Vol. 80 Wednesday, No. 126 July 1, 2015
Pages 37529–37920
OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER
VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:36 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\01JYWS.LOC 01JYWS tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with WS II Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015
The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Email [email protected] Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Phone 202–741–6000 issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see www.ofr.gov. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge at www.fdsys.gov, a service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office. The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6:00 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published and includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800 or 866-512- 1800 (toll free). E-mail, gpocusthelp.com. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $749 plus postage, or $808, plus postage, for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $165, plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover. Mail to: U.S. Government Publishing Office—New Orders, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000; or call toll free 1-866-512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, see bookstore.gpo.gov. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 80 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.
.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:36 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\01JYWS.LOC 01JYWS tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with WS III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 80, No. 126
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Agricultural Marketing Service Commission of Fine Arts RULES NOTICES Cranberries Grown in Massachusetts, et al.: Meetings: Revising Determination of Sales History, 37531–37533 Commission of Fine Arts, 37604 Increased Assessment Rates: Olives Grown in California, 37533–37535 Defense Department PROPOSED RULES See Army Department Research and Information Orders: See Engineers Corps Hardwood Lumber and Hardwood Plywood Promotion, 37555 Education Department NOTICES Agriculture Department Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, See Agricultural Marketing Service Submissions, and Approvals: See Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Student Messaging in GEAR UP Demonstration, 37605– Administration 37606 See Procurement and Property Management Office, Agriculture Department Energy Department NOTICES Army Department Application to Export Electric Energy: NOTICES Powerex Corp., 37608 Meetings: Applications to Export Electric Energy: Army Science Board, 37604–37605 Targray Americas, Inc., 37607–37608 Requests for Information: Census Bureau Electric Grid Resilience Self-Assessment Tool for NOTICES Distribution System, 37606–37607 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Engineers Corps Manufacturers’ Unfilled Orders Survey, 37583 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services South Shore of Staten Island, 37605 PROPOSED RULES Medicare Program: Environmental Protection Agency End-Stage Renal Disease Prospective Payment System, RULES and Quality Incentive Program, 37808–37860 Pesticide Tolerances; Exemptions: Cuprous Oxide, 37547–37551 Children and Families Administration PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Greenhouse Gas Determinations: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Emissions from Aircraft Cause or Contribute to Air Submissions, and Approvals, 37621–37622 Pollution that May Reasonably Be Anticipated to Endanger Public Health and Welfare, 37758–37806 Coast Guard NOTICES RULES Access to Confidential Business Information: Regulated Navigation Areas: Eastern Research Group, Inc., 37618 4th of July, Biscayne Bay, Miami, FL, 37540–37542 Science Applications International Corp., Solutions by Safety Zones: Design II, LLC, 37608–37609 Fourth of July Fireworks Displays, Murrells Inlet and Vision Technologies, Inc.; Computer Sciences Corp., North Myrtle Beach, SC, 37545–37547 37617–37618 Three Rivers Regatta/Three River Regatta and Fireworks, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Ohio River, Mile 0.5 to Mile 0.5 on the Allegheny Submissions, and Approvals: River and Mile 0.5 on the Monongahela River; Water Quality Standards Regulation, 37616–37617 Pittsburgh, PA, 37542–37545 Guidance: PROPOSED RULES Antimicrobial Pesticide Use Site Index, 37610–37611 Safety Zones: Meetings: Allegheny River between mile 0.0 and 1.4; Pittsburgh, Board of Scientific Counselors Air, Climate, and Energy PA, 37562–37565 Subcommittee, 37609–37610 Science Advisory Board Chemical Assessment Advisory Commerce Department Committee Augmented for the Review of Draft See Census Bureau Benzo[a]pyrene Assessment; Teleconferences, 37615– See International Trade Administration 37616 See Minority Business Development Agency Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: See National Institute of Standards and Technology Methyl Bromide; Critical Use Exemption Applications, See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 37611–37615
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\01JYCN.SGM 01JYCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS IV Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Contents
Export-Import Bank Fiscal Service NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Regulations Governing United States Savings Bonds, Submissions, and Approvals, 37619–37620 37559–37562 NOTICES Federal Aviation Administration Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: NOTICES Companies Holding Certificates of Authority, 37735– Changes in Use of Aeronautical Properties: 37754 Sumner County Regional Airport, Gallatin, TN, 37714 Terminations: Harleysville Worcester Insurance Co., et Designation of Oceanic Airspace, 37710–37712 al., 37735 Meetings: Special Committee 135, 37714 Special Committee 229, 37713 Fish and Wildlife Service Special Committee 231, 37712–37713 PROPOSED RULES Release from Federal Grant Assurance Obligations: Endangered and Threatened Species: Elko Regional Airport, Elko, NV, 37712 90-Day Findings on 31 Petitions, 37568–37579 Requests for Temporary Changes in Use: Albany International Airport, Albany, NY; Vehicular Food and Drug Administration Parking on Section of Active Aircraft Parking Apron, PROPOSED RULES 37713–37714 Nicotine Exposure Warnings and Child-Resistant Packaging for Liquid Nicotine, Nicotine-Containing E-Liquid(s), Federal Communications Commission and Other Tobacco Products, 37555–37559 RULES NOTICES Construction, Marking and Lighting of Antenna Structures, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, 37552–37553 Submissions, and Approvals: Permit Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure General Licensing Provisions; Biosimilar Applications, Devices in the 5 GHz Band, 37551–37552 37635–37637 Registration of Producers of Drugs and Listing of Drugs in Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Commercial Distribution, 37622–37625 NOTICES Emergency Use Authorizations: Terminations of Receivership: In Vitro Diagnostic Device for Detection of Enterovirus First Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, 37620 D68, 37625–37633 First National Bank of Barnesville, Barnesville, GA, Guidance: 37621 Intent to Exempt Certain Unclassified, Class II, and Class Hometown Community Bank, Braselton, GA, 37620 I Reserved Medical Devices from Premarket Federal Emergency Management Agency Notification Requirements, 37633–37635 NOTICES Disaster Declarations: Geological Survey Oklahoma; Amendment No. 6, 37644 NOTICES Oklahoma; Amendment No. 7, 37648 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Flood Hazard Determinations; Changes, 37644–37646 Submissions, and Approvals, 37650–37651 Flood Hazard Determinations; Proposals, 37646–37647 Federal Highway Administration Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Designation Opportunities: Submissions, and Approvals, 37715–37716 Pocatello, ID; Evansville, IN; Salt Lake City, UT; and Columbia, SC Areas, 37581–37582 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration West Sacramento, CA; Frankfort, IN; and Richmond, VA RULES Areas, 37580–37581 Lease and Interchange of Vehicles: Designations: Motor Carriers of Passengers, 37553–37554 Topeka, KS; Cedar Rapids, IA; Minot, ND; and NOTICES Cincinnati, OH Areas, 37582 Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Diabetes Mellitus, 37716–37717, 37719–37727 Vision, 37718–37719 Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Federal Railroad Administration See Children and Families Administration NOTICES See Food and Drug Administration Buy American Waivers: See Health Resources and Services Administration Rhode Island Department of Transportation, National See National Institutes of Health Railroad Passenger Corporation for Purchase of Two See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Turnouts and One Crossover, 37728–37729 Administration NOTICES Federal Reserve System Final Effect of Designation of a Class of Employees for NOTICES Addition to the Special Exposure Cohort, 37640–37641 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Meetings: Holding Companies, 37621 Advisory Committee on Minority Health, 37640–37641
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\01JYCN.SGM 01JYCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Contents V
Health Resources and Services Administration International Trade Commission NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, Submissions, and Approvals, 37638–37639 or Reviews: Lists of Designated Primary Medical Care, Mental Health, Hand Trucks from China; Five-Year Review, 37661– and Dental Health Professional Shortage Areas, 37637– 37662 37638 Woven Electric Blankets from China, 37658–37661 Statements of Organization, Functions and Delegations of Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, Authority, 37639–37640 etc.: Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and Components Thereof, 37656–37658 Historic Preservation, Advisory Council NOTICES Justice Department Meetings, 37643–37644 NOTICES Proposed Consent Decrees under CERCLA, 37662 Homeland Security Department Labor Department See Coast Guard RULES See Federal Emergency Management Agency Practice and Procedure for Administrative Hearings before See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services the Office of Administrative Law Judges; Corrections, NOTICES 37539–37540 Charter Renewals: Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Maritime Administration Committee, 37648 NOTICES Meetings: Housing and Urban Development Department Maritime Environmental and Technical Assistance Program Forum, 37729 NOTICES Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement Joint Planning Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Advisory Group Table Top Exercise, 37729–37730 Submissions, and Approvals: Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement Open Season, Evaluation of the Section 811 Project Rental Assistance 37730–37732 Program, Phase I, 37649–37650 Minority Business Development Agency Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES RULES Meetings: Federal Acknowledgment of American Indian Tribes, Guidance on MBDA Applications for Federal Funding, 37862–37895 37597 Requests for Administrative Acknowledgment of Federal National Credit Union Administration Indian Tribes, 37538–37539 PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Land Acquisitions: Member Business Loans; Commercial Lending, 37898– Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin, 37651–37654 37919 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Interior Department NOTICES See Fish and Wildlife Service Meetings: See Geological Survey National Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council, See Indian Affairs Bureau 37732–37733 See National Park Service National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Internal Revenue Service Meetings: NOTICES Smart Grid Advisory Committee, 37598 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 37754–37756 National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: International Trade Administration Center for Scientific Review, 37641–37642 NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or Reviews, 37588–37597 NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, or Reviews: Submissions, and Approvals: Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 37583– Southeast Region Vessel Monitoring System and Related 37586 Requirements, 37603–37604 Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Suspended Investigation: Essential Fish Habitat Final 5-Year Review, 37598–37599 Advance Notification of Sunset Reviews, 37587–37588 Domestic Fisheries; General Provisions: Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Reviews, 37586–37587 Applications for Exempted Fishing Permits, 37599–37600
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\01JYCN.SGM 01JYCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS VI Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Contents
Presidential Task Force on Combating Illegal Unreported Securities and Exchange Commission and Unregulated Fishing and Seafood Fraud: RULES Action Plan for Implementing Recommendations; Commission Guidance Regarding the Definition of the Determining Types of Information and Operational Terms ‘Spouse’ and ‘Marriage’ Following the Supreme Standards Related to Data Collection, 37601–37603 Court’s Decision in United States v. Windsor, 37536– 37537 National Park Service Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers— NOTICES Ban on Third-Party Solicitation; Notice of Compliance Council Establishment: Date, 37538 Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Monument Advisory Small and Additional Issues Exemptions under the Council, 37655–37656 Securities Act; Corrections, 37537–37538 National Register of Historic Places: NOTICES Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 37654–37655 Applications: Requests for Nominations: Cash Trust Series, Inc., et al., 37701–37704 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Meetings: Review Committee, 37654 Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies, 37685 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: NOTICES BOX Options Exchange, LLC, 37690–37692 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 37685–37690, Submissions, and Approvals: 37692–37695, 37700–37701 Export and Import of Nuclear Equipment and Material, EDGX Exchange, Inc., 37672 37669 NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., 37698–37700 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: NASDAQ OMX PHLX, LLC, 37672–37685 Prairie Island Independent Spent Fuel Storage NYSE MKT, LLC, 37695–37698 Installation; Proposed License Renewal, 37662–37664 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Small Business Administration Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, 37664–37666 NOTICES Guidance: Actions Subject to Intergovernmental Review, 37705–37708 Acceptance of Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis Conflicts of Interests: Computer Programs for Nuclear Power Plants, LaSalle Capital Group II–A, L.P., 37705 37666–37667 Selection of Material Balance Areas and Item Control Social Security Administration Areas, 37670–37671 NOTICES Meetings: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, 37667–37668 Submissions, and Approvals, 37708–37709 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Fukushima, 37670 Special Counsel Office Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards NOTICES Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures, 37670 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Survey Renewal for Fiscal Year 2015, 37710 NOTICES Fiscal Year 2014 Service Contract Inventory, 37709–37710 Special Permit Applications; Delays, 37733–37734 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Postal Regulatory Commission Administration NOTICES New Postal Products, 37671–37672 NOTICES Postal Service Certified Laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing PROPOSED RULES Facilities: Rules of Practice Before the Judicial Officer, 37567–37568 Urine Drug Testing for Federal Agencies, 37642–37643 Rules of Practice in Proceedings Relative to Debarment Surface Transportation Board from Contracting, 37565–37567 NOTICES NOTICES International Product Changes: Abandonment Exemptions: Global Expedited Package Services: Non-Published Rates, CSX Transportation, Inc.; Atlanta, Fulton County, GA, 37672 37734 Presidential Documents Transportation Department EXECUTIVE ORDERS See Federal Aviation Administration Committees; Establishment, Renewal, Termination, etc.: See Federal Highway Administration Toxic Substances and Worker Health, Advisory Board on; See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Establishment (EO 13699), 37529–37530 See Federal Railroad Administration See Maritime Administration Procurement and Property Management Office, See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Agriculture Department See Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety NOTICES Administration Fiscal Year 2014 Service Contract Inventories, 37582 See Surface Transportation Board
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\01JYCN.SGM 01JYCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Contents VII
Treasury Department Part IV See Fiscal Service Interior Department, Indian Affairs Bureau, 37862–37895 See Internal Revenue Service U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Part V NOTICES National Credit Union Administration, 37898–37919 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Civil Surgeon Designation Registration, 37648–37649 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice Separate Parts In This Issue of recently enacted public laws. Part II To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Environmental Protection Agency, 37758–37806 LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Part III archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Health and Human Services Department, Centers for settings); then follow the instructions. Medicare & Medicaid Services, 37808–37860
VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:56 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\01JYCN.SGM 01JYCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS VIII Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Contents
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
3 CFR Executive Orders: 13699...... 37529 7 CFR 929...... 37531 932...... 37533 Proposed Rules: 1211...... 37555 12 CFR Proposed Rules: 701...... 37898 723...... 37898 741...... 37898 17 CFR 231...... 37536 232...... 37537 241...... 37536 271...... 37536 275...... 37538 276...... 37536 21 CFR Proposed Rules: 1100...... 37555 1140...... 37555 1143...... 37555 25 CFR 83 (2 documents) ...... 37538, 37862 29 CFR 18...... 37539 31 CFR Proposed Rules: 315...... 37539 353...... 37539 360...... 37539 33 CFR 165 (3 documents) ...... 37540, 37542, 37545 Proposed Rules: 165...... 37562 39 CFR Proposed Rules: 957...... 37565 961...... 37567 966...... 37567 40 CFR 180...... 37547 Proposed Rules: 87...... 37758 1068...... 37758 42 CFR Proposed Rules: 413...... 37808 47 CFR 15...... 37551 17...... 37552 49 CFR 390...... 37553 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 17...... 37568
VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:59 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\01JYLS.LOC 01JYLS tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with LS 37529
Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 80, No. 126
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Title 3— Executive Order 13699 of June 26, 2015
The President Establishing the Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Carl Levin and Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113–291), and to allocate the responsibilities imposed by that Act, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Establishment. There is established within the Department of Labor the Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health (Advisory Board). Sec. 2. Membership. (a) The Advisory Board shall reflect a proper balance of perspectives from the scientific, medical, and claimant communities. (b) The Advisory Board shall consist of no more than 15 members to be appointed by the Secretary of Labor in consultation with organizations with expertise on worker health issues. Members shall serve without com- pensation as Special Government Employees, but shall be allowed travel and meal expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, to the extent permitted by law for persons serving intermittently in the Government service (5 U.S.C. 5701–5707). (c) The Secretary of Labor shall designate a Chair of the Board from among its members. Sec. 3. Functions. (a) The Advisory Board shall advise the Secretary of Labor with respect to: (i) the site exposure matrices of the Department of Labor; (ii) medical guidance for claims examiners for claims under subtitle E of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (EEOICPA) with respect to the weighing of the medical evidence of claimants; (iii) evidentiary requirements for claims under EEOICPA subtitle B related to lung disease; and (iv) the work of industrial hygienists, staff physicians, and consulting physicians of the Department of Labor and reports of such hygienists and physicians to ensure quality, objectivity, and consistency. (b) To the extent necessary, the Advisory Board also shall coordinate exchanges of data and findings with the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, which was authorized by EEOICPA and established by Execu- tive Order 13179 of December 7, 2000. Sec. 4. Administration. (a) The Secretary of Labor shall provide the Advisory Board with funding and administrative support, including the appointment of staff and, as the Secretary determines appropriate, authorization for the detail of Federal employees from within the Department of Labor and employ- ment of outside contractors and specialists, to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations. The Secretary also shall perform the administrative functions of the President under the Federal Advisory Com- mittee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2), with respect to the Advisory Board. (b) The Secretary of Labor shall designate a senior officer of the Department of Labor to serve as the Director of the staff of the Advisory Board.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\01JYE0.SGM 01JYE0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with E0 37530 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Presidential Documents
Sec. 5. Termination. The Advisory Board shall terminate on the date that is 5 years after the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (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.
THE WHITE HOUSE, June 26, 2015.
[FR Doc. 2015–16334 Filed 6–30–15; 08:45 am] Billing code 3295–F5
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\01JYE0.SGM 01JYE0 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with E0 OB#1.EPS 37531
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 80, No. 126
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, recommended these changes at meetings contains regulatory documents having general Marketing Order and Agreement held on February 10 and August 20, applicability and legal effect, most of which Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 2014. are keyed to and codified in the Code of AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence The order provides authority for Federal Regulations, which is published under Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, volume control in the form of a 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– producer allotment program. When in The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by 2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: effect, this program limits the quantity the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of [email protected]. of cranberries that handlers may new books are listed in the first FEDERAL SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final purchase or handle on behalf of growers REGISTER issue of each week. rule is issued under Marketing in years of oversupply. Each year, prior Agreement and Order No. 929, as to determining if volume regulation is amended (7 CFR part 929), regulating needed, grower sales histories are DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE the handling of cranberries grown in the calculated. The sales history averages recent years’ sales data using Agricultural Marketing Service states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, information submitted by each grower on a production and eligibility report 7 CFR Part 929 Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the filed with the Committee. If the [Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0091; FV15–929–1 State of New York, hereinafter referred Committee determines that volume FR] to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is effective regulation is needed, a producer under the Agricultural Marketing allotment percentage is calculated. Each Cranberries Grown in States of Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 grower’s allotment of cranberries Massachusetts, et al.; Revising eligible for handling is then calculated Determination of Sales History U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ by multiplying the allotment percentage AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, The Department of Agriculture by the grower’s sales history. USDA. (USDA) is issuing this rule in Section 929.48 of the order contains ACTION: Final rule. conformance with Executive Orders provisions for computing an annual 12866, 13563, and 13175. grower sales history. Section 929.48 also SUMMARY: This rule implements a This final rule has been reviewed provides that the Committee, with the recommendation from the Cranberry under Executive Order 12988, Civil approval of the Secretary, may establish Marketing Committee (Committee) to Justice Reform. This rule is not intended alternative grower’s sales history revise the determination of sales history to have retroactive effect. calculations as warranted. One such provisions currently prescribed under The Act provides that administrative alternative calculation is established in the cranberry marketing order (order). proceedings must be exhausted before § 929.149. This alternative calculation The Committee, which consists of 13 parties may file suit in court. Under supplements the calculation found in growers and 1 public member, locally section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any § 929.48 by including an additional administers the order regulating the handler subject to an order may file sales history for growers with new and handling of cranberries grown in with USDA a petition stating that the renovated acreage. It also provides that Massachusetts, Rhode Island, order, any provision of the order, or any the sales history be computed for Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, obligation imposed in connection with processed fruit only, with fresh fruit Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, the order is not in accordance with law sales deducted from the calculation. The Washington, and Long Island in the and request a modification of the order alternative calculation method State of New York. Under the order, or to be exempted therefrom. A handler established in § 929.149 was developed there are two different sales history is afforded the opportunity for a hearing for the 2001–02 marketing year, the last calculations that have been established on the petition. After the hearing, USDA time volume regulation was for this program. This action clarifies would rule on the petition. The Act implemented, and was recently revised when the different methods for provides that the district court of the so that it could be used for any season. calculating sales history will be used. United States in any district in which The Committee believes the This action also removes the fresh fruit the handler is an inhabitant, or has his provisions in the alternative sales exemption from one of the calculations. or her principal place of business, has history calculation are beneficial and DATES: Effective July 2, 2015. jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on provide equity to growers who have FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the petition, provided an action is filed recently planted or renovated acreage. Doris Jamieson, Marketing Specialist, or not later than 20 days after the date of However, the alternative method for Christian D. Nissen, Regional Director, the entry of the ruling. calculating sales history requires Southeast Marketing Field Office, There are two sales history physical verification of the renovated or Marketing Order and Agreement calculations in effect under two separate new acreage, thus resulting in Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, sections of the order. This final rule additional costs to the Committee. AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324– clarifies when the different methods for When considering the costs and the 3375, Fax: (863) 291–8614, or Email: calculating sales history will be used. benefits of both sales history calculation [email protected] or This final rule also removes the methods, the Committee concluded that [email protected]. exemption for fresh fruit from the sales the method in § 929.48 was adequate for Small businesses may request history calculation found in § 929.149. annual calculations when volume information on complying with this The Committee unanimously regulation was not anticipated.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37532 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
