversity is unclear because there is no that listing determinations be based this stock complex, while exact evidence at this time indicating that the solely on the best scientific and numbers of individuals are not genetic differences between stocks are commercial data available after available, the current indices show that linked to adaptive traits. Further, conducting a review of the status of the this stock complex likely has a low level genetic mixing at the boundaries of species and taking into account those of biological importance to the these stock complexes obscures the efforts, if any, being made by any state rangewide abundance estimates. Due to importance of each group with regard to or foreign nation, or political the small geographic size of the area that the genetic diversity for the species as subdivisions thereof, to protect and it inhabits, this stock contributes a small a whole. Overall, we find that the Bb- conserve the species. We have proportion of the overall geographic Mid-New England stock complex’s independently reviewed the best distribution of the blueback herring available scientific and commercial rangewide. Specifically, this stock does contribution to the population in terms information, including information not have the population numbers or of abundance and spatial distribution is provided in the petition, information habitat capacity to buffer surrounding of low biological importance and overall submitted in response to the request for stocks against environmental threats does not appear significant to blueback comments (82 FR 38672; August 15, such as droughts, or flooding. We found herring as a whole. Thus, we find that only low abundance, and we did not the Mid-New England stock complex 2017), the status review report (NMFS find unique threats to this stock does not represent a significant portion 2019), and other published and complex. of the blueback herring range. unpublished information cited herein, We also examined spatial distribution and we have consulted with species In summary, we find that there is no experts and individuals familiar with and genetic diversity. This stock portion of the blueback herring’s range complex bridges connectivity between the alewife and blueback herring. We that is both significant to the species as identified four DPSs of the alewife and the Bb-Canada/Northern New England a whole and endangered or threatened. and Bb-Southern New England stock three DPSs of the blueback herring. We Thus, we find no reason to list this considered each of the section 4(a)(1) complexes by habitat between these two species based on a significant portion of stocks. However, blueback herring have factors to determine whether any one of its range. been observed to migrate this distance the factors contributed significantly to previously (e.g., Eakin 2017), and the Protective Efforts the extinction risk of the species. We importance of this bridge between stock also considered the combination of complexes is likely low given the In the Evaluation of Threats section, those factors to determine whether they species’ straying behavior. Overall, we we describe ongoing efforts that provide collectively contributed significantly to find that the contribution that this stock for the conservation of alewife and extinction risk. As previously makes to spatial distribution of the blueback herring either indirectly or explained, we could not identify any species is low because it inhabits a directly (see, specifically, discussions portion of the species’ range that met small area compared to other stock under A. Habitat Destruction, both criteria of the SPR Policy. complexes of this species and to the Modification, or Curtailment, and B. Therefore, our determination set forth rangewide distribution. Overutilization). In these sections we below is based on a synthesis and According to the most recent genetic describe efforts to restore alewife and integration of the foregoing information, study (Reid et al. 2018), the Bb-Mid- blueback herring habitat (e.g., with factors and considerations, and their New England stock complex represents connectivity projects such as dam effects on the status of the species one of five distinguishable groupings of removal and fish passage installation throughout their ranges and within each genetic diversity for blueback herring. and improvements) and to manage DPS. Alewife and blueback herring have While it is likely that this unique threats associated with harvest. been subjected to habitat impacts for genetic signature conveys some type of Protective efforts that are likely to be centuries and to considerable fishing adaptive potential to the species most effective in supporting the long- rangewide, we do not currently have pressure for many decades. We term growth of these species center on evidence of this. Because we do not acknowledge that they are at historically ensuring connectivity in spawning know the adaptive potential of the low levels, but note that improved rivers. While hundreds of restoration genetic signature for the Bb-Mid-New fisheries management efforts in recent England complex, we are not able to projects have occurred over the last 20 years have reduced fishing mortality determine whether the genetic diversity years to improve access to alewife and rates on alewife and blueback herring contributes in a significant way to the blueback herring habitat across the stocks. persistence of the species rangewide. range, these efforts often take many Many relatively robust populations of The available genetic research currently years to accomplish, and the likelihood alewife exist, and genetic data show suggests that there is overlap in genetic of projects occurring (in the long term) connectivity among populations signatures at the boundaries of all five are not easy to predict due to (genetic continuum along the coastline) stock complexes, such that we observe confounding factors associated with despite regional groupings. a coastwide continuum where each river funding and political/community will. Demographic risks are low to moderate is most similar to its nearest neighbors. Further, once accomplished, the efforts and significant threats have been Summarizing our analysis, we find may only have localized effects on reduced. Blueback herring are at a that the Bb-Mid-New England stock independent rivers. While we have greater risk of extinction (as evidenced complex contributes a low level of reviewed the states’ efforts that may by over one third of the SRT likelihood importance to the species rangewide in convey protections for these species into points in the moderate/high categories), terms of abundance, productivity, and the future, we do not find that these as indicated by lower overall spatial distribution. As one of five of the future efforts are certain to significantly abundances, increased vulnerability to stock complexes, we find that the Bb- alter the extinction risk for alewife or anthropogenic disturbances in Mid-New England stock complex blueback herring. combination with climate change, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 28666 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Notices greater distances between populations, overfishing is not currently occurring listing as threatened or endangered at poorer performance at fishways, and within the range; (4) while the current this time. uncertainties surrounding accurate population size has significantly Additionally, since the blueback distribution information rangewide. declined from historical numbers, the herring is not in danger of extinction However, based upon the available population size is sufficient to maintain throughout all or a significant portion of information summarized here, blueback population viability into the foreseeable its range, including DPSs, or likely to herring have an overall low risk of future and consists of at least millions become so within the foreseeable future, extinction rangewide and in each DPS, of individuals in several DPSs and it does not meet the definition of a assuming the dominant threats to their hundreds of thousands in other DPSs; threatened species or an endangered populations continue to be managed. (5) there is no evidence that disease or species. Therefore, the blueback herring We conclude that the alewife and predation is contributing to increasing does not warrant listing as threatened or blueback herring are not in danger of the risk of extinction; and (6) there is no endangered at this time. extinction, nor likely to become so in evidence that the species is currently References the foreseeable future throughout all or suffering from depensatory processes a significant portion of their ranges or in (such as reduced likelihood of finding a A complete list of all references cited any of the DPSs. We summarize the mate or mate choice or diminished herein is available upon request (see FOR factors supporting this conclusion as fertilization and recruitment success) or FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). follows: (1) The species are broadly is at risk of extinction due to distributed over a large geographic range Authority environmental variation or within the Northwest Atlantic Ocean anthropogenic perturbations. The authority for this action is the and along the U.S. and Canadian Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Since the alewife is not in danger of Atlantic coasts, with no marine barriers amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). to dispersal; (2) genetic data indicate extinction throughout all or in a that populations are not isolated and significant portion of its range, Dated: June 13, 2019. that both species demonstrate a nearest including DPSs, or likely to become so Christopher Wayne Oliver, neighbor genetic continuum along the within the foreseeable future, it does not Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, coast; (3) while both the species meet the definition of a threatened National Marine Fisheries Service. possesses life history characteristics that species or an endangered species. [FR Doc. 2019–12908 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] increase vulnerability to overutilization, Therefore, the alewife does not warrant BILLING CODE 3510–22–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:25 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNN2.SGM 19JNN2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 118 June 19, 2019 Part III Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 Section 199A Rules for Cooperatives and Their Patrons; Proposed Rule VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28668 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY copy. Send hard copy submissions to: Cooperatives to reduce their section CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–118425–18), Room 199A(a) deduction if those patrons Internal Revenue Service 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. receive certain payments from such Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, cooperatives. Section 199A(g) provides 26 CFR Part 1 Washington, DC 20044. Submissions a deduction for Specified Cooperatives [REG–118425–18] may be hand-delivered Monday through and their patrons (section 199A(g) Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and deduction) that is based on the former RIN 1545–B090 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG– section 199 deduction. Before the 1118425–18), Courier’s Desk, Internal amendments of the 2018 Act, section Section 199A Rules for Cooperatives Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution 199A(g) provided a modified version of and Their Patrons Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224. the section 199A(a) deduction for AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Specified Cooperatives. Treasury. Concerning the proposed regulations, The Treasury Department and the IRS ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; James Holmes at (202) 317–4137; published proposed regulations (REG– withdrawal of notice of proposed concerning submissions of comments 107892–18) providing guidance on the rulemaking. and requests for hearing, Regina L. section 199A(a) deduction in the Johnson at (202) 317–6901 (not toll-free Federal Register (83 FR 40884) on SUMMARY: These proposed regulations numbers). August 16, 2018 (August 2018 NPRM). provide guidance to cooperatives to The final regulations were published in which sections 1381 through 1388 of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the Federal Register (84 FR 2952) on Internal Revenue Code (Code) apply Background February 8, 2019 (TD 9847). (Cooperatives) and their patrons TD 9847 did not address patrons’ This document contains proposed regarding the deduction for qualified treatment of payments received from amendments to the Income Tax business income (QBI) under section Cooperatives for purposes of section Regulations (26 CFR part 1) under 199A(a) of the Code as well as guidance 199A(a) or the section 199A(g) sections 199A and 1388 of the Code. to specified agricultural or horticultural deduction for Specified Cooperatives, Section 199A was enacted on cooperatives (Specified Cooperatives) though it did restate the reduction December 22, 2017, by section 11011 of and their patrons regarding the required under section 199A(b)(7). See ‘‘An Act to provide for reconciliation deduction for domestic production § 1.199A–1(e)(7). The August 2018 pursuant to titles II and V of the activities under section 199A(g) of the NPRM preamble stated that the Treasury concurrent resolution on the budget for Code. These proposed regulations also Department and the IRS would continue fiscal year 2018,’’ Public Law 115–97, provide guidance on section 199A(b)(7), to study the area and intended to issue 131 Stat. 2054, 2063 (TCJA). Parts of the rule requiring patrons of Specified separate proposed regulations section 199A were amended on March Cooperatives to reduce their deduction describing rules for applying section 23, 2018, as if included in TCJA, by for QBI under section 199A(a). In 199A to Specified Cooperatives and section 101 of Division T of the addition, these proposed regulations their patrons. This notice of proposed Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, include a single definition of patronage rulemaking sets forth those proposed Public Law 115–141, 132 Stat. 348, 1151 and nonpatronage under section 1388 of regulations and provides additional (2018 Act). Section 199A applies to the Code. Finally, these proposed guidance to patrons calculating their taxable years beginning after 2017 and regulations propose to remove the final 199A(a) deduction. before 2026. Unless otherwise indicated, regulations, and withdraw the proposed all references to section 199A are to Explanation of Provisions regulations that have not been finalized, section 199A as amended by the 2018 The purpose of these proposed under former section 199. These Act. regulations is to provide guidance proposed regulations affect Cooperatives In addition, section 13305 of the TCJA regarding the application of sections as well as patrons that are individuals, repealed section 199 (former section 199A(a), 199A(b)(7), and 199A(g) to partnerships, S corporations, trusts, and 199), which provided a deduction for Cooperatives and their patrons as well estates engaged in domestic trades or income attributable to domestic as to Specified Cooperatives and their businesses. production activities (section 199 patrons. Whereas section 199A(a) is DATES: Written (including electronic) deduction). Public Law 115–97, 131 generally available to patrons of all comments and requests for a public Stat. 2054, 2126. The repeal of former Cooperatives, sections 199A(b)(7) and hearing must be received by August 19, section 199 is effective for all taxable 199A(g) apply only to Specified 2019. As of June 19, 2019, the proposed years beginning after 2017. This notice Cooperatives and their patrons. rule published on August 27, 2015 (80 of proposed rulemaking therefore These proposed regulations are FR 51978), is withdrawn. proposes to remove the final regulations organized into six sections: Proposed ADDRESSES: Submit electronic under former section 199, and §§ 1.199A–7 through 1.199A–12. submissions via the Federal withdraws proposed regulations under Proposed § 1.199A–7 describes rules for eRulemaking Portal at former section 199. patrons of Cooperatives to calculate www.regulations.gov (indicate IRS and Section 199A(a) provides taxpayers a their section 199A(a) deduction and REG–118425–18) by following the deduction of up to 20 percent of QBI rules for patrons of Specified online instructions for submitting from a domestic business operated as a Cooperatives to calculate the reduction comments. Once submitted to the sole proprietorship or through a to their section 199A(a) deduction as Federal eRulemaking Portal, comments partnership, S corporation, trust, or required by section 199A(b)(7). Unless cannot be edited or withdrawn. The estate, and up to 20 percent of qualified otherwise provided in these proposed Department of the Treasury (Treasury real estate investment trust (REIT) regulations, all of the rules set forth in Department) and the IRS will publish dividends and publicly traded TD 9847 relating to the section 199A(a) for public availability any comment partnership (PTP) income (section deduction apply to Cooperatives and received to its public docket, whether 199A(a) deduction). Section 199A(b)(7) their patrons. Specified Cooperatives are submitted electronically or in hard requires patrons of Specified a subset of Cooperatives; therefore, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28669 requirements of proposed § 1.199A–7 C corporations are not eligible for the Cooperative’s trade or business level also apply to Specified Cooperatives. section 199A(a) deduction. Cooperatives (except as permitted by the threshold Proposed § 1.199A–8 sets out the are C corporations for Federal income rules, see § 1.199A–5(a)(2)), and (iv) criteria that Specified Cooperatives tax purposes and, therefore, are not provided the patron receives certain must satisfy to qualify for the section eligible for the section 199A(a) information from the Cooperative about 199A(g) deduction, and sets forth four deduction. Similarly, patrons that are C these payments (see proposed § 1.199A– steps necessary to calculate this corporations are also not eligible for the 7(c)(3) and (d)(3)). Proposed § 1.199A– deduction. These proposed regulations section 199A(a) deduction. However, 7(e) provides that in situations in which provide that the section 199A(g) patrons that are individuals are eligible a patron conducts a trade or business deduction available to Specified for the section 199A(a) deduction. that receives patronage dividends or Cooperatives and their patrons is Section 1.199A–1(a)(2) provides that, for similar payments from a Cooperative, generally computed only with respect to purposes of applying the rules of the W–2 wages and unadjusted basis patronage gross receipts and related §§ 1.199A–1 through 1.199A–6, a immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of deductions. Exempt Specified reference to an individual includes a qualified property considered are those Cooperatives (those that qualify under reference to a trust (other than a grantor of the patron’s trade or business and not section 521) may compute their section trust) or an estate to the extent that the of the Cooperative that directly 199A(g) deductions with respect to both section 199A(a) deduction is conducts the trade or business from patronage and nonpatronage gross determined by the trust or estate under which the payments arise. All of these receipts and related deductions. the rules of § 1.199A–6. These proposed proposed rules are discussed further in Proposed §§ 1.199A–9 through regulations apply this same usage of the this section. term individual. 1.199A–11 provide additional guidance, B. QBI of Patrons based on the regulations under former The benefits of section 199A(a) are section 199, regarding the four steps set limited to individuals with income from Although Cooperatives are C forth in proposed § 1.199A–8. Proposed a trade or business as defined in section corporations for Federal income tax § 1.199A–9 provides additional rules for 199A(d)(1) and § 1.199A–1(b)(14) (trade purposes, section 1382(b) and (c) allow determining a Specified Cooperative’s or business) with QBI. To the extent a Cooperatives to determine taxable domestic production gross receipts patron operating a trade or business has income after deducting distributions of (DPGR). Proposed § 1.199A–10 provides income directly from that business (as patronage dividends or similar additional rules for calculating costs opposed to receiving a patronage payments to patrons. The effect of these (including cost of goods sold (COGS) dividend from a Cooperative), the deductions is to remove the and other expenses, losses, and patron must follow the rules of distributions from income taxed at the deductions) allocable to a Specified §§ 1.199A–1 through 1.199A–6 to Cooperative level leaving it subject to Cooperative’s DPGR. Proposed calculate the section 199A deduction. income tax only at the patron level. § 1.199A–11 provides additional rules However, to the extent a patron receives Exempt and nonexempt Cooperatives for determining the W–2 wage patronage dividends or similar are both permitted to deduct patronage limitation in section 199A(g)(1)(B). payments from a Cooperative, the distributions if they satisfy the Proposed § 1.199A–12 details rules for patron must follow the additional requirements described in section applying section 199A(g) in the context special rules and clarification in 1382(b). Only exempt Cooperatives are permitted to also deduct nonpatronage of an expanded affiliated group (EAG) proposed § 1.199A–7 to calculate the distributions if the requirements under and other special rules contained in section 199A deduction. section 1382(c) are met. Cooperatives section 199A(g)(5) that are not otherwise For these purposes, patronage dividends or similar payments include are subject to Federal income tax on addressed in these proposed money, property, qualified written income for which no deduction may be regulations. taken under section 1382(b) or (c), in the These proposed regulations also notices of allocations, and qualified per- same manner as any C corporation. include, under section 1388, a single unit retain certificates for which an Section 1.199A–3(b) contains the definition of patronage and exempt or nonexempt Cooperative receives a deduction under section general rules regarding QBI. QBI is the nonpatronage in proposed § 1.1388–1(f), 1382(b), and nonpatronage distributions net amount of qualified items of income, which is intended to reflect the current paid in money, property, qualified gain, deduction, and loss with respect to case law under section 1388. This written notices of allocation as well as any trade or business as determined Explanation of Provisions describes money or property paid in redemption under those rules. While income from each section of the proposed regulations of a nonqualified written notice of the ownership of a C corporation is in more detail. allocation for which an exempt generally not QBI, section 199A I. Proposed § 1.199A–7, Rules for Cooperative receives a deduction under provides a special rule for patrons Patrons of Cooperatives section 1382(c)(2) (hereinafter receiving patronage dividends from a collectively referred to as patronage Cooperative. A. In General dividends or similar payments). Section 199A(c)(3)(B)(ii) provides that As noted in the Background, section Section 1.199A–7(c) and (d) of these any amount described in section 199A(a) may allow a taxpayer a proposed regulations provide that these 1385(a)(1), which concerns patronage deduction of up to 20 percent of QBI patronage dividends or similar dividends, is not treated as an exclusion from a domestic business operated as a payments may be included in the to a patron’s QBI. The Joint Committee sole proprietorship or through a patron’s QBI: (i) To the extent that these on Taxation Report (JCX–6–18, released partnership, S corporation, trust, or payments are related to the patron’s March 22, 2018) (Joint Committee estate, and up to 20 percent of qualified trade or business, (ii) are qualified items Report) states that QBI includes any REIT dividends and PTP income. A of income, gain, deduction, or loss at the patronage dividend (as defined in section 199A(a) deduction is not Cooperative’s trade or business level, section 1388(a)), per-unit retain available for wage income or for (iii) are not income from a specified allocation (as defined in section business income earned through a C service trade or business (SSTB), as 1388(f)), qualified written notice of corporation. defined in section 199A(d)(2), at the allocation (as defined in section VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28670 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 1388(c)), or any other similar amount business from which the distribution is attachment thereto before the received from a Cooperative, provided derived is in the best position to know publication of these proposed such amount is otherwise a qualified whether the patronage dividend or regulations in the Federal Register. item of income, gain, deduction, or loss similar payment contains qualified These rules apply to both exempt and (that is, such amount is (i) effectively items. The Cooperative must report this nonexempt Cooperatives as well as connected with the conduct of a trade information regardless of whether the patronage and nonpatronage or business within the United States, patron’s taxable income does not exceed distributions. The Treasury Department and (ii) included or allowed in the threshold amount ($315,000 in the and the IRS request comments on these determining taxable income for the case of joint returns and $157,500 for all reporting requirements and whether any taxable year). Joint Committee Report, other taxpayers for any taxable year additional information from pages 24–25. As a result, the rules of beginning before 2019). For taxable Cooperatives that make distributions to proposed § 1.199A–7(c) provide that years beginning after 2018, see Rev. their patrons is needed for their patrons patronage dividends or similar Proc. 2018–57, 2018–49 IRB 827, or its to determine their section 199A(a) payments (as previously discussed) are successor (relating to inflation deduction. included in calculating QBI for adjustments). C. Specified Service Trade or Business purposes of the patrons’ section 199A(a) A patron must use that information deduction provided the amounts are when determining the patron’s section Section 199A(c)(1) provides that only otherwise qualified items. To be 199A(a) deduction. For example, if the items attributable to a qualified trade or otherwise qualified, these amounts must Cooperative determines an entire business are taken into account in be qualified items of income, gain, distribution does not contain any determining the section 199A(a) deduction, and loss under section qualified item of income, gain, deduction for QBI. Under section 199A(c)(3). deduction, and loss because it is not 199A(d)(1) a ‘‘qualified trade or Unlike nonexempt Cooperatives, effectively connected with the conduct business’’ excludes (A) an SSTB or (B) exempt Cooperatives are permitted to of the Cooperative’s trade or business the trade or business of performing deduct nonpatronage distributions within the United States, the services as an employee. TD 9847 under section 1382(c). As a result, this Cooperative does not include such provides that, unless an exception income is subject to taxation only at the amount when reporting qualified items applies, if a trade or business is an patron level. The rules of proposed to the patron, and the patron does not SSTB, none of its items are to be taken § 1.199A–7(c) provide that a patron’s include the distribution in the patron’s into account for purposes of QBI can include payments to patrons for QBI. In addition, to the extent the determining a taxpayer’s QBI. which the exempt Cooperative receives distribution includes interest income Under section 199A(d)(3), individuals a deduction under section 1382(c)(2) in that is not properly allocable to the with taxable income not exceeding the addition to payments for which the Cooperative’s trade or business on threshold amount ($315,000 in the case exempt Cooperative receives a behalf of, or with, its patrons, the of joint returns and $157,500 for all deduction under section 1382(b). That distribution is not a qualified item of other taxpayers for any taxable year is, amounts paid under section income, gain, deduction, and loss. As a beginning before 2019), are not subject 1382(c)(2) are treated by a patron as result, the Cooperative does not include to a restriction with respect to SSTBs. equivalent to patronage dividends under such amount when reporting qualified For taxable years beginning after 2018, section 1382(b) for purposes of QBI. items to the patron, and the patron does see Rev. Proc. 2018–57, 2018–49 IRB Amounts paid under section 1382(c)(1) not include the income in the patron’s 827, or its successor. Therefore, if an (dividends on capital stock), however, QBI. individual has taxable income not are dividends from ownership of C Proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3) provides exceeding the threshold amount, the corporations, which are not included in that the Cooperative must report the individual is eligible for the section QBI. amount of qualified items of income, 199A(a) deduction with respect to TD 9847 generally provides that gain, deduction, or loss in the qualified items of income, gain, income is tested at the trade or business distributions made to the patron on an deduction, and loss from the SSTB level where it is directly generated. attachment to or on the Form 1099– notwithstanding that the trade or Accordingly, these proposed regulations PATR, Taxable Distributions Received business is an SSTB. The inapplicability provide that patronage dividends or From Cooperatives (Form 1099–PATR) of the SSTB rules, W–2 wage limitation, similar payments are considered to be (or any successor form), issued by the and UBIA of qualified property generated from the trade or business the Cooperative to the patron, unless limitation in computing the section Cooperative conducts on behalf of or otherwise provided by the instructions 199A(a) deduction is subject to a phase- with the patron, and are tested by the to the Form. The Cooperative does not in for individuals with taxable income Cooperative at its trade or business include any items from an SSTB in within the phase-in range. See the rules level. reporting the amount of qualified items in § 1.199A–5 for the rules relating to A patron must determine QBI for each of income, gain, deduction, and loss and SSTBs. trade or business it directly conducts. must instead follow the rules in The rules in proposed § 1.199A–7(d) However, in situations where the patron proposed § 1.199A–7(d) for income from clarify that a patron (whether the patron receives a distribution from a an SSTB. If a patron does not receive is a relevant passthrough entity (RPE) or Cooperative that is a patronage dividend such information from the Cooperative an individual) must determine whether or similar payment, the Cooperative on or before the due date of the Form the trades or businesses it directly determines whether that distribution 1099–PATR, the amount of distributions conducts are SSTBs. These proposed contains qualified items of income, as from the Cooperative that may be rules also provide that in the case of a defined under section § 1.199A–3(b), included in the patron’s QBI is patron’s trade or business that receives and reports that information to the presumed to be zero. This presumption patronage dividends or similar patron. The patron needs this does not apply to amounts of qualified payments distributed from a information to determine its section items of income, gain, deduction and Cooperative, the Cooperative must 199A(a) deduction, and the Cooperative loss to the extent that they were not determine whether the distributions directly conducting the trade or reported on the Form 1099–PATR or from the Cooperative include items of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28671 income, gain, deduction, and loss from additional information from UBIA of qualified property limitations an SSTB directly conducted by the Cooperatives that make distributions to at the patron level based on the patrons’ Cooperative, and whether such items their patrons is needed for their patrons trades or businesses, without any regard are qualified items with respect to such to determine their section 199A(a) to the Cooperative’s W–2 wages or UBIA SSTB. The Cooperative must report to deduction. of qualified property. the patron the amount of qualified items In summary, a Cooperative must D. Determination of W–2 Wages and report to patrons: (i) Whether the of income, gain, deduction, and loss UBIA of Qualified Property from an SSTB directly conducted by the patronage dividends or similar Cooperative. The patron then Section § 1.199A–1(d) addresses the payments include qualified items of determines if the distribution may be calculation of the section 199A(a) income, gain, deduction, and loss from included in the patron’s QBI depending deduction for individuals with taxable a non-SSTB and (ii) whether the on the patron’s taxable income and the income exceeding the threshold amount distributions from the Cooperative statutory phase-in and threshold and provides guidance on the include qualified items of income, gain, amounts. Because the Cooperative may application of these limitations. All of deduction, and loss from an SSTB not know whether the patron’s taxable the rules relating to the REIT dividends directly conducted by the Cooperative, income exceeds the threshold amount, and qualified PTP income component of but a Cooperative does not report any the Cooperative must report this the section 199A(a) deduction W–2 wages or UBIA of qualified information to all patrons. Without this applicable to individuals with taxable property to patrons. The Treasury information, a patron with taxable income not exceeding the threshold Department and the IRS request income within the phase-in range or amount also apply to individuals with comments on these proposed rules below the threshold amount would not taxable income exceeding the threshold regarding W–2 wages and UBIA of have the information necessary to take amount. The QBI component of the qualified property and whether it would into account the amount of qualified section 199A(a) deduction, however, is be appropriate for Cooperatives to be items of income, gain, deduction, and subject to limitations for individuals required to report such amounts to loss from an SSTB in determining the with taxable income exceeding the patrons to determine their section patron’s section 199A(a) deduction for threshold amount. These include the 199A(a) deduction. limitations based on the W–2 wages of QBI. The rules in § 1.199A–5 are E. Special Rules for Patrons of Specified applied by the Cooperative to determine the trade or business or a combination of the W–2 wages and the UBIA of Cooperatives if the trade or business is an SSTB. For qualified property. Section 199A provides special rules example, the Cooperative will apply the Under § 1.199A–2, W–2 wages and for patrons of Specified Cooperatives. gross receipts de minimis rules in UBIA of qualified property are Because patrons of Specified § 1.199A–5(c)(1) to determine if the determined by the individual or RPE Cooperatives may be eligible to take trade or business is an SSTB. that directly conducts the trade or both a section 199A(a) and section Proposed § 1.199A–7(d)(3) provides business. Section 199A(f)(1)(A)(2)(iii) 199A(g) deduction, section 199A(b)(7) that the Cooperative must report to the requires that S corporations and provides that if a trade or business of a patron the amount of SSTB income, partnerships allocate W–2 wages and patron of a Specified Cooperative gain, deduction, and loss in UBIA of qualified property to their receives qualified payments (as defined distributions that is qualified with owners in accordance with each owner’s in section 199A(g)(2)(e) and proposed respect to any SSTB directly conducted applicable share, and § 1.199A–6 § 1.199A–8(d)(2)(ii)) from such by the Cooperative on an attachment to contains additional information Specified Cooperative that are included or on the Form 1099–PATR (or any regarding these reporting requirements. in the patron’s QBI, the patron must successor form) issued by the Section 199A does not provide a similar reduce its section 199A(a) deduction by Cooperative to the patron, unless rule for Cooperatives. the lesser of (i) 9 percent of so much of otherwise provided by the instructions Section 199A(c)(3)(B)(ii) provides that the QBI with respect to such trade or to the Form. If the Cooperative does not patronage dividends or similar business that is properly allocable to report the amount on or before the due payments may be treated as qualified qualified payments from the Specified date of the Form 1099–PATR, then only items of income. Only the Cooperative Cooperative, or (ii) 50 percent of so the amount that a Cooperative reports as knows the origin and character of the much of the patrons’ W–2 wages qualified items of income, gain, patronage dividends or similar (determined under section 199A(b)(4)) deduction, and loss under § 1.199A– payments. As a result, the Cooperative with respect to such trade or business as 7(c)(3) may be included in the patron’s must determine if these payments meet are so allocable. This reduction is QBI, and the remaining amount of the statutory requirements in section required by section 199A(b)(7) whether distributions from the Cooperative that 199A(c)(3), and must provide the Specified Cooperative passes may be included in the patron’s QBI is information to the patron for it to through all, some, or none of the presumed to be zero. This presumption compute its section 199A(a) deduction. Specified Cooperative’s section 199A(g) does not apply to amounts of qualified In contrast, section 199A contains deduction to the patron in that taxable items of income, gain, deduction and special rules for W–2 wages and UBIA year. loss to the extent that they were not of qualified property. To provide that Section 1.199A–3(b)(5) provides an reported on the Form 1099–PATR or Cooperatives allocate their W–2 wages allocation method for items of QBI attachment thereto before the and UBIA of qualified property to their attributable to more than one trade or publication of these proposed patrons would be to treat the business. That allocation method also regulations in the Federal Register. Cooperatives as RPEs when they are C applies to patrons with multiple trades These rules apply to both exempt and corporations. Therefore, the rules in or businesses. The rules in proposed nonexempt Cooperatives as well as to proposed § 1.199A–7(e) provide that § 1.199A–7(f)(2) provide an additional patronage and nonpatronage patrons directly conducting trades or similar allocation method in situations distributions. The Treasury Department businesses that receive patronage where a patron receives qualified and the IRS request comments on these dividends or similar payments from a payments and income that is not a reporting requirements and whether any Cooperative calculate the W–2 wage and qualified payment in a trade or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28672 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules business. The patron must allocate those deduction. In order to enable the patron II. Proposed § 1.199A–8, Deduction for items using a reasonable method based to make this calculation, proposed