However, due to the importance of a There are approximately 1,300 The Committee considered the grower’s sales history in the cranberry growers in the regulated area alternative of making no changes to the determination of that grower’s allotment and approximately 45 cranberry rules and regulations pertaining to the during years of volume regulation, the handlers who are subject to regulation determination of sales history. However, inclusion of new and renovated acreage under the marketing order. Small the Committee recognized that this is paramount. Accordingly, the agricultural producers are defined by change would help the industry avoid Committee concluded that the sales the Small Business Administration the additional costs of acreage history calculation in § 929.149 should (SBA) as those having annual receipts of verification in years when volume be used in all years when volume less than $750,000, and small regulation is not being implemented. regulation is anticipated. agricultural service firms are defined as Also, the Committee agreed that the Consequently, at its February 10 and those having annual receipts of less than current grower sales history tabulation August 20, 2014, meetings, the $7,000,000 (13 CFR 121.201). exempting fresh fruit was not Committee recommended that the According to industry and Committee representative of the actual sales. alternative calculation method found in data, grower prices ranged between $15 Therefore, this alternative was rejected. § 929.149 only apply during times when and $47 per barrel for cranberries during In accordance with the Paperwork a producer allotment volume regulation the 2012–13 marketing year, and total Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. is being implemented. When a producer sales were around 7.8 million barrels. Chapter 35), the order’s information allotment volume regulation is not being Based on production data and grower collection requirements have been implemented, the Committee will prices, the average annual grower previously approved by the Office of calculate grower’s sales history revenue is below $750,000. Using Management and Budget (OMB) and according to the provisions provided in Committee information and shipment assigned OMB No. 0581–0189, Generic § 929.48 of the order. data, 44 out of the 45 cranberry handlers Fruit Crops. No changes in those The Committee also recommended could also be considered small requirements as a result of this action revising the alternative calculation businesses under SBA’s definition. are necessary. Should any changes method in § 929.149 by removing the Therefore, the majority of cranberry become necessary, they would be exemption for fresh fruit sales. growers and handlers may be classified submitted to OMB for approval. Committee members stated that as small entities. This action will not impose any automatically exempting fresh fruit from This final rule revises the rules and additional reporting or recordkeeping the sales history calculation provides regulations pertaining to the requirements on either small or large the grower with an inaccurate determination of sales history currently cranberry handlers. As with all Federal representation of their total sales. prescribed in § 929.149 of the order. marketing order programs, reports and Further, the exclusion of fresh fruit There are two sales history calculations forms are periodically reviewed to affects the industry’s total sales history, under two separate sections of the order. reduce information requirements and which is used to determine the This action clarifies when the different duplication by industry and public allotment percentage under a producer methods for calculating sales history sector agencies. allotment program. The Committee will be used. It also removes the AMS is committed to complying with believes if any exemptions to future exemption for fresh fruit from the the E-Government Act, to promote the producer allotment calculations are calculation method found in § 929.149. use of the internet and other warranted, such exemptions should be These changes were unanimously information technologies to provide considered and recommended to USDA recommended by the Committee at increased opportunities for citizen as part of a proposed volume regulation. meetings held on February 10 and access to Government information and Removing the fresh exemption August 20, 2014. Authority for these services, and for other purposes. provision from the alternative changes is provided in § 929.48 of the As noted in the initial regulatory calculation allows the Committee to order. flexibility analysis, USDA has not determine, on an as-needed basis, It is not anticipated that this action identified any relevant Federal rules whether or not volume regulation will impose any additional costs on the that duplicate, overlap or conflict with should apply to the fresh cranberry industry. Each year, the Committee is this final rule. supply. required to calculate a sales history for In addition, the Committee’s meetings each grower. This rule clarifies that the were widely publicized throughout the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis alternative sales history calculation cranberry industry, and all interested Pursuant to requirements set forth in method established under § 929.149 will persons were invited to attend the the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 only apply when a producer allotment meetings and participate in Committee U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural regulation is being implemented. The deliberations on all issues. Like all Marketing Service (AMS) has calculation method found in § 929.48 Committee meetings, the February 10 considered the economic impact of this will be used when volume regulation is and August 20, 2014, meetings were action on small entities. Accordingly, not being implemented. public meetings, and all entities, both AMS has prepared this final regulatory Removing the fresh exemption large and small, were able to express flexibility analysis. provision from the calculation found in views on this issue. The purpose of the RFA is to fit § 929.149 allows the Committee to A proposed rule concerning this regulatory actions to the scale of determine, on an as-needed basis, action was published in the Federal businesses subject to such actions in whether or not volume regulation Register on April 22, 2015 (80 FR order that small businesses will not be should apply to the fresh cranberry 22431). Copies of the rule were mailed unduly or disproportionately burdened. supply. It also provides growers, and the or sent via facsimile to all Committee Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Committee, with a more accurate members and cranberry handlers. Act, and rules issued thereunder, are representation of their sales history. The Finally, the rule was made available unique in that they are brought about benefits of this rule are not expected to through the internet by USDA and the through group action of essentially be disproportionately greater or lesser Office of the Federal Register. A 15-day small entities acting on their own for small handlers or producers than for comment period ending May 7, 2015, behalf. large entities. was provided to allow interested
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37533
persons to respond to the proposal. No Dated: June 26, 2015. ‘‘order.’’ The order is effective under the comments were received. Accordingly, Rex A. Barnes, Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act no changes will be made to the rule as Associate Administrator, Agricultural of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), proposed. Marketing Service. hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ The Department of Agriculture A small business guide on complying [FR Doc. 2015–16177 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] (USDA) is issuing this rule in with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop BILLING CODE 3410–02–P conformance with Executive Orders marketing agreements and orders may 12866, 13563, and 13175. be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE This rule has been reviewed under MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Any questions about the compliance Agricultural Marketing Service Reform. Under the marketing order now guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny in effect, California olive handlers are at the previously mentioned address in 7 CFR Part 932 subject to assessments. Funds to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT administer the order are derived from section. [Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0105; FV15–932–1 such assessments. It is intended that the FR] After consideration of all relevant assessment rate issued herein will be matter presented, including the Olives Grown in California; Increased applicable to all assessable olives information and recommendation Assessment Rate beginning on January 1, 2015, and submitted by the Committee and other continue until amended, suspended, or available information, it is hereby found AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, terminated. that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, USDA. The Act provides that administrative will tend to effectuate the declared ACTION: Final rule. proceedings must be exhausted before policy of the Act. parties may file suit in court. Under SUMMARY: This rule implements a section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any It is further found that good cause recommendation from the California handler subject to an order may file exists for not postponing the effective Olive Committee (committee) for an with USDA a petition stating that the date of this rule until 30 days after increase of the assessment rate order, any provision of the order, or any publication in the Federal Register (5 established for the 2015 and subsequent obligation imposed in connection with U.S.C. 553) because the Committee is fiscal years from $15.21 to $26.00 per the order is not in accordance with law beginning discussions regarding assessable ton of olives handled. The and request a modification of the order establishing a producer allotment committee locally administers the or to be exempted therefrom. Such volume regulation for the coming marketing order and is comprised of handler is afforded the opportunity for season. As such, it is important to have producers and handlers of olives grown a hearing on the petition. After the these changes in place as the Committee in California. Assessments upon olive hearing, USDA would rule on the moves forward with these discussions handlers are used by the committee to petition. The Act provides that the and potential implementation. Further, fund reasonable and necessary expenses district court of the United States in any handlers are aware of this rule, which of the program. The fiscal year begins district in which the handler is an was recommended at a public meeting. January 1 and ends December 31. The inhabitant, or has his or her principal Also, a 15-day comment period was assessment rate will remain in effect place of business, has jurisdiction to provided for in the proposed rule. indefinitely unless modified, review USDA’s ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 929 suspended, or terminated. DATES: Effective July 2, 2015. 20 days after the date of the entry of the Cranberries, Marketing agreements, ruling. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This rule increases the assessment Reporting and recordkeeping Terry Vawter, Senior Marketing requirements. rate established for the committee for Specialist or Martin Engeler, Regional the 2015 and subsequent fiscal years For the reasons set forth in the Manager, California Marketing Field from $15.21 to $26.00 per ton of preamble, 7 CFR part 929 is amended as Office, Marketing Order and Agreement assessable olives. follows: Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, The California olive marketing order AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487– provides authority for the committee, PART 929—CRANBERRIES GROWN IN 5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or Email: with the approval of USDA, to formulate THE STATES OF MASSACHUSETTS, [email protected] or an annual budget of expenses and RHODE ISLAND, CONNECTICUT, NEW [email protected]. collect assessments from handlers to JERSEY, WISCONSIN, MICHIGAN, Small businesses may request administer the program. The members MINNESOTA, OREGON, information on complying with this of the committee are producers and WASHINGTON, AND LONG ISLAND IN regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, handlers of California olives. They are THE STATE OF NEW YORK Marketing Order and Agreement familiar with the committee’s needs and Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, with the costs for goods and services in ■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence their local area and are thus in a part 929 continues to read as follows: Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, position to formulate an appropriate DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– budget and assessment rate. The Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: assessment rate is formulated and § 929.149 [Amended] [email protected]. discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule directly affected persons have an ■ 2. In § 929.149, the words ‘‘when a is issued under Marketing Agreement opportunity to participate and provide producer allotment volume regulation is No. 148 and Order No. 932, both as input. in effect’’ are added to the end of the amended (7 CFR part 932), regulating For the 2014 and subsequent fiscal introductory text, and paragraphs (e) the handling of olives grown in years, the committee recommended, and and (f) are removed. California, hereinafter referred to as the USDA approved, an assessment rate that
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37534 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
would continue in effect from fiscal year expenses, actual olive tonnage received area and 2 handlers subject to regulation to fiscal year unless modified, by handlers during the 2014 crop year, under the marketing order. The Small suspended, or terminated by USDA and additional pertinent information. Business Administration (13 CFR upon recommendation and information As reported by CASS, actual assessable 121.201) defines small agricultural submitted by the committee or other tonnage for the 2014 crop year is under producers as those having annual information available to USDA. 40,000 tons or less than half of the receipts of less than $750,000, and small The committee met on December 9, 91,000 assessable tons in the 2013 crop agricultural service firms as those whose 2014, and unanimously recommended year, which is a result of the alternate- annual receipts are less than $7,000,000 2015 fiscal year expenditures of bearing characteristics of olives. (13 CFR 121.210). $1,374,072, and an assessment rate of Income derived from handler Based upon information from the $26.00 per ton of assessable olives. assessments, along with interest income industry and CASS, the average Olives are an alternate-bearing crop: A and funds from the committee’s producer price for the 2014 crop year large crop followed by a smaller crop. authorized reserve will be adequate to was approximately $1,027 per ton, and Olive producers and handlers are cover budgeted expenses. Funds in the total assessable volume was less than accustomed to wide swings in crop reserve will be kept within the 40,000 tons. Based on production, yields, which necessarily result in maximum permitted by the order of producer prices, and the total number of fluctuations in the assessment rate from approximately one fiscal year’s California olive producers, the average year to year. In comparison, last year’s expenses (§ 932.40). annual producer revenue is less than budgeted expenditures were $1,262,460. The assessment rate established in $750,000. Thus, the majority of olive The assessment rate of $26.00 is $10.79 this rule will continue in effect producers may be classified as small higher than the rate currently in effect. indefinitely unless modified, entities. Both of the handlers may be The committee recommended the suspended, or terminated by USDA classified as large entities. higher assessment rate because of a upon recommendation and information This rule will increase the assessment substantial decrease in assessable olive submitted by the committee or other rate established for the committee and tonnage for the 2014 crop year. The available information. Although this collected from handlers for the 2015 and olive tonnage available for the 2014 crop assessment rate will be in effect for an subsequent fiscal years from $15.21 to year was less than 40,000 tons, which indefinite period, the committee will $26.00 per ton of assessable olives. The compares to the 91,000 tons reported for continue to meet prior to or during each committee unanimously recommended the 2013 crop year, as reported by the fiscal year to recommend a budget of 2015 fiscal year expenditures of California Agricultural Statistics Service expenses and consider $1,374,072, and an assessment rate of (CASS). recommendations for modification of $26.00 per ton. The higher assessment The reduced crop is due to olives the assessment rate. The dates and times rate is necessary because assessable being an alternate-bearing fruit. The of committee meetings are available olive receipts for the 2014 crop year 2014 crop was what is called the ‘‘off’’ from the committee or USDA. were reported by CASS to be less than crop—the smaller of the two bearing- Committee meetings are open to the 40,000 tons, compared to 91,000 tons for year crops. public and interested persons may the 2013 crop year. In addition to the funds from handler express their views at these meetings. Income derived from the $26.00 per assessments, the committee also plans USDA will evaluate committee ton assessment rate, along with funds to use available reserve funds to help recommendations and other available from the authorized reserve and interest meet its 2015 fiscal year expenses. information to determine whether income, should be adequate to meet this The major expenditures modification of the assessment rate is fiscal year’s expenses. recommended by the committee for the needed. Further rulemaking will be The major expenditures 2015 fiscal year include $259,231 for undertaken as necessary. The recommended by the committee for the research, $450,000 for marketing committee’s 2015 fiscal year budget and 2015 fiscal year include $259,231 for activities, $122,000 for inspection those for subsequent fiscal years will be research, $450,000 for marketing equipment and electronic reporting reviewed and, as appropriate, approved activities, $122,000 for inspection development, and $393,500 for by USDA. equipment development, and $393,500 administration. The major expenditures for administration. Budgeted expenses for the 2014 fiscal year included Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for these items in 2014 were $312,560 $312,560 for research, $565,600 for Pursuant to requirements set forth in for research, $565,600 for marketing marketing activities, $37,800 for the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 activities, $37,800 for inspection inspection equipment and electronic U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural equipment and electronic reporting reporting development, and $346,500 Marketing Service (AMS) has development, and $346,500 for for administration. considered the economic impact of this administration. Overall 2015 expenditures include an rule on small entities. Accordingly, The committee deliberated many of increase in inspection equipment and AMS has prepared this final regulatory the expenses, weighing the relative electronic reporting development flexibility analysis. value of various programs or projects, expenses due to the need to purchase, The purpose of the RFA is to fit and decreased their costs for research test, install, and link new sizers to the regulatory actions to the scale of and marketing, while increasing their electronic reporting system. businesses subject to such actions in costs for inspection equipment and Additionally, the research budget order that small businesses will not be electronic reporting development, as contains a contingency of $41,000 for unduly or disproportionately burdened. well as their administrative expenses. new opportunities that may arise during Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Prior to arriving at this budget, the the fiscal year, and the administrative Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are committee considered information from budget includes a $31,000 contingency unique in that they are brought about various sources such as the committee’s for unforeseen issues. through group action of essentially Executive, Marketing, Inspection, and The assessment rate recommended by small entities acting on their own Research Subcommittees. Alternate the committee resulted from behalf. There are approximately 1,000 expenditure levels were discussed by consideration of anticipated fiscal year producers of olives in the production these groups based upon the relative
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37535
value of various projects to the olive A proposed rule concerning this Accordingly, no changes will be made industry and the reduced olive action was published in the Federal to the rule as proposed based on the production. The assessment rate of Register on March 30, 2015 (80 FR comment received. $26.00 per ton of assessable olives was 16590). Copies of the proposed rule A small business guide on complying derived by considering anticipated were also provided to all olive handlers, with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop expenses, the volume of assessable as well as to all committee members. marketing agreements and orders may olives, and additional pertinent factors. Finally, the proposal was made be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ A review of preliminary information available through the Internet by USDA MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. and the Office of the Federal Register. A indicates that average producer prices Any questions about the compliance 30-day comment period, ending April for 2014 crop olives were approximately guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny 29, 2015, was provided for interested $1,027 per ton. Therefore, utilizing the at the previously-mentioned address in persons to respond to the proposal. One assessment rate of $26.00 per ton, the the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT comment was received. estimated assessment revenue for the section. 2015 fiscal year as a percentage of total The commenter noted that the net producer revenue would be increase in the assessment rate is not After consideration of all relevant approximately 2.5 percent. proportional to the proposed increase in material presented, including the This action increases the assessment expenses for the committee, and the information and recommendation obligation imposed on handlers. While proposed rule did not explain how the submitted by the committee and other assessments impose some additional magnitude of the proposed increase in available information, it is hereby found costs on handlers, the costs are minimal the assessment rate was reached. that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, and uniform on all handlers. Some of In response to the comment, the will tend to effectuate the declared the additional costs may be passed on assessment rate is based upon several policy of the Act. factors: The assessable production, the to producers. However, these costs Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it also found programs and costs the committee finds would be offset by the benefits derived and determined that good cause exists reasonable and necessary for the fiscal from the operation of the marketing year (proposed budget of expenses), as for not postponing the effective date of order. In addition, the committee’s well as the amount of funds available in this rule until 30 days after publication meeting was widely publicized the committee’s financial reserve, if they in the Federal Register because olive throughout California’s olive industry choose to use such funds to offset their handlers have already received 2014–15 and all interested persons were invited proposed expenses. The committee crop year olives from producers, the to attend the meeting and encouraged to determines, based upon their experience fiscal year began on January 1, 2015, participate in committee deliberations with costs in their area and the types of and the assessment rate applies to all on all issues. Like all committee marketing programs they propose, what olives received during the 2014–15 crop meetings, the December 9, 2014, their budget of expenses will be. Thus, year. Further, handlers are aware of this meeting was a public meeting and all they agreed that increasing the rule, which was recommended at a entities, both large and small, were assessment rate to meet their program public meeting. Also, a 30-day comment encouraged to express views on this administration and marketing needs was period was provided for in the proposed issue. acceptable, reasonable, and necessary to rule. In accordance with the Paperwork achieve their program administration List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932 Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. and marketing goals. They also Chapter 35), the order’s information determined that an even larger Olives, Marketing agreements, collection requirements have been assessment increase could be averted by Reporting and recordkeeping previously approved by the Office of utilizing funds from their financial requirements. Management and Budget (OMB) and reserves. assigned OMB No. 0581–0178. No The commenter also noted that the For the reasons set forth in the changes in those requirements as a proposed rule states that the assessment preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is amended as result of this action are necessary. rate ‘‘would continue in effect follows: Should any changes become necessary, indefinitely unless modified, they would be submitted to OMB for suspended, or terminated by USDA PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN approval. upon recommendation and information CALIFORNIA This rule imposes no additional submitted by the committee or other reporting or recordkeeping requirements available information.’’ The commenter ■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR on either small or large California olive stated that such language seemed at part 932 continues to read as follows: handlers. As with all Federal marketing odds to language in the rule indicating Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. order programs, reports and forms are that the alternate-bearing characteristics periodically reviewed to reduce of olives result in wide swings in ■ 2. Section 932.230 is revised to read information requirements and production, causing frequent changes to as follows: duplication by industry and public the assessment rate. § 932.230 Assessment rate. sector agencies. USDA has not In response to this comment, such identified any relevant Federal rules language is necessary to ensure that the On and after January 1, 2015, an that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with assessment rate established continues assessment rate of $26.00 per ton is this final rule. throughout the entire fiscal period and established for California olives. AMS is committed to complying with beyond, if necessary, thereby ensuring Dated: June 26, 2015. the E-Government Act to promote the that assessments on olives continue use of the internet and other uninterrupted. Should the committee Rex A. Barnes, information technologies to provide find it necessary to change the Associate Administrator, Agricultural increased opportunities for citizen assessment rate at any time, USDA Marketing Service. access to Government information and would consider their recommendation [FR Doc. 2015–16176 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] services, and for other purposes. and other available information. BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37536 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June appear in the federal securities statutes COMMISSION 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the administered by the Commission, the United States ruled in United States v. rules and regulations promulgated 17 CFR Parts 231, 241, 271, and 276 Windsor that Section 3 of the Defense of thereunder, releases, orders, and any Marriage Act (‘‘DOMA’’) is guidance issued by the staff or the [Release Nos. 33–9850; 34–75250; IA–4122; unconstitutional.1 Section 3 provides Commission, to include, respectively, IC–31684] that in ‘‘determining the meaning of any (1) an individual married to a person of Act of Congress, or of any ruling, the same sex if the couple is lawfully Commission Guidance Regarding the regulation, or interpretation of the married under state law, regardless of Definition of the Terms ‘‘Spouse’’ and various administrative bureaus and the individual’s domicile, and (2) such ‘‘Marriage’’ Following the Supreme agencies of the United States,’’ the a marriage between individuals of the Court’s Decision in United States v. ‘‘word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person same sex. This guidance is consistent Windsor of the opposite sex who is a husband or with Windsor. a wife,’’ and the ‘‘word ‘marriage’ means AGENCY: Securities and Exchange List of Subjects in 17 CFR Parts 231, only a legal union between one man and Commission. 241, 271, and 276 one woman as husband and wife.’’ 2 ACTION: Interpretation. This section, the Court stated, ‘‘enacts a Securities. directive applicable to over 1,000 SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Amendments to the Code of Federal federal statutes and the whole realm of Regulations Commission is publishing interpretive federal regulations.’’ 3 The Court found guidance to clarify how the Commission that this directive ‘‘undermines both the For the reasons set out above, the will interpret the terms ‘‘spouse’’ and public and private significance of state- Commission is amending Title 17, ‘‘marriage’’ in light of the Supreme sanctioned same-sex marriages’’ and chapter II of the Code of Federal Court’s ruling in United States v. concluded that ‘‘no legitimate purpose Regulations as set forth below: Windsor. overcomes the purpose and effect to PART 231—INTERPRETATIVE DATES: disparage and to injure those whom the Effective July 1, 2015. RELEASES RELATING TO THE State, by its marriage laws, sought to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 AND protect in personhood and dignity.’’ 4 Questions should be referred to GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS Benjamin Schiffrin, Senior Litigation The Court thus held that Section 3 of 5 THEREUNDER Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, DOMA was invalid. at (202) 551–5003, Securities and In light of this decision, the ■ 1. Part 231 is amended by adding Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Commission will read the terms Release No. 33–9850 to the list of Washington, DC 20549–9040. ‘‘spouse’’ and ‘‘marriage,’’ where they interpretive releases as follows:
Subject Release No. Date Fed. Reg. Vol. and Page
******* Commission Guidance Regarding the Definition of the 33–9850 June 19, 2015 ...... 80 FR [Insert FR Page Terms ‘‘Spouse’’ and ‘‘Marriage’’ Following the Supreme Number] Court’s Decision in United States v. Windsor.
PART 241—INTERPRETATIVE RELEASES RELATING TO THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS THEREUNDER ■ 2. Part 241 is amended by adding Release No. 34–75250 to the list of interpretive releases as follows:
Subject Release No. Date Fed. Reg. Vol. and Page
******* Commission Guidance Regarding the Definition of the 34–75250 June 19, 2015 ...... 80 FR [Insert FR Page Terms ‘‘Spouse’’ and ‘‘Marriage’’ Following the Supreme Number] Court’s Decision in United States v. Windsor.
1 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013). 3 133 S. Ct. at 2690. 5 Id. at 2696. 2 1 U.S.C. 7. 4 Id. at 2694, 2696.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37537
PART 271—INTERPRETATIVE RELEASES RELATING TO THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940 AND GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS THEREUNDER ■ 3. Part 271 is amended by adding Release No. IC–31684 to the list of interpretive releases as follows:
Subject Release No. Date Fed. Reg. Vol. and Page
******* Commission Guidance Regarding the Definition of the IC–31684 June 19, 2015 ...... 80 FR [Insert FR Page Terms ‘‘Spouse’’ and ‘‘Marriage’’ Following the Supreme Number] Court’s Decision in United States v. Windsor.
PART 276—INTERPRETATIVE RELEASES RELATING TO THE INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940 AND GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS THEREUNDER ■ 4. Part 276 is amended by adding Release No. IA–4122 to the list of interpretive releases as follows:
Subject Release No. Date Fed. Reg. Vol. and Page
******* Commission Guidance Regarding the Definition of the IA–4122 June 19, 2015 ...... 80 FR [Insert FR Page Terms ‘‘Spouse’’ and ‘‘Marriage’’ Following the Supreme Number] Court’s Decision in United States v. Windsor.
Dated: June 19, 2015. for Small and Additional Issues List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 232 By the Commission. Exemptions under the Securities Act Reporting and recordkeeping Robert W. Errett, (Regulation A). requirements, Securities. Deputy Secretary. DATES: This correction is effective July Accordingly, 17 CFR part 232 is [FR Doc. 2015–15506 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 1, 2015. corrected by making the following BILLING CODE 8011–01–P correcting amendments: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ■ 1. The authority citation for part 232 Linda Cullen, Office of the Secretary at continues to read in part as follows: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE (202) 551–5400. COMMISSION Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77c, 77f, 77g, 77h, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 77j, 77s(a), 77z–3, 77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 17 CFR Part 232 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a–6(c), 80a–8, Background 80a–29, 80a–30, 80a–37, 7201 et seq.; and 18 [Release Nos. 33–9741C; 34–74578C; 39– U.S.C. 1350, unless otherwise noted. 2501C; File No. S7–11–13] The final regulations that are the subject of these corrections were * * * * * RIN 3235–AL39 revisions to Item 101(a) of Regulation S– ■ 2. Section 232.101 is amended by: T (§ 232.101(a) of the chapter) on the ■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1)(xvi) and Amendments for Small and Additional effective date of the Amendments for (xvii); and Issues Exemptions Under the ■ Small and Additional Issues b. Adding paragraph (a)(1)(xviii). Securities Act (Regulation A); The revisions and addition read as Exemptions under the Securities Act Correction follows: (Regulation A) to reflect the mandatory AGENCY: Securities and Exchange electronic filing of all issuer initial filing § 232.101 Mandated electronic Commission. and ongoing reporting requirements submissions and exceptions. ACTION: Correcting amendments. under Regulation A (§§ 230.251–230.262 (a) * * * of the chapter). (1) * * * SUMMARY: This document contains (xvi) Form ABS–15G (as defined in corrections to the final regulations (SEC Need for Correction § 249.1400 of this chapter); Rel. No. 33–9741), which were As published, the final regulations (xvii) Documents filed with the published in the Federal Register of Commission pursuant to section 13(n) of contain errors which need to be Monday, April 20, 2015 (80 FR 21806). the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(n)) corrected. The regulations related to Amendments and the rules and regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37538 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
thereunder, including Form SDR (17 advisory services for compensation to a June 13, 2012.8 In the absence of a final CFR 249.1500) and reports filed government client for two years after the municipal advisor registration rule, the pursuant to Rules 13n–11(d) and (f) (17 adviser or certain of its executives or Commission extended the third-party CFR 240.13n–11(d) and (f)) under the employees (‘‘covered associates’’) make solicitor ban’s compliance date from Exchange Act; and a contribution to certain elected officials June 13, 2012 to nine months after the (xviii) Filings made pursuant to or candidates.1 Rule 206(4)–5 also compliance date of the final rule,9 Regulation A (§§ 230.251 through prohibits an adviser and its covered which is July 31, 2015.10 230.262 of this chapter). associates from providing or agreeing to This notice of compliance date is * * * * * provide, directly or indirectly, payment technical in nature and serves solely to to any third-party for a solicitation of fulfill the Commission’s commitment to Dated: June 25, 2015. advisory business from any government provide the notice for the compliance Brent J. Fields, entity on behalf of such adviser, unless date it previously set.11 Secretary. such third-party is a ‘‘regulated person’’ Dated: June 25, 2015. [FR Doc. 2015–16045 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] (‘‘third-party solicitor ban’’).2 Rule Brent J. Fields, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 206(4)–5 defines a ‘‘regulated person’’ as an SEC-registered investment adviser,3 a Secretary. registered broker or dealer subject to pay [FR Doc. 2015–16048 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE to play restrictions adopted by a BILLING CODE 8011–01–P COMMISSION registered national securities association,4 or a registered municipal 17 CFR Part 275 advisor subject to pay to play DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR [Release No. IA–4129; File No. S7–18–09] restrictions adopted by the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board Bureau of Indian Affairs RIN 3235–AK39 (‘‘MSRB’’).5 In addition, the 25 CFR Part 83 Political Contributions by Certain Commission must find, by order, that Investment Advisers: Ban on Third- these pay to play rules: (i) Impose [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/ Party Solicitation; Notice of substantially equivalent or more A0A501010.999900 253G] Compliance Date stringent restrictions on broker-dealers or municipal advisors than the Pay to Requests for Administrative AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Play Rule imposes on investment Acknowledgment of Federal Indian Commission. advisers; and (ii) are consistent with the Tribes objectives of the Pay to Play Rule.6 ACTION: Notice of compliance date. AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Rule 206(4)–5 became effective on Interior. SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange September 13, 2010 and the compliance Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) date for the third-party solicitor ban was ACTION: Policy guidance. 7 previously set and extended the set to September 13, 2011. When the SUMMARY: This policy guidance compliance date for the ban on third- Commission added municipal advisors establishes the Department’s intent to party solicitation until nine months to the definition of regulated person, the make determinations to acknowledge after the compliance date of a final rule Commission also extended the third- Federal Indian tribes within the adopted by the Commission by which party solicitor ban’s compliance date to contiguous 48 states only in accordance municipal advisors must register under with the regulations established for that 1 the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Political Contributions by Certain Investment purpose at 25 CFR part 83. This notice (‘‘final municipal advisor registration Advisers, Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 3043 (July 1, 2010) [75 FR 41018 (July 14, 2010)] (‘‘Pay directs any unrecognized group rule’’) and indicated that notice with to Play Release’’). requesting that the Department respect thereto would be provided in 2 See id. at Section II.B.2.(b). See also 17 CFR acknowledge it as an Indian tribe, the Federal Register. This notice of 275.206(4)–5(a)(2)(i)(A). 3 through reaffirmation or any other compliance date is being published to See 17 CFR 275.206(4)–5(f)(9)(i). alternative basis, to petition under 25 provide the notice of the compliance 4 See 17 CFR 275.206(4)–5(f)(9)(ii). While rule 206(4)–5 applies to any registered national CFR part 83 unless an alternate process date. securities association, the Financial Industry is established by rulemaking following DATES: The compliance date for the ban Regulatory Authority (‘‘FINRA’’) is currently the the effective date of this policy only registered national securities association under on third-party solicitation under 17 CFR section 19(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 guidance. 275.206(4)–5 [rule 206(4)–5] is July 31, [15 U.S.C. 78s(b)]. As such, for convenience, we DATES: This policy guidance is effective 2015. will refer directly to FINRA in this notice of July 1, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: compliance date when describing the exception for certain broker-dealers from the third-party solicitor FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sirimal R. Mukerjee, Senior Counsel, or ban. Elizabeth Appel, Director, Office of Sarah A. Buescher, Branch Chief, at 5 See 17 CFR 275.206(4)–5(f)(9)(iii). On June 22, Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative (202) 551–6787 or [email protected], 2011, the Commission amended the Pay to Play Rule to add municipal advisors to the definition of Investment Adviser Regulation Office, 8 ‘‘regulated persons.’’ See Rules Implementing See Municipal Advisor Addition Release at Division of Investment Management, Amendments to the Investment Advisers Act of section II.D.1. U.S. Securities and Exchange 1940, Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 3221 (June 9 See Political Contributions by Certain Commission, 100 F Street NE., 22, 2011) [76 FR 42950 (July 19, 2011)] (‘‘Municipal Investment Advisers: Ban on Third-Party Advisor Addition Release’’). The Commission Solicitation; Extension of Compliance Date, Washington, DC 20549–8549. adopted final rules with respect to the registration Investment Advisers Act Rel. No. 3418 (June 8, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The of municipal advisors on September 20, 2013. See 2012) [77 FR 35263 (June 13, 2012)] (‘‘Extension Commission adopted rule 206(4)–5 [17 Registration of Municipal Advisors, Exchange Act Release’’). CFR 275.206(4)–5] (‘‘Pay to Play Rule’’) Release No. 70462 (Sept. 20, 2013) [78 FR 67468 10 The final date on which a municipal advisor (Nov. 12, 2013)] (‘‘Municipal Advisor Registration must file a complete application for registration was under the Investment Advisers Act of Release’’). October 31, 2014. See Municipal Advisor 1940 [15 U.S.C. 80b] to prohibit an 6 See 17 CFR 275.206(4)–5(f)(9). Registration Release at section V. investment adviser from providing 7 See Pay to Play Release at section III. 11 See the Extension Release.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37539
Action—Indian Affairs, (202) 273–4680; has determined that it will no longer FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [email protected]. accept requests for acknowledgement Todd Smyth at the U.S. Department of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: outside the Part 83 process. Rather, the Labor, Office of Administrative Law Prior to the establishment of the Department intends to rely on the newly Judges, 800 K Street NW., Suite 400- regulatory process for establishing that reformed Part 83 process as the sole North, Washington, DC 20001–8002; an American Indian group exists as an administrative avenue for telephone (202) 693–7300. Indian tribe in 1978 (‘‘the Part 83 acknowledgment as a tribe. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: process’’), the Department used an Of course, the basis for the policy Background informal process for the Federal shift being announced today is the acknowledgment of Indian tribes. The Department’s reform and improvement The final regulations that are the Part 83 regulations formalized the of the Part 83 process. The recently subject of these corrections became process by which the Department revised Part 83 regulations promote effective on June 18, 2015. The reviewed requests and the criteria fairness, integrity, efficiency and regulations constitute the rules of required of groups to obtain Federal flexibility. No group should be denied practice and procedure for acknowledgment. The Department has access to other mechanisms if the only administrative hearings before the resolved over 50 petitions using the Part administrative avenue available to them Office of Administrative Law Judges. is widely considered ‘‘broken.’’ Thus, 83 process. Need for Correction However, even after the promulgation this policy guidance is contingent on of the Part 83 regulations in 1978, there the Department’s ability to implement As published, the final regulations have been a range of requests by Part 83, as reformed. If in the future the contain four internal cross-reference unrecognized groups to use other newly reformed Part 83 process is not in errors, and a typographical error in the administrative processes to obtain effect and being implemented, this title of 29 CFR 18.33(e). Federal acknowledgment. The policy guidance is deemed rescinded. List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 18 Department has utilized those processes To conclude, any group within the in limited circumstances. For example, contiguous 48 states seeking Federal Administrative practice and the Department has ‘‘reaffirmed’’ some acknowledgment as an Indian tribe procedure, Labor. tribes and reorganized some half-blood administratively must petition under 25 Accordingly, 29 CFR part 18 is communities as tribes under the Indian CFR part 83 from this date forward. The corrected by making the following Reorganization Act (IRA). decision to use only the recently correcting amendments: Over the past couple of years, the reformed Part 83 process from this point PART 18—RULES OF PRACTICE AND Department has undertaken a forward does not affect the validity of PROCEDURE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE comprehensive review and evaluation of any determination made prior to the HEARINGS BEFORE THE OFFICE OF the process and criteria by which it institution of this policy guidance; ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES federally acknowledges Indian tribes while the Department exercised its discretionary authority to use those under 25 CFR part 83. As part of that ■ 1. The authority citation for part 18 methods of acknowledgment in the past, review of the proposed revisions to Part continues to read as follows: 83, we also received comments related it no longer will. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 5 U.S.C. 551–553; to the other administrative processes Dated: June 26, 2015. 5 U.S.C. 571 note; E.O. 12778; 57 FR 7292. that have occasionally been used by the Kevin K. Washburn, Department for acknowledgment. For Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. ■ 2. Revise paragraph (c) of § 18.32 to example, the Eastern Band of Cherokee [FR Doc. 2015–16194 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] read as follows: Indians and Stand Up for California requested that the Department utilize BILLING CODE 4337–15–P § 18.32 Computing and extending time. only the Part 83 process to acknowledge * * * * * tribes. (c) Additional time after certain kinds We recognize the concerns expressed DEPARTMENT OF LABOR of service. When a party may or must act within a specified time after service and in comments about the use of Office of the Secretary administrative approaches for service is made under § 18.30(a)(2)(ii)(C) or (D), 3 days are added after the period acknowledgment other than Part 83. 29 CFR Part 18 Having worked hard to make the Part 83 would otherwise expire under process more transparent, timely and RIN 1290–AA26 paragraph (a) of this section. efficient, while maintaining Part 83’s ■ Rules of Practice and Procedure for 3. Revise paragraph (e) of § 18.33 to fairness, rigor, and integrity, the read as follows: Department has decided that, in light of Administrative Hearings Before the these reforms to improve the Part 83 Office of Administrative Law Judges; § 18.33 Motions and other papers. process, that process should be the only Corrections * * * * * method utilized by the Department to AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Labor. (e) Motions made at hearing. A acknowledge an Indian tribe in the ACTION: Correcting amendments. motion made at a hearing may be stated contiguous 48 states.1 The Department orally unless the judge determines that SUMMARY: This document contains a written motion or response would best 1 With regard to Alaska, under 473a, Congress has corrections to the final regulations serve the ends of justice. specifically provided: ‘‘that groups of Indians in which were published in the Federal Alaska not recognized prior to May 1, 1936, as * * * * * bands or tribes, but having a common bond of Register of May 19, 2015 (80 FR 28768). ■ 4. Revise paragraph (d)(1) and the occupation, or association, or residence within a Those regulations relate to rules of introductory text of paragraph (d)(3) of well-defined neighborhood, community, or rural practice and procedure for § 18.51 to read as follows: district, may organize to adopt constitutions and administrative hearings before the bylaws and to receive charters of incorporation and § 18.51 Discovery scope and limits. Federal loans under sections 470, 476, and 477 of Office of Administrative Law Judges. this title.’’ DATES: Effective on July 1, 2015. * * * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37540 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(d) Hearing preparation: Experts—(1) boating traffic expected during 4th of fireworks displays throughout the Deposition of an expert who may testify. July firework displays throughout the Miami area. As a result, it was A party may depose any person who has Miami area. To ensure the public’s impracticable to issue this rule with been identified as an expert whose safety, all vessels within the regulated opportunity to comment because the opinions may be presented at trial. If navigation area are: Required to transit Coast Guard did not receive notice of § 18.50(c)(2)(ii) requires a report from the regulated navigation area at no more Fourth of July firework displays in time the expert the deposition may be than 15 knots; subject to control by the to publish a NPRM. conducted only after the report is Coast Guard members with law Historically, there is increased vessel provided, unless the parties stipulate enforcement authority; and required to traffic on the waters of Biscayne Bay otherwise. follow the instructions of all law during Fourth of July fireworks displays * * * * * enforcement officials in the area. in the Miami area. Vessel congestion, (3) Hearing-preparation protection for DATES: This rule is effective from July 4 especially where vessels cross communications between a party’s until July 5, 2015 and will be enforced navigational channels to return to their representative and expert witnesses. from 7 p.m. on July 4 until 2 a.m. on home marinas at high rates of speed has Paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) under this July 5, 2015. resulted in accidents that caused severe section protect communications ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this injury and death. This RNA is necessary between the party’s representative and preamble are part of docket USCG– to better protect the public on this any witness required to provide a report 2015–0450. To view documents congested waterway. Under these under § 18.50(c)(2)(ii), regardless of the mentioned in this preamble as being circumstances, it would be contrary to form of the communications, except to available in the docket, go to http:// the public interest in maintaining safety the extent that the communications: www.regulations.gov, type the docket in Biscayne Bay to delay the effective * * * * * number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click date of the temporary final rule. For the same reason discussed above, ■ 5. Revise paragraph (b) of § 18.53 to ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast read as follows: Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also visit the Guard finds that good cause exists for § 18.53 Supplementing disclosures and Docket Management Facility in room making this rule effective less than 30 responses. W12–140 on the ground floor of the days after publication in the Federal * * * * * Department of Transportation West Register. (b) Expert witness. For an expert Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., II. Basis and Purpose whose report must be disclosed under Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. § 18.50(c)(2)(ii), the party’s duty to and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, The legal basis for the rule is the supplement extends both to information except Federal holidays. Coast Guard’s authority to establish regulated navigation areas and other included in the report and to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If information given during the expert’s you have questions on this rule, call or limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 deposition. Any additions or changes to email Petty Officer John Jennings, Sector U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, this information must be disclosed by Miami Prevention Department, Coast 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of the time the party’s prehearing Guard; telephone (305) 535–4317, email Homeland Security Delegation No. disclosures under § 18.50(c)(3) are due. [email protected]. If you have 0170.1. Dated: June 17, 2015. questions on viewing the docket, call The purpose of the rule is to ensure Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, the safe transit of vessels and to protect Stephen R. Henley, persons, vessels, and the marine Acting Chief Administrative Law Judge. Docket Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. environment within the regulated [FR Doc. 2015–16239 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] navigation area during 4th of July SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 4510–20–P festivities. Table of Acronyms III. Discussion of the Temporary Final DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND DHS Department of Homeland Security Rule FR Federal Register SECURITY NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking This temporary final rule will RNA Regulated Navigation Area designate a regulated navigation area Coast Guard encompassing all waters within one I. Regulatory History and Information nautical mile of the center of the 33 CFR Part 165 The Coast Guard is issuing this final Intracoastal Waterway to the east and [Docket No. USCG–2015–0450] rule without prior notice and 21⁄2 nautical miles to the west from opportunity to comment pursuant to Black Point extending 10 nautical miles RIN 1625–AA11 authority under section 4(a) of the north to the Rickenbacker Causeway Bridge; then encompassing all navigable Regulated Navigation Area; 4th of July, Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 waters of the Intracoastal Waterway Biscayne Bay, Miami, FL U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule between the Rickenbacker Causeway AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. without prior notice and opportunity to Bridge north to the Julia Tuttle ACTION: Temporary final rule. comment when the agency for good Causeway Bridge, Miami, Florida. The cause finds that those procedures are regulated navigation area will be SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary enforced from 7 p.m. July 4, 2015, until establishing a regulated navigation area to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 2 a.m. July 5, 2015. on Biscayne Bay in Miami, Florida, for 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that All vessels within the regulated multiple 4th of July fireworks displays good cause exists for not publishing a navigation area are: (1) Required to throughout the Miami area. This NPRM with respect to this temporary transit the area at no more than 15 regulation is necessary to protect the rule because information was recently knots; (2) subject to control by the Coast public from hazards associated with received regarding the location of Guard; and (3) required to follow the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37541
instructions of all law enforcement B. Impact on Small Entities Federalism, if it has a substantial direct officials in the area. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 effect on States, on the relationship The regulated navigation area is (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, between the national government and necessary to ensure the safety of the requires federal agencies to consider the the States, or on the distribution of public during a time of heightened potential impact of regulations on small power and responsibilities among the vessel traffic in the aforementioned entities during rulemaking. The term various levels of government. We have areas. Each year numerous vessels ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small analyzed this rule under that Order and congregate in the waters of Biscayne Bay businesses, not-for-profit organizations have determined that it does not have during launching of the 4th of July that are independently owned and implications for federalism. fireworks displays. The close proximity operated and are not dominant in their F. Protest Activities and increased crossing situations of fields, and governmental jurisdictions numerous vessels within the regulated with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard respects the First navigation area during 4th of July poses The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. Amendment rights of protesters. a hazardous condition. 605(b) that this rule will not have a Protesters are asked to contact the The regulated navigation area will significant economic impact on a person listed in the FOR FURTHER result in vessels transiting at a reduced substantial number of small entities. INFORMATION CONTACT section to speed, thereby significantly reducing This rule may affect the following coordinate protest activities so that your the threat of vessel collisions. Requiring entities, some of which may be small message can be received without vessels within the regulated navigation entities: the owners or operators of jeopardizing the safety or security of area to transit at no more than 15 knots vessels intending to transit the regulated people, places or vessels. will also enable law enforcement navigation area from 7 p.m. July 4, 2015 G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act officials to identify, respond to, query, until 2 a.m. July 5, 2015. For the reasons and stop operators who may pose a discussed in the Regulatory Planning The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act hazard to other vessels in the area. and Review section above, this rule will of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Nothing in this regulation alleviates not have a significant economic impact Federal agencies to assess the effects of vessel operators from their duty to on a substantial number of small their discretionary regulatory actions. In comply with all other federal, state, and entities. particular, the Act addresses actions local laws in the area. that may result in the expenditure by a C. Assistance for Small Entities State, local, or Tribal government, in the IV. Regulatory Analyses Under section 213(a) of the Small aggregate, or by the private sector of We developed this rule after Business Regulatory Enforcement $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or considering numerous statutes and Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), more in any one year. Though this rule executive orders related to rulemaking. we want to assist small entities in will not result in such an expenditure, Below we summarize our analyses understanding this rule. If the rule we do discuss the effects of this rule based on a number of these statutes or would affect your small business, elsewhere in this preamble. organization, or governmental executive orders. H. Taking of Private Property jurisdiction and you have questions A. Regulatory Planning and Review concerning its provisions or options for This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise have This rule is not a significant compliance, please contact the person FOR FURTHER INFORMATION taking implications under Executive regulatory action under section 3(f) of listed in the CONTACT, Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Executive Order 12866, Regulatory above. Small businesses may send comments Interference with Constitutionally Planning and Review, as supplemented on the actions of Federal employees Protected Property Rights. by Executive Order 13563, Improving who enforce, or otherwise determine Regulation and Regulatory Review, and I. Civil Justice Reform compliance with, Federal regulations to does not require an assessment of the Small Business and Agriculture This rule meets applicable standards potential costs and benefits under Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 and the Regional Small Business Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to or under section 1 of Executive Order Regulatory Fairness Boards. The minimize litigation, eliminate 13563. The Office of Management and Ombudsman evaluates these actions ambiguity, and reduce burden. Budget has not reviewed it under those annually and rates each agency’s Orders. J. Protection of Children responsiveness to small business. If you The economic impact of this rule is wish to comment on actions by We have analyzed this rule under not significant for the following reasons: employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– Executive Order 13045, Protection of (1) the regulated navigation area will be 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Children from Environmental Health enforced for only seven hours; (2) the Coast Guard will not retaliate against Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not regulated navigation area does not small entities that question or complain an economically significant rule and prohibit vessels from transiting the area; about this rule or any policy or action does not create an environmental risk to (3) vessels will still be able operate in of the Coast Guard. health or risk to safety that may surrounding waters that are not disproportionately affect children. encompassed within the regulated D. Collection of Information K. Indian Tribal Governments navigation area without being subject to This rule will not call for a new all the restrictions imposed by the collection of information under the This rule does not have tribal regulated navigation area; and (4) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 implications under Executive Order advance notification of the regulated U.S.C. 3501–3520). 13175, Consultation and Coordination navigation area will be made to the local with Indian Tribal Governments, maritime community via Local Notice to E. Federalism because it does not have a substantial Mariners and Broadcast Notice to A rule has implications for federalism direct effect on one or more Indian Mariners. under Executive Order 13132, tribes, on the relationship between the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37542 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Federal Government and Indian tribes, § 165.779 Regulated Navigation Area; 4th regulated area by on-scene designated or on the distribution of power and of July, Biscayne Bay, Miami, FL. representatives. responsibilities between the Federal (a) Regulated area. The regulated (d) Enforcement period. This rule will Government and Indian tribes. navigation area encompasses all waters be enforced from 7 p.m. on July 4, 2015 of Biscayne Bay between the Julia Tuttle until 2 a.m. on July 5, 2015. L. Energy Effects Causeway Bridge and Black Point Dated: June 22, 2015. This action is not a ‘‘significant contained within an imaginary line Scott A. Buschman, energy action’’ under Executive Order connecting the following points: Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations beginning at Point 1 in position Seventh Coast Guard District. ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 25 48 38 N., 80 10 40 W.; thence east [FR Doc. 2015–16261 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Distribution, or Use. to Point 2 in position 25°48′38″ N., ° ′ ″ BILLING CODE 9110–04–P M. Technical Standards 80 10 30 W.; thence southwest to Point 3 in position 25°46′41″ N., 80°10′54″ W.; This rule does not use technical thence southeast to Point 4 in position DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND standards. Therefore, we did not 25°46′17″ N., 80°10′43″ W.; thence SECURITY consider the use of voluntary consensus southwest to Point 5 in position standards. 25°45′05″ N., 80°10′50″ W.; thence Coast Guard N. Environment southeast to Point 6 in position 25°44′47″ N., 80°10′44″ W.; thence 33 CFR Part 165 We have analyzed this rule under southeast to Point 7 in position [Docket No. USCG–2015–0436] Department of Homeland Security 25°43′29″ N., 80°09′37″ W.; thence Management Directive 023–01 and southwest to Point 8 in position RIN 1625–AA00 Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 25°42′39″ N., 80°10′35″ W.; thence which guide the Coast Guard in southwest to Point 9 in position Safety Zone; Three Rivers Regatta/ complying with the National 25°31′11″ N., 80°13′06″ W.; thence Three River Regatta and Fireworks, Environmental Policy Act of 1969 northwest to Point 10 in position Ohio River, Mile 0.5 to Mile 0.5 on the (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 25°31′31″ N., 80°17′48″ W.; thence Allegheny River and Mile 0.5 on the have concluded this action is one of a northeast to Point 11 in position Monongahela River; Pittsburgh, PA category of actions which do not 25°43′25″ N., 80°13′17″ W.; thence AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. individually or cumulatively have a northeast to Point 12 in position ACTION: Temporary final rule. significant effect on the human 25°43′59″ N., 80°12′04″ W.; thence environment. This rule involves northeast to Point 13 in position SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a regulated navigation area 25°44′46″ N., 80°11′23″ W.; thence establishing a temporary safety zone to ensure the safe transit of vessels and northeast to Point 14 in position from mile 0.5 Ohio River up-bound to to protect persons, vessels, and the 25°46′10″ N., 80°10′59″ W.; thence mile 0.5 on the Allegheny River and marine environment within the northwest to Point 15 in position mile 0.5 on the Monongahela River, regulated navigation area for the 4th of 25°46′20″ N., 80°11′04″ W.; thence extending the entire width of the rivers. July which will be enforced for seven northeast to Point 16 in position This action is necessary to ensure public hours. This rule is categorically 25°46′44″ N., 80°10′59″ W.; thence safety due to the inherent hazards excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph northwest to Point 17 in position associated with launching fireworks (34)(g), of the Instruction. An 25°47′15″ N., 80°11′06″ W.; thence from a barge and the explosive nature of environmental analysis checklist and a northeast to Point 18 in position the fireworks display. During the categorical exclusion determination are 25°47′24″ N., 80°11′00″ W.; thence north enforcement period, entry into, available in the docket where indicated to Point 19 in position 25°47′36″ N., transiting, or anchoring in the safety under ADDRESSES. We seek any 80°11′00″ W.; thence back to origin. All zone is prohibited to all vessels not comments or information that may lead coordinates are North American Datum registered with the sponsor as to the discovery of a significant 1983. participants or official patrol vessels, environmental impact from this rule. (b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Pittsburgh or List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 representative’’ means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast a designated representative. Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Guard coxswains, petty officers, and DATES: This rule is effective and will be (water), Reporting and recordkeeping other officers operating Coast Guard enforced with actual notice on July 3, requirements, Security measures, vessels, and Federal, state, and local 2015 from 12:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., on Waterways. officers designated by or assisting the July 4, 2015 from 12:00 p.m. to 10:00 For the reasons discussed in the Captain of the Port Miami in the p.m. and on July 5, 2015 from 12:00 preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 enforcement of the regulated area. p.m. to 10:00 p.m. CFR part 165 as follows: (c) Regulations. (1) All vessels within ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in the regulated area are required to transit this preamble are part of docket USCG– PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION at no more than 15 knots, are subject to 2015–0436. To view documents AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS control by the Coast Guard, and must mentioned in this preamble as being follow the instructions of designated available in the docket, go to http:// ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 representatives. www.regulations.gov, type the docket continues to read as follows: (2) At least 48 hours prior to the number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; enforcement period, the Coast Guard ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; will provide notice of the regulated area Folder on the line associated with this Department of Homeland Security Delegation via Local Notice to Mariners and rulemaking. You may also visit the No. 0170.1. Broadcast Notice to Mariners. The Coast Docket Management Facility in Room ■ 2. Revise § 165.779 to read as follows: Guard will also provide notice of the W12–140 on the ground floor of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37543