Income Attributable to Domestic on all the facts and circumstances. § 1.199A–7(f)(3) requires the Specified Production Activities of Specified Different reasonable methods may be Cooperative to report the amount of Cooperatives used for different items of income, gain, such qualified payments on an A. In General deduction, and loss. The chosen attachment to or on the Form 1099– reasonable method for each item must PATR, (or any successor form) issued by Section 199A(g) provides a deduction be consistently applied from one taxable the Cooperative to the patron, unless for Specified Cooperatives and their year to another and must clearly reflect otherwise provided by the instructions patrons that is similar in many respects the income and expenses of each trade to the Form. to the deduction under former section or business. The overall combination of 199. Proposed § 1.199A–8 provides methods must also be reasonably based F. Transition Rule definitions relating to the section on all the facts and circumstances. The 199A(g) deduction, establishes the books and records maintained for a Congress provided a special transition criteria that a Specified Cooperative trade or business must be consistent rule relating to qualified payments must satisfy to be eligible to claim the with any allocations. The Treasury under former section 199 made by section 199A(g) deduction, and sets Department and the IRS are open to Specified Cooperatives in section 101 of forth the necessary steps for a Specified considering whether a permissible the 2018 Act. Under this transition rule, Cooperative to calculate the section ‘‘reasonable method’’ should be the repeal of former section 199 for 199A(g) deduction. specified in regulations or permitted to taxable years beginning after December include methods based on direct 31, 2017, does not apply to former B. Definitions tracing, allocations based on gross section 199 qualified payments received Proposed § 1.199A–8 defines the income, or other methods, within by a patron from Specified Cooperatives terms patron, Specified Cooperative, appropriate parameters. The Treasury in a taxable year beginning after and agricultural or horticultural Department and the IRS request December 31, 2017, to the extent such products. In defining patron, the comments on possible reasonable qualified payments are attributable to Treasury Department and the IRS sought methods for the allocation of items not qualified production activities income consistency with the rules under clearly attributable to a single trade or (QPAI) with respect to which a subchapter T of chapter 1 of subtitle A business, and whether any safe harbors deduction is allowable to the Specified of the Code. Thus, the rules in proposed may be appropriate. Cooperatives under former section 199 § 1.199A–8 cross-reference the Because the section 199A(b)(7) for a taxable year of the Specified definition of patron found in § 1.1388– reduction applies to the portion of a Cooperatives beginning before January 1(e). patron’s QBI that relates to qualified 1, 2018. Such qualified payments The definition of Specified payments from a Specified Cooperative, Cooperative is consistent with the these proposed rules provide a safe remain subject to former section 199, definition set forth in section harbor allocation method for patrons and any deduction under former section 199A(g)(4). This definition is different with taxable income not exceeding the 199 allocated by the Specified from the definition of Specified threshold amounts set forth in section Cooperatives to their patrons related to Cooperative as originally provided by 199A(e)(2) to determine how to such qualified payments may be section 11011(a) of the TCJA (former calculate the section 199A(b)(7) deducted by such patrons in accordance section 199A(g)(3)), as it no longer reduction. The safe harbor allocation with former section 199. In addition, no method is intended to provide a deduction is allowed under section includes a Cooperative solely engaged straightforward method for patrons if 199A(a) and (g) with respect to such in the provision of supplies, equipment, their trade or business receives qualified qualified payments. See Public Law or services to farmers or other Specified payments from a Specified Cooperative 115–97, title I, § 13305(c), Dec. 22, 2017, Cooperatives (former section in addition to other income. To 131 Stat. 2054, 2126 (codified as 199A(g)(3)(C)). calculate the required section amended at I.R.C. § 74 Note), as Proposed § 1.199A–8(a)(4) defines 199A(b)(7) reduction, the patron must amended by Public Law 115–141, div. agricultural or horticultural products as allocate the aggregate business expenses T, § 101(c), Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 348, agricultural, horticultural, viticultural, and W–2 wages between qualified 1151, providing a transitional rule for and dairy products, livestock and the payments and other gross receipts. The qualified payments of patrons of products thereof, the products of safe harbor allocation method allows Cooperatives. poultry and bee raising, the edible patrons to allocate by ratably products of forestry, and any and all Proposed § 1.199A–7(h)(3) and apportioning business expenses and W– products raised or produced on farms § 1.199A–8(h)(3) provide that the 2 wages based on the proportion that the and processed or manufactured Cooperative must identify in a written amount of qualified payments bears to products thereof within the meaning of the total gross receipts used to notice to its patrons that a section the Cooperative Marketing Act of 1926, determine QBI. The Treasury 199A(a) deduction cannot be claimed 44 Stat. 802 (1926). Agricultural or Department and the IRS request for qualified payments that otherwise horticultural products also include comments on this safe harbor rule and would constitute QBI in the patron’s aquatic products that are farmed whether there are additional or trade or business in a taxable year in whether by exempt or nonexempt alternative safe harbors that may be which the qualified payments remain Specified Cooperatives. See Rev. Rul. appropriate. subject to former section 199. The 64–246, 1964–2 C.B. 154. In addition, Further, to make the calculation Cooperative must report this agricultural or horticultural products required by section 199A(b)(7), the information on an attachment to or on include fertilizer, diesel fuel, and other patron will need to know the qualified the Form 1099–PATR (or any successor supplies used in agricultural or payments allocable to the patron that form) issued by the Cooperative to the horticultural production that are were used in calculating a Specified patron, unless otherwise provided by manufactured, produced, grown, or Cooperative’s section 199A(g) the instructions to the Form. extracted (MPGE) by the Specified VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28673 Cooperative. See Joint Committee cottonseed meal, cottonseed, peanuts, section 199A(g) deduction is based on Report, at 23, footnote 120. soybeans, soybean meal, livestock, gross receipts derived from the Agricultural or horticultural products livestock products, and frozen disposition of agricultural or do not include intangible property. For concentrated orange juice, but not horticultural products and section example, an agricultural or horticultural onions; other commodities that are, or 199A(g)(3)(D)(i) expressly excludes product includes a seed that is grown, once were, or are derived from, living gross receipts derived from the but does not include an intangible organisms, including plant, animal and disposition of land from DPGR. The property right to reproduce a seed for aquatic life, which are generally reference to tax-exempt interest under sale. This exclusion of intangible fungible, within their respective classes, section 103 is removed because it is property does not apply to intangible and are used primarily for human food, appropriate for the definition of gross characteristics of any particular shelter, animal feed or natural fiber; receipts to include only gross receipts agricultural or horticultural product. For tobacco, products of horticulture, and that are taken into account in computing example, gross receipts from the sale of such other commodities used or gross income under the Cooperative’s different varieties of oranges would all consumed by animals or humans. 17 methods of accounting used for Federal qualify as DPGR from the disposition of CFR 1.3. The Treasury Department and income tax purposes for the taxable agricultural or horticultural products the IRS concluded that this definition year. (assuming all other requirements of was too narrow, because it is limited to The Treasury Department and the IRS section 199A(g) are met). However, products that can be commodities. welcome comments regarding all gross receipts from the license of the The Treasury Department and the IRS aspects of these proposed definitions, right to produce and sell a certain are considering alternative definitions of including whether there is an variety of oranges would be considered agricultural or horticultural products to alternative or more appropriate separate from the tangible oranges address concerns that the definition definition of Specified Cooperative or themselves and therefore not gross could be interpreted inconsistently with agricultural or horticultural products, receipts from an agricultural or the ordinary meaning of agricultural or and clarification of when MPGE is horticultural product. This exclusion is horticultural products. A clarification of performed in whole or significant part consistent with former section 199, the definition that is under in the United States that would provide which excluded intangible property consideration is the limitation of greater certainty for taxpayers in other than computer software, any agricultural or horticultural products to complying with, and the IRS in property described in section 168(f)(4) products acquired from original administering, the requirements for (sound recordings), and qualified film producers, such as farmers, planters, claiming the section 199A(g) deduction. products. ranchers, dairy farmers, or nut or fruit The Treasury Department and the IRS The Treasury Department and the IRS growers, and products thereof that are also welcome comments on the considered a similar but alternative MPGE by Specified Cooperatives. The appropriateness of the 20 percent safe definition of agricultural or Treasury Department and the IRS harbor in proposed § 1.199A–9(h)(3). horticultural products as agricultural, request comments on whether the C. Steps for Calculating Section 199A(g) horticultural, viticultural, and dairy original producer approach being Deduction products, livestock and poultry, bees, considered would be appropriate, as forest products, fish and shellfish, and well as other approaches to defining Proposed § 1.199A–8 sets forth four any products thereof, including agricultural or horticultural products. required steps to determine the amount processed and manufactured products, The Treasury Department and the IRS of a nonexempt Specified Cooperative’s and any and all products raised or also request comments on the impact, if section 199A(g) deduction and provides produced on farms and any processed or any, of the proposed definition on rules to determine the amount of an manufactured product thereof within which products are MPGE by Specified exempt Specified Cooperative’s section the meaning of the Agricultural Cooperatives. 199A(g) deduction. Marketing Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 1091 A Specified Cooperative’s gross i. Patronage/Nonpatronage Split (1946). While very similar to the receipts from the disposition of definition set forth in these proposed agricultural or horticultural products The first step under the rules of rules, the Treasury Department and the qualify as DPGR if the products were proposed § 1.199A–8 for calculating the IRS proposed using the definition based MPGE by the Specified Cooperative in section 199A(g) deduction requires on the Cooperative Marketing Act of whole or significant part within the nonexempt Specified Cooperatives to 1926, which specifically concerns United States. The proposed regulations identify the gross receipts and related cooperatives, unlike the Agricultural define in whole or significant part for deductions (other than a deduction Marketing Act of 1946, which concerns these purposes in proposed § 1.199A– under section 199A(g)) that are from the marketing and distribution of 9(h) and provide a 20 percent safe patronage sources and from agricultural products. harbor for such determination in nonpatronage sources. Specified The Treasury Department and the IRS proposed § 1.199A–9(h)(3). Cooperatives must separate their also considered an alternative definition The definition of gross receipts in patronage and nonpatronage gross of agricultural or horticultural products proposed § 1.199A–8(b)(2)(iii) is receipts and related deductions when based on general regulations under the essentially the same as in § 1.199–3(c) determining taxable income and Commodity Exchange Act. The issued under former section 199, except allocating expenses between patronage Commodity Futures Trading that this definition has been modified and nonpatronage income to claim the Commission defines agricultural by removing references to section 1031 tax deductions under section 1382(b) commodities as wheat, cotton, rice, (exchange of real property held for and (c). Cooperatives that have gross corn, oats, barley, rye, flaxseed, grain productive use or investment) and tax- receipts only from patronage sources sorghums, mill feeds, butter, eggs, exempt interest within the meaning of will be unaffected. Accordingly, the Solanum tuberosum (Irish potatoes), section 103 (interest on State and local proposed regulations’ requirement to wool, wool tops, fats and oils (including bonds). The reference to section 1031 is divide patronage/nonpatronage gross lard, tallow, cottonseed oil, peanut oil, removed because that provision now receipts and related deductions should soybean oil and all other fats and oils), applies only to real property. The not significantly impact the existing VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28674 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules allocation requirements applicable to taken into account for purposes of the Specified Cooperatives to calculate their Specified Cooperatives. section 199A(g) deduction for section 199A(g) deduction, which is This step is expressly included in nonexempt Specified Cooperatives to equal to 9 percent of the lesser of QPAI these proposed rules because proposed items properly allocated to a nonexempt or taxable income, and subject to the § 1.199A–8 provides that for all Specified Cooperative’s patronage W–2 wage limitation. Nonexempt purposes of the section 199A(g) business. The Treasury Department and Specified Cooperatives are directed to deduction, nonexempt Specified the IRS request comments regarding consult proposed § 1.199A–11 for Cooperatives may use only patronage these proposed rules, including additional information on the W–2 wage gross receipts and related deductions to comments explaining any policy limitation. Proposed § 1.199A–11 does calculate DPGR, QPAI (including oil- rationale that would justify treating the not refer to patronage or nonpatronage related QPAI), taxable income, and the nonpatronage business of a nonexempt QPAI, taxable income, or W–2 wages W–2 wage limitation. Specified Cooperative differently from because it only provides additional Separating a nonexempt Specified the business operations of any other C information supplementing the W–2 Cooperative’s patronage items from its corporation subject to the tax imposed wage limitation. Proposed § 1.199A–11 nonpatronage items is consistent with under section 11. is essentially the same as § 1.199–2 the structure and intent of section 199A. issued under former section 199, ii. Identifying Patronage DPGR Section 199A in its entirety is structured adjusted to apply to Specified to give businesses that are not operating The second step set forth in proposed Cooperatives. as C corporations a deduction that § 1.199A–8 is for nonexempt Specified corresponds to the TCJA’s reduction of Cooperatives to identify patronage gross v. Exempt Specified Cooperatives the top corporate rate of tax under receipts that qualify as DPGR. The rules Proposed § 1.199A–8(c) provides that section 11. C corporations are expressly in proposed § 1.199A–8 point exempt Specified Cooperatives calculate prohibited under section 199A(a) from nonexempt Specified Cooperatives to two separate section 199A(g) claiming a section 199A(a) deduction, proposed § 1.199A–9 for additional deductions, one based on gross receipts and under section 199A(g)(2)(D)(i) from information on DPGR. The rules in and related deductions from patronage claiming a section 199A(g) deduction. proposed § 1.199A–9 do not refer to sources, and one based on gross receipts Although section 199A(g) provides a gross receipts from patronage or and related deductions from deduction for Specified Cooperatives, nonpatronage business because the rules nonpatronage sources. Like a the statutory prohibitions preventing C only provide additional information nonexempt Specified Cooperative, an corporations from benefiting under supplementing the determination of exempt Specified Cooperative earns section 199A(g) (which were absent DPGR from dispositions of agricultural patronage income that is not taxed to from the statutory text of former section or horticultural products. When the extent of any section 1382(b) 199) are in conflict with permitting a applying § 1.199A–9, which occurs after deduction for patronage distributions section 199A(g) deduction for the step 1 in § 1.199A–8, the only gross made to patrons. Exempt Specified nonpatronage business of a nonexempt receipts of a nonexempt Specified Cooperatives are also not taxed on any Specified Cooperative. Instead, Cooperative considered would be those nonpatronage income to the extent of nonpatronage source income of a derived from patronage sources. any section 1382(c) deduction for nonexempt Specified Cooperative Proposed § 1.199A–9 is essentially the nonpatronage distributions. Unlike the receives an alternate benefit shared by same as §§ 1.199–1 and 1.199–3 issued usual taxation of C corporations, the other C corporations: The TCJA’s under former section 199, adjusted to section 1382 deductions allow an reduction of the top rate of tax under apply to Specified Cooperatives. exempt Specified Cooperative to be section 11 from 35 percent to 21 treated more like a passthrough entity percent. iii. Calculating Patronage QPAI by reducing the exempt Specified Moreover, the 2018 Act amended The third step set forth in proposed Cooperative’s patronage and section 199A to address concerns that § 1.199A–8 is for nonexempt Specified nonpatronage income. It is therefore the TCJA created an unintended Cooperatives to calculate QPAI appropriate that the exempt Specified incentive for farmers and other (including oil-related QPAI) from only Cooperatives may take a section 199A(g) producers to sell their agricultural or their patronage DPGR. To do this, deduction on both patronage and horticultural products to Cooperatives nonexempt Specified Cooperatives must nonpatronage income that could be over independent buyers. The determine COGS and other expenses, deducted under section 1382(b) and amendment to section 199A was losses, or deductions that are allocable (c)(2). intended to ensure a level playing field to patronage DPGR. Nonexempt As described earlier, calculating two between Cooperatives and independent Specified Cooperatives are directed to section 199A(g) deductions is consistent buyers. Without the split between consult proposed § 1.199A–10 for with the administration of former patronage and nonpatronage businesses, additional information on making these section 199. To calculate the two section Specified Cooperatives that may benefit allocations. Proposed § 1.199A–10 does 199A(g) deductions, an exempt from both a section 199A(g) deduction not refer to patronage or nonpatronage Specified Cooperative is required under (from which taxpayers other than QPAI or DPGR because it only provides proposed § 1.199A–8 to perform steps Specified Cooperatives cannot benefit) additional information supplementing two through four twice, first using only and the reduced corporate tax rate on the QPAI calculation. Proposed its patronage gross receipts and related nonpatronage business would be § 1.199A–10 is essentially the same as deductions and second using only its significantly advantaged over § 1.199–4 issued under former section nonpatronage gross receipts and related independent buyers who could benefit 199, adjusted to apply to Specified deductions. An exempt Specified only from the reduced corporate tax rate Cooperatives. Cooperative cannot combine, merge, or under section 11. net patronage and nonpatronage items at Accordingly, the Treasury Department iv. Calculating Patronage Section any step in determining its patronage and the IRS have determined that it is 199A(g) Deduction section 199A(g) deduction and its appropriate to limit the source of the The fourth and final step set forth in nonpatronage section 199A(g) gross receipts and related deductions proposed § 1.199A–8 is for nonexempt deduction. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28675 D. Special Rule for Oil-Related QPAI section 1382(d). The amount of the disposition (collectively, a Section 199A(g)(5)(E) contains a section 199A(g) deduction that a ‘‘disposition’’) of any agricultural or special rule for Specified Cooperatives Specified Cooperative can pass through horticultural product which was MPGE with oil-related QPAI, which requires a to an eligible taxpayer is limited to the (determined after application of section reduction by 3 percent of the least of oil- portion of the section 199A(g) deduction 199A(g)(4)(B)) by the Specified related QPAI, QPAI, or taxable income that is allowed with respect to the QPAI Cooperative in whole or significant part of the Specified Cooperative for the to which the qualified payments made within the United States. Such term taxable year. The language of this rule to the eligible taxpayer are attributable. does not include gross receipts of the is the same as the language used in Section 199A(g)(2)(E) defines qualified Specified Cooperative derived from a former section 199(d)(9). Former section payments as those that are included in disposition of land or from services. 199(d)(9), which applied to taxable the eligible taxpayer’s income under These proposed regulations are based on years beginning after December 31, section 1385(a)(1) and (3) (referencing § 1.199–3 issued under former section 2008, was added by section 401(a), patronage dividends and per-unit retain 199, but remove provisions that would Division B of the Energy Extension Act allocations). Proposed § 1.199A–8 not apply to the disposition of of 2008, Public Law 110–343, 122 Stat. further provides that a Specified agricultural or horticultural products. 3765 (2008). These proposed rules Cooperative that receives a section DPGR includes the gross receipts that include rules for oil-related QPAI that 199A(g) deduction as an eligible a Specified Cooperative derives from are similar to those contained in taxpayer can take the deduction only marketing agricultural or horticultural proposed regulations (REG–136459–09) against patronage gross income and products for patrons. Section relating to the section 199 deduction related deductions, or pass on the 199A(g)(4)(B) treats marketing Specified published in the Federal Register (80 deduction to its patrons that are eligible Cooperatives as having MPGE any FR 51978) on August 27, 2015 (2015 taxpayers. The proposed rules do not agricultural or horticultural product in Proposed Regulations). allow an exempt Specified Cooperative whole or significant part within the The 2015 Proposed Regulations to pass through any of the section United States if their patrons have done included rules related to a taxpayer’s 199A(g) deduction attributable to so. The Treasury Department and the determination of oil-related QPAI (with nonpatronage activities because no IRS considered whether this rule should respect to which no comments were QPAI is attributable to any qualified apply between Specified Cooperatives received). Although not finalized, the payments. The rules of proposed and patrons taxed as C corporations. 2015 Proposed Regulations are the only § 1.199A–8 are essentially the same as These proposed regulations allow existing guidance concerning a the rules of § 1.199–6, adjusted to attribution to apply as provided in taxpayer’s determination of oil-related include other provisions of the section section 199A(g)(4)(B) because the statute QPAI. The preamble to the 2015 199 final regulations as well as does not distinguish between types of Proposed Regulations includes an proposed rules set forth in the 2015 patrons. However, these proposed explanation of the reasons supporting Proposed Regulations. regulations do not allow a Specified the proposed provisions, and these F. Cooperative as a Partner in a Cooperative to pass through to a C reasons continue to apply. These Partnership corporation any of the section 199A(g) include the determination that gross deduction of the Specified Cooperative Proposed § 1.199A–8(f) provides receipts from transportation and attributable to the disposition of such guidance regarding circumstances in distribution of oil are not included in agricultural or horticultural products. which a Specified Cooperative is a the calculation of oil-related QPAI, This is because, under section partner in a partnership as described unless the gross receipts are considered 199A(g)(2)(D), taxpayers taxed as C under section 199A(g)(5)(B). The DPGR under the de minimis rule or an corporations are not eligible to claim a proposed rules provide that the exception for embedded services now section 199A(g) deduction from the partnership must separately identify contained in proposed § 1.199A–9. Specified Cooperative. These proposed and report on the Schedule K–1 to the Gross receipts from transportation and regulations incorporate the rules from Form 1065, U.S. Return of Partnership distribution are not included in QPAI § 1.199–1(d)(1) through (3) and (e), Income, (or any successor form) issued and DPGR (unless an exception applies), issued under former section 199, as to its partner, unless otherwise provided and therefore it is appropriate to applicable. These rules relate to the by the instructions to the Form, the exclude such gross receipts when allocation of gross receipts between Specified Cooperative’s allocable share calculating oil-related QPAI. DPGR and non-DPGR, and the of gross receipts and related deductions. determination of whether an allocation E. Rules for Passing Section 199A(g) This allows the Specified Cooperative method is reasonable. Further, the rules Deduction to Patrons partner to apply the four steps in include provisions permitting Specified Once a Specified Cooperative proposed § 1.199A–8 required to Cooperatives to treat de minimis gross calculates the section 199A(g) calculate its patronage section 199A(g) receipts as DPGR or non-DPGR without deduction, it may pass on the section deduction (or patronage and allocating such gross receipts, and a 199A(g) deduction to patrons who are nonpatronage section 199A(g) provision permitting the use of eligible taxpayers as defined in section deductions in the case of an exempt historical data to allocate gross receipts 199A(g)(2)(D), that is, (i) a patron that is Specified Cooperative). for certain multiple-year transactions. other than a C corporation or (ii) a III. Proposed § 1.199A–9, Domestic The Treasury Department and the IRS patron that is a Specified Cooperative. Production Gross Receipts welcome comments regarding all Section 199A(g)(2)(A) requires the aspects of these proposed rules. When Specified Cooperative to identify the A. In General incorporating these concepts from the amount of the section 199A(g) Section 199A(g)(3)(D) defines the term former section 199 regulations, the deduction being passed to a patron in a domestic production gross receipts to Treasury Department and the IRS notice (required by proposed § 1.199A– mean gross receipts of a Specified determined that the appropriate section 8(d)(3)) mailed to the eligible patron Cooperative derived from any lease, of these proposed regulations in which during the payment period described in rental, license, sale, exchange, or other to include such guidance was proposed VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28676 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules § 1.199A–9. This is not a substantive incentive, the proposed regulations with the rules under former section 199 change, but rather a reorganization to maintain the rule from § 1.199–3(f)(1). and the rules under section 199A. The improve clarity. The Treasury Department and the IRS notice of proposed revenue procedure request comments on the continued use invites comments from the public. B. Definition of Manufactured, of the rule from § 1.199–3(f)(1). Produced, Grown, Extracted Under the proposed regulations, W–2 wages for the purpose of the wage The definition of the term MPGE is D. Other Provisions in Proposed § 1.199A–9 limitation in section 199A(g) are included in proposed § 1.199A–9 and is generally determined in a manner that generally consistent with the definition The remainder of the rules in is similar to the manner in which W–2 in § 1.199–3(e)(1). However, these proposed § 1.199A–9 are based on the wages are determined for the purpose of proposed regulations revise the rule in existing regulations in § 1.199–3. These the deduction under section 199A(a) § 1.199–3(e)(2) by removing the concept rules should be interpreted in a manner (that is, using the definition of W–2 of minor assembly. In the 2015 consistent with the interpretation under wages under section 199A(b)(4)), with Proposed Regulations, the Treasury former section 199. The Treasury three significant differences. First, Department and the IRS requested Department and the IRS request section 199A(g)(1)(B)(ii) provides that comments on defining the term minor comments on any conception or W–2 wages are determined without assembly because of the difficulty in definition that in application would be regard to section 199A(b)(4)(B), which identifying a widely applicable over or under-inclusive under the excludes from the definition amounts objective test. Based on the comments proposed regulations, or any instances received and the restriction on the where they should interpret the rules not properly allocable to QBI for section 199A(g) deduction to differently from the interpretation under purposes of section 199A(c)(1). Second, agricultural or horticultural products, former section 199. W–2 wages under section 199A(g) do proposed § 1.199A–9 does not include not include any amount that is not IV. Proposed § 1.199A–10, Costs the term minor assembly included in properly allocable to DPGR. Finally, Allocable to DPGR § 1.199–3(e)(2). This exclusion does not W–2 wages under section 199A(g) do impact a taxpayer’s obligation to meet Proposed § 1.199A–10 provides not generally include any remuneration all of the other requirements to qualify guidance on the allocation of costs to paid for services in the commonwealth for the section 199A(g) deduction. The DPGR. This section provides rules for of Puerto Rico and other United States Treasury Department and the IRS allocating a taxpayer’s COGS, as well as territories. Specifically, section request comments on whether the other expenses, losses, and deductions 199A(g)(1)(B)(ii) provides that W–2 concept of minor assembly should be properly allocable to DPGR. These wages are determined in the same retained and, if so, how this term should proposed regulations are based on and manner as under section 199A(b)(4), be defined. follow the section 199 regulations in and section 199A(b)(4)(A) defines wages § 1.199–4. as amounts described in section C. By the Taxpayer 6051(a)(3) and (8). The amounts With respect to the phrase ‘‘by the V. Proposed § 1.199A–11, Wage described in section 6051(a)(3) are taxpayer’’ as used in section Limitation ‘‘wages as defined in section 3401(a).’’ 199A(g)(3)(D)(i), these proposed Proposed § 1.199A–11 provides Section 3401(a)(8) generally excludes regulations adopt the rule from § 1.199– guidance regarding the W–2 wage from the definition of wages in section 3(f)(1) as applicable, rather than the rule limitation on the section 199A(g) 3401(a) wages paid with respect to in the 2015 Proposed Regulations. In a deduction. A notice of proposed employment in the commonwealth of contract manufacturing arrangement, revenue procedure, Notice 2019–27, Puerto Rico and other United States this means that a Specified Cooperative 2019–16 IRB, which proposes a draft territories. Therefore, wages paid with must have the benefits and burdens of revenue procedure providing three respect to employment in the ownership of the agricultural or proposed methods that Specified commonwealth of Puerto Rico and other horticultural product during the period Cooperatives may use for calculating United States territories are generally in which the MPGE activity occurs in W–2 wages, is being issued concurrently not W–2 wages within the meaning of order for the Specified Cooperative to be with this notice of proposed section 199A(b)(4)(A). This contrasts treated as engaging in such MPGE rulemaking. The guidance contained in with the section 199A(a) deduction for activity. The 2015 Proposed Regulations the notice of proposed revenue which section 199A(f)(1)(C)(ii) allows provided a different rule for contract procedure is necessary because changes certain taxpayers with QBI from sources manufacturing arrangements. The 2015 may be made to the underlying Form within the commonwealth of Puerto Proposed Regulations provided that if a W–2, Wage and Tax Statement, on a Rico (section 199A(f)(1)(C)(ii) applies qualifying activity is performed under a more frequent basis than updates to the only to Puerto Rico and not to other contract, then the party that performs regulations under section 199A(g), for United States territories) to compute the qualifying activity is the taxpayer for regulatory and statutory reasons section 199A(b)(4) W–2 wages without purposes of section 199(c)(4)(A)(i). independent of section 199A. The three regard to section 3401(a)(8). Since the Under the rule in the 2015 Proposed proposed methods for calculating W–2 section 199A(g) deduction is Regulations, a Specified Cooperative wages in the notice are substantially determined based on QPAI, not QBI, that contracts with another party for the similar to the methods provided in Rev. section 199A(f)(1)(C)(ii) does not apply MPGE of an agricultural or horticultural Proc. 2006–47, 2006–2 C.B. 869 (relating to the deduction under section 199A(g). product would never qualify as ‘‘the to the section 199 deduction), and Rev. Given the distinction between QBI and taxpayer’’ for purposes of the section Proc. 2019–11, 2019–09 IRB 742 QPAI on which the section 199A(a) and 199A(g) deduction. This result fails to (relating to the section 199A(a) section 199A(g) deductions are provide any incentive for Specified deduction). The Treasury Department respectively provided, and the absence Cooperatives to retain the benefits and and the IRS propose these methods in of a provision similar to 199A(f)(1)(C)(ii) burdens of ownership and to ensure that a notice of proposed revenue procedure with respect to QPAI, the Treasury production occurs within the United rather than in the notice of proposed Department and the IRS have States. Therefore, to maintain such an rulemaking to maintain consistency determined that remuneration paid with VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28677 respect to employment in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Special Analyses commonwealth of Puerto Rico cannot be solely because they have no future I. Regulatory Planning and Review— used in determining W–2 wages for applicability. Removal of these Economic Analysis purposes of section 199A(g). The regulations is not intended to alter any Treasury Department and the IRS non-regulatory guidance that cites to or Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 request comments with respect to this relies upon these regulations. These direct agencies to assess costs and determination. regulations as contained in 26 CFR part benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is VI. Proposed § 1.199A–12, EAG Rules 1, revised April 1, 2019, remain applicable to determining eligibility for necessary, to select regulatory Proposed § 1.199A–12 provides the section 199 deduction for any approaches that maximize net benefits guidance on the application of section taxable year that began before January 1, (including potential economic, 199A(g) to an EAG under section 2018. The beginning date of the taxable environmental, public health and safety 199A(g)(5)(A)(iii) that includes a year of a partnership, S corporation, or effects, distributive impacts, and Specified Cooperative. Unlike the a non-grantor trust or estate, rather than equity). Executive Order 13563 section 199 deduction, the section the taxable year of a partner, emphasizes the importance of 199A(g) deduction is limited to shareholder, or beneficiary is used to quantifying both costs and benefits, of Specified Cooperatives. These proposed determine items that are taken into reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, regulations address how the rules account for purposes of calculating a and of promoting flexibility. These proposed regulations have been separating patronage and nonpatronage section 199 deduction. This is designated by the Office of Management income and deductions apply in the consistent with the initial application of and Budget’s Office of Information and context of an EAG. Proposed § 1.199A– section 199 in 2005. Items arising from Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) as subject to 12 provides that in the case of a passthrough entity that had a fiscal review under Executive Order 12866 nonexempt Specified Cooperatives, year beginning before 2005 were not pursuant to the Memorandum of attribution between the members of an taken into account by calendar-year Agreement (April 11, 2018) between the EAG is allowed provided the DPGR and partners for purposes of the section 199 Treasury Department and the Office of related deductions are patronage. In the deduction. Public Law 109–135, section Management and Budget regarding case of exempt Specified Cooperatives, 102(a) (Gulf Opportunity Zone Act of review of tax regulations. OIRA has attribution is allowed in all events 2005). Further, when section 199 was determined that the proposed because exempt Specified Cooperatives amended to narrow the definition of W– rulemaking is significant and subject to are allowed to take a separate 199A(g) 2 wages, the amendment was effective review under Executive Order 12866 deduction on both their patronage and for taxable years beginning after May 17, and section 1(b) of the Memorandum of nonpatronage income. 