Department of Transportation West Allegheny River, Mile 0.0–0.5, and with and resulting from the 2015 Three Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Monongahela River, Mile 0.0–0.5. After Rivers Regatta/Three River Regatta and Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. full review of the event information and Fireworks events. Based on the inherent and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, location, the Coast Guard determined hazards associated with a fireworks except Federal holidays. that the published annual event differs show and an on-water regatta event, the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If from the intended dates and location for COTP Pittsburgh has determined that a you have questions on this rule, call or the event being held this year. A safety fireworks display and a marine regatta email Ariana Mohnke, Marine Safety zone is necessary. Therefore, to mitigate pose a significant risk to watercraft, Unit Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard, at the potential danger to spectators and participant safety, spectator safety, telephone (412) 221–0807, email participants, the Coast Guard is public safety and property. The [email protected]. If you have establishing a temporary safety zone. combination of increased numbers of questions on viewing or submitting Any delay or cancellation of the event recreational vessels and potential debris material to the docket, call Cheryl F. in order to allow for a notice and falling on passing or anchored spectator Collins, Program Manager, Docket comment period is contrary to the vessels has the potential to result in Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. public interest in not having the event serious injuries or fatalities. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: occur on the dates and in the location regulation temporarily establishes a proposed by the sponsor and advertised zone to restrict vessel movement Table of Acronyms to the public and could potentially through and around the location of the DHS Department of Homeland Security interfere with contractual obligations. regatta and the fireworks display in FR Federal Register Completing the full NPRM process order to reduce the risks associated with NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would be impracticable. Delaying this these events. The legal basis and authorities for this A. Regulatory History and Information rule by completing the full NPRM process would unnecessarily delay the rule are found in 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 On June 11, 2015, we published a safety zone and be contrary to public U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, final rule entitled ‘‘Annual fireworks interest because the safety zone is 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of displays and other events in the Eighth needed to protect transiting vessels, Homeland Security Delegation No. Coast Guard District requiring safety spectators, and the personnel involved 0170.1, which collectively authorize the zones’’ in the Federal Register (79 FR in the display from the hazards Coast Guard to establish and define 222398). In that rulemaking, the Coast associated with fireworks displays regulatory safety zones. Guard established a permanent safety taking place over the waterway. zone for the annual ‘‘Three Rivers Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast C. Discussion of the Final Rule Regatta/Three River Regatta and Guard finds that good cause exists for The Coast Guard is establishing a Fireworks’’, listed in Table no. 1 to 33 making this rule effective less than 30 safety zone for the 2015 Three Rivers CFR 165.801 at Line no. 43. On June 15, days after publication in the Federal Regatta/Three River Regatta and 2015, we published a notice of proposed Register. Delaying this rule would be Fireworks from mile 0.5 Ohio River up- rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ‘‘Three unnecessary as this event is a recurring bound to mile 0.5 on the Allegheny Rivers Regatta/Three River Regatta and event and mariners familiar with the River and mile 0.5 on the Monongahela Fireworks’’ in the Federal Register. We waterway are aware that the regatta and River, extending the entire width of the received no comments on the proposed celebrations related to Independence rivers. This temporary safety zone will rule. No public meeting was requested, Day activities occur yearly on this be enforced with actual notice from and none was held. waterway. This year the event will 12:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on July 3–5, The Coast Guard is issuing this occur over the course of three days, as 2015, daily. Additionally, prior to the temporary final rule without prior opposed to the published time period of fireworks displays, there will be boat notice and opportunity to comment two days, as per the Federal Register. In races and therefore, for the safety of pursuant to authority under section 4(a) addition, the event will take place very those involved in the boat races as well of the Administrative Procedure Act near to the published location, as the general public attempting to (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision approximately 0.1 miles distant from transit through this location, a safety authorizes an agency to issue a rule the published location in the Federal zone will be enforced. The public will without prior notice and opportunity to Register. Delaying this rule would be be informed of the enforcement periods comment when the agency for good contrary to the public interest of by local notice to mariners. Should cause finds that those procedures are ensuring the safety of spectators and there be any subsequent changes or ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary vessels during the event and immediate shortening of enforcement periods, the to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. action is necessary to prevent possible public will be notified via broadcast 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that loss of life or property. Also a delay or notice to mariners. good cause exists for not using the cancellation of the event in order to This rule establishing a temporary NPRM process with respect to this rule allow for publication in the Federal safety zone is necessary to ensure the because it is unnecessary and contrary Register is contrary to the public’s safety of spectators and vessels from to public interest. interest in having this event occur as hazards associated with the event. On May 20, 2015, the sponsor notified scheduled. Broadcast Notices to Deviation from this temporary safety the Coast Guard that it intended to hold Mariners (BNM) and information zone is prohibited unless specifically the event on July 3–5, 2015 at a location sharing with the waterway users will authorized by the COTP Pittsburgh, or a from mile 0.5 Ohio River up-bound to update mariners of the restrictions, designated representative. Deviation mile 0.5 on the Allegheny River and requirements, and enforcement times requests will be considered and mile 0.5 on the Monongahela River, during this temporary situation. reviewed on a case-by-case basis. extending the entire width of the rivers. According to Table no. 1 to 33 CFR B. Basis and Purpose D. Regulatory Analyses 165.801, the event is to be held during This regulation is necessary to ensure We developed this rule after two days the week of July 4th and is to the safety of vessels, spectators and considering numerous statutes and be located at: Ohio River, Mile 0.0–0.5, participants from hazards associated executive orders related to rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37544 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Below we summarize our analyses notifications to the marine community message can be received without based on a number of these statutes or will be made to those that could be jeopardizing the safety or security of executive orders. operating in the area during the event. people, places or vessels. Additionally, waterway users can use 1. Regulatory Planning and Review 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act the portions of the channel not affected This rule is not a significant by the safety zone. Deviation from the The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act regulatory action under section 3(f) of rule may be requested and will be of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Executive Order 12866, Regulatory considered on a case-by-case basis by Federal agencies to assess the effects of Planning and Review, as supplemented the COTP or a designated their discretionary regulatory actions. In by Executive Order 13563, Improving representative. particular, the Act addresses actions Regulation and Regulatory Review, and that may result in the expenditure by a does not require an assessment of 3. Assistance for Small Entities State, local, or tribal government, in the potential costs and benefits under Under section 213(a) of the Small aggregate, or by the private sector of section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 Business Regulatory Enforcement $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or or under section 1 of Executive Order Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), more in any one year. Though this rule 13563. The Office of Management and we want to assist small entities in will not result in such expenditure, we Budget has not reviewed it under those understanding this rule. If the rule do discuss the effects of this rule Orders. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the would affect your small business, elsewhere in this preamble. regulatory policies and procedures of organization, or governmental the Department of Homeland Security jurisdiction and you have questions 8. Taking of Private Property (DHS). This rule is limited in scope and concerning its provisions or options for This rule will not cause a taking of will be in effect for a limited time compliance, please contact the person private property or otherwise have period. The temporary safety zone will listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION taking implications under Executive be in effect for ten hours on each of CONTACT, above. Order 12630, Governmental Actions and three consecutive days. The Coast Guard Small businesses may send comments Interference with Constitutionally expects minimum adverse impact to on the actions of Federal employees Protected Property Rights. mariners from the zone’s activation as who enforce, or otherwise determine 9. Civil Justice Reform the event has been advertised to the compliance with, Federal regulations to public. Also, mariners may request the Small Business and Agriculture This rule meets applicable standards authorization from the COTP Pittsburgh Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive or the designated representative to and the Regional Small Business Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to transit the zone. Notifications to the Regulatory Fairness Boards. The minimize litigation, eliminate marine community will be made Ombudsman evaluates these actions ambiguity, and reduce burden. through local notice to mariners and annually and rates each agency’s 10. Protection of Children broadcast notice to mariners. The responsiveness to small business. If you impacts on routine navigation are wish to comment on actions by We have analyzed this rule under expected to be minimal. employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– Executive Order 13045, Protection of 2. Impact on Small Entities 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Children from Environmental Health Coast Guard will not retaliate against Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not The Regulatory Flexibility Act of small entities that question or complain an economically significant rule and 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, about this rule or any policy or action does not create an environmental risk to requires federal agencies to consider the of the Coast Guard. health or risk to safety that may potential impact of regulations on small disproportionately affect children. entities during rulemaking. The term 4. Collection of Information 11. Indian Tribal Governments ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small This rule will not call for a new businesses, not-for-profit organizations collection of information under the This rule does not have tribal that are independently owned and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 implications under Executive Order operated and are not dominant in their U.S.C. 3501–3520). 13175, Consultation and Coordination fields, and governmental jurisdictions with Indian Tribal Governments, with populations of less than 50,000. 5. Federalism because it does not have a substantial The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. A rule has implications for federalism direct effect on one or more Indian 605(b) that this rule will not have a under Executive Order 13132, tribes, on the relationship between the significant economic impact on a Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Federal Government and Indian tribes, substantial number of small entities. effect on the States, on the relationship or on the distribution of power and This rule will affect the following between the national government and responsibilities between the Federal entities, some of which may be small the States, or on the distribution of Government and Indian tribes. entities: The owners or operators of power and responsibilities among the 12. Energy Effects vessels intending to transit from mile various levels of government. We have 0.5 Ohio River up-bound to mile 0.5 on analyzed this rule under that Order and This action is not a ‘‘significant the Allegheny River and mile 0.5 on the determined that this rule does not have energy action’’ under Executive Order Monongahela River, extending the implications for federalism. 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations entire width of the rivers from 12:00 That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on July 3, 2015 and 6. Protest Activities Distribution, or Use. July 4, 2015 and July 5, 2015. This The Coast Guard respects the First safety zone will not have a significant Amendment rights of protesters. 13. Technical Standards economic impact on a substantial Protesters are asked to contact the This rule does not use technical number of small entities because this person listed in the FOR FURTHER standards. Therefore, we did not rule is limited in scope, will only be in INFORMATION CONTACT, section to consider the use of voluntary consensus effect for a limited time period, and coordinate protest activities so that your standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37545
14. Environment (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with DATES: This rule is effective on July 4, We have analyzed this rule under the general regulations in § 165.23 of 2015 and will be enforced from 9:30 Department of Homeland Security this part, entry into this zone is p.m. until 9:50 p.m. Management Directive 023–01 and prohibited unless authorized by the ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, COTP Pittsburgh or a designated this preamble are part of docket USCG– which guide the Coast Guard in representative. 2015–0529. To view documents complying with the National (2) Persons or vessels requiring entry mentioned in this preamble as being Environmental Policy Act of 1969 into or passage through the zone must available in the docket, go to http:// (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and request permission from the COTP www.regulations.gov, type the docket have determined that this action is one Pittsburgh or a designated number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click of a category of actions that do not representative. The COTP Pittsburgh ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket individually or cumulatively have a representative may be contacted at 412– Folder on the line associated with thie significant effect on the human 221–0807. rulemaking. You may also visit the environment. This rule establishes a (3) All persons and vessels shall Docket Management Facility in Room temporary safety zone from mile 0.5 comply with the instructions of the W12–140 on the ground floor of the U.S. Ohio River up-bound to mile 0.5 on the COTP Pittsburgh or their designated Department of Transportation, West Allegheny River and mile 0.5 on the representative. Designated COTP Building, Room W12–140, 1200 New Monongahela River, extending the representatives include United States Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC entire width of the rivers. This rule is Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., categorically excluded from further and petty officers. Monday through Friday, except Federal review under paragraph 34(g) of figure (d) Information broadcasts. The COTP holidays. 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction an Pittsburgh or a designated FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If environmental analysis checklist representative will inform the public you have questions on this temporary supporting this determination and a through broadcast notices to mariners of final rule, call or email CWO Categorical Exclusion Determination are the enforcement period for the safety Christopher L. Ruleman, Sector available in the docket where indicated zone as well as any changes in the Charleston Office of Waterways under ADDRESSES. We seek any planned schedule. Management, U.S. Coast Guard; comments or information that may lead Dated: June 15, 2015. telephone (843) 740–3184, email to the discovery of a significant L.N. Weaver, [email protected]. If you environmental impact from this rule. Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of have questions on viewing the docket, List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 the Port. call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202) Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation [FR Doc. 2015–16251 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 366–9826. (water), Reporting and recordkeeping BILLING CODE 9110–04–P requirements, Security measures, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Waterways. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Table of Acronyms For the reasons discussed in the SECURITY NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: Coast Guard A. Regulatory History and Information The Coast Guard is issuing this PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 33 CFR Part 165 temporary final rule without prior AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS notice and opportunity to comment [Docket No. USCG–2015–0529] ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 pursuant to authority under section 4(a) continues to read as follows: of the Administrative Procedure Act RIN 1625–AA00 (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; authorizes an agency to issue a rule 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Safety Zones; Fourth of July Fireworks Department of Homeland Security Delegation Displays, Murrells Inlet and North without prior notice and opportunity to No. 0170.1. Myrtle Beach, SC comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS ACTION: Temporary final rule. to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast ■ 2. A new temporary § 165.T08–0436 is SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is Guard finds that good cause exists for added to read as follows: establishing two temporary safety zones not publishing a notice of proposed § 165.T08–0436 Safety Zone; Three Rivers during Fourth of July Fireworks rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this Regatta/Three River Regatta and Fireworks, Displays on certain navigable waterways rule because the Coast Guard did not Ohio River mile 0.5 to mile 0.5 on the in Murrells Inlet and North Myrtle receive necessary information regarding Allegheny River and mile 0.5 on the Beach, South Carolina. These safety the fireworks displays until June 5, Monongahela River; Pittsburgh, PA. zones are necessary to protect the public 2015. As a result, the notice and (a) Location. The following area is a from hazards associated with launching opportunity procedures were safety zone: Ohio River mile 0.5 to mile fireworks over navigable waters of the impracticable because the Coast Guard 0.5 on the Allegheny River and mile 0.5 United States. Persons and vessels are did not have sufficient time to publish on the Monongahela River. prohibited from entering, transiting an NPRM and to receive public (b) Effective date. This rule is through, anchoring in, or remaining comments prior to the fireworks effective, and will be enforced through within any of the safety zones unless displays. Any delay in the effective date actual notice, from July 3, 2015 through authorized by the Captain of the Port of this rule would be impracticable and July 5, 2015 from 12:00 p.m. through Charleston or a designated contrary to the public interest because 10:00 p.m., daily. representative. immediate action is needed to minimize
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37546 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
potential danger to the public during the Guard will provide notice of the safety not have a significant economic impact fireworks displays. zones by Broadcast Notice to Mariners, on a substantial number of small For the same reason discussed above, Marine Safety Information Bulletins, entities. under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) the Coast and on-scene designated 3. Assistance for Small Entities Guard finds that good cause exists for representatives. making this rule effective less than 30 Under section 213(a) of the Small days after publication in the Federal D. Regulatory Analyses Business Regulatory Enforcement Register. We developed this rule after Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), considering numerous statutes and we want to assist small entities in B. Basis and Purpose executive orders related to rulemaking. understanding this rule. If the rule The legal basis for the rule is the Below we summarize our analyses would affect your small business, Coast Guard’s authority to establish based on these statutes and executive organization, or governmental regulated navigation areas and other orders. jurisdiction and you have questions limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 1. Regulatory Planning and Review concerning its provisions or options for U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, compliance, please contact the person 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of This rule is not a significant listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Homeland Security Delegation No. regulatory action under section 3(f) of CONTACT section above. 0170.1. The purpose of the rule is to Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Small businesses may send comments protect the public from the hazards Planning and Review, as supplemented on the actions of Federal employees associated with launching fireworks by Executive Order 13563, Improving who enforce, or otherwise determine over navigable waters of the United Regulation and Regulatory Review, and compliance with, Federal regulations to States. does not require an assessment of the Small Business and Agriculture potential costs and benefits under C. Discussion of Rule Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 and the Regional Small Business Two fireworks displays are planned or under section 1 of Executive Order Regulatory Fairness Boards. The for Fourth of July celebrations in the 13563. The Office of Management and Ombudsman evaluates these actions vicinity of Myrtle Beach in the Captain Budget has not reviewed it under those annually and rates each agency’s of the Port Charleston Zone. The orders. The economic impact of this rule responsiveness to small business. If you fireworks will be launched from piers. is not significant for the following wish to comment on actions by The fireworks will be aimed to explode reasons: (1) The safety zone will only be employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– over navigable waters of the United enforced for a total of twenty minutes; 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The States. The Coast Guard is establishing (2) although persons and vessels may Coast Guard will not retaliate against two temporary safety zones for these not enter, transit through, anchor in, or small entities that question or complain Fourth of July fireworks displays. remain within the safety zone without about this rule or any policy or action 1. Murrells Inlet, South Carolina. All authorization from the Captain of the of the Coast Guard. waters within a 1,000 yard radius Port Charleston or a designated around Veterans Pier, from which the representative, they may operate in the 4. Collection of Information fireworks will be launched, located on surrounding area during the This rule will not call for a new the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. This enforcement period; (3) persons and collection of information under the safety zone will be enforced from 9:30 vessels may still enter, transit through, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 p.m. until 9:50 p.m. on July 4, 2015. anchor in, or remain within the safety U.S.C. 3501–3520). 2. North Myrtle Beach, South zone if authorized by the Captain of the Carolina. All waters within a 500 yard Port Charleston or a designated 5. Federalism radius around Cherry Grove Pier, from representative; and (4) the Coast Guard A rule has implications for federalism which the fireworks will be launched, will provide advance notification of the under Executive Order 13132, located on the Atlantic Ocean. This safety zone to the local maritime Federalism, if it has a substantial direct safety zone will be enforced from 9:30 community by Local Notice to Mariners effect on States, on the relationship p.m. until 9:50 p.m. on July 4, 2015. and Broadcast Notice to Mariners. between the national government and Persons and vessels are prohibited the States, or on the distribution of 2. Impact on Small Entities from entering, transiting through, power and responsibilities among the anchoring in, or remaining within either The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 various levels of government. We have safety zone unless authorized by the (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, analyzed this rule under that Order and Captain of the Port Charleston or a requires federal agencies to consider the determined that this rule does not have designated representative. Persons and potential impact of regulations on small implications for federalism. vessels desiring to enter, transit through, entities during rulemaking. The term anchor in, or remain within either safety ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small 6. Protest Activities zone may contact the Captain of the Port businesses, not-for-profit organizations The Coast Guard respects the First Charleston via telephone at (843) 740– that are independently owned and Amendment rights of protesters. 7050, or a designated representative via operated and are not dominant in their Protesters are asked to contact the VHF radio on channel 16, to request fields, and governmental jurisdictions person listed in the FOR FURTHER authorization. If authorization to enter, with populations of less than 50,000. INFORMATION CONTACT section to transit through, anchor in, or remain The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. coordinate protest activities so that your within either safety zone is granted by 605(b) that this rule will not have a message can be received without the Captain of the Port Charleston or a significant economic impact on a jeopardizing the safety or security of designated representative, all persons substantial number of small entities. people, places or vessels. and vessels receiving such authorization Based on its short duration, limited must comply with the instructions of geographic area, and for the reasons 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act the Captain of the Port Charleston or a discussed in the Regulatory Planning The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act designated representative. The Coast and Review section above, this rule will of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37547
Federal agencies to assess the effects of complying with the National Port Charleston or a designated their discretionary regulatory actions. In Environmental Policy Act of 1969 representative. particular, the Act addresses actions (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f). Based (2) Persons and vessels desiring to that may result in the expenditure by a on our analysis, we concluded this enter, transit through, anchor in, or State, local, or tribal government, in the action is one of a category of actions that remain within the regulated area may aggregate, or by the private sector of do not individually or cumulatively contact the Captain of the Port $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or have a significant effect on the human Charleston by telephone at 843–740– more in any one year. Though this rule environment. This rule involves safety 7050, or a designated representative via will not result in such an expenditure, zones during Fourth of July Fireworks VHF radio on channel 16, to request we do discuss the effects of this rule displays near Murrells Inlet and North authorization. If authorization to enter, elsewhere in this preamble. Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. This rule transit through, anchor in, or remain is categorically excluded from further within the regulated area is granted by 8. Taking of Private Property review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure the Captain of the Port Charleston or a This rule will not cause a taking of 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. We designated representative, all persons private property or otherwise have seek any comments or information that and vessels receiving such authorization taking implications under Executive may lead to the discovery of a must comply with the instructions of Order 12630, Governmental Actions and significant environmental impact from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a Interference with Constitutionally this rule. designated representative. Protected Property Rights. (3) The Coast Guard will provide List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 notice of the regulated area by Local 9. Civil Justice Reform Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to This rule meets applicable standards (water), Reporting and recordkeeping Mariners, and on-scene designated in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive requirements, Security measures, representatives. Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to Waterways. (d) Effective period. This rule will be minimize litigation, eliminate For the reasons discussed in the effective on July 4, 2015 and enforced ambiguity, and reduce burden. preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 from 9:30 p.m. until 9:50 p.m. 10. Protection of Children CFR part 165 as follows: Dated: June 17, 2015. G.L. Tomasulo, We have analyzed this rule under PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION Executive Order 13045, Protection of AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston. Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 [FR Doc. 2015–15936 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] an economically significant rule and continues to read as follows: BILLING CODE 9110–04–P does not create an environmental risk to Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; health or risk to safety that may 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; disproportionately affect children. Department of Homeland Security Delegation ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION No. 0170.1. AGENCY 11. Indian Tribal Governments ■ 2. Add a temporary § 165.T07–0529 to This rule does not have tribal 40 CFR Part 180 read as follows: implications under Executive Order [EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0865; FRL–9929–51] 13175, Consultation and Coordination § 165.T07–0529 Safety Zone; Fourth of with Indian Tribal Governments, July Fireworks Displays, in vicinity of Myrtle Cuprous Oxide; Exemption From the because it does not have a substantial Beach, Myrtle Beach, SC. Requirement of a Tolerance direct effect on one or more Indian (a) Regulated Area. The following AGENCY: Environmental Protection tribes, on the relationship between the regulated areas are safety zones. Agency (EPA). Federal Government and Indian tribes, (1) Murrells Inlet, South Carolina. All ACTION: or on the distribution of power and waters within a 500 yard radius around Final rule. responsibilities between the Federal Veterans Pier, from which the fireworks SUMMARY: This regulation amends the Government and Indian tribes. will be launched, located on the tolerance exemption for copper in/on Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. 12. Energy Effects meat, milk, poultry, eggs, fish, shellfish, (2) North Myrtle Beach, South and irrigated crops when it results from This action is not a ‘‘significant Carolina. All waters within a 500 yard the use of cuprous oxide embedded in energy action’’ under Executive Order radius around Cherry Grove Pier, from polymer emitter heads used in irrigation 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations which the fireworks will be launched, systems for root incursion prevention. That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, located on the Atlantic Ocean. This regulation eliminates the need to (b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated Distribution, or Use. establish a maximum permissible level representative’’ means Coast Guard for residues of copper resulting from 13. Technical Standards Patrol Commanders, including Coast this use of cuprous oxide. This rule does not use technical Guard coxswains, petty officers, and DATES: standards. Therefore, we did not other officers operating Coast Guard This regulation is effective July consider the use of voluntary consensus vessels, and Federal, state, and local 1, 2015. Objections and requests for standards. officers designated by or assisting the hearings must be received on or before Captain of the Port Charleston in the August 31, 2015, and must be filed in 14. Environment enforcement of the regulated area. accordance with the instructions We have analyzed this rule under (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Department of Homeland Security vessels are prohibited from entering, Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY Management Directive 023–01 and transiting through, anchoring in, or INFORMATION). Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, remaining within the regulated area ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, which guide the Coast Guard in unless authorized by the Captain of the identified by docket identification (ID)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37548 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0865, is in accordance with the instructions incursion prevention. That document available at http://www.regulations.gov provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure referenced a summary of the petition or at the Office of Pesticide Programs proper receipt by EPA, you must prepared by Cupron, Inc., which is Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– available in the docket, http:// in the Environmental Protection Agency OPP–2014–0865 in the subject line on www.regulations.gov. There were no Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William the first page of your submission. All comments received in response to the Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 objections and requests for a hearing notice of filing. Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC must be in writing, and must be Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA 20460–0001. The Public Reading Room received by the Hearing Clerk on or allows EPA to establish an exemption is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., before August 31, 2015. Addresses for from the requirement for a tolerance (the Monday through Friday, excluding legal mail and hand delivery of objections legal limit for a pesticide chemical holidays. The telephone number for the and hearing requests are provided in 40 residue in or on a food) only if EPA Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, CFR 178.25(b). determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’ and the telephone number for the OPP In addition to filing an objection or Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review hearing request with the Hearing Clerk defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a the visitor instructions and additional as described in 40 CFR part 178, please reasonable certainty that no harm will information about the docket available submit a copy of the filing (excluding result from aggregate exposure to the at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. any Confidential Business Information pesticide chemical residue, including FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. all anticipated dietary exposures and all Jennifer McLain, Antimicrobials Information not marked confidential other exposures for which there is Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be reliable information.’’ This includes Programs, Environmental Protection disclosed publicly by EPA without prior exposure through drinking water and in Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Pursuant to Washington, DC 20460–0001; main objection or hearing request, identified FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in telephone number: (703) 308–0293; by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– establishing or maintaining in effect an email address: [email protected]. 2014–0865, by one of the following methods: exemption from the requirement of a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// tolerance, EPA must take into account I. General Information www.regulations.gov. Follow the online the factors set forth in FFDCA section instructions for submitting comments. 408(b)(2)(C), which requires EPA to give A. Does this action apply to me? Do not submit electronically any special consideration to exposure of You may be potentially affected by information you consider to be CBI or infants and children to the pesticide this action if you are an agricultural other information whose disclosure is chemical residue in establishing a producer, food manufacturer, or restricted by statute. tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a pesticide manufacturer. The following • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental reasonable certainty that no harm will list of North American Industrial Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ result to infants and children from Classification System (NAICS) codes is DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. aggregate exposure to the pesticide not intended to be exhaustive, but rather NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. chemical residue. . . .’’ provides a guide to help readers • Hand Delivery: To make special EPA performs a number of analyses to determine whether this document arrangements for hand delivery or determine the risks from aggregate applies to them. Potentially affected delivery of boxed information, please exposure to pesticide residues. First, entities may include: follow the instructions at http:// EPA determines the toxicity of • Crop production (NAICS code 111). www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. pesticides. Second, EPA examines • Animal production (NAICS code Additional instructions on exposure to the pesticide through food, 112). commenting or visiting the docket, drinking water, and through other • Food manufacturing (NAICS code along with more information about exposures that occur as a result of 311). dockets generally, is available at pesticide use in residential settings. • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS http://www.epa.gov/dockets. III. Toxicological Profile code 32532). II. Background and Statutory Findings Consistent with FFDCA section B. How can I get electronic access to In the Federal Register of April 22, 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the other related information? 2015 (80 FR 22466) (FRL–9925–79), available scientific data and other You may access a frequently updated EPA issued a document pursuant to relevant information in support of this electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. action and considered its validity, through the Government Printing 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a completeness and reliability and the Office’s e-CFR site at http:// pesticide tolerance petition (PP 4F8324) relationship of this information to www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- by Cupron, Inc., 800 East Leigh St., human risk. EPA has also considered idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/ Richmond, VA 23219. The petition available information concerning the 40tab_02.tpl. requested that 40 CFR 180.1021 be variability of the sensitivities of major amended by establishing an exemption identifiable subgroups of consumers, C. How can I file an objection or hearing from the requirement of a tolerance for including infants and children. The request? residues of copper in/on meat, milk, nature of the toxic effects caused by Under Federal Food, Drug and poultry, eggs, fish, shellfish, and cuprous oxide are discussed in this unit. Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(g), irrigated crops by including the use of 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an cuprous oxide (also referred to as A. Toxicological Profile objection to any aspect of this regulation copper oxide) embedded in polymer EPA has evaluated the available and may also request a hearing on those emitter heads used in irrigation systems toxicity data and considered their objections. You must file your objection for agricultural crops or residential food validity, completeness, and reliability as or request a hearing on this regulation commodities for algicidal or root well as the relationship of the results of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37549
the studies to human risk. EPA has also the liver. Available reproductive and buildings (residential and other indoor considered available information developmental studies by the oral route uses). concerning the variability of the of exposure generally indicate that the A. Dietary Exposure sensitivities of major identifiable main concern in animals for subgroups of consumers, including reproductive and teratogenic effects of Copper is ubiquitous in nature and is infants and children. Specific copper has usually been associated with necessary nutritional element for both information on the studies received and the deficiency rather than the excess of animals (including humans) and plants. the nature of the adverse effects caused copper. It is one of several elements found by cuprous oxide, as well as the no- Oral ingestion of excessive amounts of essential to life. The human body must observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) the copper ion from pesticidal uses have copper to stay healthy. In fact, for and the lowest-observed adverse effect- including the proposed use is unlikely. a variety of biochemical processes in the level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies, Copper compounds are irritating to the body to operate normally, copper must are discussed in the final rule published gastric mucosa. Ingestion of large be part of our daily diet. Copper is in the Federal Register of August 11, amounts of copper results in prompt needed for certain critical enzymes to function in the body. Actually, too little 2006 (71 FR 46106) (FRL–8085–3). emesis. This protective reflex reduces copper in the body can actually lead to Copper is ubiquitous in nature and is a the amount of copper ion available for disease. necessary nutritional element for both absorption into the human body. animals (including humans) and plants. 1. Food. The main source of copper Additionally, at high levels humans are for infants, children, and adults, Copper is found naturally in the food also sensitive to the taste of copper. we eat including fruits, vegetables, regardless of age, is the diet. Copper is Because of this organoleptic property, typically present in mineral rich foods meats, and seafood. It is found in the oral ingestion would also serve to limit water we drink, the air we breathe and like vegetables (potato, legumes (beans high doses. Only a small percentage of and peas), nuts (peanuts and pecans), in our bodies themselves. Some of the ingested copper is absorbed, and most of environmental copper is due to direct grains (wheat and rye), fruits (peaches the absorbed copper is excreted. The and raisins), and chocolate in levels that modification of the environment by human body appears to have efficient humans such as mining and smelting of range from 0.3 to 3.9 parts per million mechanisms in place to regulate total (ppm). A single day’s diet may contain the natural ore. It is one of the elements body copper. The copper ion occurs found essential to life. The copper ion 10 milligram (mg) or more of copper. It naturally in food and the metabolism of is not likely that the approval of this is present in the adult human body with copper is well understood. nearly two-thirds of the body copper petition would significantly increase content located in the skeleton and B. Toxicological Points of Departure/ exposure over that of existing levels of muscle. The liver is the primary organ Levels of Concern copper. In any event, given the lack of for the maintenance of plasma copper toxicity of copper, EPA does not expect No endpoints of toxicological concern concentrations. any increased exposure resulting from The 2006 Reregistration Eligibility were identified for risk assessment approval of this petition to be unsafe. Decision for Copper compounds purposes for copper oxide. Cuprous 2. Drinking water exposure. Copper is reviewed and summarized all toxicity oxide readily hydrolyzes into the copper a natural element found in the earth’s studies submitted for copper and has cation and oxygen anion. Copper is a crust. As a result, most of the world’s determined that the toxicological required essential nutritional element surface water and ground water that is database is sufficient to assess the for both plants and animals. Indeed, used for drinking purposes contains hazard from pesticides containing current available data and literature copper. The actual amount varies from copper. Copper generally has moderate studies indicate that there is a greater region to region, depending on how to low acute toxicity based on acute risk from the deficiency of copper intake much is present in the earth, but in oral, dermal, and inhalation studies in than from excess intake. Copper also almost all cases the amount of copper in animals. All effects resulting from acute occurs naturally in a number of food water is extremely low. Naturally exposure to copper containing items including fruits, meats, seafood, occurring copper in drinking water is pesticides are due to acute body and vegetables. In humans, as part of the safe for human consumption, even in responses to minimize excessive utilization of copper as an essential rare instances where it is at levels high absorption or exposure to copper. nutrient, there is an effective enough to impart a metallic taste to the Current available data in animals do not homeostatic mechanism that is involved water. Residues of copper in drinking show any evidence of upper limit in the dietary intake of copper and that water are regulated under the Safe toxicity level that warrant determining protects humans from excess body Drinking Water Act. A Maximum acute toxicity end points. copper. Given that copper is ubiquitous, Contaminant Level Goal of 1.3 ppm has Based on available data summarized is an essential nutrient, and is routinely been set by the Agency for copper. in the ‘‘2006 Reregistration Eligibility consumed as part of the daily diet, According to the National Research Decision for Coppers’’, there is no exposure to copper as a result of the use Council’s Committee on Copper in evidence of any dietary, oral, and of copper oxide as a pesticide chemical Drinking Water, this level is ‘‘set at a dermal or inhalation adverse effects would not be of toxicological concern. concentration at which no known or expected adverse health effects occur warranting quantitative assessment of IV. Aggregate Exposures sub-chronic or chronic risk. Available and for which there is an adequate short-term feeding studies with rats and In examining aggregate exposure, margin of safety.’’ The Agency believes mice indicate decreased food and water FFDCA section 408 directs EPA to that this level of protection would not intake with increasing oral consider available information cause any potential health problems, i.e. concentrations of copper. Irritation of concerning exposures from the pesticide stomach and intestinal distress, liver, the stomach was seen at higher copper residue in food and all other non- and kidney damage and anemia. It is not concentrations. Longer-term feeding occupational exposures, including likely that the approval of this petition studies indicate decreased feed intake drinking water from ground water or would significantly increase exposure with reductions in body weight gains, surface water and exposure through over that of the existing levels of copper. and increased copper concentration of pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or In any event, given the lack of toxicity
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37550 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
of copper, EPA does not expect any the Food and Drug Administration copper on any irrigated crop that result increased exposure resulting from (FDA). EPA has also exempted various from uses of cuprous oxide in polymer approval of this petition to be unsafe. copper compounds from the emitter heads for irrigation are exempt requirement of a tolerance when used as from the requirement of a tolerance; it B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure herbicide and algicide (40 CFR is not necessary to further clarify where Copper compounds have many uses 180.1021), including cuprous oxide the irrigation heads are intended to be on crops (food as well as non-food) and when contained in antifouling coatings used. Also, the term algaecidal was ornamentals as a fungicide. on submerged concrete or other deleted from the proposed tolerance 1. Dermal exposure. Given the (irrigation) structures (40 CFR exemption expression because the prevalence of copper in the 180.1021(a)(4)). Copper compounds product is not intended to act as an environment, no significant dermal including cuprous oxide are also algaecide. exposure increase above current levels exempt from the requirements of a VIII. Conclusion would be expected from this non- tolerance when applied to growing occupational use of cuprous oxide. In crops when used as a plant fungicide in Based on the information contained in any event, given the lack of toxicity of accordance with good agricultural the document, EPA concludes that there copper, EPA does not expect any practices (40 CFR 180.1021(b)). is no reasonable certainty of harm from increased exposure resulting from 1. U.S. population. Copper is a aggregate exposure to residues of approval of this petition to be unsafe. component of the human diet and an cuprous oxide. Accordingly, EPA finds 2. Inhalation exposure. Air essential element. In addition, no acute that the exemption for residues of concentrations of copper are relatively or chronic dietary endpoints were copper in or on meat, milk, poultry, egg, low. A study based on several thousand selected because no endpoints of fish, shellfish, and irrigated crops from samples assembled by EPA’s toxicological concern have been use of cuprous oxide embedded in Environmental Monitoring Systems identified for risk assessment purposes. polymer emitter heads used in irrigation Laboratory showed copper levels Use of cuprous oxide is not expected to systems for root incursion prevention ranging from 0.003 to 7.32 micrograms increase the amount of copper in the will be safe. Therefore, an exemption is per cubic meter. Other studies indicated diet as a result of its use on growing established for residues of copper oxide that air levels of copper are much lower. crops and post-harvest use. embedded in polymer emitter heads The Agency does not expect the air 2. Infants and children. Copper is also used in irrigation systems for root concentrations of copper to be component of the diet of infants and incursion prevention. significantly affected by this use of children as is also an essential element IX. Statutory and Executive Order cuprous oxide. In any event, given the of their diet. Since no endpoints have Reviews lack of toxicity of copper, EPA does not been identified, EPA has not conducted expect any increased exposure resulting This action establishes an exemption a quantitative risk assessment for from the requirement of a tolerance from approval of this petition to be cuprous oxide. The Agency has also unsafe. under FFDCA section 408(d) in determined that the special Food response to a petition submitted to the V. Cumulative Effects From Substances Quality Protection Act safety factor Agency. The Office of Management and With a Common Mechanism of Toxicity (FQPA SF) to protect infants and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types children was not needed since there are Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA of actions from review under Executive no toxicity endpoints or uncertainty requires that, when considering whether Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory surrounding exposure. to establish, modify, or revoke a Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, Based on the information in this tolerance, the Agency consider October 4, 1993). Because this action preamble, EPA concludes that there is a ‘‘available information’’ concerning the has been exempted from review under reasonable certainty of no harm from cumulative effects of a particular Executive Order 12866, this action is aggregate exposure to residues. pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other not subject to Executive Order 13211, Accordingly, EPA finds that exempting substances that have a common entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning residues of cuprous oxide from the mechanism of toxicity.’’ Regulations That Significantly Affect EPA has not found cuprous oxide to requirement of a tolerance will be safe. Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 share a common mechanism of toxicity VII. Other Considerations FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive with any other substances, and cuprous Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of oxide does not appear to produce a toxic A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology Children from Environmental Health metabolite produced by other An analytical method is not required Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, substances. For the purposes of this for enforcement purposes since the April 23, 1997). This action does not tolerance action, therefore, EPA has Agency is establishing an exemption contain any information collections assumed that cuprous oxide does not from the requirement of a tolerance subject to OMB approval under the have a common mechanism of toxicity without any numerical limitation. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require with other substances. For information B. Revisions to Petitioned-For any special considerations under regarding EPA’s efforts to determine Tolerances which chemicals have a common Executive Order 12898, entitled mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate The Agency is establishing an ‘‘Federal Actions to Address the cumulative effects of such exemption for cuprous oxide that differs Environmental Justice in Minority chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at slightly from the exemption that was Populations and Low-Income http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ requested. First, the Agency has Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, cumulative. removed the phrase ‘‘for agricultural 1994). crops or residential food commodities’’ Since tolerances and exemptions that VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. because the current structure of section are established on the basis of a petition Population, Infants and Children 180.1021(a) makes that language under FFDCA section 408(d), such as Cuprous oxide is considered duplicative and potentially confusing. the exemption in this final rule, do not Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) by With today’s exemption, residues of require the issuance of a proposed rule,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37551
the requirements of the Regulatory PART 180—[AMENDED] Docket No. 13–49; FCC 15–61, adopted Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et June 1, 2015, and released June 1, 2015. seq.), do not apply. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 The full text of this document is continues to read as follows: This action directly regulates growers, available for inspection and copying food processors, food handlers, and food Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY–A257), retailers, not States or tribes, nor does ■ 2. Add paragraph (a)(5) to § 180.1021 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC this action alter the relationships or to read as follows: 20554. The full text may also be distribution of power and downloaded at: www.fcc.gov. responsibilities established by Congress § 180.1021 Copper; exemption from the in the preemption provisions of FFDCA requirement of a tolerance. Summary of Order section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency (a) * * * 1. By this Order, the Commission has determined that this action will not (5) Copper oxide embedded in waives until December 2, 2015 the have a substantial direct effect on States polymer emitter heads used in irrigation requirement in § 15.37(h) of the or tribal governments, on the systems for root incursion prevention. Commission’s rules that certain relationship between the national * * * * * National Information Infrastructure (U– government and the States or tribal [FR Doc. 2015–16224 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] NII) devices must comply with its governments, or on the distribution of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P § 15.407 rules to be certified on and power and responsibilities among the after June 2, 2015. This action is taken various levels of government or between in response to a request by a group of the Federal Government and Indian FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS interested parties (Joint Petitioners) to tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined COMMISSION extend this compliance deadline as part that Executive Order 13132, entitled of a larger review of the transition ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 47 CFR Part 15 provisions the Commission recently adopted for the U–NII–3 band.This 1999) and Executive Order 13175, [ET Docket No. 13–49; FCC 15–61] entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination action is being taken without prejudice with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR Permit Unlicensed National relative to the merits of the Joint 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply Information Infrastructure (U–NII) Petitioners’ filings in the docket. to this action. In addition, this action Devices in the 5 GHz Band 2. On April 1, 2014, the Commission does not impose any enforceable duty or released a First Report and Order in the contain any unfunded mandate as AGENCY: Federal Communications above-captioned proceeding. This First described under Title II of the Unfunded Commission. R&O increased the utility of the 5 GHz Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. ACTION: Final rule; request for waiver. band where U–NII devices operate, and 1501 et seq.). modified certain U–NII rules and testing SUMMARY: In this document, the procedures to ensure that U–NII devices This action does not involve any Commission has waived requirements of do not cause harmful interference to technical standards that would require certain rules that the National authorized users of the band. The First Agency consideration of voluntary Information Infrastructure (U–NII) R&O, inter alia, extended the upper consensus standards pursuant to section devices must comply with. This action edge of the 5.725–5.825 GHz U–NII–3 12(d) of the National Technology is in response to a request by a group band to 5.85 GHz and consolidated the Transfer and Advancement Act of interested parties to extend this provisions applicable to digitally (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). compliance deadline as part of a larger modulated devices from § 15.247 of the X. Congressional Review Act review of the transition provision rules with the U–NII–3 rules in § 15.407 adopted for the U–NII–3 band. In order so that all the digitally modulated Pursuant to the Congressional Review to facilitate the new technical devices operating in the U–NII–3 band Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will requirements, without unduly impairing will operate under the same set of rules submit a report containing this rule and the availability or cost of U–NII devices and be subject to the new device other required information to the U.S. or imposing undue burdens on security requirement. Notably, the Senate, the U.S. House of manufacturers or the public the consolidated rules adopted require the Representatives, and the Comptroller Commission adopted transition more stringent out-of-band emissions General of the United States prior to provisions which are outlined in the limit formerly applicable only to U–NII– publication of the rule in the Federal Commission’s rules. Doing so will give 3 devices in order to protect Terminal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major the Commission adequate time to Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR) rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). consider the entire record, including the facilities from inference. Joint Petitioners, as part of the 3. To facilitate the transition to the List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 reconsideration proceeding. new technical requirements, without DATES: Effective date: This rule is unduly impairing the availability or cost Environmental protection, of U–NII devices or imposing undue Administrative practice and procedure, effective July 1, 2015. Applicability date: Applicable June 1, 2015, the burdens on manufacturers, or the Agricultural commodities, Pesticides public, the Commission adopted and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements in § 15.37(h) are waived until December 2, 2015. transition provisions which are outlined requirements, Cuprous oxide. in § 15.37(h). These transition FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dated: June 18, 2015. Aole provisions require that the marketing, Wilkins, Office of Engineering and Jennifer L. McClain, sale and importation into the United Technology, (202) 418–2406, email: States of digitally modulated and hybrid Acting Director, Antimicrobials Division, [email protected], TTY (202) 418– Office of Pesticide Programs. devices designed to operate in the U– 2989. NII–3 band and certified under the old Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a § 15.247 rules must cease by June 2, amended as follows: summary of the Commission’s Order, ET 2016. As an intermediate measure, they
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37552 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
provide that after June 2, 2015, digital 7. The effective date of the Order is Synopsis modulation devices and the digital June 1, 2015, the date upon which this As required by the Paperwork modulation portion of hybrid devices Order was released by the Commission. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), designed to operate in the U–NII–3 band Federal Communications Commission. the FCC is notifying the public that it must meet the new § 15.407 U–NII–3 Marlene H. Dortch, received OMB approval on May 13, rules to be FCC certified. This waiver Secretary. 2015, for the revised information order exclusively addresses the June 2, collection requirements contained in the 2015 certification requirement. [FR Doc. 2015–14806 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Commission’s rules at 47 CFR 17.4, 4. Petitions for reconsideration of the 17.48 and 17.49. Under 5 CFR part 1320, First R&O are still pending. While the an agency may not conduct or sponsor petitioners have generally alleged that FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS a collection of information unless it the current state of the technology COMMISSION displays a current, valid OMB Control inhibits the design of affordable Number. No person shall be subject to products that could comply with the 47 CFR Part 17 any penalty for failing to comply with more stringent out-of-band emission a collection of information subject to the limits for the U–NII–3 band, the [WT Docket No. 10–88; FCC 14–117] Paperwork Reduction Act that does not alternatives they suggested have been display a current, valid OMB Control wide-ranging and many of the parties Amendments To Modernize and Clarify Number. The OMB Control Number is could not agree on a single solution that the Commission’s Rules Concerning 3060–0645. would meet the needs of the varying Construction, Marking and Lighting of The foregoing notice is required by industry segments. Significant Antenna Structures the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, information was, and continues to be, Public Law 104–13, October 1, 1995, submitted into the record. In particular, AGENCY: Federal Communications and 44 U.S.C. 3507. on March 23, 2015, the Joint Petitioners Commission. The total annual reporting burdens filed a self-styled ‘‘Consensus ACTION: Final rule; announcement of and costs for the respondents are as Proposal.’’ This detailed filing included effective date. follows: technical rules that would significantly OMB Control Number: 3060–0645. OMB Approval Date: May 13, 2015. modify the out-of- band emission limits SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal adopted for the U–NII–3 Band in the Communications Commission OMB Expiration Date: May 31, 2018. Title: Sections 17.4, 17.48 and 17.49, First R&O. Shortly thereafter, the Joint (Commission) announces that the Office Antenna Structure Registration Petitioners requested that the of Management and Budget (OMB) has Requirements. Commission waive § 15.37(h) of the approved, for a period of three years, Form Number: N/A. rules. certain information collection Respondents: Business or other for- requirements associated with the 5. In light of the recent activity in the profit entities, not-for-profit institutions Commission’s Report and Order docket, The Commission conclude that and state, local or tribal government. regarding Amendments to Modernize there is good cause to grant a waiver of Number of Respondents and and Clarify the Commission’s rules the June 2, 2015 U–NII device Responses: 20,000 respondents; 475,134 concerning construction, marking and certification date. Doing so will give the responses. lighting of antenna structures. This Commission adequate time to consider Estimated Time per Response: .1–.25 document is being published pursuant the entire record—including the Joint hours. to the Report and Order, which stated Petitioners’ ‘‘Consensus Proposal’’—as Frequency of Response: On occasion that the Commission would publish a part of the reconsideration proceeding, reporting requirement, recordkeeping document in the Federal Register and it will continue to certify U–NII–3 requirement and third party disclosure announcing OMB approval and the band devices meeting the requirements requirement. effective date of the revised information of the old § 15.427 until December 2, Obligation to Respond: Required to collection requirements. 2015. A brief extension of the obtain or retain benefits. Statutory intermediate transition deadline will DATES: Amendments to 47 CFR 17.4, authority for this information collection not frustrate the ultimate U–NII–3 17.48 and 17.49, published at 79 FR is contained in Sections 4 and 303 of the transition adopted in the First R&O, 56968, September 24, 2014, are effective Communications Act of 1934, as including the Commission’s on July 1, 2015. amended, 47 U.S.C. 154, 303. determinations regarding the marketing, Total Annual Burden: 50,198 hours. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: importation, and sale of digitally Total Annual Cost: $64,380. Cathy Williams by email at modulated and hybrid devices. Grant of Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: [email protected] and telephone the waiver, however, will permit There is no need for confidentiality with at (202) 418–2918. manufacturers to better plan their this collection of information. research and design activities to comply SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Privacy Act Impact Assessment: This with the outcome of any further action document announces that, on May 13, collection of information does not affect we may take on reconsideration. 2015, OMB approved certain individuals or households; thus, there 6. Pursuant to the authority in § 1.3 of information collection requirements are no impacts under the Privacy Act. the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.3, and contained in the Commission’s Report However, respondents may request sections 302, 303(e), and 303(r) of the and Order, FCC 14–117, published in 79 materials or information submitted to Communications Act of 1934, as FR 56968, September 24, 2014. The the Commission be withheld from amended, 47 U.S.C. 302, 303(e) and OMB Control Number is 3060–0645. public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of 303(r), IT is ordered that the § 15.37(h) The Commission publishes this notice the Commission’s rules. of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR as an announcement of the effective Needs and Uses: The Commission 15.37(h) is waived to the extent date of these information collection requested OMB approval for a revision discussed above until December 2, 2015. requirements. of this information collection in order to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37553
obtain the full three year approval Congressionally-mandated provisions DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION pursuant to FCC 14–117. These revised related to the owners. Federal Motor Carrier Safety information collection requirements, Sections 17.48 and 17.49 contain Administration which implement and enforce the reporting and recordkeeping updated antenna structure notice, requirements. Section 17.48(a) required registration, reporting, and 49 CFR Part 390 that antenna structure owners promptly recordkeeping requirements of part 17 report outages of top steady burning [Docket No. FMCSA–2012–0103] of the Commission’s rules, help improve efficiency, reduce regulatory burdens, lights or flashing antenna structure RIN 2126–AB44 and enhance compliance with antenna lights to the FAA. Upon receipt of the Lease and Interchange of Vehicles; structure painting and lighting outage notification, the FAA issues a Motor Carriers of Passengers requirements, while continuing to Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), which notifies aircraft of the outage. However, ensure the safety of pilots and aircraft AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety passengers nationwide. The revised the FAA cancels all such notices within Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 15 days. Previously, the Commission’s information collection requirements are ACTION: Extension of deadline for filing as follows: rules did not require antenna structure petitions for reconsideration. Section 17.4 provides that the owner owners to provide any notification to of any proposed or existing antenna the FAA regarding the status of repairs SUMMARY: FMCSA announces an structure that requires notice of other than the initial outage report and extension of the deadline for submitting proposed construction to the Federal the resumption of normal operation. petitions for reconsideration of its May Aviation Administration (FAA) due to Thus, if the repairs to an antenna 27, 2015, final rule concerning the lease physical obstruction must register the structure’s lights required more than 15 and interchange of commercial motor structure with the Commission. Section days, the FAA may not have had any vehicles (CMVs) by motor carriers of 17.4(f) previously required antenna record of the outage from that 15th day passengers. The final rule provides structure owners ‘‘to immediately to the resumption of normal operation. regulations governing the lease and provide a copy’’ of the antenna structure interchange of passenger-carrying CMVs This rule has been revised to require to identify the motor carrier operating a registration to each tenant. This rule has antenna structure owners to provide the been revised so that it now requires that passenger-carrying CMV that is FAA with regular updates on the status antenna structure owners either provide responsible for compliance with the of their repairs of lighting outages so a copy or a link to the FCC antenna Federal Motor Carrier Safety structure Web site, and that this that the FAA can maintain notifications Regulations (FMCSRs) and ensure that a notification may be done electronically to aircraft throughout the entire period lessor surrenders control of the CMV for or via paper mail. of time the antenna structure remains the full term of the lease or temporary Section 17.4(g) previously required unlit. Consistent with the current FAA exchange of CMVs and drivers. The antenna structure owners to display the requirements, if a lighting outage cannot American Bus Association (ABA) and Antenna Structure Registration Number be repaired within the FAA’s original United Motorcoach Association (UMA) a conspicuous place that is readily NOTAM period, the revised rule filed a joint request for an extension of visible near the base of the antenna. requires the antenna structure owner to the June 26, 2015, deadline for the This rule has been revised to require notify the FAA of that fact. In addition, submission of petitions for that the Antenna Structure Number be the revised rule provides that the reconsideration of the final rule. The displayed so that it is conspicuously antenna structure owner must provide Agency grants the request and extends visible and legible from the publicly any needed updates to its estimated the deadline for submission of petitions accessible area nearest the base of the return-to-service date to the FAA. The for reconsideration from June 26 until antenna structure along the publicly revised rule also requires antenna August 25, 2015. accessible roadway or path. It has also structure owners to continue to provide DATES: Petitions for reconsideration been revised to provide that where an these updates to the FAA every NOTAM must be filed in accordance with 49 CFR antenna structure is surrounded by a period until its lights are repaired. 389.35 by close of business on August 25, 2015. perimeter fence, or where the point of Section 17.49 previously required access includes an access gate, the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. antenna structure owners to maintain a Antenna Structure Registration Number Loretta Bitner, (202) 385–2428, record of observed or otherwise known should be posted on the perimeter fence [email protected], Office of extinguishments or improper or access gate. Where multiple antenna Enforcement and Compliance. FMCSA structures having separate Antenna functioning of structure lights, but did office hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Structure Registration Numbers are not specify the time period for which Monday through Friday, except Federal located within a single fenced area, the such records must be maintained. This holidays. rule has been revised to require antenna revised rule provides that the Antenna SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Structure Registration Numbers must be structure owners to maintain a record of posted both on the perimeter fence or observed or otherwise known Background access gate and near the base of each extinguishments or improper On May 27, 2015 (80 FR 30164), antenna structure. If the base of the functioning of structure lights for two FMCSA published a final rule antenna structure has more than one years and provide the records to the concerning the lease and interchange of point of access, the revised rule requires Commission upon request. passenger-carrying CMVs to identify the that the Antenna Structure Registration Federal Communications Commission. motor carrier operating a passenger- Number be posted so that it is visible at carrying CMV that is responsible for Marlene H. Dortch, the publicly accessible area nearest each compliance with the FMCSRs and such point of access. The registration Secretary, Office of the Secretary. ensure that a lessor surrenders control number is issued to identify antenna [FR Doc. 2015–16100 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] of the CMV for the full term of the lease structure owners in order to enforce the BILLING CODE 6712–01–P or temporary exchange of CMVs and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37554 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