2006. See Public Law 109–222, section Agreement. Accordingly, the proposed Proposed § 1.199A–12 also provides 514(a) (Tax Increase Prevention and regulations have been reviewed by the certain rules for partnerships owned by Reconciliation Act of 2005). Under the Office of Management and Budget. an EAG as described in section transition rule in § 1.199–5(b)(4), 199A(g)(5)(A)(ii). In addition, the Treasury Department partners and partnerships used the and the IRS expect the proposed VII. Proposed § 1.1388–1(f) taxable year of the partnerships to regulations, when final, to be an determine the applicable definition of Proposed § 1.1388–1(f) sets forth a Executive Order 13771 regulatory action W–2 wages, and there are similar rules definition of patronage and and request comment on this in § 1.199–5(c)(4) for S corporations and nonpatronage that is consistent with the designation. § 1.199–5(e)(3) for non-grantor trusts current case law under section 1388. and estates. A. Background and Overview Specifically, the proposed definition adopts the directly related test, which is Proposed Effective/Applicability Date The TCJA repealed section 199, which a fact specific test for determining provided a deduction for income whether income and deductions of a Section 7805(b)(1)(A) and (B) of the attributable to domestic production Cooperative are patronage or Code generally provide that no activities. In its place it created section nonpatronage. The Treasury Department temporary, proposed, or final regulation 199A, which provides a deduction for and the IRS request comments with relating to the internal revenue laws qualified business income derived from respect to this definition. may apply to any taxable period ending passthrough businesses—such as sole before the earliest of (A) the date on proprietorships, partnerships, and S VIII. Proposed Removal of Section 199 which such regulation is filed with the corporations—engaged in domestic Regulations and Withdrawal of 2015 Federal Register, or (B) in the case of a trades or businesses. While the repealed Proposed Regulations final regulation, the date on which a section 199 deduction was generally In light of the TCJA, the Treasury proposed or temporary regulation to available to all taxpayers, the section Department and the IRS propose to which the final regulation relates was 199A deduction is available only to remove the section 199 regulations filed with the Federal Register. taxpayers other than C corporations. On (§§ 1.199–0 through 1.199–9) and Consistent with authority provided by March 23, 2018, the 2018 Act modified withdraw the 2015 Proposed section 7805(b)(1)(A), the proposed section 199A(g) to provide deductions Regulations because the regulations regulations are proposed to apply to for Specified Cooperatives and their interpret a provision of the Code that taxable years beginning after the date of patrons that are substantially similar to has been repealed for taxable years publication of a Treasury decision those under the repealed section 199 beginning after December 31, 2017. adopting these rules as final regulations deduction. Accordingly, these The proposed removal of these in the Federal Register. Taxpayers may regulations generally formalize prior regulations is unrelated to the substance rely upon these proposed regulations, in and current practices based on the rules of the rules in the regulations, and no their entirety, before the date of under former section 199. The 2018 Act negative inference regarding the stated publication of the Treasury Decision also added section 199A(b)(7), which rules should be made. Such regulations adopting these rules as final regulations requires patrons of Specified are proposed to be removed from the in the Federal Register. Cooperatives to reduce their section VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28678 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 199A(a) deduction if those patrons This guidance also ensures that the lack of readily available data, the receive qualified payments from section 199A deductions are calculated Treasury Department has not estimated Specified Cooperatives. similarly across taxpayers, avoiding the decrease in taxpayer compliance The estimated number of situations where one taxpayer receives burden nor tax administration costs Cooperatives affected by the 2018 Act preferential treatment over another for arising from the issuance of guidance. and these proposed regulations is 9,000, fundamentally similar economic The Treasury Department and the IRS including approximately 2,000 activity. For example, in the absence of request comments and information that Specified Cooperatives, based on 2017 these proposed regulations, a Specified can allow estimation of economic tax filings. Cooperative may have uncertainty over impacts and any changes in taxpayer B. Need for the Proposed Regulations what type of income is eligible for the compliance burden resulting from the section 199A(g) deduction. If a proposed guidance. The proposed regulations provide Specified Cooperative claimed the 3. Economic Analysis of Specific guidance regarding the application of section 199A(g) deduction on income Provisions sections 199A(a), 199A(b)(7), and that already benefits from a lower 199A(g) to Cooperatives, Specified corporate tax rate, this would confer an The proposed regulations embody Cooperatives, and their patrons. The unintended economic benefit to the certain regulatory decisions that reflect proposed regulations are needed Specified Cooperative over other C necessary regulatory discretion. These because the 2018 Act introduced a corporations performing identical decisions specify more fully how the number of terms and calculations. activities that only benefit from a lower 2018 Act is to be implemented. Patrons, Cooperatives, and Specified corporate tax rate. As discussed further The Treasury Department and the IRS Cooperatives would benefit from greater below, this guidance prevents the solicit comments on the economic specificity regarding these and other introduction of distortions of economic impacts of each of the items discussed items. decisions in the agricultural or in this section and of any other items of the proposed regulations not discussed C. Economic Analysis horticultural sector. In the absence of these proposed in this section. The Treasury 1. Baseline regulations, uncertainty over statutory Department and the IRS particularly The Treasury Department and the IRS interpretation could lead to economic solicit comments that provide data, have assessed the benefits and costs of losses to the extent that taxpayers other evidence, or models that could the proposed regulations relative to a interpret the statute in ways that are enhance the rigor of the process by no-action baseline reflecting anticipated inconsistent with the statute’s intents which provisions might be developed Federal income tax-related behavior in and purposes. For example, a Specified for the final regulations. the absence of these proposed Cooperative may pursue a project i. Determining Section 199A(g) regulations. involving a certain product that is only Deduction profitable if that product is deemed 2. Economic Rationale for Issuing ‘‘agricultural or horticultural’’ and thus Specified Cooperatives are taxed Guidance for the 2018 Act eligible for the section 199A(g) differently depending on whether they The Treasury Department and the IRS deduction. If, in fact, this product is are exempt (qualified as a cooperative anticipate that the issuance of guidance ineligible for the deduction based on the under section 521) or nonexempt pertaining to sections 199A(a), intents and purposes of the statute, then (qualified under rules elsewhere in the 199A(b)(7), and 199A(g) of the 2018 Act the project should not have been Code) and also whether their income is to Cooperatives, Specified Cooperatives, pursued and this results in an economic from patronage (generally related to the and their patrons will provide a net loss. Alternatively, without a definition cooperative’s marketing, purchasing, or economic benefit to the overall U.S. of ‘‘agricultural or horticultural,’’ a services activities) or nonpatronage economy. Specified Cooperative may incorrectly sources. In the case of exempt Specified The proposed regulations clarify a assume that a project is not eligible for Cooperatives patronage and number of concepts related to the the deduction and not pursue the nonpatronage source income is subject section 199A(a) deduction for patrons of project, which could also result in an to a single level of tax at the patron Cooperatives, provide guidance to economic loss. In such cases, guidance level. Whereas, for nonexempt Specified patrons of Specified Cooperatives who provides value by bringing economic Cooperatives only patronage source may be required to reduce their section decisions closer in line with Congress’ income is subject to a single level of tax 199A(a) deduction under section intent or, when such intent is broad, at the patron level; nonpatronage source 199A(b)(7), and provide guidance to with decisions that are economically income is subject to a double level of Specified Cooperatives on the section efficient contingent on the overall Code. tax, similar to other C corporations. 199A(g) deduction on income While no guidance can fully curtail all Because the Code does not define attributable to their domestic inaccurate interpretations of the statute, patronage and nonpatronage source production activities. In the absence of the proposed regulations significantly income, proposed § 1.1388–1(f) sets guidance, affected taxpayers would have mitigate the chance for such forth a definition of patronage and to calculate their tax liability without interpretations and thereby increase nonpatronage that is consistent with the the definitions and clarifications economic efficiency. Due to the lack of current state of federal case law. provided by the proposed regulations, a readily available data, the Treasury Specifically, the proposed definition situation that is generally considered Department and the IRS have not adopts the directly related test, which is more burdensome and could lead to estimated the increase in United States a fact specific test for determining greater conflicts with tax administrators. economic activity that would arise from whether income and deductions of a Thus, the Treasury Department and the the proposed guidance. Cooperative are patronage or IRS project that the proposed The Treasury Department further nonpatronage. Specifying a definition regulations will reduce taxpayer projects that the issuance of guidance that is consistent with current case law compliance burden and the costs of tax will reduce taxpayer compliance burden will help to minimize the economic administration relative to not issuing and the costs of tax administration impacts of these proposed regulations. any such guidance. relative to a no-action baseline. Due to The Treasury Department and the IRS VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28679 request comments with respect to this products of forestry, and any and all commodities within the meaning of definition. products raised or produced on farms general regulations under the The TCJA reduced the corporate tax and processed or manufactured Commodity Exchange Act. The Treasury rate for C corporations under section 11 products thereof within the meaning of Department and the IRS concluded that and provided the section 199A the Cooperative Marketing Act of 1926. this definition was too narrow, because deduction for domestic businesses Agricultural or horticultural products it is limited to products that can be operated as sole proprietorships or also include aquatic products that are commodities. The use of this narrow through partnerships, S corporations, farmed as well as fertilizer, diesel fuel, definition would have restricted the trusts, or estates. The TCJA also and other supplies used in agricultural range of products for which the section repealed section 199, which did not or horticultural production that are 199A(g) deduction would be otherwise preclude deductions on income earned MPGE by the Specified Cooperative. be available. by C corporations. The 2018 Act Agricultural or horticultural products, The Treasury Department and the IRS amended section 199A to address however, do not include intangible request comments on other approaches concerns that the TCJA created an property, since agricultural or to defining agricultural or horticultural unintended incentive for farmers to sell horticultural products were considered products. The Treasury Department and their agricultural or horticultural a subset of tangible property under the IRS did not attempt to provide products to Specified Cooperatives over former section 199. Intangible property quantitative estimates of the revenue independent buyers. Specifically, the (defined in § 1.199–3(j)(2)(iii)) was a effects or economic consequences of 2018 Act amended section 199A(g) to separate category of property and gross different designations of agricultural or allow Specified Cooperatives and their receipts from intangible property did horticultural products because suitable patrons a deduction similar to the not qualify as DPGR. data are not readily available at this former section 199 deduction. Because The Treasury Department and the IRS level of detail. The Treasury Department the section 199A(g) deduction is not considered other definitions of and the IRS request comments that can intended to benefit C corporations and agricultural or horticultural products inform such estimation. their shareholders in general, the but determined that taxpayer burden iii. De Minimis Threshold proposed regulations specify that the and tax administration costs would be section 199A(g) deduction can be lowest under a definition that was In general, proposed § 1.199A–9 claimed on income that can be subject consistent with extant law. requires that Specified Cooperatives to tax only at the patron level. Under the For example, the Treasury allocate gross receipts between domestic proposed regulations, non-exempt Department and the IRS considered a production gross receipts (DPGR) and Specified Cooperatives may not claim similar but alternative definition of non-DPGR. However, proposed the section 199A(g) deductions on agricultural or horticultural products as § 1.199A–9(c)(3) includes a de minimis income that cannot be paid to patrons agricultural, horticultural, viticultural, provision that allows Specified and deducted under section 1382(b) and and dairy products, livestock and Cooperatives to allocate total gross exempt Specified Cooperatives may not poultry, bees, forest products, fish and receipts to DPGR if less than 5 percent claim section 199A(g) deductions on shellfish, and any products thereof, of total gross receipts are non-DPGR or income that cannot be paid to patrons including processed and manufactured to allocate total gross receipts to non- and deducted under sections 1382(b) or products, and any and all products DPGR if less than 5 percent of total gross 1382(c)(2). raised or produced on farms and any receipts are DPGR. The Treasury In the absence of these proposed processed or manufactured product Department and the IRS chose to regulations, a Specified Cooperative thereof within the meaning of the include a de minimis rule to reduce may have uncertainty as to whether Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946. compliance costs and simplify tax filing non-patronage source income, which While very similar to the definition in relative to an alternative of no de would be taxed in the same manner as these proposed rules, the Treasury minimis rule. The de minimis threshold a C corporation, could receive both the Department and the IRS proposed using modestly reduces compliance costs for lower corporate tax rate and be further the definition based on the Cooperative businesses with relatively small offset by a section 199A(g) deduction. Marketing Act of 1926, which amounts of non-DPGR or DPGR by Other C corporations performing specifically concerns cooperatives and allowing them to avoid allocating identical activities would only benefit with which Specified Cooperatives are receipts between DPGR and non-DPGR from the lower corporate tax rate. familiar, unlike the Agricultural activities. The de minimis threshold is The Treasury Department and the IRS Marketing Act of 1946, which concerns unlikely to create any substantial effects have determined that this potential the marketing and distribution of on market activity because any change uncertainty as to tax treatment could agricultural products without reference in the ratio of DPGR to non-DPGR will distort economic decisions in the to Cooperatives. The Treasury be localized around the threshold, agricultural or horticultural sector. The Department and the IRS looked to the meaning that the movement will be a proposed regulations avoid this United States Department of Agriculture small fraction of receipts to get below outcome, promoting a more efficient (USDA) for definitions because there is the de minimis threshold. allocation of resources by providing no definition of agricultural or The thresholds provided in the more uniform incentives across horticultural products in the Internal proposed regulations are based on the taxpayers. Revenue Code or Income Tax thresholds set forth in § 1.199–1(d)(3). Regulations and because the USDA has The Treasury Department and the IRS ii. Definition of Agricultural or expertise concerning Specified maintained the de minimis rule from Horticultural Products Cooperatives and because Specified the final regulations under former Proposed § 1.199A–8(a)(4) defines Cooperatives are likely familiar with section 199 because the 2018 Act agricultural or horticultural products as USDA law. directed that regulations concerning the agricultural, horticultural, viticultural, The Treasury Department and the IRS section 199A(g) deduction be based on and dairy products, livestock and the also considered an alternative definition the regulations applicable to products thereof, the products of of agricultural or horticultural products Cooperatives and their patrons under poultry and bee raising, the edible based on the definition of agricultural former section 199. The Treasury VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28680 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules Department and the IRS considered harbor that allows patrons who receive Cooperative to inform its patron of the changes in the de minimis provisions qualified payments in addition to other amount of any distribution to the patron but determined that changing these from income to use a simpler method to that constitutes qualified items of provisions that were previously allocate business expenses and W–2 income, gain, deduction, and loss from available would lead to taxpayer wages between qualified payments and a non-SSTB conducted directly by the confusion. Because the de minimis other gross receipts to calculate the Cooperative. Not all distributions to provision exempts taxpayers from section 199A(b)(7) reduction to the patrons are qualified items of income, having to perform certain allocations, section 199A(a) deduction. The safe gain, deduction, and loss because the the Treasury Department and the IRS do harbor allocation method allows patrons source of the distribution may not be not have sufficient information on to allocate by ratably apportioning effectively connected with the conduct taxpayers’ use of this exemption under business expenses and W–2 wages of a trade or business within the United former section 199 to perform a based on the proportion that the amount States or may include interest income quantitative analysis of the impacts of of qualified payments bears to the total that is not properly allocable to the the de minimis provision. gross receipts used to determine QBI. patron’s trade or business. The The Treasury Department and the IRS This safe harbor is available to patrons Cooperative directly conducting the solicit comments on the de minimis with taxable incomes below the trade or business from which the thresholds and particularly request threshold amounts set forth in section distribution to the patron originates is in comments that provide data, other 199A(e)(2). the best position to know how much of evidence, and models that can enhance The Treasury Department and the IRS the distribution is qualified items of the rigor of the process by which such considered an alternative of not income, gain, deduction, and loss. The thresholds might be determined for the allowing a safe harbor but determined Cooperative is also in the best position final regulations while maintaining that a safe harbor could reduce to know if it is generating income from consistency with the statute’s directive compliance costs and simplify tax filing. an SSTB. Accordingly, the collection of that the thresholds be based on The threshold was set at amounts set information is necessary for the patron regulations issued under former section forth in section 199A(e)(2) to avoid a to calculate correctly the patron’s 199. proliferation of thresholds applicable to section 199A(a) deduction for the taxpayers claiming a section 199A(a) iv. Reporting Requirements patron’s trade or business. deduction. Because the threshold The collection of information in Proposed § 1.199A–7(c) and (d) amounts are relatively low, the Treasury proposed § 1.199A–7(d)(3) requires the provide that, when a patron conducts a Department and the IRS expect that the Cooperative to inform its patron of the trade or business that receives safe harbor would not distort business amount of any distributions to the distributions from a Cooperative, the decisions or reduce revenue to any patron that constitutes qualified items of Cooperative is required to provide the meaningful extent. income, gain, deduction, and loss from patron with qualified items of income, an SSTB conducted directly by the II. Paperwork Reduction Act gain, deduction, and loss and specified Cooperative. Accordingly, the collection service trade or business (SSTB) The collections of information in of information is necessary for the determinations with respect to those these proposed regulations are in patron to correctly calculate the patron’s distributions. This increases the proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3), (d)(3), (f)(3), section 199A(a) deduction for the compliance burden on such and (h)(3), as well as proposed patron’s qualified trade or business. Cooperatives. However, in the absence § 1.199A–8(d)(3), (f), and (h)(3). The The collection of information in of these proposed regulations, the collections of information in proposed proposed § 1.199A–7(f)(3) is essential burden for determination of the amount § 1.199A–7(c)(3), (d)(3), (f)(3), and (h)(3), for the eligible taxpayer’s calculation of of distributions from a Cooperative that as well as proposed § 1.199A–8(d)(3) the reduction in the eligible taxpayer’s constitute qualified items of income, and (h)(3) will be conducted through section 199A(a) deduction for the gain, deduction, and loss from a non- Form 1099–PATR, while the collection eligible taxpayer’s trade or business that SSTB and an SSTB would lie with the of information in proposed § 1.199A– is required by section 199A(b)(7). patron. Because patrons are less well 8(f) will be conducted through Schedule Section 199A(g)(2)(A) requires the positioned to acquire the relevant K–1 to Form 1065. In 2018, the IRS Specified Cooperative to identify the information to determine whether released and invited comments on the amount of qualified payments being distributions from a Cooperative are draft of Form 1065, Schedule K–1. The distributed to an eligible taxpayer and qualified items of income, gain, IRS received no comments on the form identify the portion of the deduction deduction, and loss and whether items during the comment period. allowed in a notice mailed to the that would otherwise qualify are from Consequently, the IRS made the form eligible taxpayer during the payment an SSTB, the Treasury Department and available December 6, 2018 for use by period described in section 1382(d). the IRS expect that these proposed the public. On February 26, 2019, the Section 199A(b)(7) provides that an regulations will reduce overall IRS invited comments on Form 1099– eligible taxpayer who receives qualified compliance costs relative to an PATR and the comment period closed payments from a Specified Cooperative alternative approach of not introducing on April 29, 2019. The IRS plans to must reduce the eligible taxpayer’s a reporting requirement. issue in the near term an additional section 199A(a) deduction by an amount notice with a thirty-day comment period set forth in this section. Without the v. Allocation Safe Harbor on Form 1099–PATR. The IRS is notice described in proposed § 1.199A– If a patron receives both qualified contemplating making additional 7(f)(3), the eligible taxpayer cannot payments and payments that are not changes to those two forms as discussed calculate the reduction required by qualified payments in a qualified trade below in these proposed regulations. section 199A(b)(7). or business, the patron must allocate The collection of information in those items and related deductions A. Collections of Information Conducted proposed § 1.199A–8(d)(3) is using a reasonable method based on all Through Form 1099–PATR necessitated by section 199A(g)(2)(A). of the facts and circumstances. The The collection of information in Section 199A(g)(2)(A) permits a proposed regulations provide a safe proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3) requires the Specified Cooperative to pass through VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28681 an amount of its section 199A(g) by the transition rule from using a related deductions to calculate its deduction to an eligible taxpayer. The qualified payment received that is QBI section 199A(g) deduction. The amount of the section 199A(g) for the patron’s trade or business to proposed rules provide that the deduction that the Specified claim a section 199A(a) deduction for partnership must separately identify Cooperative is permitted to pass through the patron’s trade or business. and report the allocable share of gross is an amount that is allocable to the The collections of information in receipts and related deductions on or QPAI generated from qualified proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3), (d)(3), (f)(3), attached to the Schedule K–1 to the payments distributed to the eligible and (h)(3) as well as proposed § 1.199A– Form 1065 (or any successor form) taxpayer and identified by such 8(d)(3) and (h)(3) are satisfied by issued to a Specified Cooperative cooperative in a written notice mailed to providing information about qualified partner, unless otherwise provided by such taxpayer during the payment items of income, SSTB determinations, the instructions to the Form. Without period described in section 1382(d). qualified payments, the section 199A(g) this reporting, the Specified Cooperative Without the notice required in proposed deduction, and the use of qualified partner would not have the information § 1.199A–8(d)(3) the eligible taxpayer payments tied to the former section 199 necessary to calculate its section would not know that the Specified deduction, as applicable, on an 199A(g) deduction from its activities Cooperative is passing a portion of its attachment to or on the Form 1099– with the partnership. section 199A(g) deduction to the eligible PATR (or any successor form) issued by The Schedule K–1 to the Form 1065 taxpayer. the Cooperative to the patron, unless will be modified to include a The collections of information in otherwise provided by the instructions proposed §§ 1.199A–7(h)(3) and mechanism to report the Specified to the Form. Cooperative partner’s allocable share of 1.199A–8(h)(3) are necessitated by a For purposes of the Paperwork gross receipts and related deductions. special transition rule in section 101 of Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. The collection of information in the 2018 Act. Under this transition rule, 3507(d)) (PRA), the reporting burden proposed § 1.199A–8(f) is satisfied when the repeal of former section 199 for associated with proposed § 1.199A– the partnership provides the required taxable years beginning after December 7(c)(3), (d)(3), (f)(3), and (h)(3) as well as information to its Specified Cooperative 31, 2017, does not apply to a qualified proposed § 1.199A–8(d)(3) and (h)(3) partners on or attached to the Schedule payment received by a patron from a will be reflected in the PRA Submission K–1 of Form 1065 (or any successor Specified Cooperative in a taxable year associated with Form 1099–PATR (OMB form), unless otherwise provided by the beginning after December 31, 2017, to control number 1545–0118). As further instructions to the Form. For purposes the extent such qualified payment is discussed in this section, the estimated of the PRA, the reporting burden attributable to QPAI with respect to number of respondents for the reporting associated with proposed § 1.199A–8(f) which a deduction is allowable to the burden associated with these will be reflected in the PRA Submission Specified Cooperative under former information collections is 9,000 based associated with Form 1065 (OMB section 199 for a taxable year of the on 2017 tax filings. Specified Cooperative beginning before control number 1545–0123). As January 1, 2018. Such qualified payment B. Collections of Information Conducted provided in this section, the estimated remains subject to former section 199 Through Schedule K–1, Form 1065 number of respondents for the reporting and no deduction is allowed under The collection of information in burden associated with these section 199A(a) or (g) with respect to proposed § 1.199A–8(f) is required by information collections is 407 based on such qualified payment. Without these section 199A(g)(5)(B). This section 2017 tax filings. collections of information by the allows a Specified Cooperative that is a C. Revised Tax Forms Specified Cooperative, the patron has no partner in a partnership to use its way of knowing that the patron is barred allocable share of gross receipts and The revised tax forms are as follows: Revision of Number of New existing form respondents Form 1099–PATR ...... ✓ 9,000 Schedule K–1 (Form 1065) ...... ✓ 407 The current status of the PRA will be included in the aggregated related to the requirements under the submissions related to the tax forms that burden estimates for OMB control proposed regulations. Those estimates will be revised as a result of the number 1545–0123, which represents a would need to capture both changes information collections in the proposed total estimated burden time for all forms made by the 2018 Act and those that regulations is provided in the and schedules of 3.157 billion hours arise out of discretionary authority accompanying table. As described and total estimated monetized costs of exercised in the proposed regulations. previously, the burdens associated with $58.148 billion ($2017). The overall The Treasury Department and the IRS proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3), (d)(3), (f)(3), burden estimates provided for 1545– request comments on all aspects of and (h)(3) as well as proposed 0118 and 1545–0123 are aggregate information collection burdens related §§ 1.199A–8(d)(3) and (h)(3) will be amounts that relate to all information to the proposed regulations, including included in the aggregated burden collections associated with the estimates for how much time it would estimates for OMB control number applicable OMB control number. take to comply with the paperwork 1545–0118, which represents a total No burden estimates specific to the burdens described above for each estimated burden time of 509,895 hours forms affected by the proposed relevant form and ways for the IRS to and total estimated monetized costs of regulations are currently available. The minimize the paperwork burden. $44.733 million ($2018). The burdens Treasury Department and the IRS have Proposed revisions to these forms that associated with the information not estimated the burden, including that reflect the information collections collection in proposed § 1.199A–8(f) of any new information collections, contained in these proposed regulations VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28682 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules will be made available for public picklist/list/draftTaxForms.htm and will have been approved by OMB under the comment at https://apps.irs.gov/app/ not be finalized until after these forms PRA. Form Type of filer OMB No.(s) Status Form 1099–PATR ...... [Business (Legacy Model)] ..... 1545–0118 Existing collection of information approved by OIRA on 6/3/ 2016. Public comments will be sought on a revised collec- tion of information that will be submitted for OIRA review before 6/30/2019. Link: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201602-1545-024. Form 1065, Schedule K–1 ...... Business (NEW Model) ...... 1545–0123 Published in the Federal Register on 10/11/18. Public Com- ment period closed on 12/10/18. Approved by OIRA on 12/ 21/18. Link:https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/10/09/2018-21846/proposed-collection-comment-request- for-forms-1065-1065-b-1066-1120-1120-c-1120-f-1120-h-1120-nd. III. Regulatory Flexibility Act RPE was directly engaged four items: (1) TD 9847 that the requirements in As described in more detail in this The amount of QBI, (2) W–2 wages, (3) § 1.199A–6 imposed no significant section, pursuant to the Regulatory UBIA of qualified property, and (4) economic impact on affected entities. Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. chapter SSTBs. The reporting requirements under Although Cooperatives are not RPEs, 6, the Treasury Department and the IRS proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3) and (d)(3) hereby certify that these proposed Cooperatives make distributions to patrons that such patrons are permitted require Specified Cooperatives to report regulations will not have a significant only two of the four pieces of economic impact on a substantial to include in calculating their individual section 199A(a) deductions. information RPEs are required to report number of small entities. under proposed § 1.199A–6: The Notwithstanding this certification, the Proposed § 1.199A–7(c) and (d) require the Cooperatives to determine and amount of qualified items of income, Treasury Department and the IRS invite gain, deduction, and loss and whether comments on any impact this rule report to their patrons whether the the distributions are from an SSTB in would have on small entities. distributions for which the Cooperatives take deductions under section 1382(b) which the Cooperative was directly A. Proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3) and (d)(3) and/or (c)(2), as applicable, constitute engaged. Although proposed § 1.199A–7(c)(3) qualified items of income, gain, The burden imposed by proposed and (d)(3) will have an impact on a deduction, and loss and whether they § 1.199A–7(c)(3) and (d)(3) only occurs substantial number of small entities, the are from an SSTB in which the when a Cooperative has net income that economic impact will not be significant. Cooperative was directly engaged. In TD 9847 the Treasury Department it may distribute to its patrons such that The IRS creates the Business Master File the income will qualify for the income which contains data from Form 1120–C, and the IRS determined that the reporting burden in § 1.199A–6 was tax deductions under section 1382(b) U.S. Income Tax Return for Cooperative and/or (c), as applicable. With respect to Associations. According to the Business estimated at 30 minutes to 20 hours, this net income, Cooperatives already Master File data, in 2017, the IRS depending on individual circumstances, know the source of their income and received approximately 9,000 Forms with an estimated average of 2.5 hours 1120–C from Cooperatives. Under the for all affected entities, regardless of deductions without which information North American Industry Classification size. The burden on entities with they would not be able to determine the System (NAICS), a Cooperative is business receipts below $10 million was correct distributions to their patrons and considered a small entity if it has less expected to be at the lower end of the to claim the income tax deduction for than $750,000 in annual gross receipts. range (30 minutes to 2.5 hours). The these distributions under section Approximately 4,050 (45 percent) of the estimated compliance burden for 1382(b) and/or (c)(2), as applicable. 9,000 filers of Forms 1120–C reported passthrough entities that issue Finally, assuming that the annual gross receipts of less than Schedules K–1 is $53 per hour. This approximately 4,050 filers of Forms $750,000. Therefore, a substantial estimate was derived from the Business 1120–C that reported annual gross number of small entities are affected by Taxpayer Burden model developed by receipts of less than $750,000 in 2017 the requirements in proposed § 1.199A– the IRS’s Office of Research, Applied and that each business incurred half of 7(c)(3) and (d)(3). Analytics, and Statistics (RAAS), which the higher figure of $132.50 ($66.25) Proposed § 1.199A–7 provides rules relates time and out-of-pocket costs of determined for the § 1.199A–6 similar to those provided in § 1.199A– business tax preparation, derived from regulations to satisfy the reporting 6. In § 1.199A–6, relevant passthrough survey data, to assets and receipts of requirements under proposed § 1.199A– entities (RPEs) are not permitted to take affected taxpayers along with other 7(c)(3) and (d)(3), the annual burden the section 199A deduction but are relevant variables. See Tax Compliance imposed by the reporting requirements required to determine and report the Burden (John Guyton et al., July 2018) would not exceed $66.25 per business. information necessary for their direct at https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/ and indirect owners to determine their d13315.pdf. Thus, the annual aggregate Accordingly, the Treasury Department individual section 199A(a) deductions. burden on businesses with gross and the IRS conclude that the Section 1.199A–6 requires RPEs to receipts below $10 million was requirements in proposed § 1.199A– determine and report on or attach to the estimated to be between $19.50 and 7(c)(3) and (d)(3) will not impose a RPEs’ Schedule K–1s to the Form 1065 $132.50 per business. The Treasury significant economic impact on small for each trade or business in which the Department and the IRS determined in entities. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28683 B. Proposed § § 1.199A–7(h)(3) and economic impact on a substantial 158 partnerships would be small 1.199A–8(h)(3) number of small entities. This claim is entities, while five would not be small Although proposed §§ 1.199A–7(h)(3) based on the fact that this rulemaking entities based on the reported number of and 1.199A–8(h)(3) will have an impact will impact a population of Specified Forms W–2 filed in connection with the on a substantial number of small Cooperatives, only a small percentage of Forms 1065 the partnerships filed in entities, this economic impact will not which are considered small entities. 