drivers. The Agency indicated that the passengers operating CMVs under a provide clarification of the various final rule is necessary to ensure that lease or interchange agreement. provisions in the final rule but those meetings are not likely to be completed unsafe passenger carriers cannot evade ABA and UMA Request FMCSA oversight and enforcement by before the June 26, 2015, deadline for entering into a questionable lease On June 18, the ABA and UMA petitions for reconsideration. arrangement to operate under the submitted a joint request for a 60-day FMCSA Decision authority of another carrier that extension of the deadline for petitions exercises no actual control over those for reconsideration of the final rule. The FMCSA has considered the ABA and operations. This rule will enable the associations stated: UMA request and believes that granting an extension of the deadline is FMCSA, the National Transportation ‘‘In the wake of publication of the Final appropriate. The extension will enable Safety Board (NTSB), and our Federal Rule, our members have raised a number of the associations to work with their and State partners to identify motor significant questions regarding the practical members to better understand the final carriers transporting passengers in and operational applications of the rule’s requirements necessary for the successful rule, seek clarification or guidance from interstate commerce and correctly implementation of the rule. FMCSA if necessary, and determine assign responsibility to these entities for The diversity or our [members’] operations, subsequently whether there are indeed regulatory violations during inspections, some of which are addressed directly by this substantive issues to be addressed compliance investigations, and crash rule and some of which are indirectly through a petition for reconsideration. investigations. It also provides the addressed, we believe, has led to unintended The Agency extends the deadline for consequences or possibly inaccurate general public with the means to submission for an additional 60 days to identify the responsible motor carrier at interpretations. Therefore, before we consider filing a petition for reconsideration, we August 25, 2015. the time transportation services are initially would like to work with the Agency Issued on: June 24, 2015. provided. and seek clarification.’’ T.F. Scott Darling, III, The effective date of the final rule is The associations indicated that they Chief Counsel. July 27, 2015, and the compliance date are currently in the process of [FR Doc. 2015–16111 Filed 6–26–15; 4:15 pm] is January 1, 2017, for motor carriers of coordinating meetings with FMCSA to BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:34 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYR1.SGM 01JYR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 37555
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 80, No. 126
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER including the name and address if DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND contains notices to the public of the proposed provided, in the above office during HUMAN SERVICES issuance of rules and regulations. The regular business hours or can be viewed purpose of these notices is to give interested at http://www.regulations.gov. Food and Drug Administration persons an opportunity to participate in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rule making prior to the adoption of the final 21 CFR Parts 1100, 1140, and 1143 rules. Patricia A. Petrella, Marketing Specialist, Promotion and Economics [Docket No. FDA–2015–N–1514] Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence RIN 0910–AH24 Avenue SW., Room 1406–S, Stop 0244, Agricultural Marketing Service Washington, DC 20250–0244; telephone: Nicotine Exposure Warnings and (301) 334–2891; or facsimile: (202) 205– Child-Resistant Packaging for Liquid 7 CFR Part 1211 2800; or email: Patricia.Petrella@ Nicotine, Nicotine-Containing E- [Document No. AMS–FV–11–0074; PR–A2 ams.usda.gov. Liquid(s), and Other Tobacco and PR–B2] Products; Request for Comments SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The RIN 0581–AD24 proposed rules on the Order and the AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Hardwood Lumber and Hardwood referendum procedures were published HHS. Plywood Promotion, Research and in the Federal Register on November 13, ACTION: Advance notice of proposed Information Order; Extension of 2013 (78 FR 68298 and 78 FR 67979, rulemaking. Comment Period on Supplemental respectively). Those rules proposed the SUMMARY: Notices establishment of an industry-funded The Food and Drug promotion, research and information Administration (FDA) is issuing this AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, program for hardwood lumber and advance notice of proposed rulemaking USDA. hardwood plywood and referendum (ANPRM) to obtain information related ACTION: Extension of comment period. procedures. Those proposals provided to the regulation of ‘‘tobacco products’’ for a 60-day comment period which subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that ended on January 13, 2014. On January Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), as the comment period on a supplemental 16, 2014, a notice was published in the amended by the Family Smoking notice to amend the 2013 proposed rule Federal Register that reopened and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act for a Hardwood Lumber and Hardwood extended the comment period on the (Tobacco Control Act), and restrictions Plywood Promotion, Research and proposed Order until February 18, 2014 regarding the sale and distribution of Information Order (Order) is extended. (79 FR 2805). A total of 939 comments such tobacco products. Specifically, this Under the proposed Order, assessments were received during both comment ANPRM is seeking comments, data, would be collected from hardwood periods. As a result of the extensive research results, or other information lumber and plywood manufacturers and comments received, USDA published that may inform regulatory actions FDA would be used to fund programs to supplemental notices of proposed might take with respect to nicotine promote hardwood lumber and rulemaking on the proposed Order and exposure warnings and child-resistant plywood. The comment period is also the referendum procedures in the packaging for liquid nicotine and extended for the supplemental notice to Federal Register on June 9, 2015 (80 FR nicotine-containing e-liquid(s) that are amend the 2013 proposed rule on 32493 and 80 FR 32488, respectively) to made or derived from tobacco and procedures for conducting a referendum amend the 2013 proposed rules. intended for human consumption, and to determine whether issuance of a USDA received a request to extend potentially for other tobacco products proposed Order is favored by the comment period to allow additional including, but not limited to, novel manufacturers of hardwood lumber and time for interested persons to review the tobacco products such as dissolvables, hardwood plywood. proposals and submit comments. USDA lotions, gels, and drinks. In April 2014, DATES: Comments must be received by is therefore extending the comment FDA published a proposed rule seeking September 7, 2015. period an additional 60 days until to deem products meeting the statutory ADDRESSES: Interested persons are September 7, 2015 to provide interested definition of ‘‘tobacco product,’’ except invited to submit written comments on persons more time to review these rules, accessories to proposed deemed tobacco the Internet at http:// perform a complete analysis, and submit products, to be subject to the FD&C Act, www.regulations.gov or to the written comments. as amended by the Tobacco Control Act. Promotion and Economics Division, Specifically, the proposed rule seeks to Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, Authority: This notice is issued pursuant extend the Agency’s ‘‘tobacco product’’ to the Commodity Promotion, Research and USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue Information Act of 1996 (1996 Act) (7 U.S.C. authorities to those products that meet SW., Room 1406–S, Stop 0244, 7411–7425). the statutory definition of ‘‘tobacco Washington, DC 20250–0244; facsimile: product,’’ prohibiting the sale of (202) 205–2800. All comments should Dated: June 26, 2015. ‘‘covered tobacco products’’ to reference the docket number and the Rex A. Barnes, individuals under the age of 18, and date and page number of this issue of Associate Administrator. requiring the display of health warnings the Federal Register and will be made [FR Doc. 2015–16184 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] on certain tobacco product packages and available for public inspection, BILLING CODE 3410–02–P in advertisements. The deeming
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37556 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
rulemaking does not address the issues any other tobacco products that the authority to adopt a tobacco product raised in this ANPRM. Secretary of Health and Human Services standard under section 907 of the FD&C DATES: Submit either electronic or by regulation deems to be subject to this Act if the Secretary finds that it is written comments by August 31, 2015. chapter. Accordingly, in the Federal appropriate for the protection of the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Register of April 25, 2014 (79 FR public health. by any of the following methods: 23142), FDA published a proposed rule In making such a finding under either seeking to deem all products meeting section 906(d)(1) or section 907 of the Electronic Submissions the statutory definition of ‘‘tobacco FD&C Act, the Secretary must consider: Submit electronic comments in the product’’ in section 201(rr) of the FD&C (1) The risks and benefits to the following way: Act (21 U.S.C. 321(rr)), except population as a whole, including users • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// accessories to those products, to be and nonusers of tobacco products; (2) www.regulations.gov. Follow the subject to chapter IX of the FD&C Act. the increased or decreased likelihood instructions for submitting comments. FDA has evaluated data and science that existing users of tobacco products (including all of the evidence submitted will stop using such products; and (3) Written Submissions to the docket of the proposed the increased or decreased likelihood Submit written submissions in the ‘‘deeming’’ rule cited below) related to that those who do not use tobacco following ways: the risks, especially to infants and products will start using such products. • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for children, from accidental exposure to FDA intends to use the information paper submissions): Division of Dockets nicotine, including exposure to liquid submitted in response to this ANPRM to Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug nicotine and nicotine-containing e- further inform its thinking about options Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. liquid(s), which are primarily used with for issuing potential regulations that 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. electronic nicotine delivery systems would require nicotine exposure Instructions: All submissions received (ENDS), such as electronic cigarettes. warnings and/or child-resistant must include the Docket No. FDA– Recent increases in calls and visits to packaging for some tobacco products, as 2015–N–1514 for this rulemaking. All both poison control centers (see, e.g., articulated in this document. For the comments received may be posted CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly purposes of the questions in this without change to http:// Report, available at http://www.cdc.gov/ ANPRM: www.regulations.gov, including any mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ • ‘‘Liquid nicotine and nicotine- personal information provided. For mm6313a4.htm) and emergency rooms containing e-liquid(s) (liquid nicotine additional information on submitting in the United States involving liquid combined with colorings, flavorings, comments, see the ‘‘Comments’’ heading nicotine poisonings and exposures has and/or potentially other ingredients)’’ of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION increased the public health concerns of are generally referred to as liquid section of this document. these exposure risks. As a result of nicotine. • Docket: For access to the docket to FDA’s evaluation and these recent ‘‘Liquid nicotine’’ (as used read background documents or trends, FDA is considering whether, throughout this document) refers to comments received, go to http:// based on the acute toxicity of nicotine liquid nicotine that is made or derived www.regulations.gov and insert the (up to and including nicotine from tobacco and intended for human docket number(s), found in brackets in poisoning), it would be appropriate for consumption. • the heading of this document, into the the protection of the public health to ‘‘Novel tobacco products’’ (as used ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts warn the public about the dangers of throughout this document) refers to and/or go to the Division of Dockets nicotine exposure, especially due to products such as dissolvables, lotions, Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. inadvertent nicotine exposure in infants gels, and drinks. and children, and/or require that some 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. tobacco products be sold in child- II. Requests for Comments and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: resistant packaging. Comments Information Bryant M. Godfrey, Center for Tobacco submitted in response to FDA’s FDA is seeking comments, data, Products, Food and Drug proposed rule seeking to deem all research results, and other information Administration, 10903 New Hampshire tobacco products to be subject to the related to the following questions. Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993, 1–877– FD&C Act support such actions, and Please explain your responses and CTP–1373, [email protected]. many request that FDA take prompt provide any evidence or other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: action to mitigate nicotine exposure information supporting your responses I. Background risks (see Docket No. FDA–2014–N– to the following questions: 0189, http://www.regulations.gov). The Tobacco Control Act was enacted As previously discussed, the FD&C A. Nicotine Exposure Warnings on June 22, 2009, amending the FD&C Act provides FDA with authority to 1. Should FDA consider requiring Act and providing FDA with the regulate tobacco products. Sections nicotine exposure warning(s) text on authority to regulate tobacco products 906(d)(1) and 910(c)(1)(B) of the FD&C liquid nicotine? If so, why? (Pub. L. 111–31). Specifically, section Act provide FDA the authority to, by 2. Should FDA consider requiring 101(b) of the Tobacco Control Act regulation or in a marketing nicotine exposure warning(s) text on amends the FD&C Act by adding a new authorization order, require restrictions tobacco products other than liquid chapter that provides FDA with on the sale and distribution of a tobacco nicotine, including, but not limited to, authority over tobacco products. Section product. The restrictions on the sale and novel tobacco products? If so, which 901 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387a), distribution of a tobacco product may products and why? as amended by the Tobacco Control Act, include restrictions on the access to, 3. On what basis (e.g., physical states that the new chapter in the FD&C and the advertising and promotion of, characteristics or appearance of the Act (chapter IX—Tobacco Products) (21 the tobacco product, if FDA determines product or packaging, product risks, U.S.C. 387 through 387u) applies to all such restrictions would be appropriate form of marketing, route of exposure, cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your- for the protection of the public health. type of packaging) should FDA own tobacco, smokeless tobacco, and The FD&C Act also provides FDA with determine which products should be
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37557
required to carry the warning(s)? What Poison Control Center). Please submit 10. If FDA were to require a nicotine data or information would be helpful to data or evidence to support your exposure warning(s) (text and any demonstrate the need for a warning or position. applicable color or graphic element) for warnings? 7. With preceding question 6 in mind, liquid nicotine, should FDA adopt a 4. If FDA were to require nicotine please respond to the following different nicotine exposure warning(s) exposure warning(s) text for liquid questions: Should there be multiple requirement based on the packaging/ nicotine, what issues should the textual warnings that randomly display containers (e.g., a brief/abbreviated warning(s) address and what wording to convey different dangers, or should warning(s) for liquid nicotine in small should be used? Please consider: (a) there be a single, consistent textual packaging/containers, omit the Whether the warning(s) should be warning that covers all of the different warning(s) if the tobacco product is in broad, or directed at specific dangers; dangers? Should different types of a child-resistant package)? If so, how (b) whether the warning(s) should tobacco products carry different should the warning(s) differ? Please specifically address oral, ocular, and warnings? If so, which type(s) of tobacco submit data or evidence to support your dermal exposure dangers; (c) whether products should carry what warning(s) position. the warning(s) should focus exclusively and what is the reasoning for different 11. With respect to tobacco products on the risks to children and youth, or warnings for different types of tobacco other than liquid nicotine, including, include the risks to vulnerable products? Please submit data or but not limited to, novel tobacco populations, such as pregnant women, evidence to support your position. products, if FDA were to require a adults with medical conditions, and 8. If FDA were to require nicotine nicotine exposure warning(s) (text and pets; (d) whether the warning(s) should exposure warning(s) text for liquid any applicable color or graphic contain instructions to avoid the nicotine, should FDA consider requiring element), should FDA adopt a different dangers altogether, such as ‘‘keep out of color(s) or graphic elements, such as nicotine exposure warning(s) the reach of children’’; (e) whether there symbols, as part of the warning(s)? If so, requirement based on the packaging/ are other dangers of liquid nicotine what color or graphic elements should containers (e.g., a brief/abbreviated exposure that should be covered by the FDA consider? warning(s) for tobacco products in small warning(s); and (f) whether information (a) Are there data on graphic elements packaging, omit the warning(s) if the about what to do in the case of an and/or colors that would be most tobacco product is in a child-resistant accidental exposure to liquid nicotine effective in communicating the dangers package)? If so, how should the should be included (e.g., when to seek associated with nicotine exposure? If so, warning(s) differ? Please submit data or medical attention, when to contact a please provide these data. evidence to support your position. Poison Control Center). Please submit (b) Would a graphic element alone (as 12. Are you aware of data or data or evidence to support your opposed to text alone or any information that would support any position. combination of text, color, or graphic required font sizes, formatting, and 5. With preceding question 4 in mind, elements) be sufficient to effectively display considerations for nicotine should there be multiple textual communicate the dangers associated exposure warnings (textual and/or warnings that randomly display to with nicotine exposure? Please provide graphic)? If so, please provide that convey different dangers, or should data or evidence to support your evidence. there be a single, consistent textual position. 13. Should FDA require the inclusion warning that covers all of the different (c) How could the warning(s) text and of the American Association of Poison dangers? Please submit data or evidence graphic image(s) add to or detract from Control Centers’ telephone number on to support your position. each other? the container labeling and/or packaging 6. If FDA were to require nicotine 9. If FDA were to require nicotine of liquid nicotine and tobacco products exposure warning(s) text for tobacco exposure warning(s) text for tobacco other than liquid nicotine? Why or why products other than liquid nicotine, products other than liquid nicotine, not? including, but not limited to, novel including, but not limited to, novel 14. Are there any nicotine exposure tobacco products, what issues should tobacco products, should FDA consider warnings (textual and/or graphic) for the warning(s) address and what requiring color(s) or graphic elements as liquid nicotine required by authorities wording should be used? Please part of the warning(s)? If so, what color at the local, State, or Federal (i.e., other consider: (a) Whether the warning(s) or graphic elements should FDA agencies) level, or by foreign should be broad, or directed at specific consider? governments that you particularly dangers; (b) whether the warning(s) (a) Are there data on graphics and/or would like to highlight? If so, which should specifically address oral, ocular, colors that would be most effective in ones and why? Are there any data and dermal exposure dangers; (c) communicating the dangers associated regarding the effectiveness or utility of whether the warning(s) should focus with nicotine exposure? If so, please these warnings? If so, please provide exclusively on the risks to children and provide these data. these data. youth, or include the risks to vulnerable (b) Would a graphic image alone be 15. Are there any nicotine exposure populations, such as pregnant women, sufficient to effectively communicate warnings (textual and/or graphic) for adults with medical conditions, and the dangers associated with nicotine tobacco products other than liquid pets; (d) whether the warning(s) should exposure? Please provide data or nicotine required by authorities at the contain instructions to avoid the evidence to support your position. local, State, or Federal (i.e., other dangers altogether, such as ‘‘keep out of (c) How could the warning(s) text and agencies) level, or by foreign the reach of children’’; (e) whether there graphic image(s) add to or detract from governments that you particularly are other dangers of nicotine exposure each other? would like to highlight? If so, which that should be covered by the (d) Should different tobacco products ones and why? Are there any data warning(s); and (f) whether information carry different color or graphic regarding the effectiveness or utility of about what to do in the case of an elements? If so, what criteria should these warnings? If so, please provide accidental exposure to liquid nicotine FDA use to determine which type of these data. should be included (e.g., when to seek tobacco products should carry what 16. Are you aware of any existing medical attention, when to contact a color or graphic elements? evidence regarding whether warnings
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37558 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
(text and any applicable color or graphic resistant cap, blister packaging); (b) (textual and/or graphic) and provide element) are effective for mitigating the whether the requirement should be evidence or data to support your risks of nicotine exposure? If so, please performance based (e.g., unable to be recommendation. provide that evidence. opened by 80 percent or more of 5-year- 4. With respect to tobacco products olds who try to open the package, and other than liquid nicotine, including, B. Child-Resistant Packaging more than 90 percent of adults on but not limited to, novel tobacco 1. Should FDA require child-resistant average between the ages of 50–70 can products, and the dangers of nicotine packaging for liquid nicotine? If so, successfully open the package); or (c) poisoning, should FDA consider why? whether the requirement should be requiring any additional warnings 2. Should FDA require child-resistant based on a combination of (a) and (b), beyond a nicotine exposure warning packaging for liquid nicotine if the or is there some other basis for the (text and/or any applicable color or liquid nicotine product is not intended requirement that FDA should consider? graphic element)? If so, for which to be opened by the consumer (e.g., Is your proposal technically feasible? products? Also, please describe the liquid nicotine in permanently sealed, Please submit data or evidence to warning(s) (textual and/or graphic) and prefilled, and/or disposable cartridges)? support your position. provide evidence or data to support Please provide the reason for your 8. Are there other factors FDA should your recommendation. response. consider to further prevent or 5. Should FDA consider any 3. Should FDA consider requiring discourage people (especially infants additional measures to mitigate nicotine child-resistant packaging for tobacco and children) from inadvertently exposure risks for people (especially products other than liquid nicotine, consuming or being exposed to liquid infants and children) beyond nicotine including, but not limited to, novel nicotine? If so, please explain. Examples exposure warnings (text and any tobacco products? If so, which ones and of other factors may include: applicable color or graphic element) and why? attractiveness of the product or child-resistant packaging? If so, what 4. If FDA were to require child- packaging (e.g., appealing images, measures should FDA consider and resistant packaging for liquid nicotine fragrance, flavors), resemblance of why? Please provide evidence or data to (including for those products that are packaging to food and drink items (e.g., support your recommendation. not intended to be opened by the candy, fruit), color of the product (e.g., consumer), what type of exposure risks resemblance to beverages such as juice), III. Comments (e.g., oral, ocular, dermal) should FDA resemblance of packaging to that of A. General Information About seek to mitigate with the requirement? medications (e.g., eye drops). Submitting Comments 5. If FDA were to require child- 9. If FDA were to require child- resistant packaging for tobacco products resistant packaging, what should FDA Interested persons may submit either other than liquid nicotine, including, consider and what actions should FDA electronic comments regarding this but not limited to, novel tobacco take to mitigate the risk that users of document to http://www.regulations.gov products, what risks (e.g., oral, ocular, products with child-resistant packaging or written comments to the Division of dermal) should FDA seek to mitigate will defeat the purpose of the packaging Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It with the requirement? by leaving the packaging open, by is only necessary to send one set of 6. If FDA were to require child- disabling the protection mechanism, or comments. Identify comments with the resistant packaging for liquid nicotine, by moving the product to a different docket number found in brackets in the how should the requirement be container? heading of this document. articulated? Please consider: (a) B. Public Availability of Comments Whether the requirement should be C. Other Actions and Considerations based on mandated physical 1. With respect to liquid nicotine, Received comments may be seen in characteristics of the packaging (e.g., should FDA require both nicotine the Division of Dockets Management must have a squeeze-to-turn lid, flow exposure warnings (text and/or any between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday restrictor); (b) whether the requirement applicable color or graphic element) and through Friday, and will be posted to should be performance based (e.g., child-resistant packaging, or should the docket at http:// unable to be opened by 80 percent or only one and not the other be required? www.regulations.gov. As a matter of more of 5-year-olds who try to open the Please explain your reasoning and Agency practice, FDA generally does package, and more than 90 percent of provide data or evidence to support not post comments submitted by adults on average between the ages of your position. individuals in their individual capacity 50–70 can successfully open the 2. With respect to tobacco products on http://www.regulations.gov. This is package); or (c) whether the requirement other than liquid nicotine, including, determined by information indicating should be based on a combination of (a) but not limited to, novel tobacco that the submission is written by an and (b), or is there some other basis for products, should FDA require both individual, for example, the comment is the requirement that FDA should nicotine exposure warnings (text and/or identified with the category ‘‘Individual consider? Is your proposal technically any applicable color or graphic element) Consumer’’ under the field entitled feasible? Please submit data or evidence and child-resistant packaging, or should ‘‘Category (Required)’’, on the ‘‘Your to support your position. only one and not the other be required? Information’’ page on http:// 7. If FDA were to require child- Please explain your reasoning and www.regulations.gov; for this ANPRM, resistant packaging for tobacco products provide data or evidence to support however, FDA will not be following this other than liquid nicotine, including, your position. general practice. Instead, FDA will post but not limited to, novel tobacco 3. With respect to liquid nicotine and on http://www.regulations.gov products, how should the requirement the dangers of nicotine poisoning, comments to this docket that have been be articulated? Please consider: (a) should FDA consider requiring any submitted by individuals in their Whether the requirement should be additional warnings beyond a nicotine individual capacity. If you wish to based on mandated physical exposure warning (text and/or any submit any information under a claim of characteristics of the packaging (e.g., applicable color or graphic element)? If confidentiality, please refer to 21 CFR must have a squeeze-to-turn lid, child- so, please describe the warning(s) 10.20.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37559
C. Information Identifying the Person receipt, and enables the Department to require owners to redeem their paper Submitting the Comment make them available to the public. savings bonds by a certain date. In some cases, Treasury regulations Please note that your name, contact Comments submitted electronically determine who is entitled to payment information, and other information through the http://www.regulations.gov based on state law. Treasury may look identifying you will be posted on http:// Web site can be viewed by other to state probate law, for example, to www.regulations.gov if you include that commenters and interested members of determine who is entitled to payment information in the body of your the public. Mail: Send to Department of the for savings bonds in a decedent’s estate. comments. For electronic comments See 31 CFR 315.71, 353.71, and 360.71. submitted to http:// Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal Service, Attn: Theodore Simms, 401 14th Street, Treasury may also recognize certain www.regulations.gov, FDA will post the state judicial proceedings that require body of your comment on http:// SW., Washington, DC 20227–0001. In general, Treasury will post all payment to creditors, divorced spouses, www.regulations.gov along with your and other claimants specifically listed State/province and country (if comments to http://www.regulations.gov without change, including any business in the regulations. See 31 CFR part 315, provided), the name of your subpart E; Part 353, subpart E; part 360, representative (if any), and the category or personal information provided, such as names, addresses, email addresses, or subpart E. The touchstone for these identifying you (e.g., individual, claims, however, is Treasury’s savings consumer, academic, industry). For telephone numbers. Treasury will also make such comments available for bond regulations. written submissions submitted to the Since at least 1952, Treasury has Division of Dockets Management, FDA public inspection and copying. You can make an appointment to inspect acknowledged circumstances when it will post the body of your comments on will recognize a state’s claim of title to http://www.regulations.gov, but you can comments by telephoning (202) 504– 3710. All comments received, including savings bonds based on a judgment of put your name and/or contact escheat. ‘‘Escheat’’ describes a state’s attachments and other supporting information on a separate cover sheet claim to property that has no owner. materials, will be part of the public and not in the body of your comments. Many state probate laws allow a state to record and subject to public disclosure. escheat the property of a person who Dated: June 26, 2015. You should only submit information dies without a will and without heirs. Leslie Kux, that you wish to make publicly Treasury regulations do not specifically Associate Commissioner for Policy. available. mention escheat, but they do provide [FR Doc. 2015–16151 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: that Treasury will pay a person entitled BILLING CODE 4164–01–P Theodore C. Simms II, Senior Attorney, to the estate of a deceased savings bond 202–504–3710 or Theodore.Simms@ owner in specified circumstances. When fiscal.treasury.gov. these circumstances are met, Treasury DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY will pay a state that has title to savings SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: bonds in the estate of a deceased owner. Fiscal Service I. Background Like all claimants, the state must present the bonds to Treasury or 31 CFR Parts 315, 353, and 360 The Department of the Treasury has otherwise meet Treasury’s requirements issued savings bonds since 1935 to raise [Docket No.: FISCAL–2015–0002] for payment. funds for the operation of the Federal In recent years, states have submitted RIN 1530–AA11 government, and to encourage savings escheat claims to Treasury for savings by small investors. From the beginning bonds based on state unclaimed Regulations Governing United States of the savings bond program, savings property laws, when there is no Savings Bonds bonds have been registered securities. evidence that the savings bond owner Treasury has authorized several forms of AGENCY: has died. The first claims came from Bureau of the Fiscal Service, registration, including registration to Fiscal Service, Treasury. states whose escheat laws purported to individuals, co-owners, fiduciaries, give them custody, but not title, to ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. institutions, and beneficiaries. See 31 certain unredeemed savings bonds. In CFR 315.7, 353.7, and 360.6. Savings SUMMARY: The United States Department 2012, the United States Court of bonds generally are not transferrable of the Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld and are payable only to the registered Service, is proposing regulations Treasury’s position that states are not owner, except as described in Treasury governing United States savings bonds entitled to payment for savings bonds regulations. See 31 CFR 315.15, 353.15, to address certain state escheat claims. held only in their custody, because such and 360.15. Detailed regulations claims interfere with the rights of DATES: Comment due date: August 17, describe when payment will be made to registered owners and others under 2015. a person or entity that is not the Treasury regulations. New Jersey v. U.S. ADDRESSES: The Bureau of the Fiscal registered owner. Dept. of Treasury, 684 F.3d 382 (3rd Cir. Service invites comments on this Ownership of a savings bond is 2012). proposed rule. Comments may be determined by Treasury’s savings bond More recently, the State of Kansas submitted through one of the following regulations. Federal and state courts, submitted an escheat claim based upon methods: including the United States Supreme a state court judgment that purported to Electronic Submission of Comments: Court, have upheld these ownership convey title over certain unredeemed Interested persons may submit rights against challenges by parties savings bonds. Kansas sought to redeem comments electronically through the asserting claims under state law. See, savings bonds in its possession, which Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// e.g., Free v. Bland, 369 U.S. 663 (1962). had been turned over to the state as www.regulations.gov. Electronic The rights of registered owners and unclaimed property, and to redeem a submission of comments allows the others under Treasury regulations much larger class of savings bonds that commenter maximum time to prepare persist even for bonds that matured it did not possess. In this class are and submit a comment, ensures timely years ago, because Treasury does not matured, unredeemed savings bonds
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37560 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