2017. The SBA uses income to determine if be significant. As previously noted, in According to the Business Master File an entity is a small entity for the 2017, approximately 45 percent of filing data from the transcribed fields from the Forms 1120–C for 2017, of the reported business activities of the Cooperatives reported on Forms 1120–C approximately 9,000 Forms 1120–C remaining 186 partnerships using the gross receipts of less than $750,000. filed by Cooperatives, approximately NAICS. Based upon the reported income Therefore, a substantial number of small 2,000 filers identified their Cooperatives for 2017, 140 of the remaining 186 entities are affected by proposed as involving agriculture or horticulture partnerships are small entities, while 46 §§ 1.199A–7(h)(3) and 1.199A–8(h)(3). using the NAICS. As noted previously, partnerships are not small entities. Proposed §§ 1.199A–7(h)(3) and a Cooperative is considered small if it Therefore, a substantial number of small 1.199A–8(h)(3) requires Cooperatives to reports less than $750,000 in annual entities are affected by requirements in notify patrons if, pursuant to the gross receipts. Of the 2,000 filers of proposed § 1.199A–8(f). transition rule in section 101 of the 2018 Forms 1120–C identifying as Specified The economic impact of proposed Act, the patron is barred from using Cooperatives, only 175 filers (less than § 1.199A–8(f), however, will not be certain qualified payments from a 1 percent) reported annual gross significant because the information Cooperative to claim a section 199A(a) receipts of less than $750,000. required to be reported is gross receipts deduction in a taxable year because Accordingly, proposed §§ 1.199A–7(f)(3) and related deductions. This these qualified payments are and 1.199A–8(d)(3) will not impose a information is readily available to each attributable to QPAI with respect to significant economic impact on a partnership and already known for the which a deduction is allowable to the substantial number of small entities. purpose of determining tax obligations. Cooperative under former section 199 in Because the information required to be D. Proposed § 1.199A–8(f) a taxable year beginning before January reported is already available and 1, 2018. The Cooperative knows which Although proposed § 1.199A–8(f) will familiar to each partnership, the patrons are impacted since, in order to have an impact on a substantial number reporting required by proposed claim its deduction under former of small entities, this impact will not be § 1.199A–8(f) will not impose a section 199, the Cooperative must economically significant. According to significant economic impact on small identify which qualified payments to the Business Master File filing data from entities. use. The Treasury Department and the the transcribed fields from the Forms Accordingly, the Treasury Department IRS estimate that the annual burden 1065 for 2017, the IRS estimates that and the IRS hereby certify that the imposed by the requirement in there were 3,954,000 partnerships proposed regulations will not have a proposed §§ 1.199A–7(h)(3) and reporting their partners’ share of significant economic impact on a 1.199A–8(h)(3) will be far less than the partnership items on Schedules K–1 substantial number of small entities. We $66.25 per business estimated for the (Form 1065). The IRS also identified invite public comments with respect to requirements in proposed §§ 1.199A– approximately 407 different this conclusion. 7(c)(3) and 1.199A–8(c)(3) discussed partnerships that issued a Schedule K– Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the above, since the Cooperatives know 1 to 680 different Cooperatives in 2017. Code, this notice of proposed which patrons are impacted and the The IRS does not have information as to rulemaking has been submitted to the reporting is limited to informing these whether the 680 Cooperatives all Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small patrons that they cannot use such qualified as Specified Cooperatives. Business Administration for comment qualified payments to calculate their Of the 407 different partnerships, the on its impact on small business. section 199A(a) deduction. IRS determined that 344 of the In addition, absent notice from the partnerships conducted activities in IV. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Cooperatives, patrons would have no 2017 that would have required the Section 202 of the Unfunded way of determining whether they were partnerships to file under proposed Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) barred from claiming the section § 1.199A–8(f). The IRS does not have requires that agencies assess anticipated 199A(a) deduction using such qualified sufficient data to determine the type of costs and benefits and take certain other payments. Finally, Cooperatives are not business activities of the remaining 63 actions before issuing a final rule that able to claim a deduction under former partnerships. To be as comprehensive includes any Federal mandate that may section 199 for taxable years beginning and transparent as possible in analyzing result in expenditures in any one year after December 31, 2017. Therefore, the the potential impact of the proposed by a state, local, or tribal government, in reporting required by proposed regulations, it is assumed that all 63 of the aggregate, or by the private sector, of §§ 1.199A–7(h)(3) and 1.199A–8(h)(3) these partnerships would be required to $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated will be for a short duration and have a file under proposed § 1.199A–8(f) and annually for inflation. In 2018, that limited impact on Cooperatives. would be considered small entities. threshold is approximately $150 Accordingly, for all these reasons, the Of the 344 partnerships identified as million. This rule does not include any requirements in proposed §§ 1.199A– having both issued a Schedule K–1 to a Federal mandate that may result in 7(h)(3) and 1.199A–8(h)(3) will not Cooperative and conducting eligible expenditures by state, local, or tribal impose a significant economic impact activities in 2017, the IRS determined governments, or by the private sector in on small entities. that 158 of these partnerships excess of that threshold. conducted activities for which the Small C. Proposed §§ 1.199A–7(f)(3) and Business Administration (SBA) uses the V. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 1.199A–8(d)(3) number of employees to determine if an Executive Order 13132 (titled Sections 1.199A–7(f)(3) and 1.199A– entity is a small entity using the NAICS. Federalism) prohibits an agency from 8(d)(3) will not have a significant The IRS determined that 153 of these publishing any rule that has federalism VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28684 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules implications if the rule either imposes PART 1—INCOME TAXES Cooperatives relating to the definition of substantial, direct compliance costs on QBI. Paragraph (d) of this section state and local governments, and is not Paragraph 1. The authority citation provides special rules for patrons and required by statute, or preempts state for part 1 is amended by: Cooperatives relating to specified ■ 1. Removing the entries for §§ 1.199– law, unless the agency meets the service trades or businesses (SSTBs). 0 through 1.199–9, and consultation and funding requirements Paragraph (e) of this section provides ■ 2. Adding entries in numerical order of section 6 of the Executive Order. This special rules for patrons relating to the to read in part as follows: proposed rule does not have federalism statutory limitations based on W–2 implications, and does not impose Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. wages and unadjusted basis substantial direct compliance costs on * * * * * immediately after acquisition (UBIA) of state and local governments or preempt Section 1.199A–7 also issued under 26 qualified property. Paragraph (f) of this state law, within the meaning of the U.S.C. 199A(f)(4) and (g)(6). section provides special rules for Executive Order. Section 1.199A–8 also issued under 26 specified agricultural or horticultural U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). cooperatives (Specified Cooperatives) Comments and Requests for a Public Section 1.199A–9 also issued under 26 and paragraph (g) of this section Hearing U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Section 1.199A–10 also issued under 26 provides examples for Specified The Treasury Department and the IRS U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Cooperatives and their patrons. request comments on all aspects of the Section 1.199A–11 also issued under 26 Paragraph (h) of this section sets forth proposed rules. Before these proposed U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). the applicability date of this section and regulations are adopted as final Section 1.199A–12 also issued under 26 a special transition rule relating to regulations, consideration will be given U.S.C. 199A(g)(6). Specified Cooperatives and their to any written or electronic comments * * * * * patrons. that are submitted timely to the IRS. All §§ 1.199–0 through 1.199–9 [Removed] (2) At patron level. The section comments will be available for public 199A(a) deduction is applied at the ■ Par. 2. Sections 1.199–0 through inspection and copying. A public patron level, and patrons who are hearing may be scheduled if requested 1.199–9 are removed. ■ individuals (as defined in § 1.199A– in writing by any person who timely Par. 3. Sections 1.199A–7 through 1.199A–12 are added to read as follows: 1(a)(2)) may take the section 199A(a) submits written comments. If a public deduction. hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, Sec. (3) Definitions. For purposes of time, and place for the hearing will be * * * * * section 199A and § 1.199A–7, the published in the Federal Register. 1.199A–7 Section 199A(a) Rules for following definitions apply— Cooperatives and their Patrons. (i) Individual is defined in § 1.199A– Statement of Availability of IRS 1.199A–8 Deduction for income attributable Documents to domestic production activities of 1(a)(2). (ii) Patron is defined in § 1.1388–1(e). IRS Revenue Procedures, Revenue specified agricultural or horticultural (iii) Patronage and nonpatronage is Rulings, Notices and other guidance cooperatives. 1.199A–9 Domestic production gross defined in § 1.1388–1(f). cited in this document are published in receipts. (iv) Relevant Passthrough Entity (RPE) the Internal Revenue Bulletin and are 1.199A–10 Allocation of costs of goods sold is defined in § 1.199A–1(a)(9). available from the Superintendent of (COGS) and other deductions to (v) Qualified payment is defined in Documents, U.S. Government domestic production gross receipts § 1.199A–8(d)(2)(ii). Publishing Office, Washington, DC (DPGR), and other rules. (vi) Specified Cooperative is defined 20402, or by visiting the IRS website at 1.199A–11 Wage limitation for the section in § 1.199A–8(a)(2) and is a subset of http://www.irs.gov. 199A(g) deduction. 1.199A–12 Expanded affiliated groups. Cooperatives defined in § 1.199A– Drafting Information * * * * * 7(a)(1). The principal author of these (b) Trade or business. A patron proposed regulations is Theresa § 1.199A–7 Section 199A(a) Rules for (whether the patron is an RPE or an Melchiorre, Office of Associate Chief Cooperatives and their Patrons. individual) must determine whether it Counsel (Passthroughs and Special (a) Overview—(1) In general. This has one or more trades or businesses Industries). Other personnel from the section provides guidance and special that it directly conducts as defined in Treasury Department and the IRS rules on the application of the rules of § 1.199A–1(b)(14). To the extent a participated in their development. §§ 1.199A–1 through 1.199A–6 patron operating a trade or business has regarding the deduction for qualified income directly from that business, the List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1 business income (QBI) under section patron must follow the rules of Income taxes, Reporting and 199A(a) (section 199A(a) deduction) of §§ 1.199A–1 through 1.199A–6 to recordkeeping requirements. the Internal Revenue Code (Code) by calculate the section 199A deduction. patrons (patrons) of cooperatives to Patronage dividends or similar Withdrawal of Notice of Proposed which Part I of subchapter T of chapter payments are considered to be generated Rulemaking 1 of subtitle A of the Code applies from the trade or business the ■ Accordingly, under the authority of 26 (Cooperatives). Unless otherwise Cooperative conducts on behalf of or U.S.C. 7805, the notice of proposed provided in this section, all of the rules with the patron, and are tested by the rulemaking (REG–136459–09) published in §§ 1.199A–1 through 1.199A–6 Cooperative at its trade or business in the Federal Register (80 FR 51978) on relating to calculating the section level. A patron that receives patronage August 27, 2015, is withdrawn. 199A(a) deduction apply to patrons and dividends or similar payments, as Cooperatives. Paragraph (b) of this described in paragraph (c)(1) of this Proposed Amendments to the section provides special rules for section, from a Cooperative must follow Regulations patrons relating to trades or businesses. the rules of paragraphs (c) through (e) of Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 is Paragraph (c) of this section provides this section to calculate the section proposed to be amended as follows: special rules for patrons and 199A deduction. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28685 (c) Qualified Business Income—(1) In otherwise provided by the instructions UBIA of qualified property must be general. QBI means the net amount of to the Form. If the Cooperative does not made for each trade or business by the qualified items of income, gain, report on or before the due date of the patron (whether an RPE or individual) deduction, and loss with respect to any Form 1099–PATR the amount of such that directly conducts the trade or trade or business as determined under qualified items of income, gain, business before applying the aggregation the rules of § 1.199A–3(b). A qualified deduction, and loss in the distributions rules of § 1.199A–4. Unlike RPEs, item of income includes distributions to the patron, the amount of Cooperatives do not allocate their W–2 for which the Cooperative is allowed a distributions from the Cooperative that wages and UBIA of qualified property to deduction under section 1382(b) and may be included in the patron’s QBI is patrons. (c)(2) (including patronage dividends or presumed to be zero. See special rule in (f) Special rules for patrons of similar payments, such as money, paragraph (d)(3) of this section relating Specified Cooperatives—(1) Section property, qualified written notices of to reporting of qualified items of 199A(b)(7) reduction. A patron of a allocations, and qualified per-unit retain income, gain, deduction, and loss with Specified Cooperative that receives a certificates, as well as money or respect to SSTBs of the Cooperative. qualified payment must reduce its property paid in redemption of a (d) Specified Service Trades or section 199A(a) deduction as provided nonqualified written notice of allocation Businesses—(1) In general. This section in § 1.199A–1(e)(7). This reduction (collectively patronage dividends or provides guidance on the determination applies whether the Specified similar payments)), provided such of SSTBs. Unless otherwise provided in Cooperative passes through all, some, or distribution is otherwise a qualified this section, all of the rules in § 1.199A– none of the Specified Cooperative’s item of income, gain, deduction, or loss. 5 relating to SSTBs apply to patrons of section 199A(g) deduction to the patron See special rule in paragraph (d)(3) of Cooperatives. in that taxable year. The proposed rules this section relating to SSTBs that may (2) SSTB determinations made by relating to the section 199A(g) affect QBI. patron. A patron (whether an RPE or an deduction can be found in §§ 1.199A–8 (2) QBI determinations made by individual) must determine whether through 1.199A–12. patron. A patron must determine QBI each trade or business it directly (2) Deduction Calculation—(i) for each trade or business it directly conducts is an SSTB. Allocation method. If in any taxable conducts. In situations where the patron (3) SSTB determinations made and year, a patron receives both qualified receives distributions described in reported by Cooperatives. In the case of payments and income that is not a paragraph (c)(1) of this section, the a Cooperative that makes distributions qualified payment in a trade or Cooperative must determine whether described in paragraph (c)(1) of this business, the patron must allocate those those distributions include qualified section to a patron, the Cooperative items and related deductions using a items of income, gain, deduction, and must determine whether the reasonable method based on all the facts loss. These distributions may be distributions from the Cooperative and circumstances. Different reasonable included in the QBI of the patron’s trade include items of income, gain, methods may be used for different items or business: deduction, and loss from an SSTB and related deductions of income, gain, (i) To the extent that those payments directly conducted by the Cooperative, deduction, and loss. The chosen are related to the patron’s trade or and whether such items are qualified reasonable method for each item must business; items of income, gain, deduction, and be consistently applied from one taxable (ii) Are qualified items of income, loss with respect to such SSTB. The year of the patron to another, and must gain, deduction, and loss at the Cooperative must report to the patron clearly reflect the income and expenses Cooperative’s trade or business level; the amount of income, gain, deduction, of each trade or business. The overall (iii) Are not income from an SSTB at and loss in the distributions that is a combination of methods must also be the Cooperative’s trade or business level qualified item of income, gain, reasonable based on all the facts and (except as permitted by the threshold deduction, and loss with respect to such circumstances. The books and records rules (see § 1.199A–5(a)(2)); and SSTB. The Cooperative must report the maintained for a trade or business must (iv) Provided the patron receives amount on an attachment to or on the be consistent with any allocations under certain information from the Form 1099–PATR (or any successor this paragraph (f)(2)(i). Cooperative about these payments as form) issued by the Cooperative to the (ii) Safe harbor. A patron with taxable provided in paragraphs (c)(3) and (d)(3) patron, unless otherwise provided by income under the threshold amount set of this section. the instructions to the Form. If the forth in section 199A(e)(2) is eligible to (3) Qualified items of income, gain, Cooperative does not report the amount use the safe harbor set forth in this deduction, and loss determinations on or before the due date of the Form paragraph (f)(2)(ii) instead of the made and reported by Cooperatives. In 1099–PATR, then only the amount that allocation method set forth in paragraph the case of a Cooperative that makes a Cooperative reports as qualified items (f)(2)(i) of this section for any taxable distributions described in paragraph of income, gain, deduction, and loss year in which the patron receives (c)(1) of this section to a patron, the under § 1.199A–7(c)(3) may be included qualified payments and income from Cooperative must determine the amount in the patron’s QBI, and the remaining other than qualified payments in its of qualified items of income, gain, amount of distributions from the trade or business. Under the safe harbor deduction, and loss in those Cooperative that may be included in the the patron may apportion its deductions distributions. Pursuant to this paragraph patron’s QBI is presumed to be zero. and W–2 wages ratably between income (c)(3), the Cooperative must report the (e) W–2 wages and unadjusted basis from qualified payments and income amounts of qualified items with respect immediately after acquisition of from other than qualified payments for to any non-SSTB of the Cooperative in qualified property—(1) In general. This purposes of calculating the reduction in the distributions made to the patron on section provides guidance on paragraph (f)(1) of this section. an attachment to or on the Form 1099– calculating a trade or business’s W–2 Accordingly, the amount of deductions PATR, Taxable Distributions Received wages and the UBIA of qualified apportioned to determine QBI allocable From Cooperatives (Form 1099–PATR), property properly allocable to QBI. to qualified payments is equal to the (or any successor form) issued by the (2) Determinations made by patron. proportion of the total deductions that Cooperative to the patron, unless The determination of W–2 wages and the amount of qualified payments bears VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28686 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules to total gross receipts used to determine (ii) P’s deductible amount related to the expenses between qualified payments QBI. The same proportion applies to grain trade or business is 20% of QBI ($150,000) and other income ($105,000), P determine the amount of W–2 wages ($10,000) reduced by the lesser of 9% of QBI compares the bushels of grain delivered to C allocable to the portion of the trade or related to qualified payments received from (65x) to the total bushels of grain delivered C ($900) or 50% of W–2 wages related to to C and sold to the independent grain business that received qualified qualified payments received from C ($0), or elevator (100x). P determines $136,500 (65% payments. $10,000. × $210,000) of expenses (including $19,500 (3) Qualified payments notice (iii) P’s deduction under section 199A for of W–2 wages) are properly allocable to the requirement. A Specified Cooperative 2019 is $11,000, which consists of the qualified payments. The portion of QBI from must report the amount of the qualified combined QBI amount of $10,000, plus P’s P’s grain trade or business related to qualified payments made to the eligible taxpayer, deduction passed through from C of $1,000. payments received from C is $13,500, which as defined in section 199A(g)(2)(D), on (3) Example 3. Patron of Specified consists of qualified payments of $150,000 an attachment to or on the Form 1099– Cooperative—Qualified Payments do not less the properly allocable expenses of PATR (or any successor form) issued by equal QBI and no section 199A(g) $136,500 (including $19,500 of W–2 wages). passthrough. (i) P, a grain farmer and a P’s method of allocating expenses is a the Cooperative to the patron, unless patron of a nonexempt Specified Cooperative reasonable method under paragraph (f)(2)(ii) otherwise provided by the instructions (C), during 2019, receives $60,000 in of this section. to the Form. patronage dividends, $100,000 in per-unit (5) Example 5. Patron of Specified (g) Examples. The following examples retain allocations, and $0 of allocated section Cooperative using safe harbor to allocate. (i) illustrate the provisions of paragraph (f) 199A(g) deduction from C related to the grain P is a grain farmer with taxable income of of this section. For purposes of these delivered to C. C notifies P that only $100,000 for 2019 (determined without examples, assume that the Specified $150,000 of the patronage dividends and per- regard to section 199A) and has a filing status Cooperative has satisfied the applicable unit retain allocations are qualified payments of married filing jointly. P’s QBI related to P’s grain trade or business for 2019 is $50,000, written notice requirements in because $10,000 of the payments are not attributable to C’s qualified production which consists of gross receipts of $180,000 paragraphs (c)(3), (d)(3) and (f)(3) of this activities income (QPAI). from sales to an independent grain elevator, section. (ii) P has taxable income of $90,000 per-unit retain allocations received from a (1) Example 1. Patron of Specified (determined without regard to section 199A) Specified Cooperative (C) during 2019 of Cooperative with W–2 wages. (i) P, a grain and has a filing status of married filing $15,000, patronage dividends received from farmer and patron of nonexempt Specified jointly. P’s QBI related to its grain trade or C during 2019 related to C’s 2018 net Cooperative (C), delivered to C during 2018 business is $45,000, which consists of gross earnings of $5,000, and expenses of $150,000 2% of all grain marketed through C during receipts of $95,000 from sales to an (including $50,000 of W–2 wages). C also such year. During 2019, P receives $20,000 in independent grain elevator, plus $160,000 passed through $1,800 of the section 199A(g) patronage dividends and $1,000 of allocated from C (all payments from C qualify as deduction to P, which related to the grain section 199A(g) deduction from C related to qualified items of income, gain, deduction, delivered by P to the Specified Cooperative the grain delivered to C during 2018. and loss), less expenses of $210,000 during 2018. P uses the safe harbor in (ii) P has taxable income of $75,000 for (including $30,000 of W–2 wages). paragraph (f)(2)(iii) of this section to 2019 (determined without regard to section (iii) The portion of QBI from P’s grain trade determine the expenses (including W–2 199A) and has a filing status of married filing or business related to qualified payments wages) allocable to the qualified payments. jointly. P’s QBI related to its grain trade or received from C is $25,000, which consists of (ii) Using the safe harbor to allocate P’s business for 2019 is $50,000, which consists the qualified payments received from C of $150,000 of expenses, P allocates $15,000 of of gross receipts of $150,000 from sales to an $150,000, less the properly allocable the expenses to the qualified payments independent grain elevator, per-unit retain expenses of $125,000 (including $18,000 of ($150,000 of expenses multiplied by the ratio allocations received from C during 2019 of W–2 wages), which were determined using a (0.10) of qualified payments ($20,000) to total $80,000, patronage dividends received from reasonable method under paragraph (f)(2)(ii) gross receipts ($200,000)). Using the same C during 2019 related to C’s 2018 net of this section. ratio, P also determines there are $5,000 of earnings of $20,000, and expenses of (iv) P’s patron reduction is $2,250, which W–2 wages allocable ($50,000 multiplied by $200,000 (including $50,000 of W–2 wages). is the lesser of 9% of QBI related to qualified 0.10) to the qualified payments. (iii) The portion of QBI from P’s grain trade payments received from C, $2,250 (9% × (iii) The portion of QBI from P’s grain trade or business related to qualified payments $25,000), or 50% of W–2 wages related to or business related to qualified payments received from C during 2019 is $10,000, qualified payments received from C, $9,000 received from C during 2019 is $5,000, which which consists of per-unit retain allocations (50% × $18,000). As P does not have any consists of per-unit retain allocations received from C during 2019 of $80,000, other trades or businesses, the combined QBI received from C during 2019 of $15,000, patronage dividends received from C during amount is $6,750 (20% of P’s total QBI, patronage dividends of $5,000, and properly 2019 related to C’s 2018 net earnings of $9,000 (20% × $45,000), reduced by the allocable expenses of $15,000 (including $20,000, and properly allocable expenses of patron reduction of $2,250). $5,000 of W–2 wages). $90,000 (including $25,000 of W–2 wages). (v) P’s deduction under section 199A is (iv) P’s QBI related to the grain trade or (iv) P’s deductible amount related to the $6,750, which consists of the combined QBI business is 20% of QBI ($10,000) reduced by grain trade or business is 20% of QBI amount of $6,750. the lesser of 9% of QBI related to qualified ($10,000) reduced by the lesser of 9% of QBI (4) Example 4. Patron of Specified payments received from C ($450) or 50% of related to qualified payments received from Cooperative—Reasonable Method under W–2 wages related to qualified payments C ($900) or 50% of W–2 wages related to paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section. P is a grain received from C ($2,500), or $9,550. As P qualified payments received from C farmer that has $45,000 of QBI related to P’s does not have any other trades or businesses, ($12,500), or $9,100. As P does not have any grain trade or business in 2019. P’s QBI the combined QBI amount is also $9,550. other trades or businesses, the combined QBI consists of $105,000 of sales to an (v) P’s deduction under section 199A for amount is also $9,100. independent grain elevator, $100,000 of per- 2019 is $11,350, which consists of the (v) P’s deduction under section 199A for unit retain allocations, and $50,000 of combined QBI amount of $9,550, plus P’s 2019 is $10,100, which consists of the patronage dividends from a nonexempt deduction passed through from C of $1,800. combined QBI amount of $9,100, plus P’s Specified Cooperative (C), for which C (h) Effective/Applicability date—(1) deduction passed through from C of $1,000. reports $150,000 of qualified payments to P General rule. Except as provided in (2) Example 2. Patron of Specified as required by paragraph (f)(3) of this section. Cooperative without W–2 wages. (i) C and P P’s grain trade or business has $210,000 of paragraph (h)(2) of this section, the have the same facts for 2018 and 2019 as expenses (including $30,000 of W–2 wages). provisions of this section apply to Example 1, except that P has expenses of P delivered 65x bushels of grain to C and taxable years ending after the date the $200,000 that include zero W–2 wages during sold 35x bushels of comparable grain to the Treasury decision adopting these 2019. independent grain elevator. To allocate the regulations as final regulations is VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28687 published in the Federal Register. (2) Specified Cooperative—(i) In variety of an orange would be Taxpayers, however, may rely on these general. Specified Cooperative means a considered separate from the orange and regulations until that date, but only if cooperative to which Part I of not from an agricultural or horticultural the taxpayers apply the rules in their subchapter T of chapter 1 of subtitle A product. entirety and in a consistent manner. of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) (b) Steps for a nonexempt Specified (2) Transition rule for qualified applies and which— Cooperative in calculating deduction— payments of patrons of Cooperatives. No (A) Manufactures, produces, grows, or (1) In general. Except as provided in deductions under section 199A are extracts (MPGE) in whole or significant paragraph (c)(3) of this section, this allowed to patrons for any qualified part within the United States any paragraph (b) applies only to nonexempt payments that are attributable to QPAI agricultural or horticultural product, or Specified Cooperatives. with respect to which a deduction is (B) Is engaged in the marketing of (2) Step 1—Gross receipts and related allowable to the Specified Cooperative agricultural or horticultural products deductions—(i) Identify. To determine under section 199 as in effect on and that have been MPGE in whole or the section 199A(g) deduction, a before December 31, 2017, for a taxable significant part within the United States Specified Cooperative first identifies its year of the Specified Cooperative by the patrons of the cooperative. patronage and nonpatronage gross beginning before January 1, 2018. (ii) Additional rules. See § 1.199A–9 receipts and related cost of goods sold (3) Notice from the Cooperative. If a for rules to determine if a Specified (COGS), deductible expenses, W–2 patron of a Cooperative cannot claim a Cooperative has MPGE an agricultural wages, etc. (deductions) and allocates deduction under section 199A for any or horticultural product in whole or them between patronage and qualified payments described in the significant part within the United nonpatronage. A single definition for transition rule set forth in paragraph States. the term patronage and nonpatronage is (h)(2) of this section, the Cooperative (iii) Types of Specified Cooperatives. found in § 1.1388–1(f). must report this information on an A Specified Cooperative that is qualified (ii) Applicable gross receipts and attachment to or on the Form 1099– as a farmer’s cooperative organization deductions. For all purposes of the PATR (or any successor form) issued by under section 521 is an exempt section 199A(g) deduction, a Specified the Cooperative to the patron, unless Specified Cooperative, while a Specified Cooperative can use only patronage otherwise provided by the instructions Cooperative not so qualified is a gross receipts and related deductions to to the Form. nonexempt Specified Cooperative. calculate qualified production activities (3) Patron is defined in § 1.1388–1(e). income (QPAI) as defined in paragraph § 1.199A–8 Deduction for income (4) Agricultural or horticultural (b)(4)(ii) of this section, oil-related QPAI attributable to domestic production products are agricultural, horticultural, as defined in paragraph (b)(7)(ii) of this activities of specified agricultural or viticultural, and dairy products, section, or the W–2 wage limitation in horticultural cooperatives. livestock and the products thereof, the paragraph (b)(5)(ii)(B) of this section. A (a) Overview—(1) In general. This products of poultry and bee raising, the Specified Cooperative cannot use its section provides rules relating to the edible products of forestry, and any and nonpatronage gross receipts and related deduction for income attributable to all products raised or produced on deductions to calculate its section domestic production activities of a farms and processed or manufactured 199A(g) deduction. specified agricultural or horticultural products thereof within the meaning of (iii) Gross receipts are the Specified cooperative (Specified Cooperative). the Cooperative Marketing Act of 1926, Cooperative’s receipts for the taxable This paragraph (a) provides an overview 44 Stat. 802 (1926). Agricultural or year that are recognized under the and definitions of certain terms. horticultural products also include Specified Cooperative’s methods of Paragraph (b) of this section provides aquatic products that are farmed accounting used for Federal income tax rules explaining the steps a nonexempt whether by an exempt or a nonexempt purposes for the taxable year. See Specified Cooperative performs to Specified Cooperative. In addition, § 1.199A–12 if the gross receipts are calculate its section 199A(g) deduction agricultural or horticultural products recognized in an intercompany and includes definitions of relevant include fertilizer, diesel fuel, and other transaction within the meaning of terms. Paragraph (c) of this section supplies used in agricultural or § 1.1502–13. Gross receipts include total provides rules explaining the steps an horticultural production that are MPGE sales (net of returns and allowances) exempt Specified Cooperative performs by a Specified Cooperative. Agricultural and all amounts received for services. In to calculate its section 199A(g) or horticultural products, however, do addition, gross receipts include any deduction. Paragraph (d) of this section not include intangible property (other income from investments and from provides rules for Specified than as provided in the exception in incidental or outside sources. For Cooperatives passing through the § 1.199A–9(b)(2)); for example, an example, gross receipts include interest section 199A(g) deduction to patrons. agricultural or horticultural product (except interest under section 103 but Paragraph (e) of this section provides includes a seed that is grown, but does including original issue discount), examples that illustrate the provisions not include the intangible property right dividends, rents, royalties, and of paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this to reproduce a seed for sale. This annuities, regardless of whether the section. Paragraph (f) of this section exclusion of intangible property does amounts are derived in the ordinary provides guidance for Specified not apply to intangible characteristics of course of the Specified Cooperative’s Cooperatives that are partners in a any particular agricultural or trade or business. Gross receipts are not partnership. Paragraph (g) of this section horticultural product. For example, reduced by COGS or by the cost of provides guidance on the recapture of a gross receipts from the sale of different property sold if such property is claimed section 199A(g) deduction. varieties of oranges would all qualify as described in section 1221(a)(1), (2), (3), Paragraph (h) of this section provides DPGR from the disposition of (4), or (5). Finally, gross receipts do not effective dates. For additional rules agricultural or horticultural products include amounts received by the addressing an expanded affiliated group (assuming all other requirements of Specified Cooperative with respect to (EAG) see § 1.199A–12. The principles section 199A(g) are met). However, sales tax or other similar state or local of this section apply to the EAG rules in gross receipts from the license of the taxes if, under the applicable state or § 1.199A–12. right to produce and sell a certain local law, the tax is legally imposed on VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28688 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules the purchaser of the good or service and (2) Taxable income of the Specified patronage DPGR derived from the the Specified Cooperative merely Cooperative for the taxable year. production, refining or processing of oil, collects and remits the tax to the taxing (B) W–2 wage limitation. The gas, or any primary product thereof (oil- authority. If, in contrast, the tax is deduction allowed under paragraph related DPGR) over the sum of— imposed on the Specified Cooperative (b)(5)(ii)(A) of this section for any (A) COGS of the Specified under the applicable law, then gross taxable year cannot exceed 50 percent of Cooperative that is allocable to such receipts include the amounts received the patronage W–2 wages attributable to receipts; and that are allocable to the payment of such DPGR for the taxable year. See (B) Other expenses, losses, or tax. § 1.199A–11 for additional rules on deductions (other than the section (3) Step 2—Determine gross receipts calculating the patronage W–2 wage 199A(g) deduction) that are properly that are DPGR—(i) In general. A limitation. allocable to such receipts. Specified Cooperative examines its (C) Taxable income. Taxable income (iii) Special rule for patronage oil- patronage gross receipts to determine is defined in section 1382 and § 1.1382– related DPGR. Oil-related DPGR does which of these are DPGR. A Specified 1 and § 1.1382–2. For purposes of not include gross receipts derived from Cooperative does not use nonpatronage determining the amount of the the transportation or distribution of oil, gross receipts to determine DPGR. deduction allowed under paragraph gas, or any primary product thereof. (ii) DPGR are the gross receipts of the (b)(5)(ii) of this section, taxable income However, to the extent that the Specified Cooperative that are derived is limited to taxable income and related nonexempt Specified Cooperative treats from any lease, rental, license, sale, deductions from patronage sources. gross receipts derived from exchange, or other disposition of an Patronage net operating losses (NOLs) transportation or distribution of oil, gas, agricultural or horticultural product that reduce taxable income. Taxable income or any primary product thereof as part is MPGE by the Specified Cooperative or is computed without taking into account of DPGR under § 1.199A–9(j)(3)(i), or its patrons in whole or significant part the section 199A(g) deduction or any under § 1.199A–9(j)(3)(i)(B), then the within the United States. DPGR does not deduction allowable under section Specified Cooperative must treat those include gross receipts derived from 1382(b). Taxable income is determined patronage gross receipts as oil-related services or the lease, rental, license, using the same method of accounting DGPR. sale, exchange, or other disposition of used to determine distributions under (iv) Oil includes oil recovered from land unless a de minimis or other section 1382(b) and qualified payments both conventional and non- exception applies. See § 1.199A–9 for to eligible taxpayers. conventional recovery methods, additional rules on determining if gross (6) Use of patronage section 199A(g) including crude oil, shale oil, and oil receipts are DPGR. deduction. Except as provided in recovered from tar/oil sands. The (4) Step 3—Determine QPAI—(i) In § 1.199A–12(c)(2) related to the rules for primary product from oil includes all general. A Specified Cooperative EAGs, the patronage section 199A(g) products derived from the destructive determines QPAI from patronage DPGR deduction cannot create or increase a distillation of oil, including volatile and patronage deductions identified in patronage or nonpatronage NOL or the products, light oils such as motor fuel paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) and (b)(2)(i) of this amount of a patronage or nonpatronage and kerosene, distillates such as section, respectively. A Specified NOL carryover or carryback, if naphtha, lubricating oils, greases and Cooperative does not use nonpatronage applicable, in accordance with section waxes, and residues such as fuel oil. gross receipts or deductions to 172. A patronage section 199A(g) The primary product from gas means all determine QPAI. deduction can be applied only against gas and associated hydrocarbon (ii) QPAI for the taxable year means patronage income and deductions. A components from gas wells or oil wells, an amount equal to the excess (if any) patronage section 199A(g) deduction whether recovered at the lease or upon of— that is not used in the appropriate further processing, including natural (A) DPGR for the taxable year, over taxable year is lost. gas, condensates, liquefied petroleum (B) The sum of— (7) Special rules for nonexempt gases such as ethane, propane, and (1) COGS that are allocable to DPGR, Specified Cooperatives that have oil- butane, and liquid products such as and related QPAI—(i) Reduction of section natural gasoline. The primary products (2) Other expenses, losses, or 199A(g) deduction. If a Specified from oil and gas provided in this deductions (other than the section Cooperative has oil-related QPAI for any paragraph (b)(7)(iv) are not intended to 199A(g) deduction) that are properly taxable year, the amount otherwise represent either the only primary allocable to DPGR. allowable as a deduction under products from oil or gas, or the only (C) QPAI computational rules. QPAI paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section must processes from which primary products is computed without taking into account be reduced by 3 percent of the least of— may be derived under existing and the section 199A(g) deduction or any (A) Oil-related QPAI of the Specified future technologies. Examples of non- deduction allowed under section Cooperative for the taxable year, primary products include, but are not 1382(b). See § 1.199A–10 for additional (B) QPAI of the Specified Cooperative limited to, petrochemicals, medicinal rules on calculating QPAI. for the taxable year, or products, insecticides, and alcohols. (5) Step 4—Calculate deduction—(i) (C) Taxable income of the Specified (c) Exempt Specified Cooperatives— In general. From QPAI and taxable Cooperative for the taxable year. (1) In general. This paragraph (c) applies income, a Specified Cooperative (ii) Oil-related QPAI means, for any only to exempt Specified Cooperatives. calculates its section 199A(g) deduction taxable year, the patronage QPAI that is (2) Two section 199A(g) deductions. as provided in paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of attributable to the production, refining, The Specified Cooperative must this section. processing, transportation, or calculate two separate section 199A(g) (ii) Deduction—(A) In general. A distribution of oil, gas, or any primary deductions, one patronage sourced and Specified Cooperative is allowed a product thereof (within the meaning of the other nonpatronage sourced. deduction equal to 9 percent of the section 927(a)(2)(C), as in effect before Patronage and nonpatronage gross lesser of— its repeal) during such taxable year. Oil- receipts, related COGS that are allocable (1) QPAI of the Specified Cooperative related QPAI for any taxable year is an to DPGR, and other expenses, losses, or for the taxable year, or amount equal to the excess (if any) of deductions (other than the section VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28689 199A(g) deduction) that are properly it receives from the federated (4) Section 199A(g) deduction allocable to DPGR (deductions), DPGR, cooperative to its member patrons that allocated to eligible taxpayer. An QPAI, NOLs, W–2 wages, etc. are not are eligible taxpayers. eligible taxpayer may deduct the lesser netted to calculate these two separate (2) Amount of deduction being passed of the section 199A(g) deduction section 199A(g) deductions. through—(i) In general. A Specified identified on the notice described in (3) Exempt Specified Cooperative Cooperative is permitted to pass through paragraph (d)(3) of this section or the patronage section 199A(g) deduction. to an eligible taxpayer an amount equal eligible taxpayer’s taxable income in the The Specified Cooperative calculates its to the portion of the Specified taxable year in which the eligible patronage section 199A(g) deduction Cooperative’s section 199A(g) deduction taxpayer receives the timely written following steps 1 through 4 in that is allowed with respect to the notice described in paragraph (d)(3) of paragraphs (b)(2) through (5) of this portion of the cooperative’s QPAI that is this section. For this purpose, the section as if it were a nonexempt attributable to the qualified payments eligible taxpayer’s taxable income is Specified Cooperative. the Specified Cooperative distributed to determined without taking into account (4) Exempt Specified Cooperative the eligible taxpayer during the taxable the section 199A(g) deduction being nonpatronage section 199A(g) year and identified on the notice passed through to the eligible taxpayer deduction—(i) In general. The Specified required in § 1.199A–7(f)(3) on an and after taking into account any section Cooperative calculates its nonpatronage attachment to or on the Form 1099– 199A(a) deduction allowed to the section 199A(g) deduction following PATR, Taxable Distributions Received eligible taxpayer. Any section 199A(g) steps 2 through 4 in paragraphs (b)(2) From Cooperatives (Form 1099–PATR), deduction the eligible taxpayer does not through (5) of this section using only (or any successor form) issued by the use in the taxable year in which the nonpatronage gross receipts and related Specified Cooperative to the eligible eligible taxpayer receives the notice nonpatronage deductions. For purposes taxpayer, unless otherwise provided by (received on or before the due date of of determining the amount of the the instructions to the Form. The notice the Form 1099–PATR) is lost and cannot nonpatronage section 199A(g) deduction requirement to pass through the section be carried forward or back to other allowed under paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of 199A(g) deduction is in paragraph (d)(3) taxable years. The taxable income this section, taxable income is limited to of this section. limitation for the section 199A(a) taxable income and related deductions (ii) Qualified payment means any deduction set forth in section 199A(b)(3) from nonpatronage sources. amount of a patronage dividend or per- and § 1.199A–1(a) and (b) does not Nonpatronage NOLs reduce taxable unit retain allocation, as described in apply to limit the deductibility of the income. Taxable income is computed section 1385(a)(1) or (3) received by a section 199A(g) deduction passed without taking into account the section patron from a Specified Cooperative that through to the eligible taxpayer. 199A(g) deduction or any deduction is attributable to the portion of the (5) Special rules for eligible taxpayers allowable under section 1382(c). Specified Cooperative’s QPAI, for which that are Specified Cooperatives. A Taxable income is determined using the the cooperative is allowed a section Specified Cooperative that receives a same method of accounting used to 199A(g) deduction. For this purpose, section 199A(g) deduction as an eligible determine distributions under section patronage dividends include any taxpayer can take the deduction only 1382(c)(2). advances on patronage and per-unit against patronage gross income and (ii) Use of nonpatronage section retain allocations include per-unit related deductions. 199A(g) deduction. Except as provided retains paid in money during the taxable (6) W–2 wage limitation. The W–2 in § 1.199A–12(c)(2) related to the rules year. A Specified Cooperative calculates wage limitation described in paragraph for EAGs, the nonpatronage section its qualified payment using the same (b)(5)(ii)(B) of this section is applied at 199A(g) deduction cannot create or method of accounting it uses to the cooperative level whether or not the increase a nonpatronage NOL or the calculate its taxable income. Specified Cooperative chooses to pass amount of nonpatronage NOL carryover (3) Notice requirement to pass through some or all of the section or carryback, if applicable, in through deduction. A Specified 199A(g) deduction. Any section 199A(g) accordance with section 172. A Cooperative must identify in a written deduction that has been passed through Specified Cooperative cannot allocate notice the amount of the section 199A(g) by a Specified Cooperative to an eligible its nonpatronage section 199A(g) deduction being passed through to the taxpayer is not subject to the W–2 wage deduction under paragraph (d) of this eligible taxpayer. This written notice limitation a second time at the eligible section and can apply the nonpatronage must be mailed by the Specified taxpayer’s level. section 199A(g) deduction only against Cooperative to the eligible taxpayer no (7) Specified Cooperative denied its nonpatronage income and later than the 15th day of the ninth section 1382 deduction for portion of deductions. As is the case for the month following the close of the taxable qualified payments. A Specified patronage section 199A(g) deduction, year of the Specified Cooperative. The Cooperative must reduce its section the nonpatronage section 199A(g) Specified Cooperative may use the same 1382 deduction under section 1382(b) deduction that a Specified Cooperative written notice, if any, that it uses to and/or (c), as applicable) by an amount does not use in the appropriate taxable notify the eligible taxpayer of the equal to the portion of any qualified year is lost. eligible taxpayer’s respective allocations payment that is attributable to the (d) Discretion to pass through of patronage distributions, or may use a Specified Cooperative’s section 199A(g) deduction—(1) In general. A Specified separate timely written notice(s) to deduction passed through to the eligible Cooperative may, at its discretion, pass comply with this section. The Specified taxpayer. This means the Specified through all, some, or none of its Cooperative must report the amount of Cooperative must reduce its section patronage section 199A(g) deduction to section 199A(g) deduction passed 1382 deduction in an amount equal to an eligible taxpayer. An eligible through to the eligible taxpayer on an the section 199A(g) deduction passed taxpayer is a patron other than a C attachment to or on the Form 1099– through to its eligible taxpayers. corporation or a Specified Cooperative. PATR (or any successor form) issued by (8) No double counting. A qualified A Specified Cooperative member of a the Specified Cooperative to the eligible payment received by a Specified federated cooperative may pass through taxpayer, unless otherwise provided by Cooperative that is a patron of a the patronage section 199A(g) deduction the instructions to the Form. Specified Cooperative is not taken into VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28690 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules account by the patron for purposes of patronage sourced. C identifies 25% of the 199A(g) deduction attributable to patronage section 199A(g). gross receipts and related expenses from sources is the same as the deduction (e) Examples. The following examples grain sales as nonpatronage sourced. calculated by the nonexempt Specified illustrate the application of paragraphs (iii) C does not include any nonpatronage Cooperative in Example 1 in paragraph (e)(1) gross receipts or related expenses from grain (b), (c), and (d) of this section. Assume of this section. sales in either QPAI or taxable income when (iii) C’s nonpatronage QPAI and taxable for each example that the Specified calculating the section 199A(g) deduction. income is equal to $100 ($500¥$400). C’s Cooperative sent all required notices to C’s QPAI includes the patronage DPGR, less deduction under paragraph (c)(3) of this patrons on or before the due date of the related expenses (allocable COGS, wages and section that directs C to use paragraph Form 1099–PATR. other expenses). C’s taxable income includes (b)(5)(ii) of this section attributable to the patronage gross receipts, whether such (1) Example 1. Nonexempt Specified nonpatronage sources is equal to $9 (9% of gross receipts are DPGR or non-DPGR. Cooperative calculating section 199A(g) $100), which does not exceed $10 (50% of (iv) C allocates and reports patronage deduction. (i) C is a grain marketing C’s W–2 wages properly allocable to DPGR). dividends to its harvesting patrons and grain nonexempt Specified Cooperative, with C cannot pass through any of the marketing patrons. C also notifies its grain $5,250,000 in gross receipts during 2018 from nonpatronage section 199A(g) deduction marketing patrons (in accordance with the the sale of grain grown by its patrons. C paid amount to its patrons. requirements of § 1.199A–7(f)(3)) that their $4,000,000 to its patrons at the time the grain (6) Example 6. NOL. C, a nonexempt patronage dividends are qualified payments was delivered in the form of per-unit retain Specified Cooperative, MPGE agricultural or used in C’s section 199A(g) computation. The allocations pursuant to an agreement and horticultural products. C is not part of an patrons must use this information for another $1,000,000 in patronage dividends EAG as defined in § 1.199A–12. In 2018, C purposes of computing their section after the close of the 2018 taxable year. C has generates QPAI and taxable income is $600, 199A(b)(7) reduction to their section 199A(a) other expenses of $250,000 during 2018, without taking into account any of its deduction (see § 1.199A–7(f)). including $100,000 of W–2 wages. deductions under section 1382(b), the (4) Example 4. Nonexempt Specified (ii) C has DPGR of $5,250,000 and QPAI as deduction under section 199A(g), or an NOL defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(4)(ii) of $5,000,000 Cooperative with patronage and deduction. During 2018, C incurs W–2 wages for 2018. C’s section 199A(g) deduction is nonpatronage gross receipts and related as defined in § 1.199A–11 of $300. C has an equal to the least of 9% of QPAI ($450,000), deductions. (i) C, a nonexempt Specified NOL carryover to 2018 of $500. C’s deduction 9% of taxable income ($450,000), or 50% of Cooperative, markets corn grown by its under this section for 2018 is $9 (9% × (lesser W–2 wages ($50,000). C passes through the patrons in the United States. For the calendar of QPAI of $600 and taxable income of $100 entire section 199A(g) deduction to its year ending December 31, 2020, C derives ($600 taxable income¥$500 NOL)). Under patrons. Accordingly, C reduces its gross receipts from the marketing activity of these facts the wage limitation does not act $5,000,000 deduction allowable under $1,800. Such gross receipts qualify as DPGR. to limit the deduction because the wage section 1382(b) (relating to the $1,000,000 Assume C has $800 of expenses (including limitation is $150 (50% × $300). patronage dividends and $4,000,000 per-unit COGS, other expenses, and $400 of W–2 (7) Example 7. NOL. (i) C, a nonexempt retain allocations) by $50,000. wages) properly allocable to DPGR, and a Specified Cooperative, MPGE agricultural or (2) Example 2. Nonexempt Specified $1,000 deduction allowed under section horticultural products. C is not part of an Cooperative calculating section 199A(g) 1382(b). C also derives gross receipts from EAG. In 2018, C generates QPAI and taxable deduction with purchases. Same facts as nonpatronage sources in the amount of $500, income of $100, without taking into account Example 1, except C purchased grain from its and has nonpatronage deductions in the any of its deductions under section 1382(b), patrons for $4,000,000 and these purchases amount of $400 (including COGS, other the deduction under section 199A(g), or an are not per-unit retain allocations described expenses, and $100 of W–2 wages). NOL deduction. C has an NOL carryover to in section 1388(f). C allocated and reported (ii) C does not include any gross receipts 2018 of $500 that reduces its taxable income the $1,000,000 patronage dividends to its or deductions from nonpatronage sources for 2018 to $0. C’s section 199A(g) deduction patrons and provided notification (in when calculating the deduction under for 2018 is $0 (9% × (lesser of QPAI of $100 accordance with the requirements of paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section. C’s QPAI and taxable income of $0)). § 1.199A–7(f)(3)) that only the patronage and taxable income both equal $1,000 (ii) Carryover to 2019. C’s taxable income dividends are treated as qualified payments ($1,800—800). C’s deduction under for purposes of determining its NOL for purposes of its section 199A(g) deduction. paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section for the carryover to 2019 is $100. Accordingly, for C has QPAI and taxable income of $1,000,000 taxable year is equal to $90 (9% of $1,000), purposes of section 199A(g), C’s NOL ($5,250,000—$4,000,000—$250,000). C’s which does not exceed $200 (50% of C’s W– carryover to 2019 is $400 ($500 NOL section 199A(g) deduction is the lesser of 9% 2 wages properly allocable to DPGR). C carryover to 2018—$100 NOL used in 2018). of QPAI ($90,000), 9% of taxable income passes through $90 of the deduction to without taking into account any deduction patrons and C reduces its section 1382(b) (f) Special rule for Specified under section 1382(b) ($90,000), or 50% of deduction by $90. Cooperative partners. In the case W–2 wages ($50,000). C passes through the (5) Example 5. Exempt Specified described in section 199A(g)(5)(B), entire section 199A(g) deduction to its Cooperative with patronage and where a Specified Cooperative is a patrons. Accordingly, C reduces its nonpatronage income and deductions. (i) C, partner in a partnership, the partnership $1,000,000 deduction allowable under an exempt Specified Cooperative, markets must separately identify and report on section 1382(b) by $50,000. Patrons do not corn MPGE by its patrons in the United the Schedule K–1 of the Form 1065, include any of the $4,000,000 of payments States. For the calendar year ending U.S. Return of Partnership Income (or when determining the reduction amount December 31, 2020, C derives gross receipts under section 199A(b)(7). from the marketing activity of $1,800. For any successor form) issued to the (3) Example 3. Nonexempt Specified this activity assume C has $800 of expenses Specified Cooperative the cooperative’s Cooperative determines amounts included in (including COGS, other expenses, and $400 share of gross receipts and related QPAI and taxable income. (i) C, a nonexempt of W–2 wages) properly allocable to DPGR, deductions, unless otherwise provided Specified Cooperative, offers harvesting and a $1,000 deduction under section by the instructions to the Form. The services and markets the grain of patrons and 1382(b). C also derives gross receipts from Specified Cooperative determines what nonpatrons. C had gross receipts from nonpatronage sources in the amount of $500. gross receipts reported by the harvesting services and grain sales, and Assume the gross receipts qualify as DPGR. partnership qualify as DPGR and expenses related to both. All of C’s harvesting For this activity assume C has $400 of includes these gross receipts and related services were performed for their patrons, expenses (including COGS, other expenses, and 75% of the grain sales were for patrons. and $20 of W–2 wages) properly allocable to deductions to calculate one section (ii) C identifies 75% of the gross receipts DPGR and no deduction under section 199A(g) deduction (in the case of a and related expenses from grain sales and 1382(c). nonexempt Specified Cooperative) or 100% of the gross receipts and related (ii) C calculates two separate section two section 199A(g) deductions (in the expenses from the harvesting services as 199A(g) deduction amounts. C’s section case of an exempt Specified VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28691 Cooperative) using the steps set forth in or rented by the Specified Cooperative (2) Reasonable method of allocation. paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. for use by any related person. A person If a Specified Cooperative has the (g) Recapture of section 199A(g) is treated as related to another person if information readily available and can, deduction. If the amount of the section both persons are treated as a single without undue burden or expense, 199A(g) deduction that was passed employer under either section 52(a) or specifically identify whether the gross through to eligible taxpayers exceeds (b) (without regard to section 1563(b)), receipts are derived from an item (and the amount allowable as a section or section 414(m) or (o). Any other thus, are DPGR), then the Specified 199A(g) deduction as determined on person is an unrelated person for Cooperative must use that specific examination or reported on an amended purposes of the section 199A(g) identification to determine DPGR. If the return, then recapture of the excess will deduction. Specified Cooperative does not have occur at the Specified Cooperative level (2) Exceptions. Notwithstanding information readily available to in the taxable year the Specified paragraph (b)(1) of this section, gross specifically identify whether gross Cooperative took the excess section receipts derived from any agricultural or receipts are derived from an item or 199A(g) deduction. horticultural product leased or rented cannot, without undue burden or (h) Applicability date. Except as by the Specified Cooperative to a related expense, specifically identify whether provided in paragraph (h)(2) of person may qualify as DPGR if the gross receipts are derived from an item, § 1.199A–7, the provisions of this agricultural or horticultural product is then the Specified Cooperative is not section apply to taxable years ending held for sublease or rent, or is subleased required to use a method that after the date the Treasury decision or rented, by the related person to an specifically identifies whether the gross adopting these regulations as final unrelated person for the ultimate use of receipts are derived from an item but regulations is published in the Federal the unrelated person. Similarly, can use a reasonable allocation method. Register. Taxpayers, however, may rely notwithstanding paragraph (b)(1) of this Factors taken into consideration in on these regulations until that date, but section, gross receipts derived from a determining whether the Specified only if the taxpayers apply the rules in license of the right to reproduce an Cooperative’s method of allocating gross their entirety and in a consistent agricultural or horticultural product to a receipts between DPGR and non-DPGR manner. related person for reproduction and is reasonable include whether the sale, exchange, lease, or rental to an § 1.199A–9 Domestic production gross Specified Cooperative uses the most unrelated person for the ultimate use of accurate information available; the receipts. the unrelated person are treated as gross (a) Domestic production gross relationship between the gross receipts receipts from a disposition of an and the method used; the accuracy of receipts—(1) In general. The provisions agricultural or horticultural product and of this section apply solely for purposes the method chosen as compared with may qualify as DPGR. other possible methods; whether the of section 199A(g) of the Internal (c) Allocating gross receipts—(1) In method is used by the Specified Revenue Code (Code). The provisions of general. A Specified Cooperative must Cooperative for internal management or this section provide guidance to determine the portion of its gross other business purposes; whether the determine what gross receipts (defined receipts for the taxable year that is method is used for other Federal or state in § 1.199A–8(b)(2)(iii)) are domestic DPGR and the portion of its gross income tax purposes; the time, burden, production gross receipts (DPGR) receipts that is non-DPGR using a and cost of using alternative methods; (defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(3)(ii)). DPGR reasonable method based on all the facts and whether the Specified Cooperative does not include gross receipts derived and circumstances. Applicable Federal applies the method consistently from from services or the lease, rental, income tax principles apply to year to year. license, sale, exchange, or other determine whether a transaction is, in disposition of land unless a de minimis substance, a lease, rental, license, sale, (3) De minimis rules—(i) DPGR. A or other exception applies. Partners, exchange, or other disposition the gross Specified Cooperative’s applicable gross including partners in an EAG receipts of which may constitute DPGR, receipts as provided in §§ 1.199A–8(b) partnership described in § 1.199A– whether it is a service the gross receipts and/or (c) may be treated as DPGR if less 12(i)(1), may not treat guaranteed of which may constitute non-DPGR, or than 5 percent of the Specified payments under section 707(c) as DPGR. some combination thereof. For example, Cooperative’s total gross receipts are (2) Application to marketing if a Specified Cooperative sells an non-DPGR (after application of the cooperatives. For purposes of agricultural or horticultural product exceptions provided in § 1.199A– determining DPGR, a Specified and, in connection with that sale, also 9(j)(3)). If the amount of the Specified Cooperative (defined in § 1.199A– provides services, the Specified Cooperative’s gross receipts that are 8(a)(2)) will be treated as having Cooperative must allocate its gross non-DPGR equals or exceeds 5 percent manufactured, produced, grown, or receipts from the transaction using a of the Specified Cooperative’s total gross extracted (MPGE) (defined in paragraph reasonable method based on all the facts receipts, then, except as provided in (f) of this section) in whole or and circumstances that accurately paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section, the significant part (defined in paragraph identifies the gross receipts that Specified Cooperative is required to (h) of this section) any agricultural or constitute DPGR and non-DPGR in allocate all gross receipts between DPGR horticultural product (defined in accordance with the requirements of and non-DPGR in accordance with § 1.199A–8(a)(4)) within the United §§ 1.199A–8(b) and/or (c). The chosen paragraph (c)(1) of this section. If a States (defined in paragraph (i) of this reasonable method must be consistently Specified Cooperative is a member of an section) marketed by the Specified applied from one taxable year to another expanded affiliated group (EAG) Cooperative which its patrons (defined and must clearly reflect the portion of (defined in § 1.199A–12), but is not a in § 1.1388–1(e)) have so MPGE. gross receipts for the taxable year that is member of a consolidated group, then (b) Related persons—(1) In general. DPGR and the portion of gross receipts the determination of whether less than Pursuant to 199A(g)(3)(D)(ii), DPGR that is non-DPGR. The books and 5 percent of the Specified Cooperative’s does not include any gross receipts records maintained for gross receipts total gross receipts are non-DPGR is derived from agricultural or must be consistent with any allocations made at the Specified Cooperative level. horticultural products leased, licensed, under this paragraph (c)(1). If a Specified Cooperative is a member VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28692 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules of a consolidated group, then the disposition of such product qualify as Cooperative the acquired property determination of whether less than 5 DPGR; or contains. percent of the Specified Cooperative’s (ii) If paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section (f) Definition of manufactured, total gross receipts are non-DPGR is does not apply to the product, then any produced, grown, or extracted (MPGE)— made at the consolidated group level. component of the product described in (1) In general. Except as provided in See § 1.199A–12(d). paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section is paragraphs (f)(2) and (3) of this section, (ii) Non-DPGR. A Specified treated as the item, provided that the the term MPGE includes manufacturing, Cooperative’s applicable gross receipts gross receipts from the disposition of producing, growing, extracting, as provided in §§ 1.199A–8(b) and/or (c) the product described in paragraph installing, developing, improving, and may be treated as non-DPGR if less than (e)(1)(i) of this section that are creating agricultural or horticultural 5 percent of the Specified Cooperative’s attributable to such component qualify products; making agricultural or total gross receipts are DPGR. If a as DPGR. Each component that meets horticultural products out of material by Specified Cooperative is a member of an the requirements under this paragraph processing, manipulating, refining, or EAG, but is not a member of a (e)(1)(ii) must be treated as a separate changing the form of an article, or by consolidated group, then the item and a component that meets the combining or assembling two or more determination of whether less than 5 requirements under this paragraph articles; cultivating soil, raising percent of the Specified Cooperative’s (e)(1)(ii) may not be combined with a livestock, and farming aquatic products. total gross receipts are DPGR is made at component that does not meet these The term MPGE also includes storage, the Specified Cooperative level. If a requirements. handling, or other processing activities Specified Cooperative is a member of a (2) Special rules. (i) For purposes of (other than transportation activities) consolidated group, then the paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section, in no within the United States related to the determination of whether less than 5 event may a single item consist of two sale, exchange, or other disposition of percent of the Specified Cooperative’s or more products unless those products agricultural or horticultural products total gross receipts are DPGR is made at are offered for disposition, in the normal only if the products are consumed in the consolidated group level. course of the Specified Cooperative’s connection with or incorporated into (d) Use of historical data for multiple- trade or business, as a single item the MPGE of agricultural or year transactions. If a Specified (regardless of how the products are horticultural products, whether or not Cooperative recognizes and reports packaged). by the Specified Cooperative. The gross receipts from upfront payments or Specified Cooperative (or the patron if (ii) In the case of agricultural or other similar payments on a Federal section 1.199A–9(a)(2) applies) must horticultural products customarily sold income tax return for a taxable year, have the benefits and burdens of by weight or by volume, the item is then the Specified Cooperative’s use of ownership of the agricultural or determined using the most common historical data in making an allocation horticultural products under Federal of gross receipts from the transaction custom of the industry (for example, income tax principles during the period between DPGR and non-DPGR may barrels of oil). the MPGE activity occurs in order for constitute a reasonable method. If a (3) Exception. If the Specified the gross receipts derived from the Specified Cooperative makes allocations Cooperative MPGE agricultural or MPGE of the agricultural or using historical data, and subsequently horticultural products within the United horticultural products to qualify as updates the data, then the Specified States that it disposes of, and the DPGR. Cooperative must use the more recent or Specified Cooperative leases, rents, (2) Packaging, repackaging, or updated data, starting in the taxable licenses, purchases, or otherwise labeling. If the Specified Cooperative year in which the update is made. acquires property that contains or may packages, repackages, or labels (e) Determining DPGR item-by-item— contain the agricultural or horticultural agricultural or horticultural products (1) In general. For purposes of the products (or a portion thereof), and the and engages in no other MPGE activity section 199A(g) deduction, a Specified Specified Cooperative cannot with respect to those agricultural or Cooperative determines, using a reasonably determine, without undue horticultural products, the packaging, reasonable method based on all the facts burden and expense, whether the repackaging, or labeling does not qualify and circumstances, whether gross acquired property contains any of the as MPGE with respect to those receipts qualify as DPGR on an item-by- original agricultural or horticultural agricultural or horticultural products. item basis (and not, for example, on a products MPGE by the Specified (3) Installing. If a Specified division-by-division, product line-by- Cooperative, then the Specified Cooperative installs agricultural or product line, or transaction-by- Cooperative is not required to determine horticultural products and engages in no transaction basis). The chosen whether any portion of the acquired other MPGE activity with respect to the reasonable method must be consistently property qualifies as an item for agricultural or horticultural products, applied from one taxable year to another purposes of paragraph (e)(1) of this the Specified Cooperative’s installing and must clearly reflect the portion of section. Therefore, the gross receipts activity does not qualify as an MPGE gross receipts that is DPGR. The books derived from the disposition of the activity. Notwithstanding paragraph and records maintained for gross acquired property may be treated as (j)(3)(i)(A) of this section, if the receipts must be consistent with any non-DPGR. Similarly, the preceding Specified Cooperative installs allocations under this paragraph (e)(1). sentences apply if the Specified agricultural or horticultural products (i) The term item means the Cooperative can reasonably determine MPGE by the Specified Cooperative and agricultural or horticultural product that the acquired property contains the Specified Cooperative has the offered by the Specified Cooperative in agricultural or horticultural products (or benefits and burdens of ownership of the normal course of its trade or a portion thereof) MPGE by the the agricultural or horticultural business for lease, rental, license, sale, Specified Cooperative, but cannot products under Federal income tax exchange, or other disposition (for reasonably determine, without undue principles during the period the purposes of this paragraph (e), burden or expense, how much, or what installing activity occurs, then the collectively referred to as disposition) to type, grade, etc., of the agricultural or portion of the installing activity that customers, if the gross receipts from the horticultural MPGE by the Specified relates to the agricultural or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28693 horticultural products is an MPGE paragraph (g) of this section, the overhead is all costs required to be activity. Specified Cooperative is considered to capitalized under section 263A except (4) Consistency with section 263A. A MPGE the agricultural or horticultural direct materials and direct labor. For Specified Cooperative that has MPGE products under this section. The Specified Cooperatives not subject to agricultural or horticultural products for unrelated person must perform the section 263A, overhead may be the taxable year must treat itself as a MPGE activity on behalf of the Specified computed using a reasonable method producer under section 263A with Cooperative in whole or significant part based on all the facts and respect to the agricultural or within the United States in order for the circumstances, but may not include any horticultural products unless the Specified Cooperative to satisfy the cost, or amount of any cost, that would Specified Cooperative is not subject to requirements of this paragraph (h)(1). not be required to be capitalized under section 263A. A Specified Cooperative (2) Substantial in nature. Agricultural section 263A if the Specified that currently is not properly accounting or horticultural products will be treated Cooperative were subject to section for its production activities under as MPGE in whole or in significant part 263A. Research and experimental section 263A, and wishes to change its by the Specified Cooperative (or its expenditures under section 174 and the method of accounting to comply with patrons in the case described in costs of creating intangible assets are not the producer requirements of section paragraph (a)(2) of this section) within taken into account in determining direct 263A, must follow the applicable the United States for purposes of labor or overhead for any agricultural or administrative procedures issued under paragraph (h)(1) of this section if the horticultural product. In the case of § 1.446–1(e)(3)(ii) for obtaining the MPGE of the agricultural or agricultural or horticultural products, Commissioner’s consent to a change in horticultural products by the Specified research and experimental expenditures accounting method (for further Cooperative within the United States is under section 174 and any other costs guidance, for example, see Rev. Proc. substantial in nature taking into account incurred in the creation of intangible 2015–13, 2015–5 IRB 419, or any all the facts and circumstances, assets may be excluded from COGS or applicable subsequent guidance (see including the relative value added by, unadjusted depreciable basis for § 601.601(d)(2) of this chapter)). and relative cost of, the Specified purposes of determining whether the (g) By the taxpayer. With respect to Cooperative’s MPGE within the United Specified Cooperative meets the safe the exception of the rules applicable to States, the nature of the agricultural or harbor under this paragraph (h)(3). For an EAG and EAG partnerships under horticultural products, and the nature of Specified Cooperatives not subject to § 1.199A–12, only one Specified the MPGE activity that the Specified section 263A, the chosen reasonable Cooperative may claim the section Cooperative performs within the United method to compute overhead must be 199A(g) deduction with respect to any States. The MPGE of a key component consistently applied from one taxable qualifying activity under paragraph (f) of an agricultural or horticultural year to another and must clearly reflect of this section performed in connection product does not, in itself, meet the the Specified Cooperative’s portion of with the same agricultural or substantial-in-nature requirement with overhead not subject to section 263A. horticultural product. If an unrelated respect to an agricultural or The method must also be reasonable party performs a qualifying activity horticultural product under this based on all the facts and under paragraph (f) of this section paragraph (h)(2). In the case of an circumstances. The books and records pursuant to a contract with a Specified agricultural or horticultural product, maintained for overhead must be Cooperative (or its patron as relevant research and experimental activities consistent with any allocations under under paragraph (a)(2) of this section), under section 174 and the creation of this paragraph (h)(3)(i). then only if the Specified Cooperative intangible assets are not taken into (ii) Unadjusted depreciable basis. The (or its patron) has the benefits and account in determining whether the term unadjusted depreciable basis burdens of ownership of the agricultural MPGE of the agricultural or means the basis of property for purposes or horticultural product under Federal horticultural product is substantial in of section 1011 without regard to any income tax principles during the period nature. adjustments described in section in which the qualifying activity occurs (3) Safe harbor—(i) In general. A 1016(a)(2) and (3). This basis does not is the Specified Cooperative (or its Specified Cooperative (or its patrons in reflect the reduction in basis for— patron) treated as engaging in the the case described in paragraph (a)(2) of (A) Any portion of the basis the qualifying activity. this section) will be treated as having Specified Cooperative properly elects to (h) In whole or significant part MPGE an agricultural or horticultural treat as an expense under sections 179 defined—(1) In general. Agricultural or product in whole or in significant part or 179C; or horticultural products must be MPGE in within the United States for purposes of (B) Any adjustments to basis provided whole or significant part by the paragraph (h)(1) of this section if the by other provisions of the Code and the Specified Cooperative (or its patrons in direct labor and overhead of such regulations under the Code (for the case described in paragraph (a)(2) of Specified Cooperative to MPGE the example, a reduction in basis by the this section) and in whole or significant agricultural or horticultural product amount of the disabled access credit part within the United States to qualify within the United States account for 20 pursuant to section 44(d)(7)). under section 199A(g)(3)(D)(i). If a percent or more of the Specified (4) Special rules—(i) Contract with an Specified Cooperative enters into a Cooperative’s COGS of the agricultural unrelated person. If a Specified contract with an unrelated person for or horticultural product, or in a Cooperative enters into a contract with the unrelated person to MPGE transaction without COGS (for example, an unrelated person for the unrelated agricultural or horticultural products for a lease, rental, or license), account for person to MPGE an agricultural or the Specified Cooperative and the 20 percent or more of the Specified horticultural product within the United Specified Cooperative has the benefits Cooperative’s unadjusted depreciable States for the Specified Cooperative, and and burdens of ownership of the basis (as defined in paragraph (h)(3)(ii) the Specified Cooperative is considered agricultural or horticultural products of this section) in property included in to MPGE the agricultural or under applicable Federal income tax the definition of agricultural or horticultural product pursuant to principles during the period the MPGE horticultural products. For Specified paragraph (f)(1) of this section, then, for activity occurs, then, pursuant to Cooperatives subject to section 263A, purposes of the substantial-in-nature VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28694 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules requirement under paragraph (h)(2) of lease, rental, license, sale, exchange, or received in a taxable exchange, net of this section and the safe harbor under other disposition is defined as, and any adjustments between the parties paragraph (h)(3)(i) of this section, the limited to, the gross receipts directly involved in the taxable exchange to Specified Cooperative’s MPGE activities derived from the lease, rental, license, account for differences in the eligible or direct labor and overhead must sale, exchange, or other disposition of property exchanged (for example, include both the Specified Cooperative’s agricultural or horticultural products location differentials and product MPGE activities or direct labor and even if the Specified Cooperative has differentials), may be treated as the overhead to MPGE the agricultural or already recognized receipts from a value of the eligible property received horticultural product within the United previous lease, rental, license, sale, by the Specified Cooperative in the States as well as the MPGE activities or exchange, or other disposition of the taxable exchange. For purposes of the direct labor and overhead of the same agricultural or horticultural preceding sentence, the taxable unrelated person to MPGE the products. Applicable Federal income exchange is deemed to occur on the date agricultural or horticultural product tax principles apply to determine of the sale of the eligible property within the United States under the whether a transaction is, in substance, a received in the taxable exchange by the contract. lease, rental, license, sale, exchange, or Specified Cooperative, to the extent the (ii) Aggregation. In determining other disposition, whether it is a sale occurs no later than the last day of whether the substantial-in-nature service, or whether it is some the month following the month in requirement under paragraph (h)(2) of combination thereof. which the exchanged eligible property this section or the safe harbor under (ii) Lease income. The financing and is received by the Specified paragraph (h)(3)(i) of this section is met interest components of a lease of Cooperative. In addition, if the at the time the Specified Cooperative agricultural or horticultural products are Specified Cooperative engages in any disposes of an agricultural or considered to be derived from the lease further MPGE activity with respect to horticultural product— of such agricultural or horticultural the eligible property received in the (A) An EAG member must take into products. However, any portion of the taxable exchange, then, unless the account all of the previous MPGE lease income that is attributable to Specified Cooperative meets the in- activities or direct labor and overhead of services or non-qualified property as whole-or-in-significant-part requirement the other members of the EAG; defined in paragraph (j)(3) of this under paragraph (h)(1) of this section (B) An EAG partnership as defined in section is not derived from the lease of with respect to the property sold, for § 1.199A–12(i)(1) must take into account agricultural or horticultural products. purposes of this paragraph (j)(1)(iv)(B), all of the previous MPGE activities or (iii) Income substitutes. The proceeds the Specified Cooperative must also direct labor and overhead of all from business interruption insurance, value the property sold without taking members of the EAG in which the governmental subsidies, and into account the gross receipts partners of the EAG partnership are governmental payments not to produce attributable to the further MPGE members (as well as the previous MPGE are treated as gross receipts derived activity. activities of any other EAG partnerships from the lease, rental, license, sale, (C) Eligible property. For purposes of owned by members of the same EAG); exchange, or other disposition to the paragraph (j)(1)(iv)(B) of this section, and extent they are substitutes for gross eligible property is— (C) A member of an EAG in which the receipts that would qualify as DPGR. (1) Oil, natural gas, or petrochemicals, partners of an EAG partnership are (iv) Exchange of property—(A) or products derived from oil, natural members must take into account all of Taxable exchanges. The value of gas, or petrochemicals; or the previous MPGE activities or direct property received by the Specified (2) Any other property or product labor and overhead of the EAG Cooperative in a taxable exchange of designated by publication in the partnership (as well as those of any agricultural or horticultural products Internal Revenue Bulletin (see other members of the EAG and any MPGE in whole or in significant part by § 601.601(d)(2)(ii)(b) of this chapter). previous MPGE activities of any other the Specified Cooperative within the (3) For this purpose, the term natural EAG partnerships owned by members of United States is DPGR for the Specified gas includes only natural gas extracted the same EAG). Cooperative (assuming all the other from a natural deposit and does not (i) United States defined. For requirements of this section are met). include, for example, methane gas purposes of section 199A(g), the term However, unless the Specified extracted from a landfill. In the case of United States includes the 50 states, the Cooperative meets all of the natural gas, production activities District of Columbia, the territorial requirements under this section with include all activities involved in waters of the United States, and the respect to any additional MPGE by the extracting natural gas from the ground seabed and subsoil of those submarine Specified Cooperative of the agricultural and processing the gas into pipeline areas that are adjacent to the territorial or horticultural products received in the quality gas. waters of the United States and over taxable exchange, any gross receipts (2) Hedging transactions—(i) In which the United States has exclusive derived from the sale by the Specified general. For purposes of this section, if rights, in accordance with international Cooperative of the property received in a transaction is a hedging transaction law, with respect to the exploration and the taxable exchange are non-DPGR, within the meaning of section exploitation of natural resources. because the Specified Cooperative did 1221(b)(2)(A) and § 1.1221–2(b), is Consistent with its definition in section not MPGE such property, even if the properly identified as a hedging 7701(a)(9), the term United States does property was an agricultural or transaction in accordance with not include possessions and territories horticultural product in the hands of the § 1.1221–2(f), and the risk being hedged of the United States or the airspace or other party to the transaction. relates to property described in section space over the United States and these (B) Safe harbor. For purposes of 1221(a)(1) that gives rise to DPGR or to areas. paragraph (j)(1)(iv)(A) of this section, property described in section 1221(a)(8) (j) Derived from the lease, rental, the gross receipts derived by the that is consumed in an activity that license, sale, exchange, or other Specified Cooperative from the sale of gives rise to DPGR, then— disposition—(1) In general—(i) eligible property (as defined in (A) In the case of a hedge of purchases Definition. The term derived from the paragraph (j)(1)(iv)(C) of this section) of property described in section VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28695 1221(a)(1), income, deduction, gain, or horticultural products (assuming all the (3) A qualified operating manual, that loss on the hedging transaction must be other requirements of this section are is, a manual of instructions that is taken into account in determining met) and not any receipts attributable to provided in connection with the lease, COGS; the embedded service. In addition, rental, license, sale, exchange, or other (B) In the case of a hedge of sales of DPGR does not include gross receipts disposition of the agricultural or property described in section 1221(a)(1), derived from the lease, rental, license, horticultural products if, in the normal income, deduction, gain, or loss on the sale, exchange, or other disposition of course of the Specified Cooperative’s hedging transaction must be taken into property that does not meet all of the business— account in determining DPGR; and requirements under this section (non- (i) The price for the manual is not (C) In the case of a hedge of purchases qualified property). The allocation of separately stated from the amount of property described in section the gross receipts attributable to the charged for the lease, rental, license, 1221(a)(8), income, deduction, gain, or embedded services or non-qualified sale, exchange, or other disposition of loss on the hedging transaction must be property will be deemed to be the agricultural or horticultural taken into account in determining reasonable if the allocation reflects the products; DPGR. fair market value of the embedded (ii) The manual is neither separately (ii) Allocation. The income, services or non-qualified property. offered by the Specified Cooperative nor deduction, gain and loss from hedging (B) Exceptions. There are five separately bargained for with customers transactions described in paragraph exceptions to the rules under paragraph (that is, a customer cannot purchase the (j)(2) of this section must be allocated (j)(3)(i)(A) of this section regarding agricultural or horticultural products between the patronage and embedded services and non-qualified without the manual); and nonpatronage (defined in § 1.1388–1(f)) property. A Specified Cooperative may (iii) The manual is not provided in sourced income and related deductions include in DPGR, if all the other connection with a training course for of the Specified Cooperatives consistent requirements of this section are met customers. with the cooperative’s method for with respect to the underlying item of (4) A qualified installation, that is, an determining patronage and agricultural or horticultural products to installation service for agricultural or nonpatronage income and deductions. which the embedded services or non- horticultural products that is provided (iii) Effect of identification and qualified property relate, the gross in connection with the lease, rental, nonidentification. The principles of receipts derived from— license, sale, exchange, or other § 1.1221–2(g) apply to a Specified (1) A qualified warranty, that is, a disposition of the agricultural or Cooperative that identifies or fails to warranty that is provided in connection horticultural products if, in the normal identify a transaction as a hedging with the lease, rental, license, sale, course of the Specified Cooperative’s transaction, except that the consequence exchange, or other disposition of business— of identifying as a hedging transaction a agricultural or horticultural products if, (i) The price for the installation transaction that is not in fact a hedging in the normal course of the Specified service is not separately stated from the transaction described in paragraph (j)(2) Cooperative’s business— amount charged for the lease, rental, of this section, or of failing to identify (i) The price for the warranty is not license, sale, exchange, or other a transaction that the Specified separately stated from the amount disposition of the agricultural or Cooperative has no reasonable grounds charged for the lease, rental, license, horticultural products; and for treating as other than a hedging sale, exchange, or other disposition of (ii) The installation is neither transaction described in paragraph (j)(2) the agricultural or horticultural separately offered by the Specified of this section, is that deduction or loss products; and Cooperative nor separately bargained for (but not income or gain) from the (ii) The warranty is neither separately with customers (that is, a customer transaction is taken into account under offered by the Specified Cooperative nor cannot purchase the agricultural or paragraph (j)(2) of this section. separately bargained for with customers horticultural products without the (iv) Other rules. See § 1.1221–2(e) for (that is, a customer cannot purchase the installation service). rules applicable to hedging by members agricultural or horticultural products (5) A de minimis amount of gross of a consolidated group and § 1.446–4 without the warranty); receipts from embedded services and for rules regarding the timing of income, (2) A qualified delivery, that is, a non-qualified property for each item of deductions, gains or losses with respect delivery or distribution service that is agricultural or horticultural products to hedging transactions. provided in connection with the lease, may qualify. For purposes of this (3) Allocation of gross receipts to rental, license, sale, exchange, or other exception, a de minimis amount of gross embedded services and non-qualified disposition of agricultural or receipts from embedded services and property—(i) Embedded services and horticultural products if, in the normal non-qualified property is less than 5 non-qualified property—(A) In general. course of the Specified Cooperative’s percent of the total gross receipts Except as otherwise provided in business— derived from the lease, rental, license, paragraph (j)(3)(i)(B) of this section, (i) The price for the delivery or sale, exchange, or other disposition of gross receipts derived from the distribution service is not separately each item of agricultural or horticultural performance of services do not qualify stated from the amount charged for the products. In the case of gross receipts as DPGR. In the case of an embedded lease, rental, license, sale, exchange, or derived from the lease, rental, license, service, that is, a service the price of other disposition of the agricultural or sale, exchange, or other disposition of which, in the normal course of the horticultural products; and agricultural or horticultural products business, is not separately stated from (ii) The delivery or distribution that are received over a period of time the amount charged for the lease, rental, service is neither separately offered by (for example, a multi-year lease or license, sale, exchange, or other the Specified Cooperative nor separately installment sale), this de minimis disposition of agricultural or bargained for with customers (that is, a exception is applied by taking into horticultural products, DPGR includes customer cannot purchase the account the total gross receipts for the only the gross receipts derived from the agricultural or horticultural products entire period derived (and to be derived) lease, rental, license, sale, exchange, or without the delivery or distribution from the lease, rental, license, sale, other disposition of agricultural or service). exchange, or other disposition of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28696 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules item of agricultural or horticultural § 1.199A–10 Allocation of costs of goods relationship between COGS and the products. For purposes of the preceding sold (COGS) and other deductions to method used; the accuracy of the sentence, if a Specified Cooperative domestic production gross receipts method chosen as compared with other (DPGR), and other rules. treats gross receipts as DPGR under this possible methods; whether the method de minimis exception, then the (a) In general. The provisions of this is used by the Specified Cooperative for Specified Cooperative must treat the section apply solely for purposes of internal management or other business gross receipts recognized in each taxable section 199A(g) of the Internal Revenue purposes; whether the method is used Code (Code). The provisions of this year consistently as DPGR. The gross for other Federal or state income tax section provide additional guidance on receipts that the Specified Cooperative purposes; the availability of costing determining qualified production treats as DPGR under paragraphs information; the time, burden, and cost activities income (QPAI) as described (j)(3)(i)(B)(1) through (4) of this section of using alternative methods; and are treated as DPGR for purposes of and defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(4)(ii). (b) COGS allocable to DPGR—(1) In whether the Specified Cooperative applying this de minimis exception. general. When determining its QPAI, applies the method consistently from This de minimis exception does not the Specified Cooperative (defined in year to year. Depending on the facts and apply if the price of a service or non- § 1.199A–8(a)(2)) must subtract from its circumstances, reasonable methods may qualified property is separately stated DPGR (defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(3)(ii)) include methods based on gross receipts by the Specified Cooperative, or if the the COGS allocable to its DPGR. The (defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(2)(iii)), service or non-qualified property is Specified Cooperative determines its number of units sold, number of units separately offered or separately COGS allocable to DPGR in accordance produced, or total production costs. bargained for with the customer (that is, with this paragraph (b)(1) or, if Ordinarily, if a Specified Cooperative the customer can purchase the applicable, paragraph (f) of this section. uses a method to allocate gross receipts agricultural or horticultural products In the case of a sale, exchange, or other between DPGR and non-DPGR, then the without the service or non-qualified disposition of inventory, COGS is equal use of a different method to allocate property). to beginning inventory of the Specified COGS that is not demonstrably more (ii) Non-DPGR. Applicable gross Cooperative plus purchases and accurate than the method used to receipts as provided in §§ 1.199A–8(b) production costs incurred during the allocate gross receipts will not be and/or (c) derived from the lease, rental, taxable year and included in inventory considered reasonable. However, if a license, sale, exchange or other costs by the Specified Cooperative, less Specified Cooperative has information disposition of an item of agricultural or ending inventory of the Specified readily available to specifically identify horticultural products may be treated as Cooperative. In determining its QPAI, COGS allocable to DPGR and can non-DPGR if less than 5 percent of the the Specified Cooperative does not specifically identify that amount Specified Cooperative’s total gross include in COGS any payment made, without undue burden or expense, receipts derived from the lease, rental, whether during the taxable year, or COGS allocable to DPGR is that amount license, sale, exchange or other included in beginning inventory, for irrespective of whether the Specified disposition of that item are DPGR which a deduction is allowed under Cooperative uses another allocation (taking into account embedded services section 1382(b) and/or (c), as applicable. method to allocate gross receipts and non-qualified property included in See § 1.199A–8(b)(4)(C). COGS is between DPGR and non-DPGR. A such disposition, but not part of the determined under the methods of Specified Cooperative that does not item). In the case of gross receipts accounting that the Specified have information readily available to derived from the lease, rental, license, Cooperative uses to compute taxable specifically identify COGS allocable to sale, exchange, or other disposition of income. See sections 263A, 471, and DPGR and that cannot, without undue agricultural or horticultural products 472. If section 263A requires the burden or expense, specifically identify that are received over a period of time Specified Cooperative to include that amount is not required to use a (for example, a multi-year lease or additional section 263A costs (as method that specifically identifies installment sale), this paragraph (j)(5)(ii) defined in § 1.263A–1(d)(3)) in is applied by taking into account the COGS allocable to DPGR. The chosen inventory, additional section 263A costs reasonable method must be consistently total gross receipts for the entire period must be included in determining COGS. derived (and to be derived) from the applied from one taxable year to another COGS also includes the Specified and must clearly reflect the portion of lease, rental, license, sale, exchange, or Cooperative’s inventory valuation other disposition of the item of COGS between DPGR and non-DPGR. adjustments such as write-downs under The method must also be reasonable agricultural or horticultural products. the lower of cost or market method. In For purposes of the preceding sentence, based on all the facts and the case of a sale, exchange, or other circumstances. The books and records if the Specified Cooperative treats gross disposition (including, for example, maintained for COGS must be consistent receipts as non-DPGR under this de theft, casualty, or abandonment) by the with any allocations under this minimis exception, then the Specified Specified Cooperative of non-inventory paragraph (b)(2). Cooperative must treat the gross receipts property, COGS for purposes of this recognized in each taxable year section includes the adjusted basis of (ii) Gross receipts recognized in an consistently as non-DPGR. the property. earlier taxable year. If the Specified (k) Applicability date. The provisions (2) Allocating COGS—(i) In general. A Cooperative (other than a Specified of this section apply to taxable years Specified Cooperative must use a Cooperative that uses the small business ending after the date the Treasury reasonable method based on all the facts simplified overall method of paragraph decision adopting these regulations as and circumstances to allocate COGS (f) of this section) recognizes and reports final regulations is published in the between DPGR and non-DPGR. Whether gross receipts on a Federal income tax Federal Register. Taxpayers, however, an allocation method is reasonable is return for a taxable year, and incurs may rely on these regulations until that based on all the facts and COGS related to such gross receipts in date, but only if the taxpayers apply the circumstances, including whether the a subsequent taxable year, then rules in their entirety and in a Specified Cooperative uses the most regardless of whether the gross receipts consistent manner. accurate information available; the ultimately qualify as DPGR, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28697 Specified Cooperative must allocate the expense cost component, is allocable to information readily available to COGS to— DPGR in 2018. specifically identify the proper amount (A) DPGR if the Specified Cooperative (3) Special allocation rules. Section of inventory valuation adjustments identified the related gross receipts as 199A(g)(3)(C) provides the following allocable to DPGR, then the Specified DPGR in the prior taxable year; or two special rules— Cooperative must allocate that amount (B) Non-DPGR if the Specified (i) For purposes of determining the to DPGR. The Specified Cooperative that Cooperative identified the related gross COGS that are allocable to DPGR, any does not have information readily receipts as non-DPGR in the prior item or service brought into the United available to specifically identify the taxable year or if the Specified States (defined in § 1.199A–9(i)) is proper amount of its inventory Cooperative recognized under the treated as acquired by purchase, and its valuation adjustments allocable to Specified Cooperative’s methods of cost is treated as not less than its value DPGR and that cannot, without undue accounting those gross receipts in a immediately after it entered the United burden or expense, specifically identify taxable year to which section 199A(g) States. A similar rule applies in the proper amount of its inventory does not apply. determining the adjusted basis of leased valuation adjustments allocable to (iii) COGS associated with activities or rented property where the lease or DPGR, is not required to use a method undertaken in an earlier taxable year— rental gives rise to DPGR. that specifically identifies inventory (A) In general. A Specified Cooperative (ii) In the case of any property valuation adjustments to DPGR. The must allocate its COGS between DPGR described in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this chosen reasonable method must be and non-DPGR under the rules provided section that has been exported by the consistently applied from one taxable in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (iii) of this Specified Cooperative for further year to another and must clearly reflect section, regardless of whether certain manufacture, the increase in cost or inventory adjustments. The method costs included in its COGS can be adjusted basis under paragraph (b)(3)(i) must also be reasonable based on all the associated with activities undertaken in of this section cannot exceed the facts and circumstances. The books and an earlier taxable year (including a year difference between the value of the records maintained for inventory prior to the effective date of section property when exported and the value adjustments must be consistent with 199A(g)). A Specified Cooperative may of the property when brought back into any allocations under this paragraph not segregate its COGS into component the United States after the further (b)(4). costs and allocate those component manufacture. For the purposes of this (5) Rules applicable to inventories costs between DPGR and non-DPGR. paragraph (b)(3), the value of property is accounted for under the last-in, first-out (B) Example. The following example its customs value as defined in section inventory method—(i) In general. This illustrates an application of paragraph 1059A(b)(1). paragraph (b)(5) applies to inventories (b)(2)(iii)(A) of this section. (4) Rules for inventories valued at accounted for using the specific goods (1) Example. During the 2018 taxable year, market or bona fide selling prices. If part last-in, first-out (LIFO) method or the nonexempt Specified Cooperative X grew of COGS is attributable to the Specified dollar-value LIFO method. Whenever a and sold Horticultural Product A. All of the Cooperative’s inventory valuation specific goods grouping or a dollar- patronage gross receipts from sales adjustments, then COGS allocable to value pool contains agricultural or recognized by X in 2018 were from the sale of Horticultural Product A and qualified as DPGR includes inventory adjustments to horticultural products that produce DPGR. Employee 1 of X was involved in X’s agricultural or horticultural products DPGR and goods that do not, the production process until he retired in 2013. that are MPGE in whole or significant Specified Cooperative must allocate In 2018, X paid $30 directly from its general part within the United States. COGS attributable to that grouping or assets for Employee 1’s medical expenses Accordingly, a Specified Cooperative pool between DPGR and non-DPGR pursuant to an unfunded, self-insured plan that values its inventory under § 1.471– using a reasonable method based on all for retired X employees. For purposes of 4 (inventories at cost or market, the facts and circumstances. Whether a computing X’s 2018 taxable income, X whichever is lower) or § 1.471–2(c) method of allocating COGS between capitalized those medical costs to inventory (subnormal goods at bona fide selling DPGR and non-DPGR is reasonable must under section 263A. In 2018, the COGS for a unit of Horticultural Product A was $100 prices) must allocate a proper share of be determined in accordance with (including the applicable portion of the $30 such adjustments (for example, write- paragraph (b)(2) of this section. In paid for Employee 1’s medical costs that was downs) to DPGR based on a reasonable addition, this paragraph (b)(5) provides allocated to COGS under X’s allocation method based on all the facts and methods that a Specified Cooperative method for additional section 263A costs). X circumstances. Factors taken into may use to allocate COGS for a has information readily available to account in determining whether the Specified Cooperative’s inventories specifically identify COGS allocable to DPGR method is reasonable include whether accounted for using the LIFO method. If and can identify that amount without undue the Specified Cooperative uses the most the Specified Cooperative uses the burden and expense because all of X’s gross accurate information available; the LIFO/FIFO ratio method provided in receipts from sales in 2018 are attributable to the sale of Horticultural Product A and relationship between the adjustment paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section or the qualify as DPGR. The inventory cost of each and the allocation base chosen; the change in relative base-year cost method unit of Horticultural Product A sold in 2018, accuracy of the method chosen as provided in paragraph (b)(5)(iii) of this including the applicable portion of retiree compared with other possible methods; section, then the Specified Cooperative medical costs, is related to X’s gross receipts whether the method is used by the must use that method for all of the from the sale of Horticultural Product A in Specified Cooperative for internal Specified Cooperative’s inventory 2018. X may not segregate the 2018 COGS by management or other business purposes; accounted for under the LIFO method. separately allocating the retiree medical whether the method is used for other The chosen reasonable method must be costs, which are components of COGS, to Federal or state income tax purposes; consistently applied from one taxable DPGR and non-DPGR. Thus, even though the retiree medical costs can be associated with the time, burden, and cost of using year to another and must clearly reflect activities undertaken in prior years, $100 of alternative methods; and whether the the inventory method. The method must inventory cost of each unit of Horticultural Specified Cooperative applies the also be reasonable based on all the facts Product A sold in 2018, including the method consistently from year to year. and circumstances. The books and applicable portion of the retiree medical If the Specified Cooperative has records maintained for the inventory VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28698 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules method must be consistent with any 263A costs included in the Specified apportion deductions (including, if allocations under this paragraph (b)(5). Cooperative’s beginning inventory as applicable, its distributive share of (ii) LIFO/FIFO ratio method. The well as additional section 263A costs deductions from passthrough entities) to LIFO/FIFO ratio method is applied with incurred during the taxable year by the gross income attributable to DPGR. If the respect to the LIFO inventory on a Specified Cooperative. Ordinarily, if the Specified Cooperative applies the grouping-by-grouping or pool-by-pool Specified Cooperative uses a simplified allocation and apportionment rules of basis. Under the LIFO/FIFO ratio method specifically described in the the section 861 regulations for section method, a Specified Cooperative section 263A regulations to allocate its 199A(g) and another operative section, computes the COGS of a grouping or additional section 263A costs to its then the Specified Cooperative must use pool allocable to DPGR by multiplying ending inventory, the additional section the same method of allocation and the the COGS of agricultural or horticultural 263A costs must be allocated in the same principles of apportionment for products (defined in § 1.199A–8(a)(4)) same proportion as section 471 costs are purposes of all operative sections. in the grouping or pool that produced allocated. Research and experimental DPGR computed using the FIFO method (c) Other deductions properly expenditures must be allocated and by the LIFO/FIFO ratio of the grouping allocable to DPGR or gross income apportioned in accordance with or pool. The LIFO/FIFO ratio of a attributable to DPGR—(1) In general. In § 1.861–17 without taking into account grouping or pool is equal to the total determining its QPAI, the Specified the exclusive apportionment rule of COGS of the grouping or pool computed Cooperative must subtract from its § 1.861–17(b). Deductions for charitable using the LIFO method over the total DPGR (in addition to the COGS), the contributions (as allowed under section COGS of the grouping or pool computed deductions that are properly allocable 170 and section 873(b)(2) or using the FIFO method. and apportioned to DPGR. A Specified 882(c)(1)(B)) must be ratably (iii) Change in relative base-year cost Cooperative generally must allocate and apportioned between gross income method. A Specified Cooperative using apportion these deductions using the attributable to DPGR and gross income the dollar-value LIFO method may use rules of the section 861 method attributable to non-DPGR based on the the change in relative base-year cost provided in paragraph (d) of this relative amounts of gross income. method. The change in relative base- section. In lieu of the section 861 (e) Simplified deduction method—(1) year cost method for a Specified method, an eligible Specified In general. An eligible Specified Cooperative using the dollar-value LIFO Cooperative may apportion these Cooperative (defined in paragraph (e)(2) method is applied to all LIFO inventory deductions using the simplified of this section) may use the simplified on a pool-by-pool basis. The change in deduction method provided in deduction method to apportion business relative base-year cost method paragraph (e) of this section. Paragraph deductions between DPGR and non- determines the COGS allocable to DPGR (f) of this section provides a small DPGR. The simplified deduction by increasing or decreasing the total business simplified overall method that method does not apply to COGS. Under production costs (section 471 costs and may be used by a qualifying small the simplified deduction method, the additional section 263A costs) of Specified Cooperative. A Specified business deductions (except the NOL agricultural or horticultural products Cooperative using the simplified deduction) are ratably apportioned that generate DPGR by a portion of any deduction method or the small business between DPGR and non-DPGR based on increment or liquidation of the dollar- simplified overall method must use that relative gross receipts. Accordingly, the value pool. The portion of an increment method for all deductions. A Specified amount of deductions for the current or liquidation allocable to DPGR is Cooperative eligible to use the small taxable year apportioned to DPGR is determined by multiplying the LIFO business simplified overall method may equal to the proportion of the total value of the increment or liquidation choose at any time for any taxable year business deductions for the current (expressed as a positive number) by the to use the small business simplified taxable year that the amount of DPGR ratio of the change in total base-year overall method or the simplified bears to total gross receipts. cost (expressed as a positive number) of deduction method for a taxable year. agricultural or horticultural products (2) Treatment of net operating losses. (2) Eligible Specified Cooperative. For that will generate DPGR in ending A deduction under section 172 for a net purposes of this paragraph (e), an inventory to the change in total base- operating loss (NOL) is not allocated or eligible Specified Cooperative is— year cost (expressed as a positive apportioned to DPGR or gross income (i) A Specified Cooperative that has number) of all goods in ending attributable to DPGR. average annual total gross receipts (as inventory. The portion of an increment (3) W–2 wages. Although only W–2 defined in paragraph (g) of this section) or liquidation allocable to DPGR may be wages as described in § 1.199A–11 are of $100,000,000 or less; or zero but cannot exceed the amount of taken into account in computing the W– (ii) A Specified Cooperative that has the increment or liquidation. Thus, a 2 wage limitation, all wages paid (or total assets (as defined in paragraph ratio in excess of 1.0 must be treated as incurred in the case of an accrual (e)(3) of this section) of $10,000,000 or 1.0. method taxpayer) in the taxable year are less. (6) Specified Cooperative using a taken into account in computing QPAI (3) Total assets.—(i) In general. For simplified method for additional section for that taxable year. purposes of the simplified deduction 263A costs to ending inventory. A (d) Section 861 method. Under the method, total assets mean the total Specified Cooperative that uses a section 861 method, the Specified assets the Specified Cooperative has at simplified method specifically Cooperative must allocate and apportion the end of the taxable year. described in the section 263A its deductions using the allocation and (ii) Members of an expanded affiliated regulations to allocate additional section apportionment rules provided under the group. To compute the total assets of an 263A costs to ending inventory must section 861 regulations under which expanded affiliated group (EAG) at the follow the rules in paragraph (b)(2) of section 199A(g) is treated as an end of the taxable year, the total assets this section to determine the amount of operative section described in § 1.861– at the end of the taxable year of each additional section 263A costs allocable 8(f). Accordingly, the Specified member of the EAG at the end of the to DPGR. Allocable additional section Cooperative applies the rules of the taxable year that ends with or within the 263A costs include additional section section 861 regulations to allocate and taxable year of the computing member VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28699 (as described in § 1.199A–12(g)) are regardless of the cost allocation method portion of total costs allocable to oil- aggregated. used by the other members. related DPGR by multiplying the total (4) Members of an expanded affiliated (ii) Exception. Notwithstanding costs allocable to DPGR by the ratio of group—(i) In general. Whether the paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section, all oil-related DPGR to DPGR from all members of an EAG may use the members of the same consolidated activities. simplified deduction method is group must use the same cost allocation (i) Applicability date. The provisions determined by reference to all the method. of this section apply to taxable years members of the EAG. If the average (g) Average annual gross receipts—(1) ending after the date the Treasury annual gross receipts of the EAG are less In general. For purposes of the decision adopting these regulations as than or equal to $100,000,000 or the simplified deduction method and the final regulations is published in the total assets of the EAG are less than or small business simplified overall Federal Register. Taxpayers, however, equal to $10,000,000, then each member method, average annual gross receipts may rely on these regulations until that of the EAG may individually determine means the average annual gross receipts date, but only if the taxpayers apply the whether to use the simplified deduction of the Specified Cooperative for the 3 rules in their entirety and in a method, regardless of the cost allocation taxable years (or, if fewer, the taxable consistent manner. years during which the taxpayer was in method used by the other members. § 1.199A–11 Wage limitation for the (ii) Exception. Notwithstanding existence) preceding the current taxable year, even if one or more of such taxable section 199A(g) deduction. paragraph (e)(4)(i) of this section, all (a) Rules of application—(1) In members of the same consolidated years began before the effective date of section 199A(g). In the case of any general. The provisions of this section group must use the same cost allocation apply solely for purposes of section method. taxable year of less than 12 months (a short taxable year), the gross receipts of 199A(g) of the Internal Revenue Code (f) Small business simplified overall the Specified Cooperative are (Code). The provisions of this section method—(1) In general. A qualifying annualized by multiplying the gross provide guidance on determining the small Specified Cooperative may use the receipts for the short period by 12 and W–2 wage limitation as defined in small business simplified overall dividing the result by the number of § 1.199A–8(b)(5)(ii)(B). Except as method to apportion COGS and months in the short period. provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this deductions between DPGR and non- (2) Members of an expanded affiliated section, the Form W–2, Wage and Tax DPGR. Under the small business group—(i) In general. To compute the Statement, or any subsequent form or simplified overall method, a Specified average annual gross receipts of an EAG, document used in determining the Cooperative’s total costs for the current the gross receipts for the entire taxable amount of W–2 wages, are those issued taxable year (as defined in paragraph year of each member that is a member for the calendar year ending during the (f)(3) of this section) are apportioned of the EAG at the end of its taxable year taxable year of the Specified between DPGR and non-DPGR based on that ends with or within the taxable year Cooperative (defined in § 1.199A– relative gross receipts. Accordingly, the are aggregated. For purposes of this 8(a)(2)) for wages paid to employees (or amount of total costs for the current paragraph (g)(2), a consolidated group is former employees) of the Specified taxable year apportioned to DPGR is treated as one member of an EAG. Cooperative for employment by the equal to the proportion of total costs for (ii) Exception. Notwithstanding Specified Cooperative. Employees are the current taxable year that the amount paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section, all limited to employees defined in section of DPGR bears to total gross receipts. members of the same consolidated 3121(d)(1) and (2) (that is, officers of a (2) Qualifying small Specified group must use the same cost allocation corporate taxpayer and employees of the Cooperative. For purposes of this method. taxpayer under the common law rules). paragraph (f), a qualifying small (h) Cost allocation methods for See paragraph (a)(5) of this section for Specified Cooperative is a Specified determining oil-related QPAI—(1) the requirement that W–2 wages must Cooperative that has average annual Section 861 method. A Specified have been included in a return filed total gross receipts (as defined in Cooperative that uses the section 861 with the Social Security Administration paragraph (g) of this section) of method to determine deductions that (SSA) within 60 days after the due date $25,000,000 or less. are allocated and apportioned to gross (including extensions) of the return. See (3) Total costs for the current taxable income attributable to DPGR must use also section 199A(a)(4)(C). year. For purposes of the small business the section 861 method to determine (2) Wage limitation for section simplified overall method, total costs for deductions that are allocated and 199A(g) deduction. The amount of the the current taxable year means the total apportioned to gross income attributable deduction allowable under section COGS and deductions for the current to oil-related DPGR. 199A(g) to the Specified Cooperative for taxable year. Total costs for the current (2) Simplified deduction method. A any taxable year cannot exceed 50 taxable year are determined under the Specified Cooperative that uses the percent of the W–2 wages (as defined in methods of accounting that the simplified deduction method to section 199A(g)(1)(B)(ii) and paragraph Specified Cooperative uses to compute apportion deductions between DPGR (b) of this section) for the taxable year taxable income. and non-DPGR must determine the that are attributable to domestic (4) Members of an expanded affiliated portion of deductions allocable to oil- production gross receipts (DPGR), group—(i) In general. Whether the related DPGR by multiplying the defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(3)(ii), of members of an EAG may use the small deductions allocable to DPGR by the agricultural or horticultural products business simplified overall method is ratio of oil-related DPGR to DPGR from defined in § 1.199A–8(a)(4). determined by reference to all the all activities. (3) Wages paid by entity other than members of the EAG. If the average (3) Small business simplified overall common law employer. In determining annual gross receipts of the EAG are less method. A Specified Cooperative that W–2 wages, the Specified Cooperative than or equal to $25,000,000 then each uses the small business simplified may take into account any W–2 wages member of the EAG may individually overall method to apportion total costs paid by another entity and reported by determine whether to use the small (COGS and deductions) between DPGR the other entity on Forms W–2 with the business simplified overall method, and non-DPGR must determine the other entity as the employer listed in VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28700 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules Box c of the Forms W–2, provided that that was filed with SSA on or before the term W–2 wages means with respect to the W–2 wages were paid to common 60th day after the due date (including any person for any taxable year of such law employees or officers of the extensions) of the information return person, the amounts described in Specified Cooperative for employment (Return A) and paragraph (a)(5)(iii) of paragraphs (3) and (8) of section 6051(a) by the Specified Cooperative. In such this section does not apply, then the paid by such person with respect to cases, the entity paying the W–2 wages wage information on Return B must be employment of employees by such and reporting the W–2 wages on Forms included in determining W–2 wages. If person during the calendar year ending W–2 is precluded from taking into a corrected information return (Return during such taxable year. Thus, the term account such wages for purposes of D) is filed with SSA later than the 60th W–2 wages includes the total amount of determining W–2 wages with respect to day after the due date (including wages as defined in section 3401(a); the that entity. For purposes of this extensions) of Return D to correct an total amount of elective deferrals paragraph (a)(4), entities that pay and information return (Return C) that was (within the meaning of section report W–2 wages on behalf of or with filed with SSA on or before the 60th day 402(g)(3)); the compensation deferred respect to other taxpayers can include, after the due date (including extensions) under section 457; and the amount of but are not limited to, certified of the information return (Return C), designated Roth contributions (as professional employer organizations then if Return D reports an increase (or defined in section 402A). under section 7705, statutory employers increases) in wages included in (2) Section 199A(g) deduction. under section 3401(d)(1), and agents determining W–2 wages from the wage Pursuant to section 199A(g)(3)(A), W–2 under section 3504. amounts reported on Return C, such wages do not include any amount which (4) Requirement that wages must be increase (or increases) on Return D is is not properly allocable to DPGR for reported on return filed with the Social disregarded in determining W–2 wages purposes of calculating qualified Security Administration—(i) In general. (and only the wage amounts on Return production activities income (QPAI) as Pursuant to section 199A(g)(1)(B)(ii) and C may be included in determining W– defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(4)(ii). The section 199A(b)(4)(C), the term W–2 2 wages). If Return D reports a decrease Specified Cooperative may determine wages does not include any amount that (or decreases) in wages included in the amount of wages that is properly is not properly included in a return filed determining W–2 wages from the allocable to DPGR using a reasonable with SSA on or before the 60th day after amounts reported on Return C, then, in method based on all the facts and the due date (including extensions) for determining W–2 wages, the wages circumstances. The chosen reasonable such return. Under § 31.6051–2 of this reported on Return C must be reduced method must be consistently applied chapter, each Form W–2 and the by the decrease (or decreases) reflected from one taxable year to another and transmittal Form W–3, Transmittal of on Return D. must clearly reflect the wages allocable Wage and Tax Statements, together (iii) Corrected return filed to correct a to DPGR for purposes of QPAI. The constitute an information return to be return that was filed later than 60 days books and records maintained for wages filed with SSA. Similarly, each Form after the due date. If an information allocable to DPGR for purposes of QPAI W–2c, Corrected Wage and Tax return (Return F) is filed to correct an must be consistent with any allocations Statement, and the transmittal Form W– information return (Return E) that was under this paragraph (b)(2). 3 or W–3c, Transmittal of Corrected not filed with SSA on or before the 60th Wage and Tax Statements, together day after the due date (including (c) Methods for calculating W–2 constitute an information return to be extensions) of Return E, then Return F wages. The Secretary may provide for filed with SSA. In determining whether (and any subsequent information methods to be used in calculating W–2 any amount has been properly included returns filed with respect to Return E) wages, including W–2 wages for short in a return filed with SSA on or before will not be considered filed on or before taxable years by publication in the the 60th day after the due date the 60th day after the due date Internal Revenue Bulletin (see (including extensions) for such return, (including extensions) of Return F (or § 601.601(d)(2)(ii)(b) of this chapter). each Form W–2 together with its the subsequent corrected information (d) Wage limitation—acquisitions, accompanying Form W–3 is considered return). Thus, if a Form W–2c is filed to dispositions, and short taxable years— a separate information return and each correct a Form W–2 that was not filed (1) In general. For purposes of Form W–2c together with its with SSA on or before the 60th day after computing the deduction under section accompanying Form W–3 or Form W–3c the due date (including extensions) of 199A(g) of the Specified Cooperative, in is considered a separate information the Form W–2 (or to correct a Form W– the case of an acquisition or disposition return. Section 6071(c) provides that 2c relating to a Form W–2 that had not (as defined in section 199A(b)(5) and Forms W–2 and W–3 must be filed on been filed with SSA on or before the paragraph (d)(3) of this section) that or before January 31 of the year 60th day after the due date (including causes more than one Specified following the calendar year to which extensions) of the Form W–2), then this Cooperative to be an employer of the such returns relate (but see the special Form W–2c is not to be considered to employees of the acquired or disposed rule in § 31.6071(a)–1T(a)(3)(1) of this have been filed with SSA on or before of Specified Cooperative during the chapter for monthly returns filed under the 60th day after the due date calendar year, the W–2 wages of the § 31.6011(a)–5(a) of this chapter). (including extensions) for this Form W– Specified Cooperative for the calendar Corrected Forms W–2 are required to be 2c, regardless of when the Form W–2c year of the acquisition or disposition are filed with SSA on or before January 31 is filed. allocated between or among each of the year following the year in which (b) Definition of W–2 wages—(1) In Specified Cooperative based on the the correction is made. general. Section 199A(g)(1)(B)(ii) period during which the employees of (ii) Corrected return filed to correct a provides that the W–2 wages of the the acquired or disposed of Specified return that was filed within 60 days of Specified Cooperative must be Cooperatives were employed by the the due date. If a corrected information determined in the same manner as Specified Cooperative, regardless of return (Return B) is filed with SSA on under section 199A(b)(4) (without which permissible method is used for or before the 60th day after the due date regard to section 199A(b)(4)(B) and after reporting predecessor and successor (including extensions) of Return B to application of section 199A(b)(5)). wages on Form W–2, Wage and Tax correct an information return (Return A) Section 199A(b)(4)(A) provides that the Statement. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28701 (2) Short taxable year that does not any wage expense disallowed by section § 1.199A–12 Expanded affiliated groups. include December 31. If the Specified 465, 469, 704(d), or 1366(d). A Specified (a) In general. The provisions of this Cooperative has a short taxable year that Cooperative that uses either the section section apply solely for purposes of does not contain a calendar year ending 861 method of cost allocation or the section 199A(g) of the Internal Revenue during such short taxable year, wages simplified deduction method to Code (Code). Except as otherwise paid to employees for employment by determine QPAI must use the same provided in the Code or regulations the Specified Cooperative during the expense allocation and apportionment issued under the relevant section of the short taxable year are treated as W–2 methods that it uses to determine QPAI Code (for example, sections wages for such short taxable year for to allocate and apportion wage expense 199A(g)(3)(D)(ii) and 267, § 1.199A–8(c), purposes of paragraph (a) of this section for purposes of this safe harbor. For paragraph (a)(3) of this section, and the (if the wages would otherwise meet the purposes of this paragraph (g)(1), the consolidated return regulations under requirements to be W–2 wages under term wage expense means wages (that section 1502, each Specified this section but for the requirement that is, compensation paid by the employer Cooperative whether exempt or a calendar year must end during the in the active conduct of a trade or nonexempt (as defined in § 1.199A– short taxable year). business to its employees) that are 8(a)(2)(iii)) that is a member of an (3) Acquisition or disposition. For properly taken into account under the expanded affiliated group (EAG) purposes of paragraph (d)(1) and (2) of Specified Cooperative’s method of (defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this this section, the terms acquisition and accounting. section) computes its own taxable disposition include an incorporation, a (2) Wage expense included in cost of income or loss, qualified production liquidation, a reorganization, or a goods sold. For purposes of paragraph activities income (QPAI) (defined in purchase or sale of assets. (g)(1) of this section, a Specified § 1.199A–8(b)(4)(ii)), and W–2 wages (e) Application in the case of a Cooperative may determine its wage (defined in § 1.199A–11(b)). If a Specified Cooperative with a short expense included in cost of goods sold Specified Cooperative is also a member taxable year. In the case of a Specified (COGS) using a reasonable method of a consolidated group, see paragraph Cooperative with a short taxable year, based on all the facts and (d) of this section. subject to the rules of paragraph (a) of circumstances, such as using the (1) Definition of an expanded this section, the W–2 wages of the amount of direct labor included in affiliated group. An EAG is an affiliated Specified Cooperative for the short COGS or using section 263A labor costs group as defined in section 1504(a), taxable year can include only those (as defined in § 1.263A–1(h)(4)(ii)) determined by substituting ‘‘more than wages paid during the short taxable year included in COGS. The chosen 50 percent’’ for ‘‘at least 80 percent’’ in to employees of the Specified reasonable method must be consistently each place it appears and without regard Cooperative, only those elective applied from one taxable year to another to section 1504(b)(2) and (4). deferrals (within the meaning of section (2) Identification of members of an and must clearly reflect the portion of 402(g)(3)) made during the short taxable expanded affiliated group—(i) In wage expense included in COGS. The year by employees of the Specified general. Each Specified Cooperative method must also be reasonable based Cooperative, and only compensation must determine if it is a member of an on all the facts and circumstances. The actually deferred under section 457 EAG on a daily basis. during the short taxable year with books and records maintained for wage (ii) Becoming or ceasing to be a respect to employees of the Specified expense included in COGS must be member of an expanded affiliated Cooperative. consistent with any allocations under group. If a Specified Cooperative (f) Non-duplication rule. Amounts this paragraph (g)(2). becomes or ceases to be a member of an that are treated as W–2 wages for a (3) Small business simplified overall EAG, the Specified Cooperative is taxable year under any method cannot method safe harbor. The Specified treated as becoming or ceasing to be a be treated as W–2 wages of any other Cooperative that uses the small business member of the EAG at the end of the day taxable year. Also, an amount cannot be simplified overall method under on which its status as a member treated as W–2 wages by more than one § 1.199A–10(f) may use the small changes. taxpayer. Finally, an amount cannot be business simplified overall method safe (3) Attribution of activities—(i) In treated as W–2 wages by the Specified harbor for determining the amount of general. Except as provided in Cooperative both in determining W–2 wages determined under paragraph paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this section, if a patronage and nonpatronage W–2 (b)(1) of this section that is properly Specified Cooperative that is a member wages. allocable to DPGR. Under this safe of an EAG (disposing member) derives (g) Wage expense safe harbor—(1) In harbor, the amount of W–2 wages gross receipts (defined in § 1.199A– general. A Specified Cooperative using determined under paragraph (b)(1) of 8(b)(2)(iii)) from the lease, rental, either the section 861 method of cost this section that is properly allocable to license, sale, exchange, or other allocation under § 1.199A–10(d) or the DPGR is equal to the same proportion of disposition (defined in § 1.199A–9(j)) of simplified deduction method under W–2 wages determined under paragraph agricultural or horticultural products § 1.199A–10(e) may determine the (b)(1) of this section that the amount of (defined in § 1.199A–8(a)(4)) that were amount of W–2 wages that are properly DPGR bears to the Specified manufactured, produced, grown or allocable to DPGR for a taxable year by Cooperative’s total gross receipts. extracted (MPGE) (as defined in multiplying the amount of W–2 wages (h) Applicability date. The provisions § 1.199A–9(f)), in whole or significant determined under paragraph (b)(1) of of this section apply to taxable years part (as defined in § 1.199A–9(h)) in the this section for the taxable year by the ending after the date the Treasury United States (as defined in § 1.199A– ratio of the Specified Cooperative’s decision adopting these regulations as 9(i)) by another Specified Cooperative, wage expense included in calculating final regulations is published in the then the disposing member is treated as QPAI for the taxable year to the Federal Register. Taxpayers, however, conducting the previous activities Specified Cooperative’s total wage may rely on these regulations until that conducted by such other Specified expense used in calculating the date, but only if the taxpayers apply the Cooperative with respect to the Specified Cooperative’s taxable income rules in their entirety and in a agricultural or horticultural products in for the taxable year, without regard to consistent manner. determining whether its gross receipts VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28702 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules are domestic production gross receipts exempt Specified Cooperatives that are Cooperative has a net operating loss (DPGR) (defined in § 1.199A–8(b)(3)(ii)) members of the EAG. The section (NOL) from its patronage sources that if— 199A(g) deduction from patronage may be carried over or carried back, if (A) Such property was MPGE by such sources of Specified Cooperatives is applicable, (in accordance with section other Specified Cooperative, and determined by aggregating the income 172), to the taxable year, then for (B) The disposing member is a or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages, if any, purposes of determining the taxable member of the same EAG as such other of each patronage source of a Specified income of the Specified Cooperative, the Specified Cooperative at the time that Cooperative that is a member of the EAG amount of the NOL used to offset the disposing member disposes of the (whether an exempt or nonexempt taxable income cannot exceed the agricultural or horticultural products. Specified Cooperative). The section taxable income of the patronage source (ii) Date of disposition for leases, 199A(g) deduction from nonpatronage of that Specified Cooperative. Similarly, rentals, or licenses. Except as provided sources of exempt Specified if a Specified Cooperative has an NOL in paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this section, Cooperatives is determined by from its nonpatronage sources that may with respect to a lease, rental, or license, aggregating the income or loss, QPAI, be carried over to the taxable year, then the disposing member described in and W–2 wages, if any, of each for purposes of determining the taxable paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section is nonpatronage source of exempt income of the Specified Cooperative, the treated as having disposed of the Specified Cooperatives that are amount of the NOL used to offset agricultural or horticultural products on members of the EAG. For purposes of taxable income cannot exceed the the date or dates on which it takes into this determination, a member’s QPAI taxable income of the nonpatronage account the gross receipts derived from may be positive or negative. A Specified sources of that Specified Cooperative. the lease, rental, or license under its Cooperative’s taxable income or loss (4) Losses used to reduce taxable methods of accounting. and QPAI will be determined by income of an expanded affiliated group. (iii) Date of disposition for sales, reference to the Specified Cooperative’s The amount of an NOL sustained by a exchanges, or other dispositions. Except method of accounting. For purposes of Specified Cooperative member of an as provided in paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of determining the section 199A(g) EAG that is used in the year sustained this section, with respect to a sale, deduction for an EAG, taxable income in determining an EAG’s taxable income exchange, or other disposition, the or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages of a limitation under § 1.199A–8(b)(5)(ii)(C) disposing member is treated as having nonexempt Specified Cooperative from (for nonexempt Specified Cooperatives) disposed of the agricultural or nonpatronage sources are considered to or § 1.199A–8(c)(4)(i) (for exempt horticultural products on the date on be zero. See § 1.199A–8(b)(2)(ii). Specified Cooperatives), as applicable, which it ceases to own the agricultural (2) Example. The following examples is not treated as an NOL carryover to or horticultural products for Federal illustrates the application of paragraph any taxable year in determining the income tax purposes, even if no gain or (b)(1) of this section. taxable income limitation under loss is taken into account. § 1.199A–8(b)(5)(ii)(C) or § 1.199A– (iv) Exception. Nonexempt Specified (i) Example. Nonexempt Specified 8(c)(4)(i), as applicable. For purposes of Cooperatives. A nonexempt Specified Cooperatives X, Y, and Z, calendar year this paragraph (b)(4), an NOL is Cooperative is not attributed taxpayers, are the only members of an EAG and are not members of a consolidated group. considered to be used if it reduces an nonpatronage activities conducted by X’s patronage source has taxable income of EAG’s aggregate taxable income from another Specified Cooperative. See $50,000, QPAI of $15,000, and W–2 wages of patronage source or nonpatronage § 1.199A–8(b)(2)(ii). $0. Y has patronage source taxable income of source, as the case may be, regardless of (4) Marketing Specified Cooperatives. ($20,000), QPAI of ($1,000), and W–2 wages A Specified Cooperative will be treated whether the use of the NOL actually of $750. Z’s patronage source has taxable reduces the amount of the section as having MPGE in whole or significant income of $0, QPAI of $0, and W–2 wages part any agricultural or horticultural of $3,000. In determining the EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction that the EAG would product within the United States 199A(g) deduction, the EAG aggregates each otherwise derive. An NOL is not marketed by the Specified Cooperative member’s patronage source’s taxable income considered to be used to the extent that which its patrons have so MPGE. or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages. Thus, the it reduces an EAG’s aggregate taxable EAG’s patronage source has taxable income income from patronage source or Patrons are defined in § 1.1388–1(e). of $30,000, the sum of X’s patronage source (5) Anti-avoidance rule. If a nonpatronage source, as the case may taxable income of $50,000, Y’s patronage be, to an amount less than zero. If more transaction between members of an EAG source taxable income of ($20,000), and Z’s is engaged in or structured with a than one Specified Cooperative has an patronage source taxable income of $0. The NOL used in the same taxable year to principal purpose of qualifying for, or EAG has QPAI of $14,000, the sum of X’s increasing the amount of, the section QPAI of $15,000, Y’s QPAI of ($1,000), and reduce the EAG’s taxable income from 199A(g) deduction of the EAG or the Z’s QPAI of $0. The EAG has W–2 wages of patronage or nonpatronage sources, as portion of the section 199A(g) deduction $3,750, the sum of X’s W–2 wages of $0, Y’s the case may be, the respective NOLs allocated to one or more members of the W–2 wages of $750, and Z’s W–2 wages of are deemed used in proportion to the EAG, the Secretary may make $3,000. Accordingly, the EAG’s section amount of each Specified Cooperative’s 199A(g) deduction equals $1,260, 9% of adjustments to eliminate the effect of NOL. $14,000, the lesser of the QPAI and patronage (5) Example. The following example the transaction on the computation of source taxable income, but not greater than the section 199A(g) deduction. illustrates the application of paragraph $1,875, 50% of its W–2 wages of $3,750. This (b)(4) of this section. (b) Computation of EAG’s section result would be the same if X had a 199A(g) deduction.—(1) In general. The nonpatronage source income or loss, because (i) Example—(A) Facts. Nonexempt section 199A(g) deduction for an EAG is nonpatronage source income of a nonexempt Specified Cooperatives A and B are the only determined by separately computing the Specified Cooperative is not taken into two members of an EAG. A and B are both section 199A(g) deduction from the account in determining the section 199A(g) calendar year taxpayers and they do not join deduction. in the filing of a consolidated Federal income patronage sources of Specified tax return. Neither A nor B had taxable Cooperatives that are members of the (3) Net operating loss carryovers/ income or loss prior to 2018. In 2018, A has EAG and the section 199A(g) deduction carrybacks. In determining the taxable patronage QPAI and taxable income of $1,000 from the nonpatronage sources of income of an EAG, if a Specified and B has patronage QPAI of $1,000 and a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28703 patronage NOL of $1,500. A also has taxable income or W–2 wages for the using its members’ DPGR, non-DPGR, nonpatronage income of $3,000. B has no taxable year. An EAG’s section 199A(g) cost of goods sold (COGS), and all other activities other than from its patronage deduction from its nonpatronage deductions, expenses, or losses activities. In 2019, A has patronage QPAI of sources, as determined in paragraph (b) (hereinafter deductions), determined $2,000 and patronage taxable income of $1,000 and B has patronage QPAI of $2,000 of this section, is allocated among the after application of § 1.1502–13. and patronage taxable income prior to the Specified Cooperatives that are (3) Determining the section 199A(g) NOL deduction allowed under section 172 of members of the EAG in proportion to deduction—(i) Expanded affiliated $2,000. Neither A nor B has nonpatronage each Specified Cooperative’s group consists of consolidated group activities in 2019. A’s and B’s patronage nonpatronage QPAI, regardless of and non-consolidated group members. activities have aggregate W–2 wages in excess whether the Specified Cooperative has In determining the section 199A(g) of the section 199A(g)(1)(B) wage limitation nonpatronage taxable income or W–2 deduction, if an EAG includes Specified in both 2018 and 2019. wages for the taxable year. For these Cooperatives that are members of the (B) Section 199A(g) deduction for 2018. In purposes, if a Specified Cooperative has same consolidated group and Specified determining the EAG’s section 199A(g) negative patronage or nonpatronage Cooperatives that are not members of deduction for 2018, A’s $1,000 of QPAI and the same consolidated group, the B’s $1,000 of QPAI are aggregated, as are A’s QPAI, such QPAI is treated as zero. $1,000 of taxable income from its patronage Pursuant to § 1.199A–8(b)(6), a consolidated taxable income or loss, activities and B’s $1,500 NOL from its patronage section 199A(g) deduction QPAI, and W–2 wages, from patronage patronage activities. A’s nonpatronage can be applied only against patronage sources, if any, of the consolidated income is not included. Thus, for 2018, the income and deductions. Pursuant to group (and not the separate taxable EAG has patronage QPAI of $2,000 and § 1.199A–8(c)(ii), a nonpatronage income or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages patronage taxable income of ($500). The section 199A(g) deduction and can be from patronage sources of the members EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction for 2018 is applied only against nonpatronage of the consolidated group), are 9% of the lesser of its patronage QPAI or its income and deductions. aggregated with the taxable income or patronage taxable income. Because the EAG (2) Use of section 199A(g) deduction loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages, from has a taxable loss from patronage sources in to create or increase a net operating patronage sources, if any, of the non- 2018, the EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction is $0. loss. If a Specified Cooperative that is a consolidated group members. A similar (C) Section 199A(a) deduction for 2019. In member of an EAG has some or all of rule applies with respect to determining the EAG’s section 199A the EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction nonpatronage taxable income or loss, deduction for 2019, A’s patronage QPAI of allocated to it under paragraph (c)(1) of QPAI, and W–2 wages. For example, if $2,000 and B’s patronage QPAI of $2,000 are this section and the amount allocated A, B, C, S1, and S2 are Specified aggregated, resulting in the EAG having exceeds patronage or nonpatronage Cooperatives that are members of the patronage QPAI of $4,000. Also, $1,000 of B’s taxable income, determined as same EAG, and A, S1, and S2 are patronage NOL from 2018 was used in 2018 described in this section and prior to members of the same consolidated to reduce the EAG’s taxable income from allocation of the section 199A(g) group (the A consolidated group), then patronage sources to $0. The remaining $500 deduction, the section 199A(g) the A consolidated group is treated as of B’s patronage NOL from 2018 is not considered to have been used in 2018 deduction will create an NOL for the one member of the EAG. Accordingly, because it reduced the EAG’s patronage patronage source or nonpatronage the EAG is considered to have three taxable income to less than $0. Accordingly, source. Similarly, if a Specified members, the A consolidated group, B, for purposes of determining the EAG’s Cooperative that is a member of an EAG, and C. The consolidated taxable income taxable income limitation under § 1.199A– prior to the allocation of some or all of or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages from 8(b)(5) in 2019, B is deemed to have only a the EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction to patronage sources, if any, of the A $500 NOL carryover from its patronage the member, has a patronage or consolidated group are aggregated with sources from 2018 to offset a portion of its nonpatronage NOL for the taxable year, the taxable income or loss from 2019 taxable income from its patronage the portion of the EAG’s section 199A(g) patronage sources, QPAI, and W–2 sources. Thus, B’s taxable income from its deduction allocated to the member will wages, if any, of B and C in determining patronage sources in 2019 is $1,500, which is aggregated with A’s $1,000 of taxable increase such NOL. the EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction income from its patronage sources. The (d) Special rules for members of the from patronage sources. Similarly, the EAG’s taxable income limitation in 2019 is same consolidated group—(1) consolidated taxable income or loss, $2,500. The EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction Intercompany transactions. In the case QPAI, and W–2 wages from is 9% of the lesser of its patronage sourced of an intercompany transaction between nonpatronage sources, if any, of the A QPAI of $4,000 and its taxable income from consolidated group members S and B (as consolidated group are aggregated with patronage sources of $2,500. Thus, the EAG’s the terms intercompany transaction, S the taxable income or loss from section 199A(g) deduction in 2019 is 9% of and B are defined in § 1.1502–13(b)(1)), nonpatronage sources, QPAI, and W–2 $2,500, or $225. The results for 2019 would S takes the intercompany transaction wages, if any, of B and C in determining be the same if neither A nor B had patronage into account in computing the section the EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction sourced QPAI in 2018. 199A(g) deduction at the same time and from nonpatronage sources. Pursuant to (c) Allocation of an expanded in the same proportion as S takes into § 1.199A–8(b)(6), a patronage section affiliated group’s section 199A(g) account the income, gain, deduction, or 199A(g) deduction can be applied only deduction among members of the loss from the intercompany transaction against patronage income and expanded affiliated group—(1) In under § 1.1502–13. deductions. Pursuant to § 1.199A– general. An EAG’s section 199A(g) (2) Application of the simplified 8(c)(ii), a nonpatronage section 199A(g) deduction from its patronage sources, as deduction method and the small deduction and can be applied only determined in paragraph (b) of this business simplified overall method. For against nonpatronage income and section, is allocated among the purposes of applying the simplified deductions. Specified Cooperatives that are deduction method under § 1.199A–10(e) (ii) Expanded affiliated group consists members of the EAG in proportion to and the small business simplified only of members of a single each Specified Cooperative’s patronage overall method under § 1.199A–10(f), a consolidated group. If all of the QPAI, regardless of whether the Specified Cooperative that is part of a Specified Cooperatives that are Specified Cooperative has patronage consolidated group determines its QPAI members of an EAG are also members of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28704 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules the same consolidated group, the 50% of its W–2 wages of $3,000, i.e., $1,500). (f) Allocation of patronage income consolidated group’s section 199A(g) Pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section, and loss by a Specified Cooperative that deduction is determined using the the $720 section 199A(g) deduction is is a member of the expanded affiliated consolidated group’s consolidated allocated to X, Y, and Z in proportion to their group for only a portion of the year—(1) taxable income or loss, QPAI, and W– respective amounts of QPAI, that is $144 to In general. A Specified Cooperative that X ($720 × $2,000/$10,000), $216 to Y ($720 2 wages, from patronage sources or × $3,000/$10,000), and $360 to Z ($720 × becomes or ceases to be a member of an nonpatronage sources, as the case may $5,000/$10,000). Although X’s patronage EAG during its taxable year must be, rather than the separate taxable source taxable income for 2018 determined allocate its taxable income or loss, income or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages prior to allocation of a portion of the EAG’s QPAI, and W–2 wages between the from patronage sources or nonpatronage section 199A(g) deduction to it was $0, portion of the taxable year that the sources of its members. pursuant to paragraph (c)(2) of this section, Specified Cooperative is a member of (4) Allocation of the section 199A(g) X will have an NOL from its patronage source the EAG and the portion of the taxable deduction of a consolidated group for 2018 equal to $144, which will be a year that the Specified Cooperative is among its members. The section carryover to 2019. not a member of the EAG. This 199A(g) deduction from patronage (ii) Example 2. (A) Facts. Corporation X is allocation of items is made by using the sources of a consolidated group (or the the common parent of a consolidated group, consisting of X and Y, which has filed a pro rata allocation method described in section 199A(g) deduction allocated to a consolidated Federal income tax return for this paragraph (f)(1). Under the pro rata consolidated group that is a member of many years. Corporation P is the common allocation method, an equal portion of an EAG) is allocated among the parent of a consolidated group, consisting of patronage taxable income or loss, QPAI, patronage sources of Specified P and S, which has filed a consolidated and W–2 wages, and nonpatronage Cooperatives in proportion to each Federal income tax return for many years. taxable income or loss, QPAI, and W– Specified Cooperative’s patronage QPAI, The X and P consolidated groups each file 2 wages for the taxable year is assigned regardless of whether the Specified their consolidated Federal income tax returns to each day of the Specified Cooperative has patronage separate on a calendar year basis. X, Y, P, and S are Cooperative’s taxable year. Those items taxable income or W–2 wages for the each Specified Cooperatives, and none of X, assigned to those days that the Specified taxable year. In allocating the section Y, P, or S has ever had activities other than from its patronage sources. The X Cooperative was a member of the EAG 199A(g) deduction of a patronage source consolidated group and the P consolidated are then aggregated. of a Specified Cooperative that is part of group are members of the same EAG in 2019. (2) Coordination with rules relating to a consolidated group among patronage In 2018, the X consolidated group incurred the allocation of income under sources of other members of the same a consolidated net operating loss (CNOL) of § 1.1502–76(b). If § 1.1502–76(b) group, any redetermination of a $25,000. Neither P nor S (nor the P (relating to items included in a member’s patronage receipts, COGS, or consolidated group) has ever incurred an consolidated return) applies to a NOL. In 2019, the X consolidated group has other deductions from an intercompany Specified Cooperative that is a member transaction under § 1.1502–13(c)(1)(i) or (prior to the deduction under section 172) taxable income of $8,000 and the P of an EAG, then any allocation of items (c)(4) is not taken into account for required under this paragraph (f) is purposes of section 199A(g). Also, for consolidated group has taxable income of $20,000. X’s QPAI is $8,000, Y’s QPAI is made only after the allocation of the purposes of this allocation, if a ($13,000), P’s QPAI is $16,000 and S’s QPAI items pursuant to § 1.1502–76(b). patronage source of a Specified is $4,000. There are sufficient W–2 wages to (g) Total section 199A(g) deduction Cooperative that is a member of a exceed the section 199A(g)(1)(B) limitation. consolidated group has negative QPAI, (B) Analysis. The X consolidated group for a Specified Cooperative that is a the QPAI of the patronage source is uses $8,000 of its CNOL from 2018 to offset member of an expanded affiliated group treated as zero. the X consolidated group’s taxable income in for some or all of its taxable year—(1) (e) Examples. The following examples 2019. None of the X consolidated group’s Member of the same EAG for the entire illustrate the application of paragraphs remaining CNOL may be used to offset taxable year. If a Specified Cooperative (a) through (d) of this section. taxable income of the P consolidated group is a member of the same EAG for its under paragraph (b)(3) of this section. entire taxable year, the Specified (i) Example 1. Specified Cooperatives X, Y, Accordingly, for purposes of determining the Cooperative’s section 199A(g) deduction and Z are members of the same EAG but are EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction for 2019, not members of a consolidated group. X, Y, for the taxable year (whether patronage the EAG has taxable income of $20,000 (the sourced or nonpatronage sourced) is the and Z each files Federal income tax returns X consolidated group’s taxable income, after on a calendar year basis. None of X, Y, or Z the deduction under section 172, of $0 plus amount of the section 199A(g) have activities other than from its patronage the P consolidated group’s taxable income of deduction allocated to it by the EAG sources. Prior to 2018, X had no taxable $20,000). The EAG has QPAI of $15,000 (the under paragraph (c)(1) of this section. income or loss. In 2018, X has taxable income X consolidated group’s QPAI of ($5,000) (X’s of $0, QPAI of $2,000, and W–2 wages of $0, (2) Member of the expanded affiliated Y has taxable income of $4,000, QPAI of $8,000 + Y’s ($13,000)), and the P group for a portion of the taxable year. $3,000, and W–2 wages of $500, and Z has consolidated group’s QPAI of $20,000 (P’s If a Specified Cooperative is a member taxable income of $4,000, QPAI of $5,000, $16,000 + S’s $4,000)). The EAG’s section of an EAG for only a portion of its 199A(g) deduction equals $1,350, 9% of the and W–2 wages of $2,500. Accordingly, the taxable year and is either not a member EAG’s patronage source taxable income is lesser of its taxable income of $20,000 and its QPAI of $15,000. The section 199A(g) of any EAG or is a member of another $8,000, the sum of X’s taxable income of $0, EAG, or both, for another portion of the Y’s taxable income of $4,000, and Z’s taxable deduction is allocated between the X and P income of $4,000. The EAG has QPAI of consolidated groups in proportion to their taxable year, the Specified Cooperative’s $10,000, the sum of X’s QPAI of $2,000, Y’s respective QPAI. Because the X consolidated section 199A(g) deduction for the QPAI of $3,000, and Z’s QPAI of $5,000. The group has negative QPAI, all of the section taxable year (whether patronage sourced EAG’s W–2 wages are $3,000, the sum of X’s 199A(g) deduction of $1,350 is allocated to or nonpatronage sourced) is the sum of W–2 wages of $0, Y’s W–2 wages of $500, the P consolidated group. This $1,350 is its section 199A(g) deductions for each and Z’s W–2 wages of $2,500. Thus, the allocated between P and S, the members of portion of the taxable year. EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction for 2018 is the P consolidated group, in proportion to $720 (9% of the lesser of the EAG’s patronage their QPAI. Accordingly, P is allocated (3) Example. The following example source taxable income of $8,000 and the $1,080 ($1,350 × ($16,000/$20,000) and S is illustrates the application of paragraphs EAG’s QPAI of $10,000, but no greater than allocated $270 ($1,350 × $4,000/$20,000)). (f) and (g) of this section. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules 28705 (i) Example—(A) Facts. Specified (i) Attributable to the period that each a portion of the $360 deduction to Z, Y’s Cooperatives X and Y, calendar year other member of the EAG and the QPAI is treated as being $0 because Y’s QPAI taxpayers, are members of the same EAG for computing member are members of the is negative. Z’s section 199A(g) deduction for the entire 2018 taxable year. Specified EAG; and its taxable year ending June 30, 2019, is $72 Cooperative Z, also a calendar year taxpayer, ($360 × ($2,000/($8,000 + $0 + $2,000))). (ii) Taken into account in a taxable is a member of the EAG of which X and Y (i) Partnership owned by expanded are members for the first half of 2018 and not year that begins after the effective date a member of any EAG for the second half of of section 199A(g) and ends with or affiliated group—(1) In general. For 2018. Assume that X, Y, and Z each has W– within the taxable year of the computing purposes of section 199A(g)(3)(D) 2 wages in excess of the section 199A(g)(1)(B) member with respect to which the relating to DPGR, if all of the interests wage limitation for all relevant periods. In section 199A(g) deduction is computed. in the capital and profits of a 2018, X’s patronage source has taxable (2) Example. The following example partnership are owned by members of a income of $2,000 and QPAI of $600, Y’s illustrates the application of this single EAG at all times during the patronage source has a taxable loss of $400 paragraph (h). taxable year of such partnership (EAG and QPAI of ($200), and Z’s patronage source partnership), then the EAG partnership has taxable income of $1,400 and QPAI of (i) Example. (A) Specified Cooperatives X, and all members of that EAG are treated Y, and Z are members of the same EAG. $2,400. as a single taxpayer during such period. (B) Analysis. Pursuant to the pro rata Neither X, Y, nor Z is a member of a allocation method, $700 of Z’s 2018 consolidated group. X and Y are calendar (2) Attribution of activities—(i) In patronage taxable income and $1,200 of its year taxpayers and Z is a June 30 fiscal year general. If a Specified Cooperative 2018 QPAI are allocated to the first half of taxpayer. Z came into existence on July 1, which is a member of an EAG the 2018 taxable year (the period in which Z 2017. All of X, Y’s, and Z’s activities are (disposing member) derives gross is a member of the EAG) and $700 of Z’s 2018 patronage sourced. Each Specified receipts from the lease, rental, license, patronage taxable income and $1,200 of its Cooperative has taxable income that exceeds sale, exchange, or other disposition of 2018 QPAI are allocated to the second half its QPAI and W–2 wages in excess of the property that was MPGE by an EAG of the 2018 taxable year (the period in which section 199A(g)(1)(B) wage limitation. For the partnership, all the partners of which Z is not a member of any EAG). Accordingly, taxable year ending December 31, 2018, X’s are members of the same EAG to which in 2018, the EAG has taxable income from QPAI is $8,000 and Y’s QPAI is ($6,000). For the disposing member belongs at the patronage source of $2,300 (X’s $2,000 + Y’s its taxable year ending June 30, 2019, Z’s ($400) + Z’s $700) and QPAI of $1,600 (X’s QPAI is $2,000. time that the disposing member $600 + Y’s ($200) + Z’s $1,200). The EAG’s (B) In computing X’s and Y’s respective disposes of such property, then the section 199A(g) deduction for 2018 is $144 section 199A(g) deductions for their taxable disposing member is treated as (9% of the lesser of the EAG’s taxable income years ending December 31, 2018, X’s taxable conducting the MPGE activities from patronage source of $2,300 or QPAI of income or loss, QPAI and W–2 wages and Y’s previously conducted by the EAG $1,600). Pursuant to § 1.199A–14(c)(1), this taxable income or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages partnership with respect to that $144 deduction is allocated to X’s, Y’s, and from their respective taxable years ending property. The previous sentence applies Z’s patronage source in proportion to their December 31, 2018, are aggregated. The only for those taxable years in which the respective QPAI. Accordingly, X’s patronage EAG’s QPAI for this purpose is $2,000 (X’s disposing member is a member of the source is allocated $48 of the EAG’s section QPAI of $8,000 + Y’s QPAI of ($6,000)). The EAG of which all the partners of the 199A(g) deduction ($144 × ($600/($600 + $0 $180 deduction is allocated to each of X and + $1,200))), Y’s patronage source is allocated Y in proportion to their respective QPAI as EAG partnership are members for the $0 of the EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction a percentage of the QPAI of each member of entire taxable year of the EAG ($144 × ($0/($600 + $0 + $1,200))), and Z’s the EAG that was taken into account in partnership. With respect to a lease, patronage source is allocated $96 of the computing the EAG’s section 199A(g) rental, or license, the disposing member EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction ($144 × deduction. Pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of is treated as having disposed of the ($1,200/($600 + $0 + $1,200))). For the this section, in allocating the section 199A(g) property on the date or dates on which second half of 2018, Z’s patronage source has deduction between X and Y, because Y’s it takes into account its gross receipts taxable income of $700 and QPAI of $1,200. QPAI is negative, Y’s QPAI is treated as being from the lease, rental, or license under Therefore, for the second half of 2018, Z’s $0. Accordingly, X’s section 199A(g) its method of accounting. With respect patronage source has a section 199A(g) deduction for its taxable year ending to a sale, exchange, or other disposition, deduction of $63 (9% of the lesser of its December 31, 2018, is $180 ($180 × $8,000/ taxable income of $700 or its QPAI of $1,200 ($8,000 + $0)). Y’s section 199A(g) deduction the disposing member is treated as for the second half of 2018). Accordingly, X’s for its taxable year ending December 31, having disposed of the property on the 2018 section 199A(g) deduction is $48 and 2018, is $0 ($180 × $0/($8,000 + $0)). date it ceases to own the property for Y’s 2018 section 199A(g) deduction is $0. Z’s (C) In computing Z’s section 199A(g) Federal income tax purposes, even if no 2018 section 199A(g) deduction is $159, the deduction for its taxable year ending June 30, gain or loss is taken into account. sum of the $96 section 199A(g) deduction of 2019, X’s and Y’s items from their respective Likewise, if an EAG partnership derives the EAG allocated to Z for the first half of taxable years ending December 31, 2018, are gross receipts from the lease, rental, 2018 and Z’s $63 section 199A(g) deduction taken into account. Therefore, X’s taxable license, sale, exchange, or other for the second half of 2018. income or loss and Y’s taxable income or disposition of property that was MPGE loss, determined without regard to the (h) Computation of section 199A(g) section 199A(g) deduction, QPAI, and W–2 by a member (or members) of the same deduction for members of an expanded wages from their taxable years ending EAG (the producing member) to which affiliated group with different taxable December 31, 2018, are aggregated with Z’s all the partners of the EAG partnership years—(1) In general. If Specified taxable income or loss, QPAI, and W–2 wages belong at the time that the EAG Cooperatives that are members of an from its taxable year ending June 30, 2019. partnership disposes of such property, EAG have different taxable years, in The EAG’s QPAI is $4,000 (X’s QPAI of then the EAG partnership is treated as determining the section 199A(g) $8,000 + Y’s QPAI of ($6,000) + Z’s QPAI of conducting the MPGE activities $2,000). The EAG’s section 199A(g) deduction of a member (the computing × previously conducted by the producing member), the computing member is deduction is $360 (9% $4,000). A portion member with respect to that property. of the $360 deduction is allocated to Z in required to take into account the taxable proportion to its QPAI as a percentage of the The previous sentence applies only for income or loss, determined without QPAI of each member of the EAG that was those taxable years in which the regard to the section 199A(g) deduction, taken into account in computing the EAG’s producing member is a member of the QPAI, and W–2 wages of each other section 199A(g) deduction. Pursuant to EAG of which all the partners of the group member that are both— paragraph (c)(1) of this section, in allocating EAG partnership are members for the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 28706 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Proposed Rules entire taxable year of the EAG its method of accounting. With respect accomplishment of the cooperative’s partnership. With respect to a lease, to a sale, exchange, or other disposition, marketing, purchasing, or services rental, or license, the EAG partnership the disposing partnership is treated as activities, the income or deduction is is treated as having disposed of the having disposed of the property on the from patronage sources. However, if the property on the date or dates on which date it ceases to own the property for transaction producing the income or it takes into account its gross receipts Federal income tax purposes, even if no deduction does not actually facilitate derived from the lease, rental, or license gain or loss is taken into account. the accomplishment of these activities under its method of accounting. With (iii) Exception. No member of an EAG but merely enhances the overall respect to a sale, exchange, or other other than an exempt Specified profitability of the cooperative, being disposition, the EAG partnership is Cooperative is attributed nonpatronage merely incidental to the association’s treated as having disposed of the activities conducted by an EAG cooperative operation, the income or property on the date it ceases to own the partnership. An EAG partnership is not deduction is from nonpatronage property for Federal income tax attributed nonpatronage activities sources. Patronage and nonpatronage purposes, even if no gain or loss is taken conducted by any member of the EAG income or deductions cannot be netted into account. or by another EAG partnership. unless otherwise permitted by the (ii) Attribution between expanded (j) Applicability date. The provisions Internal Revenue Code or regulations affiliated group partnerships. If an EAG of this section apply to taxable years issued under the relevant section of the partnership (disposing partnership) ending after the date the Treasury Internal Revenue Code, or guidance derives gross receipts from the lease, decision adopting these regulations as published in the Internal Revenue rental, license, sale, exchange, or other final regulations is published in the Bulletin (see § 601.601(d)(2) of this disposition of property that was MPGE Federal Register. Taxpayers, however, chapter). by another EAG partnership (producing may rely on these regulations until that (g) Effective/applicability date. The partnership), then the disposing date, but only if the taxpayers apply the provisions of paragraph (f) of this partnership is treated as conducting the rules in their entirety and in a section apply to taxable years ending MPGE activities previously conducted consistent manner. after the date the Treasury decision by the producing partnership with ■ Par. 3. Section 1.1388–1 is amended adopting these regulations as final respect to that property, provided that by adding paragraphs (f) and (g). regulations is published in the Federal each of these partnerships (the The additions read as follows: Register. However, taxpayers may rely producing partnership and the on the provisions of paragraph (f) of this § 1.1388–1 Definitions and special rules. disposing partnership) is owned for its section until the date the Treasury entire taxable year in which the * * * * * decision adopting these regulations as disposing partnership disposes of such (f) Patronage and nonpatronage. final regulations is published in the property by members of the same EAG. Whether an item of income or deduction Federal Register. With respect to a lease, rental, or is patronage or nonpatronage sourced is license, the disposing partnership is determined by applying the directly Kirsten Wielobob, treated as having disposed of the related use test. The directly related use Deputy Commissioner for Services and property on the date or dates on which test provides that if the income or Enforcement. it takes into account its gross receipts deduction is produced by a transaction [FR Doc. 2019–11501 Filed 6–18–19; 8:45 am] from the lease, rental, or license under that actually facilitates the BILLING CODE 4830–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:36 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNP2.SGM 19JNP2 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Vol. 84 Wednesday, No. 118 June 19, 2019 Part IV The President Proclamation 9906—Father’s Day, 2019 Executive Order 13875—Evaluating and Improving the Utility of Federal Advisory Committees VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:40 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\19JND0.SGM 19JND0 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PRESDOC0 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:40 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\19JND0.SGM 19JND0 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PRESDOC0 28709 Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 84, No. 118 Wednesday, June 19, 2019 Title 3— Proclamation 9906 of June 14, 2019 The President Father’s Day, 2019 By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation On Father’s Day, we celebrate and honor the men who have embraced the essential role of fatherhood. Through acts of selflessness, determination, and love, fathers and father figures enrich and bless all of our lives. Today, we thank them for boldly embracing the tremendous responsibility of raising our Nation’s children to be happy, productive, and responsible adults, and for their ceaseless devotion to their families. As children, we take comfort in the presence and companionship of fathers, and we are strengthened by their encouragement as we prepare to confront future challenges. Throughout life, we draw courage from our father’s firm and loving guidance and example. With the values they instill in us, they encourage us to live a life of virtue and exercise good judgment as we enter into adulthood and have families of our own. Children of all ages benefit in countless ways from a father’s ongoing presence and involvement. A father’s time, attention, and mentorship are crucial to the physical, emotional, and spiritual growth of his child. Our Nation heralds the dignity of fatherhood, a father’s role in developing children’s character, and the indispensable influence fathers have on their children and our communities. Increasingly, research has shown that children with involved fathers are more likely to have healthy self-esteem, do well in school, and make higher salaries as adults. This is one reason why my Administration is committed to promoting the role of fathers and father figures in ensuring the growth, development, and well-being of America’s youth. We support the continuance of grant funding to organizations across our country that promote responsible fatherhood by helping fathers to strengthen their relationships with their children and to seek and retain gainful employment to provide a stable home life for their families. On this day, we thank all amazing fathers for their unending dedication and leadership. They impact countless lives in such important and powerful ways. We express our heartfelt love and appreciation to fathers, whether their children are by birth, adoption, or foster care, for the many sacrifices they have made to ensure that their children have every opportunity to reach their full potential in life. NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, in accordance with a joint resolution of the Congress approved April 24, 1972, as amended (36 U.S.C. 109), do hereby proclaim June 16, 2019, as Father’s Day. I call on United States Government officials to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on Father’s Day and invite State and local governments and the people of the United States to observe Father’s Day with appropriate ceremonies. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:40 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\19JND0.SGM 19JND0 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PRESDOC0 28710 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Presidential Documents IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourteenth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand nineteen, and of the Independ- ence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-third. [FR Doc. 2019–13173 Filed 6–18–19; 11:15 am] Billing code 3295–F9–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:40 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\19JND0.SGM 19JND0 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PRESDOC0 Trump.EPS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Presidential Documents 28711 Presidential Documents Executive Order 13875 of June 14, 2019 Evaluating and Improving the Utility of Federal Advisory Committees By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Review of Current Advisory Committees. (a) Each executive depart- ment and agency (agency) shall evaluate the need for each of its current advisory committees established under section 9(a)(2) of FACA and those advisory committees established under section 9(a)(1) that are authorized by law but not required by statute (eligible committees). (b) Each agency shall, by September 30, 2019, terminate at least one- third of its current committees established under section 9(a)(2) of FACA, including committees for which the: (i) stated objectives of the committee have been accomplished; (ii) subject matter or work of the committee has become obsolete; (iii) primary functions have been assumed by another entity; or (iv) agency determines that the cost of operation is excessive in relation to the benefits to the Federal Government. (c) Each agency may request a waiver of the requirement in subsection (b) of this section from the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (Director). The Director may grant such a waiver if the Director concludes it is necessary for the delivery of essential services, for effective program delivery, or because it is otherwise warranted by the public interest. (d) Each agency that has fewer than three current eligible committees is exempt from subsection (b) of this section. (e) Agencies may count eligible committees terminated since January 20, 2017, toward the requirement of subsection (b) of this section. Sec. 2. Limitations on New Advisory Committees. The Government-wide combined total number of eligible committees (excluding committees covered by section 6(d) of this order) shall not exceed 350. If the combined total number of eligible committees exceeds 350, an agency may not establish a new advisory committee under section 9(a)(2) of FACA, unless the agency obtains a waiver pursuant to subsection 4(b) of this order. Such a waiver is in addition to the notice and other requirements of FACA and its imple- menting regulations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:45 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\19JNE0.SGM 19JNE0 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with EXECORDER 28712 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Presidential Documents Sec. 3. Reporting Requirements. (a) The head of each agency shall submit to the Director on or before August 1, 2019: (i) a recommendation for each of the agency’s current advisory committees established by the President under section 9(a)(1) of FACA regarding whether the committee should be continued; and (ii) a detailed plan, for each advisory committee required by statute, for continuing or terminating such committee, including, as appropriate, rec- ommended legislation for submission to the Congress. (b) The Administrator of General Services (Administrator) shall submit to the Director such justifications and recommendations required by sub- section (a) of this section for independent Presidential advisory committees, as defined by 41 CFR 102–3.25. Sec. 4. Office of Management and Budget Role. (a) The Director, in coordina- tion with the Administrator, shall issue instructions regarding the implemen- tation of this order, including how to calculate the number of eligible commit- tees to eliminate in each agency and how to comply with applicable law. (b) The Director may, with the concurrence of the Administrator, grant an agency a waiver of the requirements of section 2 of this order if the Director concludes that such waiver is necessary for the delivery of essential services, for effective program delivery, or because it is otherwise warranted by the public interest. (c) By September 1, 2019, the Director shall make appropriate recommenda- tions to the President about terminating committees established by the Presi- dent under section 9(a)(1) of FACA. The Director shall also include in the President’s FY 2021 budget submission to the Congress a detailed plan for terminating such committees required by statute whose continued oper- ations no longer serve the public interest, including with respect to the criteria set forth in subsection 1(b) of this order. Sec. 5. Exemption for Merit Review Panels. (a) The requirements of sections 1, 2, and 3 of this order do not apply to a merit review panel or advisory committee whose primary purpose is to provide scientific expertise to support agencies making decisions related to the safety or efficacy of products to be marketed to American consumers. (b) A merit review panel, for purposes of this order, is any collegial body whose approval is necessary to fund an extramural research procure- ment contract, grant, or cooperative agreement (including second level peer review), such as those at the National Institutes of Health. Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (c) This order 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:45 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\19JNE0.SGM 19JNE0 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with EXECORDER Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Presidential Documents 28713 (d) The provisions of this order do not apply to any independent regulatory agency, as that term is defined in section 3502(5) of title 44, United States Code. THE WHITE HOUSE, June 14, 2019. [FR Doc. 2019–13175 Filed 6–18–19; 11:15 am] Billing code 3295–F9–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:45 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4790 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\19JNE0.SGM 19JNE0 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with EXECORDER Trump.EPS i Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 118 Wednesday, June 19, 2019 CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING JUNE 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. 9 CFR Presidential Documents 2 CFR 79...... 28202 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 3187...... 27703 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 10 CFR 3 CFR Other Services 170...... 25679 Proclamations: 171...... 25679 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 9897...... 26313 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6050 9898...... 26315 Proposed Rules: 9899...... 26317 50...... 27209 171...... 26774 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 9900...... 26319 9901...... 26321 431...... 28239 World Wide Web 9902...... 26323 12 CFR 9903...... 26737 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 9904...... 27501 50...... 25975 is located at: www.govinfo.gov. 9905...... 27699 249...... 25975 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 9906...... 28709 268...... 27027 Inspection List and electronic text are located at: Executive Orders: 329...... 25975 www.federalregister.gov. 11888 (Amended by 1041...... 27907 Proc. 9902) ...... 26323 1248...... 28202 E-mail 13874...... 27899 Proposed Rules: FEDREGTOC (Daily Federal Register Table of Contents Electronic 13875...... 28711 261...... 27976 Mailing List) is an open e-mail service that provides subscribers Administrative Orders: 13 CFR with a digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The Memorandums: digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes Memorandum of May Proposed Rules: HTML and PDF links to the full text of each document. 24, 2019 ...... 27695 115...... 25496 Memorandum of May To join or leave, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/ 14 CFR USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your email address, then 24, 2019 ...... 27697 follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your Notices: 21...... 27707 subscription. Notice of June 13, 25 ...... 25978, 26739, 26741 2019 ...... 27905 39 ...... 25982, 25984, 26331, PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail Presidential 26334, 26546, 26548, 26556, service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. Determinations: 26743, 27193, 27503, 27506, To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html Presidential 27508, 27511, 27930, 27932, and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow Determination 2019– 28202 the instructions. 13 ...... 27701 71 ...... 25679, 26341, 26342, 26343, 26558, 26746, 27935, FEDREGTOC and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 5 CFR respond to specific inquiries. 27937 894...... 26543 97...... 26748, 26749 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: Federal Register system to: [email protected] 532...... 26767 25...... 26593 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 1650...... 26769 39 ...... 26023, 26025, 26027, regulations. 1651...... 26769 26373, 26598, 26601, 26775, 26778, 26781, 27042, 27990, 6 CFR FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, JUNE 28429, 28431 Proposed Rules: 71 ...... 25497, 26376, 26377, 25493–25678...... 3 31...... 25495 27044, 28434, 28436, 28438, 25679–25974...... 4 28439, 28440 25975–26330...... 5 7 CFR 121...... 25499 26331–26542...... 6 760...... 28171 135...... 25499 1430...... 28171 26543–26738...... 7 15 CFR 26739–27026...... 10 1493...... 28185 705...... 26751 27027–27192...... 11 1728...... 28186 1755...... 28186 740...... 25986 27193–27502...... 12 3434...... 26544 746...... 25986 27503–27702...... 13 Proposed Rules: 801...... 27197 27703–27906...... 14 271...... 27743 27907–28170...... 17 278...... 27743 16 CFR 28171–28428...... 18 340...... 26514 1112...... 28205 28429–28714...... 19 372...... 26514 1238...... 28205 8 CFR 17 CFR 235...... 27704 240...... 27708 VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:33 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\19JNCU.LOC 19JNCU jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Reader Aids 18 CFR 561...... 27714 27039, 27202 46 CFR 80...... 26980 401...... 27035 566...... 27714 10...... 26580 180 ...... 26352, 27966, 28235 420...... 27035 576...... 27714 11...... 26580 271...... 26359 583...... 27714 15...... 26580 21 CFR 584...... 27714 300...... 26576 355...... 27533 1100...... 27200 588...... 27714 47 CFR 1140...... 27200 592...... 27714 Proposed Rules: 1143...... 27200 594...... 27714 52 ...... 26030, 26031, 26041, 1...... 26363 1301...... 28212 595...... 27714 26047, 26049, 26053, 26057, 2...... 25685 1305...... 28212 597...... 27714 26379, 26804, 26806, 27046, 5...... 25685 598...... 27714 1308 ...... 27938, 27943, 28212 27049, 27053, 27055, 27212, 15...... 25685 27559, 27566, 27996, 28132 Proposed Rules: 32 CFR 27...... 26363 63...... 25904 54...... 27973 16...... 27543 171...... 27201 1107...... 27543 70...... 27055 64...... 25692, 26364 33 CFR 81...... 26627, 27566 74...... 27734 22 CFR 180...... 26630 100 ...... 25680, 26565, 27036, Proposed Rules: 42...... 25989 239...... 26632 1 ...... 25514, 26234, 26634, 27719, 28216 271...... 27057 117...... 26764, 27036 27998 25 CFR 300 ...... 25509, 25725, 28259 2...... 25514, 27998 147...... 27036 721...... 27061 Proposed Rules: 165 ...... 25993, 25995, 26567, 25...... 25514 30...... 26785 26569, 26571, 26572, 26574, 42 CFR 27...... 25514, 27998 27036, 27039, 27531, 27720, 54...... 27570 26 CFR 22...... 27968 64...... 26379, 28264 27956, 27958, 27959, 27960, 32...... 27968 1 ...... 26559, 27513, 27947, 27962, 27964, 28219, 28221, 96...... 26634 28214, 28398 60...... 27969 28223, 28225 412...... 26360 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 422...... 26578 48 CFR 1 ...... 26605, 28426, 28668 100...... 27743 423...... 25610, 26578 Ch. 1...... 27494, 27497 117...... 27994 27 CFR 438...... 26578 15...... 27494 165 ...... 25506, 25721, 25723, 460...... 25610 Proposed Rules: 27210 Proposed Rules: 9...... 28442 498...... 26578 App. D...... 27745 34 CFR Proposed Rules: App. J ...... 27745 29 CFR Ch. IV...... 27070 Ch. II ...... 25682 701...... 27745 412...... 28263 2520...... 27952 225...... 25996 4022...... 27713 413...... 28263 Proposed Rules: 423...... 28450 49 CFR 4044...... 27713 Ch. III ...... 26623 438...... 27846 541...... 27205 30 CFR 600...... 27404 440...... 27846 602...... 27404 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 460...... 27846 270...... 27215 603...... 27404 482...... 27069 913...... 26802 654...... 27404 271...... 27215 485...... 27069 1152...... 26387 31 CFR 668...... 27404 495...... 28264 674...... 27404 501...... 27714 44 CFR 50 CFR 510...... 27714 36 CFR 64...... 27970 17...... 26393 515...... 25992 Proposed Rules: 535...... 27714 220...... 27544 206...... 25685 300...... 25493 536...... 27714 622...... 26022, 27974 539...... 27714 38 CFR 45 CFR 635...... 25707 541...... 27714 4...... 28227 88...... 26580 648...... 26766, 27741 542...... 27714 17...... 25998, 26278 2105...... 27721 660...... 25708 544...... 27714 Proposed Rules: 665...... 26394 546...... 27714 39 CFR 86...... 27846 679...... 25494, 28237 547...... 27714 20...... 26345 92...... 27846 Proposed Rules: 548...... 27714 147...... 27846 622...... 27576 549...... 27714 40 CFR 155...... 27846 648...... 26634 560...... 27714 52 ...... 26019, 26347, 26349, 156...... 27846 660...... 27072 VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:33 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\19JNCU.LOC 19JNCU jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTCU Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2019 / Reader Aids iii in today’s List of Public enacted public laws. To Laws. subscribe, go to http:// LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Public Laws Electronic listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ Last List June 14, 2019 Notification Service publaws-l.html (PENS) Note: No public bills which Note: This service is strictly have become law were for E-mail notification of new received by the Office of the PENS is a free electronic mail laws. The text of laws is not Federal Register for inclusion notification service of newly available through this service. PENS cannot respond to specific inquiries sent to this address. VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:33 Jun 18, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\19JNCU.LOC 19JNCU jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with FRONTCU