that were registered to an owner with an address issues that arise from state interests. See 31 CFR 315.91, 353.91, address in Kansas, generally more than escheat claims. and 360.91. thirty years ago. Kansas cannot identify The proposed regulations make II. This Proposed Rule who owns these bonds, where the explicit that Treasury will not recognize owners currently reside, or whether the Treasury proposes to amend its escheat judgments that convey custody, owners intend to redeem their bonds in savings bond regulations to explicitly but not title, to a state. This principle is the future. The physical bonds address state escheat claims to well established in Federal case law and themselves may be in their owners’ unclaimed savings bonds. The has been incorporated into the proposed possession. Kansas asserted that amendments would be published at part regulation. Treasury was bound to accept its claim 315, subparts E and O; part 353, Treasury proposes to recognize because the state court judgment was a subparts E and O; and part 360, subparts escheat judgments regarding bonds in a valid judicial proceeding, citing 31 CFR E and M. state’s possession as a discretionary 315.20. One group of amendments further matter, because the breadth of state The savings bond regulations do not defines the scope of the judicial escheat laws is not within Treasury’s require Treasury to recognize the Kansas proceedings covered by subpart E in control. In exercising discretion, escheat judgment. However, Treasury parts 315, 353, and 360. The proposed Treasury will consider whether a state’s does acknowledge that a savings bond amendments explicitly provide that escheat claim impairs any existing can be abandoned, with no one entitled escheat proceedings will not be rights under Treasury regulations and to payment under Treasury regulations. recognized under subpart E. will assess the risk to Treasury of Treasury agreed to redeem the savings A second group of amendments duplicative payment claims. Requiring bonds that Kansas possessed using establishes a new procedure for states to states to possess the bonds that they Treasury’s waiver authority under 31 submit escheat claims under their seek to redeem protects these interests, CFR 315.90, after reviewing evidence unclaimed property statutes for and enables Treasury to locate records showing that the bonds had been Treasury’s consideration. The proposed of the bonds for which the state seeks abandoned, and determining that regulations provide Treasury with payment. redemption would not impair any discretion to recognize an escheat The proposed regulations on escheat existing rights or subject the United judgment that purports to vest a state claims to unclaimed property do not States to any substantial expense or with title to a definitive savings bond apply when a state claims title to a liability. In addition to other facts that has reached the final extended definitive savings bond as the heir to a presented by the state, Kansas’s maturity date and is in the state’s deceased owner. Treasury has long possession of the bonds was evidence of possession, when the state presents recognized circumstances in which a abandonment, as well as a guarantee evidence satisfactory to Treasury that state may obtain title to a savings bond that no one else could submit the bonds the bond has been abandoned by all by escheat when the bond owner has for payment. died. These escheat claims will be Treasury did not redeem the broad persons entitled to payment under considered under existing savings bond class of savings bonds that Kansas did Treasury regulations. Escheat judgments regulations that pertain to the estates of not possess. Because Treasury that purport to vest a state with title to deceased owners, co-owners, and regulations do not require a savings bonds that the state does not possess beneficiaries. See 31 CFR part 315, bond owner to redeem bonds by a will not be recognized. subpart L; part 353, subpart L; and part certain date, a bond is not abandoned The proposed regulations would 360, subpart L. merely because it has not been require a state to demonstrate, at a redeemed. Treasury’s standard minimum, that it made reasonable III. Procedural Requirements procedures for redeeming savings bonds efforts to provide actual and allow the registered owner to present a constructive notice of the escheat A. Administrative Procedure Act (APA). matured bond for payment at any time, proceeding to all persons listed on the Because this proposed rule relates to irrespective of state law. Recognizing face of the bond and all persons who United States securities, which are Kansas’s escheat claim to bonds that it may have an interest in the bond. The contracts between Treasury and the does not possess, and cannot establish state must also demonstrate that those owner of the security, this rulemaking are abandoned, would impair the rights persons had an opportunity to be heard falls within the contract exception to the of registered owners and others under before the escheat judgment was APA at 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2). Treasury, Treasury regulations, and expose entered. The steps normally required in however, is voluntarily seeking public Treasury to claims for double payment. a state escheat proceeding may be comment to assist the agency in giving Kansas sued Treasury in the United adequate to establish abandonment, but full consideration to the matters States Court of Federal Claims, seeking Treasury is not bound by these discussed in the proposed rule. payment for all matured, unredeemed proceedings. Because state escheat rules savings bonds with registration may vary and state escheat proceedings B. Congressional Review Act (CRA). addresses in Kansas that were issued are often uncontested, Treasury reserves This proposed rule is not a major rule between 1935 and 1974, as well as other the right to require additional evidence pursuant to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et relief. At issue in the ongoing litigation of abandonment. Under the proposed seq. It is not expected to lead to any of is whether Treasury’s savings bond regulations, if a state seeks to redeem the results listed in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This regulations at 31 CFR 315.20 require bonds in its possession to which it has proposed rule may take immediate Treasury to recognize the Kansas obtained title via escheat, the effect after we submit a copy of it to escheat judgment. Although the proceeding must have provided notice Congress and the Comptroller General. regulations do not require Treasury to and an opportunity to be heard to those recognize a state escheat judgment for who the state claims have abandoned C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). unclaimed property, especially a their right to payment. Treasury may There is no new collection of judgment that interferes with existing also require a bond of indemnity, with information contained in this proposed rights, Treasury is proposing to amend or without surety, in any case for the rule that would be subject to the PRA, 31 CFR 315.20 and other sections to protection of the United States’ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Under the PRA,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37561
an agency may not conduct or sponsor, of ownership of, or interest in, a bond PART 353—REGULATIONS and a person is not required to respond between coowners or between the GOVERNING DEFINITIVE UNITED to, a collection of information unless it registered owner and the beneficiary, if STATES SAVINGS BONDS, SERIES EE displays a valid OMB control number. established by valid, judicial AND HH proceedings specifically listed in this D. Regulatory Flexibility Act. ■ subpart. Escheat proceedings will not be 1. The authority for this part The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 recognized under this subpart. Section continues to read: U.S.C. 601 et seq., does not apply to this 315.23 specifies the evidence required Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 12 U.S.C. 391; 31 rulemaking because, pursuant to 5 to establish the validity of the judicial U.S.C. 3105, 3125. U.S.C. 553(a)(2), issuance does not proceedings. ■ 2. Amend § 353.20 by revising require notice and opportunity for * * * * * paragraph (b) to read as follows: public comment. Nonetheless, this proposed rule will not have a significant ■ 3. Redesignate subpart O as subpart P § 353.20 General . economic impact on a substantial and add a new subpart O to read as * * * * * number of small entities. This follows: (b) The Department of the Treasury rulemaking primarily affects states and will recognize a claim against an owner Subpart O—Escheat and Unclaimed is not expected to have a direct impact of a savings bond and conflicting claims Property Claims by States on any small entities. The proposed rule of ownership of, or interest in, a bond formally states Treasury’s existing between coowners or between the Sec. interpretation of the savings bond registered owner and the beneficiary, if 315.88 Payment to a State claiming title to established by valid, judicial regulations as they apply to escheat abandoned bonds. claims, and proposes a new procedure proceedings specifically listed in this subpart. Escheat proceedings will not be through which states can submit claims § 315.88 Payment to a State claiming title to Treasury. Treasury is voluntarily to abandoned bonds. recognized under this subpart. Section seeking public comment in order to give 353.23 specifies the evidence required thorough consideration to a range of (a) General. The Department of the to establish the validity of the judicial views on state escheat claims before Treasury may, in its discretion, proceedings. issuing the final rule. recognize an escheat judgment that * * * * * purports to vest a State with title to a ■ 3. Redesignate subpart O as subpart P E. Executive Order 12866. definitive savings bond that has reached and add a new subpart O to read as This rule is not a significant the final extended maturity date and is follows: regulatory action pursuant to Executive in the State’s possession, when the State Order 12866. presents evidence satisfactory to Subpart O—Escheat and Unclaimed Treasury that the bond has been Property Claims by States List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 315 abandoned by all persons entitled to Government securities, Savings payment under Treasury regulations. A Sec. bonds. State claiming title to a definitive 353.88 Payment to a State claiming title to savings bond as the heir to a deceased abandoned bonds. List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 353 owner must comply with the Government securities, Savings requirements of subpart L, and not this § 353.88 Payment to a State claiming title bonds. section. Treasury will not recognize an to abandoned bonds. (a) General. The Department of the List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 360 escheat judgment that purports to vest a State with title to a bond that has not Treasury may, in its discretion, Government securities, Savings reached its final extended maturity date. recognize an escheat judgment that bonds. Treasury also will not recognize an purports to vest a State with title to a Accordingly, for the reasons set out in escheat judgment that purports to vest a definitive savings bond that has reached the preamble, the Department of the State with title to a bond that the State final maturity and is in the State’s Treasury proposes to amend 31 CFR does not possess, or a judgment that possession, when the State presents part 315 subparts E and O; part 353 purports to grant the State custody of a evidence satisfactory to Treasury that subparts E and O; and part 360 subparts bond, but not title. the bond has been abandoned by all E and M to read as follows: persons entitled to payment under (b) Due Process. At a minimum, a Treasury regulations. A State claiming PART 315—REGULATIONS State requesting payment under this title to a definitive savings bond as the GOVERNING U.S. SAVINGS BONDS, section must demonstrate to Treasury’s heir to a deceased owner must comply SERIES A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, AND satisfaction that it made reasonable with the requirements of subpart L, and K, AND U.S. SAVINGS NOTES efforts to provide actual and not this section. Treasury will not constructive notice of the escheat recognize an escheat judgment that ■ 1. The authority citation for part 315 proceeding to all persons listed on the purports to vest a State with title to a continues to read as follows: face of the bond and all persons who bond that has not reached its final Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3105 and 5 U.S.C. may have an interest in the bond, and maturity. Treasury also will not 301. that those persons had an opportunity to recognize escheat judgments that be heard before the escheat judgment ■ purport to vest a State with title to a 2. Amend § 315.20 by revising was entered. paragraph (b) to read as follows: bond that the State does not possess, or (c) Fulfillment of Obligation. Payment judgments that purport to grant the State § 315.20 General to a State claiming title under this custody of a bond, but not title. * * * * * section fulfills the United States’ (b) Due Process. At a minimum, a (b) The Department of the Treasury obligations to the same extent as if State requesting payment under this will recognize a claim against an owner payment had been made to the section must demonstrate to Treasury’s of a savings bond and conflicting claims registered owner. satisfaction that it made reasonable
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37562 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
efforts to provide actual and this part, and not this section. Treasury ADDRESSES: You may submit comments constructive notice of the escheat will not recognize an escheat judgment identified by docket number using any proceeding to all persons listed on the that purports to vest a State with title to one of the following methods: face of the bond and all persons who a bond that is still earning interest. (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: may have an interest in the bond, and Treasury also will not recognize escheat http://www.regulations.gov. that those persons had an opportunity to judgments that purport to vest a State (2) Fax: 202–493–2251. be heard before the escheat judgment with title to a bond that the State does (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket was entered. not possess, or judgments that purport Management Facility (M–30), U.S. (c) Fulfillment of Obligation. Payment to grant the State custody of a bond, but Department of Transportation, West to a State claiming title under this not title. Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, section fulfills the United States’ (b) Due Process. At a minimum, a 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., obligations to the same extent as if State requesting payment under this Washington, DC 20590–0001. Deliveries payment had been made to the section must demonstrate to Treasury’s accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., registered owner. satisfaction that it made reasonable Monday through Friday, except federal efforts to provide actual and holidays. The telephone number is 202– PART 360—REGULATIONS constructive notice of the escheat 366–9329. GOVERNING DEFINITIVE UNITED proceeding to all persons listed on the See the ‘‘Public Participation and STATES SAVINGS BONDS, SERIES I face of the bond and all persons who Request for Comments’’ portion of the ■ 1. The authority for this part may have an interest in the bond, and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section continues to read: that those persons had an opportunity to below for further instructions on be heard before the escheat judgment submitting comments. To avoid Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 31 U.S.C. 3105 duplication, please use only one of and 3125. was entered. (c) Fulfillment of Obligation. Payment these three methods. ■ 2. Amend § 360.20 by revising to a State claiming title under this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If paragraph (b) to read as follows: section fulfills the United States’ you have questions on this rule, call or § 360.20 General obligations to the same extent as if email MST1 Jennifer Haggins, Marine payment had been made to the Safety Unit Pittsburgh Waterways * * * * * registered owner. Management Division, U.S. Coast (b) The Department of the Treasury Guard; telephone (412) 221–0807, email will recognize a claim against an owner Dated: June 26, 2015. [email protected]. If you have of a savings bond and conflicting claims David A. Lebryk, questions on viewing or submitting of ownership of, or interest in, a bond Fiscal Assistant Secretary. material to the docket, call Cheryl F. between coowners or between the [FR Doc. 2015–16278 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Collins, Program Manager, Docket registered owner and the beneficiary, if BILLING CODE 4810–AS–P Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. established by valid, judicial proceedings specifically listed in this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: subpart. Escheat proceedings will not be Table of Acronyms recognized under this subpart. Section DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 360.23 specifies the evidence required SECURITY DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register to establish the validity of the judicial Coast Guard proceedings. NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking SAR Search and Rescue * * * * * 33 CFR Part 165 ■ 3. Redesignate subpart M as subpart N A. Public Participation and Request for and add a new subpart M to read as [Docket Number USCG–2015–0332] Comments follows: RIN 1625–AA00 We encourage you to participate in Subpart M—Escheat and Unclaimed this rulemaking by submitting Property Claims by States Safety zone; Allegheny River Between comments and related materials. All Mile 0.0 and 1.4; Pittsburgh, PA comments received will be posted Sec. without change to http:// AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 360.77 Payment to a State claiming title to www.regulations.gov and will include abandoned bonds. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. any personal information you have provided. § 360.77 Payment to a State claiming title SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to abandoned bonds. to establish a temporary safety zone on 1. Submitting Comments (a) General. The Department of the the Allegheny River mile 0.0 to mile 1.4 If you submit a comment, please Treasury may, in its discretion, from 5:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. on August include the docket number for this recognize an escheat judgment that 8, 2015 and August 9, 2015. This safety rulemaking, indicate the specific section purports to vest a State with title to a zone is needed to protect persons of this document to which each definitive savings bond that has stopped participating in the Pittsburgh comment applies, and provide a reason earning interest and is in the State’s Triathlon. Entry into this zone will be for each suggestion or recommendation. possession, when the State presents prohibited to all vessels, mariners, and You may submit your comments and evidence satisfactory to Treasury that persons unless specifically authorized material online at http:// the bond has been abandoned by all by the Captain of the Port (COTP), www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or persons entitled to payment under Pittsburgh or a designated hand delivery, but please use only one Treasury regulations. A State claiming representative. of these means. If you submit a title to a definitive savings bond as the DATES: Comments and related material comment online, it will be considered heir to a deceased owner must comply must be received by the Coast Guard on received by the Coast Guard when you with the requirements of subpart L of or before July 16, 2015. successfully transmit the comment. If
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37563
you fax, hand deliver, or mail your determine that one would aid this within the enforcement areas is granted comment, it will be considered as rulemaking, we will hold one at a time by the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or having been received by the Coast and place announced by a later notice a designated representative, all persons Guard when it is received at the Docket in the Federal Register. and vessels receiving such authorization Management Facility. We recommend must comply with the instructions of B. Regulatory History and Information that you include your name and a the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh or a mailing address, an email address, or a The Coast Guard has a long history designated representative. telephone number in the body of your working with local, state, and federal E. Regulatory Analyses document so that we can contact you if agencies in areas to improve emergency we have questions regarding your response, to prepare for events that call We developed this proposed rule after submission. for swift action, and to protect our considering numerous statutes and To submit your comment online, go to nation. The Coast Guard is proposing to executive orders related to rulemaking. http://www.regulations.gov, type the establish this safety zone on the waters Below we summarize our analyses docket number [USCG–2015–0332] in of the Allegheny River for the Pittsburgh based on a number of these statutes or the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click Triathlon. The marine event is executive orders. scheduled to take place from 5:45 a.m. ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on ‘‘Submit a 1. Regulatory Planning and Review Comment’’ on the line associated with to 8:45 a.m. on August 8, 2015 and this rulemaking. August 9, 2015. This proposed rule is This proposed rule is not a significant If you submit your comments by mail necessary to protect the safety of the regulatory action under section 3(f) of or hand delivery, submit them in an participants, spectators, commercial Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 1 Planning and Review, as supplemented unbound format, no larger than 8 ⁄2 by traffic, and the general public on the 11 inches, suitable for copying and navigable waters of the United States by Executive Order 13563, Improving electronic filing. If you submit during the event. Regulation and Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of comments by mail and would like to C. Basis and Purpose know that they reached the Facility, potential costs and benefits under please enclose a stamped, self-addressed The legal basis and authorities for this section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 postcard or envelope. We will consider proposed rule are found in 33 U.S.C. or under section 1 of Executive Order all comments and material received 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 13563. The Office of Management and during the comment period and may 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department Budget has not reviewed it under those change the rule based on your of Homeland Security Delegation No. Orders. The temporary safety zone listed comments. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the in this proposed rule will restrict vessel Coast Guard to propose, establish, and traffic from entering, transiting, or 2. Viewing Comments and Documents define safety zones. The purpose of this anchoring within a portion of the To view comments, as well as proposed safety zone is to protect the Allegheny River. The effect of this documents mentioned in this preamble participants of the Pittsburgh Triathlon proposed regulation will not be as being available in the docket, go to during the swim portion of the event significant for several reasons: (1) The http://www.regulations.gov, type the from the hazards of other vessels in the amount of time the Allegheny River will docket number (USCG–2015–0332) in water. be closed (2) the impacts on routine navigation are expected to be minimal the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click D. Discussion of Proposed Rule ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket because notifications to the marine Folder on the line associated with this This proposed rule is necessary to community will be made through local rulemaking. You may also visit the establish a safety zone that will notice to mariners (LNM) and broadcast Docket Management Facility in Room encompass all waters of the Allegheny notice to mariners (BNM). Therefore, W12–140 on the ground floor of the River in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The these notifications will allow the public Department of Transportation West proposed safety zone regulations would to plan operations around the proposed Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., be enforced from approximately 5:45 safety zone and its enforcement times. a.m. to 8:45 a.m. for approximately 3 Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 2. Impact on Small Entities and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, hours on August 8, 2015 and August 9, except Federal holidays. 2015. As proposed, the safety zone The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 would be a complete closure on the (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 3. Privacy Act Allegheny River from mile 0.0 to mile requires federal agencies to consider the Anyone can search the electronic 1.4 from 5:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. on potential impact of regulations on small form of comments received into any of August 8, 2015 and August 9, 2015. All entities during rulemaking. The term our dockets by the name of the persons and vessels, except those ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small individual submitting the comment (or persons and vessels participating in the businesses, not-for-profit organizations signing the comment, if submitted on triathlon and those vessels enforcing the that are independently owned and behalf of an association, business, labor areas, would be prohibited from operated and are not dominant in their union, etc.). You may review a Privacy entering, transiting through, anchoring fields, and governmental jurisdictions Act notice regarding our public dockets in, or remaining within the proposed with populations of less than 50,000. in the January 17, 2008, issue of the safety zone area. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. Federal Register (73 FR 3316). Persons and vessels may request 605(b) that this proposed rule will not authorization to enter, transit through, have a significant economic impact on 4. Public Meeting anchor in, or remain within the a substantial number of small entities. We do not plan to hold a public enforcement areas by contacting the This proposed rule will affect the meeting. But you may submit a request Captain of the Port Pittsburgh by following entities, some of which may for one using one of the methods telephone at (412) 221–0807, or a be small entities: the owners or specified under ADDRESSES. Please designated representative via VHF radio operators of vessels intending to transit explain why you believe a public on channel 16. If authorization to enter, the Allegheny River from mile 0.0 to meeting would be beneficial. If we transit through, anchor in, or remain mile 1.4 effective from 5:45 a.m. to 8:45
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37564 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
a.m. on August 8, 2015 and August 9, 6. Protest Activities 12. Energy Effects 2015. This proposed safety zone will not The Coast Guard respects the First This proposed rule is not a have a significant economic impact on ‘‘significant energy action’’ under a substantial number of small entities Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the Executive Order 13211, Actions because this proposed rule will impede Concerning Regulations That navigational traffic for a short period of person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to Significantly Affect Energy Supply, time. Traffic in this area is almost Distribution, or Use. entirely limited to recreational vessels coordinate protest activities so that your and commercial towing vessels. message can be received without 13. Technical Standards Notifications to the marine community jeopardizing the safety or security of This proposed rule does not use will be made through BNMs and people, places or vessels. technical standards. Therefore, we did electronic mail. Notices of changes to 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act not consider the use of voluntary the proposed safety zone and scheduled consensus standards. effective times and enforcement periods The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 14. Environment will also be made. Deviation from the of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires proposed restrictions may be requested Federal agencies to assess the effects of We have analyzed this proposed rule from the COTP or designated their discretionary regulatory actions. In under Department of Homeland representative and will be considered particular, the Act addresses actions Security Management Directive 023–01 on a case-by-case basis. that may result in the expenditure by a and Commandant Instruction State, local, or tribal government, in the M16475.lD, which guide the Coast If you think that your business, aggregate, or by the private sector of Guard in complying with the National organization, or governmental $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or Environmental Policy Act of 1969 jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity more in any one year. Though this (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and and that this rulemaking would have a proposed rule would not result in such have made a preliminary determination significant economic impact on it, expenditure, we do discuss the effects of that this action is one of a category of please submit a comment (see this rule elsewhere in this preamble. actions that do not individually or ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it cumulatively have a significant effect on 8. Taking of Private Property qualifies and how and to what degree the human environment. This proposed this proposed rule would economically This proposed rule would not cause a rule involves establishing a temporary affect it. taking of private property or otherwise safety zone. The safety zone will be on 3. Assistance for Small Entities have taking implications under the Allegheny River mile 0.0 to mile 1.4 Executive Order 12630, Governmental from 5:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. on August Under section 213(a) of the Small Actions and Interference with 8, 2015 and August 9, 2015. This action Business Regulatory Enforcement Constitutionally Protected Property is necessary to protect persons and Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), Rights. property during the Pittsburgh we want to assist small entities in Triathlon. This rule is categorically understanding this proposed rule. If the 9. Civil Justice Reform excluded from further review under rule would affect your small business, This proposed rule meets applicable paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the organization, or governmental standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Commandant Instruction. A preliminary jurisdiction and you have questions Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice environmental analysis checklist concerning its provisions or options for Reform, to minimize litigation, supporting this determination and a compliance, please contact the person eliminate ambiguity, and reduce Categorical Exclusion Determination are listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION burden. available in the docket where indicated CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will under ADDRESSES. We seek any not retaliate against small entities that 10. Protection of Children From comments or information that may lead question or complain about this Environmental Health Risks to the discovery of a significant proposed rule or any policy or action of environmental impact from this We have analyzed this proposed rule the Coast Guard. proposed rule. under Executive Order 13045, 4. Collection of Information Protection of Children from List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Environmental Health Risks and Safety Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation This proposed rule will not call for a Risks. This rule is not an economically (water), Reporting and recordkeeping new collection of information under the significant rule and would not create an requirements, Security measures, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 environmental risk to health or risk to Waterways. U.S.C. 3501–3520.). safety that might disproportionately For the reasons discussed in the 5. Federalism affect children. preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 11. Indian Tribal Governments amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, This proposed rule does not have PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION Federalism, if it has a substantial direct tribal implications under Executive AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS effect on the States, on the relationship Order 13175, Consultation and between the national government and Coordination with Indian Tribal ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 the States, or on the distribution of Governments, because it would not have continues to read as follows: power and responsibilities among the a substantial direct effect on one or Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; various levels of government. We have more Indian tribes, on the relationship 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; analyzed this proposed rule under that between the Federal Government and Department of Homeland Security Delegation Order and determined that this Indian tribes, or on the distribution of No. 0170.1. rulemaking does not have implications power and responsibilities between the ■ 2. A new temporary § 165.T08–0332 is for federalism. Federal Government and Indian tribes. added to subpart F, under the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37565
undesignated center heading Eighth completely replace and supersede the 957.9 Appearances. Coast Guard District, to read as follows: prior rules. 957.10 Conduct of the hearing. 957.11 Witness fees. DATES: § 165.T08–0332 Safety Zone; Allegheny Comments must be received on 957.12 Transcript. River between mile 0.0 and 1.4; Pittsburgh, or before July 31, 2015. 957.13 Proposed findings of fact. PA. ADDRESSES: Judicial Officer Department, 957.14 Findings of fact. (a) Locations. The following area is a United States Postal Service, 2101 957.15 Computation of time. 957.16 Official record. temporary safety zone: All waters on the Wilson Boulevard, Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22201–3078. 957.17 Public information. Allegheny River mile 0.0 to mile 1.4. 957.18 Ex parte communications. (b) Effective date and time. The safety FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: zone listed in section (a) is effective Associate Judicial Officer Gary E. Authority: 39 U.S.C. 204, 401. from 5:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. on August Shapiro, (703) 812–1910. § 957.1 Authority for rules. 8, 2015 and August 9, 2015. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The rules The rules in this part are issued by the (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with governing the Judicial Officer’s role Judicial Officer of the Postal Service the general regulations in § 165.23 of regarding Postal Service debarments are pursuant to authority delegated by the this part, entry into this area is set forth in 39 CFR part 957. The Postmaster General (39 U.S.C. 204, 401). prohibited unless authorized by the proposed rules would completely Captain of the Port (COTP) Pittsburgh or replace the former rules of this part. § 957.2 Scope of rules. a designated representative. In 2007, the Postal Service changed its The rules in this part apply to (2) Spectator vessels may safely procurement regulations regarding proceedings initiated pursuant to transit outside the safety zones at a suspension and debarment from paragraphs (g)(2) or (h)(2) of § 601.113 of minimum safe speed, but may not contracting. See 72 FR 58252 (October this chapter. anchor, block, loiter, or impede 15, 2007). Whereas prior to that change, § 957.3 Definitions. participants or official patrol vessels. the Judicial Officer conducted hearings (3) Vessels requiring entry into or and rendered final agency decisions (a) Vice President means the Vice passage through the safety zones must regarding suspension and debarment President, Supply Management, or the Vice President’s representative for the request permission from the COTP from contracting, the revised purpose of carrying out the provisions Pittsburgh or a designated procurement regulations at 39 CFR representative. They may be contacted of § 601.113 of this chapter. 601.113 eliminated any role of the (b) General Counsel includes the by telephone at (412) 412–0807. Judicial Officer from suspensions, and (4) All vessels shall comply with the Postal Service’s General Counsel and reserved final agency action regarding any designated representative within instructions of the COTP Pittsburgh and debarments to the Vice President, the Office of the General Counsel. designated personnel. Designated Supply Management. The remaining (c) Judicial Officer includes the Postal personnel include commissioned, role of the Judicial Officer relative to Service’s Judicial Officer, Associate warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. debarment from contracting is set forth Judicial Officer, and Acting Judicial Coast Guard. in paragraphs (g)(2) and (h)(2) of Officer. (d) Informational Broadcasts: The § 601.113. Those paragraphs provide (d) Debarment has the meaning given Captain of the Port, Pittsburgh or a that the Vice President, Supply by paragraph (b)(2) of § 601.113 of this designated representative will inform Management, may request the Judicial chapter. the public through broadcast notices to Officer to conduct fact-finding hearings (e) Respondent means any individual, mariners (BNM) of the effective period to resolve questions of material facts firm or other entity which has been for the safety zone and of any changes involving a debarment, and will served a written notice of proposed in the effective period, enforcement consider those findings when deciding debarment pursuant to paragraph (h), or times, or size of the safety zones. the matter. Under paragraph (h)(2) of which previously has been debarred, as Dated: June 10, 2015. § 601.113, fact-finding hearings will be provided in paragraph (g)(2) of L. N. Weaver, governed by rules of procedure § 601.113 of this chapter. Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of promulgated by the Judicial Officer. (f) Hearing Officer means the judge the Port Pittsburgh. These rules of procedure satisfy that assigned to the case by the Judicial [FR Doc. 2015–16258 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] requirement. Officer. The Hearing Officer may be the Judicial Officer, Associate Judicial BILLING CODE 9110–04–P List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 957 Officer, Administrative Law Judge or an Administrative practice and Administrative Judge who is a member procedure, Government contracts. of the Postal Service Board of Contract POSTAL SERVICE Accordingly, for the reasons stated, Appeals. 39 CFR Part 957 the Postal Service proposes to revise 39 (g) Recorder means the Recorder of CFR part 957 to read as follows: the Judicial Officer Department of the Rules of Practice in Proceedings United States Postal Service, 2101 Relative to Debarment From PART 957—RULES OF PRACTICE IN Wilson Boulevard, Suite 600, Arlington, Contracting PROCEEDINGS RELATIVE TO VA 22201–3078. The Recorder’s DEBARMENT FROM CONTRACTING telephone number is (703) 812–1900, AGENCY: Postal Service. fax number is (703) 812–1901, and the Sec. ACTION: Proposed rule. 957.1 Authority for rules. Judicial Officer’s Web site is http:// 957.2 Scope of rules. www.about.usps.com/who-we-are/ SUMMARY: This document requests 957.3 Definitions. judicial/welcome.htm. comments regarding a revision of the 957.4 Authority of the Hearing Officer. § 957.4 Authority of the Hearing Officer. rules for proceedings in which the 957.5 Case initiation. Judicial Officer Department conducts 957.6 Filing documents for the record. The Hearing Officer’s authority fact-finding relative to debarments. The 957.7 Failure to appear at the hearing. includes, but is not limited to, the revised rules of procedure would 957.8 Hearings. following:
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37566 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
(a) Ruling on all motions or requests § 957.6 Filing documents for the record. cross-examination. The Hearing Officer by the parties. The parties shall file documents, may exclude evidence to avoid unfair (b) Issuing notices, orders or permitted by the rules in this part or prejudice, confusion of the issues, memoranda to the parties concerning required by the Hearing Officer, in the undue delay, waste of time, or the hearing proceedings. Judicial Officer Department’s electronic presentation of irrelevant, immaterial or (c) Conducting conferences with the filing system. The Web site for cumulative evidence. Although the parties. The Hearing Officer will prepare electronic filing is https:// Hearing Officer will consider the a Memorandum of Conference, which uspsjoe.justware.com/justiceweb. Federal Rules of Evidence for guidance will be transmitted to both parties and Documents submitted using that system regarding admissibility of evidence and which serves as the official record of are considered filed as of the date and other evidentiary issues, he or she is not that conference. time (Eastern Time) reflected in the bound by those rules. The weight to be (d) Determining whether an oral system. Orders issued by the Hearing attached to evidence presented in any hearing will be conducted, and setting Officer shall be considered received by particular form will be within the the place, date, and time for such a the parties on the date posted to the discretion of the Hearing Officer, taking hearing. electronic filing system. into consideration all the circumstances of the particular case. Stipulations of (e) Administering oaths or § 957.7 Failure to appear at the hearing. fact agreed upon by the parties may be affirmations to witnesses. If a party fails to appear at the accepted as evidence at the hearing. The (f) Conducting the proceedings and hearing, the Hearing Officer may parties may stipulate the testimony that the hearing in a manner to maintain proceed with the hearing, receive would be given by a witness if the discipline and decorum while ensuring evidence and issue findings of fact witness were present. The Hearing that relevant, reliable and probative without requirement of further notice to Officer may in any case require evidence is elicited, but irrelevant, the absent party. evidence in addition to that offered by immaterial or repetitious evidence is § 957.8 Hearings. the parties. A party requiring the use of excluded. The Hearing Officer in his or a foreign language interpreter allowing her discretion may examine witnesses to Hearings ordinarily will be conducted testimony to be taken in English for ensure that a satisfactory record is in the Judicial Officer Department itself or witnesses it proffers is developed. courtroom at 2101 Wilson Boulevard, responsible for making all necessary (g) Establishing the record. The Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22201–3078. arrangements and paying all costs and weight to be attached to evidence will However, the Hearing Officer, in his or expenses associated with the use of an rest within the discretion of the Hearing her discretion, may order the hearing to interpreter. Officer. Except as the Hearing Officer be conducted at another location, or by may otherwise order, no proof shall be another means such as by video. § 957.11 Witness fees. received in evidence after completion of § 957.9 Appearances. Each party is responsible for the fees a hearing. The Hearing Officer may and costs for its own witnesses. require either party, with appropriate (a) An individual Respondent may appear in his or her own behalf, a notice to the other party, to submit § 957.12 Transcript. additional evidence on any relevant corporation may appear by an officer matter. thereof, a partnership or joint venture Testimony and argument at hearings may appear by a member thereof, or any shall be reported verbatim, unless the (h) Granting reasonable time of these may appear by a licensed Hearing Officer otherwise orders. extensions or other relief for good cause attorney. Transcripts of the proceedings will be shown, in the Hearing Officer’s sole (b) After a request for a hearing has made available or provided to the discretion. been filed pursuant to the rules in this parties. (i) Issuing findings of fact. The part, the General Counsel shall Hearing Officer will issue findings of designate a licensed attorney as counsel § 957.13 Proposed findings of fact. fact to the Vice President within 30 days assigned to handle the case. (a) The Hearing Officer may direct the from the close of the record, to the (c) All counsel, or a self-represented extent practicable. parties to submit proposed findings of Respondent, shall register in the fact and supporting explanations within § 957.5 Case initiation. electronic filing system, and request to 15 days after the delivery of the official be added to the case. Counsel also transcript to the Recorder who shall (a) Upon receipt of a request or promptly shall file notices of referral from the Vice President, the notify both parties of the date of its appearance. receipt. The filing date for proposed Recorder will docket a case under this (d) An attorney for any party who has Part. Following docketing, the Judicial findings shall be the same for both filed a notice of appearance and who parties. Officer will assign a Hearing Officer. wishes to withdraw must file a motion The Hearing Officer will establish the requesting withdrawal, explaining the (b) Proposed findings of fact shall be schedule for the proceeding, perform all reasons supporting the motion, and set forth in numbered paragraphs and judicial duties under this Part and identifying the name, email address, shall state with particularity all render Findings of Fact. Whenever mailing address, telephone number, and evidentiary facts in the record with practicable, a hearing should be fax number of the person who will appropriate citations to the transcript or conducted within 30 days of the date of assume responsibility for representation exhibits supporting the proposed docketing. of the party in question. findings. (b) The request or referral from the § 957.14 Findings of fact. Vice President shall include the notice § 957.10 Conduct of the hearing. of proposed debarment and the The Hearing Officer may approve or The Hearing Officer shall issue information or argument submitted by disapprove witnesses in his or her written findings of fact, and transmit the Respondent pursuant to paragraphs discretion. All testimony will be taken them to the Vice President. Copies will (g) or (h) of § 601.113 of this chapter. under oath or affirmation, and subject to be sent to the parties.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37567
§ 957.15 Computation of time. A. Background PART 961—RULES OF PRACTICE IN A designated period of time under the PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 5 OF The Judicial Officer Department THE DEBT COLLECTION ACT rules in this part excludes the day the recently implemented an electronic period begins, and includes the last day filing system. Changes to the rules of ■ 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR of the period unless the last day is a practice concerning debt collection part 961 continues to read as follows: Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, in proceedings against current and former which event the period runs until the Authority: 39 U.S.C. 204, 401; 5 U.S.C. postal employees (39 CFR parts 961 and 5514. close of business on the next business 966, respectively) are necessary to day. ■ 2. In § 961.4, revise the first sentence accommodate the new system, and to of paragraph (a), and add a sentence at § 957.16 Official record. establish rules relative to that system. the beginning of paragraph (b) to read as No other changes to the rules are follows: The transcript of testimony together proposed. with all pleadings, orders, exhibits, § 961.4 Employee petition for a hearing. briefs, and other documents filed in the B. Explanation of Changes (a) If an employee desires a hearing, proceeding shall constitute the official Amendments to 39 CFR Part 961 prescribed by section 5 of the Debt record of the proceeding. Collection Act, to challenge the Postal In § 961.4, concerning filing a § 957.17 Public information. Service’s determination of the existence petition: or amount of a debt, or to challenge the The Postal Service shall maintain for • Paragraph (a) is amended to identify involuntary repayment terms proposed public inspection copies of all findings the internet address for the electronic by the Postal Service, the employee of fact issued under this Part, and make filing system. must file a written petition them available through the Postal • electronically at https:// Service Web site. The Recorder Paragraph (b) is amended to indicate that a sample petition is uspsjoe.justware.com/justiceweb, or by maintains the complete official record of mail at Recorder, Judicial Officer every proceeding. available through the electronic filing system. Department, United States Postal § 957.18 Ex parte communications. In § 961.6, concerning the filing, Service, 2101 Wilson Blvd., Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22201–3078, on or before The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 551(14), docketing and serving of documents, the fifteenth (15th) calendar day 556(d), and 557(d) prohibiting ex parte paragraph (a) is amended to indicate following the receipt of the Postal communications are made applicable to when documents submitted by parties Service’s ‘‘Notice of Involuntary proceedings under these rules of are considered received, and to indicate Administrative Salary Offsets Under the practice. when service of documents on the opposing party is required for purposes Debt Collection Act.’’ * * * Stanley F. Mires, of the electronic filing system. (b) A sample petition is available Attorney, Federal Compliance. through the Judicial Officer Electronic [FR Doc. 2015–16143 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Amendments to 39 CFR Part 966 Filing Web site (https:// uspsjoe.justware.com/justiceweb).*** BILLING CODE 7710–12–P In § 966.4, concerning filing a petition: * * * * * ■ 3. Revise paragraph (a) of § 961.6 to • POSTAL SERVICE Paragraph (c) is amended to identify read as follows: the internet address for the electronic 39 CFR Parts 961, 966 filing system. § 961.6 Filing, docketing and serving • documents; computation of time; Paragraph (d) is amended to representation of parties. Rules of Practice Before the Judicial indicate that a sample petition is (a) Filing. After a petition is filed, all Officer available through the electronic filing documents relating to the Debt system. AGENCY: Postal Service. Collection Act hearing proceedings In § 966.6, concerning the filing, must be filed using the electronic filing ACTION: Proposed rule. docketing and serving of documents, system unless the Hearing Official paragraph (a) is amended to indicate SUMMARY: permits otherwise. Documents This document proposes to when documents submitted by parties amend the rules of practice prescribed submitted using the electronic filing are considered received, and to indicate system are considered filed as of the by the Judicial Officer relative to debt when service of documents on the collection proceedings against current date/time (Eastern Time) reflected in the opposing party is required for purposes system. Documents mailed to the and former postal employees. These of the electronic filing system. amendments are necessary to Recorder are considered filed on the implement a new electronic filing List of Subjects date mailed as evidenced by a United system. States Postal Service postmark. Filings 39 CFR Part 961 by any other means are considered filed DATES: Comments must be received on Claims, Government employees, upon receipt by the Recorder of a or before July 31, 2015. Wages. complete copy of the filing during ADDRESSES: Postal Service Judicial normal business hours (Normal Officer Department, 2101 Wilson 39 CFR Part 966 Recorder office business hours are between 8:45 a.m. and 4:45 p.m., Boulevard, Suite 600, Arlington, VA Administrative practice and Eastern Time). If both parties are 22201–3078. procedure, Claims, Government participating via the electronic filing employees, Wages. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: system, separate service upon the Associate Judicial Officer Gary E. Accordingly, for the reasons stated, opposing party is not required. Shapiro, (703) 812–1910. the Postal Service proposes to amend 39 Otherwise, documents shall be served SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CFR parts 961 and 966 as follows: personally or by mail on the opposing
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37568 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
party, noting on the document filed, or submitted using the electronic filing indicating that the petitioned actions on the transmitting letter, that a copy system are considered filed as of the may be warranted, we find that one has been so furnished. date/time (Eastern Time) reflected in the petition does not present substantial * * * * * system. Documents mailed to the information that the petitioned entity Recorder are considered filed on the may be a listable entity under the Act, PART 966—RULES OF PRACTICE IN date mailed as evidenced by a United and we find that one petition does not PROCEEDINGS RELATIVE TO States Postal Service postmark. Filings present substantial information that the ADMINISTRATIVE OFFSETS INITIATED by any other means are considered filed petitioned entity may be a listable entity AGAINST FORMER EMPLOYEES OF upon receipt by the Recorder of a under the Act and does not present THE POSTAL SERVICE complete copy of the filing during substantial scientific or commercial normal business hours (Normal ■ 4. The authority citation for 39 CFR information indicating that the Recorder office business hours are part 966 continues to read as follows: petitioned action may be warranted, and between 8:45 a.m. and 4:45 p.m., we are not initiating status reviews in Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3716; 39 U.S.C. 204, Eastern Time). If both parties are response to these petitions. We refer to 401, 2601. participating via the electronic filing these as ‘‘not-substantial petition ■ 5. In § 966.4, revise paragraph (c), and system, separate service upon the findings.’’ Based on our review, we find add a sentence at the beginning of opposing party is not required. that 21 petitions present substantial paragraph (d) to read as follows: Otherwise, documents shall be served scientific or commercial information personally or by mail on the opposing indicating that the petitioned actions § 966.4 Petition for a hearing and party, noting on the document filed, or supplement to petition. may be warranted. Therefore, with the on the transmitting letter, that a copy publication of this document, we are * * * * * has been so furnished. initiating a review of the status of each (c) Within thirty (30) calendar days * * * * * of these species to determine if the after the date of receipt of the petitioned actions are warranted. To Accounting Service Center’s decision Stanley F. Mires, ensure that these status reviews are upon reconsideration, after the Attorney, Federal Compliance. comprehensive, we are requesting expiration of sixty (60) calendar days [FR Doc. 2015–16141 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] scientific and commercial data and after a request for reconsideration where BILLING CODE 7710–12–P other information regarding these a reconsideration determination is not made, or following an administrative species. Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month findings on the offset taken without prior notice and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR opportunity for reconsideration petitions, which will address whether the petitioned action is warranted, as pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this Fish and Wildlife Service section, the former employee must file provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. a written petition electronically at 50 CFR Part 17 DATES: To allow us adequate time to https://uspsjoe.justware.com/justiceweb, [4500030115] conduct the status reviews, we request or by mail at Recorder, Judicial Officer that we receive information on or before Department, United States Postal Endangered and Threatened Wildlife August 31, 2015. Information submitted Service, 2101 Wilson Blvd., Suite 600, and Plants; 90-Day Findings on 31 electronically using the Federal Arlington, VA 22201–3078. Petitions eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, (d) A sample petition is available below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. through the Judicial Officer Electronic AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastern Time on the closing date. Filing Web site (https:// Interior. uspsjoe.justware.com/justiceweb).*** ACTION: Notice of petition findings and ADDRESSES: Not-substantial petition findings: The not-substantial petition * * * * * initiation of status reviews. findings announced in this document ■ 6. Revise paragraph (a) of § 966.6 to SUMMARY: are available on http:// read as follows: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90- www.regulations.gov under the § 966.6 Filing, docketing and serving day findings on various petitions to list appropriate docket number (see Table 1, documents; computation of time; 30 species and one petition that below). Supporting information in representation of parties. describes itself as a petition to reclassify preparing these findings is available for (a) Filing. After a petition is filed, all one species under the Endangered public inspection, by appointment, documents required under this part Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). during normal business hours by must be filed using the electronic filing Based on our review, we find that eight contacting the appropriate person, as system unless the Hearing Official petitions do not present substantial specified under FOR FURTHER permits otherwise. Documents scientific or commercial information INFORMATION CONTACT.
TABLE 1—NOT-SUBSTANTIAL PETITION FINDINGS
Species Docket No. Docket link
Blue Ridge gray-cheeked FWS–R4–ES–2015–0042 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0042 salamander. Caddo Mountain salamander FWS–R4–ES–2015–0043 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0043 California giant salamander FWS–R8–ES–2015–0044 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R8-ES-2015-0044 Colorado checkered whiptail FWS–R6–ES–2015–0048 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R6-ES-2015-0048 Distinct population segment FWS–R8–ES–2015–0049 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R8-ES-2015-0049 of North American wild horse.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37569
TABLE 1—NOT-SUBSTANTIAL PETITION FINDINGS—Continued
Species Docket No. Docket link
Gray wolf, excluding Mexi- FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0072 http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-HQ-ES-2015-0072 can wolf, in the conterminous U.S.. Olympic torrent salamander FWS–R1–ES–2015–0056 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R1-ES-2015-0056 Pigeon Mountain sala- FWS–R4–ES–2015–0058 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0058 mander. Weller’s salamander ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0065 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0065 Wingtail crayfish ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0067 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0067
Status reviews: You may submit provided comment box, please use this docket number; see table below]; U.S. information on species for which a feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, status review is being initiated (see it is most compatible with our 5275 Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA Table 2, below) by one of the following information review procedures. If you 22041–3803. methods: attach your information as a separate We request that you send information (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal document, our preferred file format is only by the methods described above. eRulemaking Portal: http:// Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, comments (such as form letters), our We will post all information received on enter the appropriate docket number preferred format is a spreadsheet in http://www.regulations.gov. This (see Table 2, below). Then click the Microsoft Excel. generally means that we will post any Search button. You may submit (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail personal information you provide us information by clicking on ‘‘Comment or hand-delivery to: Public Comments (see the Request for Information section, Now!’’ If your information will fit in the Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate below, for more details).
TABLE 2—SUBSTANTIAL PETITION FINDINGS
Species Docket number Docket link
Alligator snapping turtle ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0038 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0038 Apalachicola kingsnake ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0039 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0039 Arizona toad ...... FWS–R2–ES–2015–0040 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R2-ES-2015-0040 Blanding’s turtle ...... FWS–R3–ES–2015–0041 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R3-ES-2015-0041 Cascade Caverns sala- FWS–R2–ES–2015–0045 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R2-ES-2015-0045 mander. Cascades frog ...... FWS–R1–ES–2015–0046 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R1-ES-2015-0046 Cedar Key mole skink ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0047 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0047 Foothill yellow-legged frog ... FWS–R8–ES–2015–0050 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R8-ES-2015-0050 Gopher frog ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0051 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0051 Green salamander ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0052 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0052 Illinois chorus frog ...... FWS–R3–ES–2015–0053 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R3-ES-2015-0053 Kern Canyon slender sala- FWS–R8–ES–2015–0054 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R8-ES-2015-0054 mander. Key ringneck snake ...... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0055 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0055 Oregon slender salamander FWS–R1–ES–2015–0057 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R1-ES-2015-0057 Relictual slender salamander FWS–R8–ES–2015–0059 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R8-ES-2015-0059 Rim Rock crowned snake .... FWS–R4–ES–2015–0060 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0060 Rio Grande cooter ...... FWS–R2–ES–2015–0061 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R2-ES-2015-0061 Silvery phacelia ...... FWS–R1–ES–2015–0062 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R1-ES-2015-0062 Southern hog-nosed snake .. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0063 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R4-ES-2015-0063 Spotted turtle ...... FWS–R5–ES–2015–0064 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R5-ES-2015-0064 Western spadefoot toad ...... FWS–R8–ES–2015–0066 .. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FWS-R8-ES-2015-0066
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Species Contact information Species Contact information
Species Contact information Caddo Mountain Andreas Moshogianis; Distinct population Doug Krofta; (703) 358– salamander. (404) 679–7119 segment of 2527 Alligator snapping Andreas Moshogianis; California giant Dan Russell; (916) 414– North American turtle. (404) 679–7119 salamander. 6647 wild horse. Apalachicola Andreas Moshogianis; Cascade Caverns Michelle Shaughnessy; Foothill yellow- Dan Russell; (916) 414– kingsnake. (404) 679–7119 salamander. (505) 248–6920 legged frog. 6647 Arizona toad ...... Michelle Shaughnessy; Cascades frog ...... Paul Henson; (503) Gopher frog ...... Andreas Moshogianis; (505) 248–6920 231–6179 (404) 679–7119 Blanding’s turtle .... Laura Ragan; (612) Cedar Key mole Andreas Moshogianis; Gray wolf, exclud- Don Morgan; (703) 358– 713–5350 skink. (404) 679–7119 ing Mexican 2444 Blue Ridge gray- Susan Cameron; (828) Colorado check- Leslie Ellwood; (303) wolf, in the cheeked sala- 258–3939, ext. 224 ered whiptail. 236–4747 conterminous mander. U.S.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:07 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37570 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Species Contact information American Tribes, the scientific journal articles or other publications) to community, industry, and any other allow us to verify any scientific or Green salamander Andreas Moshogianis; interested parties. We seek information commercial information you include. (404) 679–7119 on: Submissions merely stating support Illinois chorus frog Laura Ragan; (612) (1) The species’ biology, range, and for or opposition to the actions under 713–5350 population trends, including: consideration without providing Kern Canyon slen- Dan Russell; (916) 414– (a) Habitat requirements; der salamander. 6647 supporting information or analysis, (b) Genetics and taxonomy; although noted, will not be considered Key ringneck Andreas Moshogianis; (c) Historical and current range, snake. (404) 679–7119 in making a determination. Section including distribution patterns; 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that Olympic torrent Eric Rickerson; (360) (d) Historical and current population salamander. 753–9440 determinations as to whether any levels, and current and projected trends; Oregon slender Paul Henson; (503) species is an endangered or threatened and salamander. 231–6179 species must be made ‘‘solely on the Pigeon Mountain Andreas Moshogianis; (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its habitat, or basis of the best scientific and salamander. (404) 679–7119 commercial data available.’’ Relictual slender Dan Russell; (916) 414– both. salamander. 6647 (2) The factors that are the basis for You may submit your information Rim Rock crowned Andreas Moshogianis; making a listing, reclassification, or concerning these status reviews by one snake. (404) 679–7119 delisting determination for a species of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES Rio Grande cooter Michelle Shaughnessy; under section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 section. If you submit information via (505) 248–6920 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are: http://www.regulations.gov, your entire Silvery phacelia .... Paul Henson; (503) (a) The present or threatened submission—including any personal 231–6179 destruction, modification, or identifying information—will be posted Southern hog- Andreas Moshogianis; on the Web site. If you submit a nosed snake. (404) 679–7119 curtailment of its habitat or range Spotted turtle ...... Wende Mahaney; (207) (Factor A); hardcopy that includes personal 866–3344 (b) Overutilization for commercial, identifying information, you may Weller’s sala- Susan Cameron; (828) recreational, scientific, or educational request at the top of your document that mander. 258–3939, ext. 224 purposes (Factor B); we withhold this personal identifying Western spadefoot Dan Russell; (916) 414– (c) Disease or predation (Factor C); information from public review. toad. 6647 (d) The inadequacy of existing However, we cannot guarantee that we Wingtail crayfish ... Patty Kelly; (850) 769– regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); or will be able to do so. We will post all 0552, x 228 (e) Other natural or manmade factors hardcopy submissions on http:// affecting its continued existence (Factor www.regulations.gov. If you use a telecommunications E). Information and supporting device for the deaf (TDD), please call the (3) The potential effects of climate documentation that we received and Federal Information Relay Service change on the species and its habitat. used in preparing this finding will be (4) If, after the status review, we (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. available for you to review at http:// determine that listing is warranted, we SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: www.regulations.gov, or you may make will propose critical habitat (see an appointment during normal business Request for Information definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act) hours at the appropriate lead U.S. Fish under section 4 of the Act for those When we make a finding that a and Wildlife Service Field Office (see petition presents substantial species that fall within the jurisdiction FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). information indicating that listing, of the United States, to the maximum reclassification, or delisting a species extent prudent and determinable at the Background time we propose to list the species. may be warranted, we are required to Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires Therefore, we also specifically request promptly review the status of the that we make a finding on whether a data and information for the 21 species species (status review). For the status petition to list, delist, or reclassify a for which we are conducting status review to be complete and based on the species presents substantial scientific or reviews on: best available scientific and commercial commercial information indicating that (a) What may constitute ‘‘physical or information, we request information on the petitioned action may be warranted. biological features essential to the alligator snapping turtle, Apalachicola To the maximum extent practicable, we conservation of the species,’’ within the kingsnake, Arizona toad, Blanding’s are to make this finding within 90 days geographical range occupied by the turtle, Cascade Caverns salamander, of our receipt of the petition and species; Cascades frog, Cedar Key mole skink, publish our notice of the finding foothill yellow-legged frog, gopher frog, (b) Where these features are currently found; promptly in the Federal Register. green salamander, Illinois chorus frog, Our standard for substantial scientific Kern Canyon slender salamander, Key (c) Whether any of these features may require special management or commercial information within the ringneck snake, Oregon slender Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with salamander, relictual slender considerations or protection; (d) Specific areas outside the regard to a 90-day petition finding is salamander, Rim Rock crowned snake, ‘‘that amount of information that would Rio Grande cooter, silvery phacelia, geographical area occupied by the species that are ‘‘essential for the lead a reasonable person to believe that southern hog-nosed snake, spotted the measure proposed in the petition turtle, and western spadefoot toad from conservation of the species’’; and (e) What, if any, critical habitat you may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). governmental agencies, Native think we should propose for designation If we find that substantial scientific or if the species is proposed for listing, and commercial information was presented, why such habitat meets the we are required to promptly commence requirements of section 4 of the Act. a review of the status of the species, Please include sufficient information which we will subsequently summarize with your submission (such as scientific in our 12-month finding.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37571
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) or threatened and critical habitat be review we will thoroughly evaluate all and its implementing regulations at 50 designated under the Act. The petition potential threats to the species. CFR 424 set forth the procedures for clearly identified itself as such and Thus, for the Apalachicola kingsnake, adding a species to, or removing a included the requisite identification the Service requests information on the species from, the Federal Lists of information for the petitioner, required five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding of the Act, including the factors and Plants. A species may be addresses the petition. identified in this finding (see Request determined to be an endangered or for Information, above). threatened species due to one or more Finding of the five factors described in section Based on our review of the petition Evaluation of a Petition To List the 4(a)(1) of the Act (see (2) under Request and sources cited in the petition, we Arizona Toad as an Endangered or For Information, above). find that the petition presents Threatened Species Under the Act In considering what factors might substantial scientific or commercial Additional information regarding our constitute threats, we must look beyond information indicating that the review of this petition can be found as the exposure of the species to a factor petitioned action may be warranted for an appendix at http:// to evaluate whether the species may the alligator snapping turtle www.regulations.gov under Docket No. respond to the factor in a way that (Macrochelys temminckii; previously FWS–R2–ES–2015–0040 under the causes actual impacts to the species. If Macroclemys temminckii) based on Supporting Documents section. there is exposure to a factor and the Factors A, B, C and D. However, during species responds negatively, the factor our status review we will thoroughly Species and Range may be a threat, and, during the evaluate all potential threats to the subsequent status review, we attempt to species. Arizona toad (Anaxyrus determine how significant a threat it is. Thus, for the alligator snapping turtle, microscaphus); Arizona, California, The threat is significant if it drives, or the Service requests information on the Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah contributes to, the risk of extinction of five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) Petition History the species such that the species may of the Act, including the factors warrant listing as an ‘‘endangered identified in this finding (see Request On July 11, 2012, we received a species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species,’’ as for Information, above). petition dated July 11, 2012, from the those terms are defined in the Act. Center for Biological Diversity Evaluation of a Petition To List the However, the identification of factors requesting that 53 species of reptiles Apalachicola Kingsake as an that could affect a species negatively and amphibians, including the Arizona Endangered or Threatened Species may not be sufficient for us to find that toad, be listed as endangered or Under the Act the information in the petition and our threatened and critical habitat be files is substantial. The information Additional information regarding our designated under the Act. The petition must include evidence sufficient to review of this petition can be found as clearly identified itself as such and suggest that these factors may be an appendix at http:// included the requisite identification operative threats that act on the species www.regulations.gov under Docket No. information for the petitioner, required to the point that the species may meet FWS–R4–ES–2015–0039 under the at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding the definition of an ‘‘endangered Supporting Documents section. addresses the petition. species’’ or ‘‘threatened species’’ under Species and Range Finding the Act. Apalachicola kingsnake (Lampropeltis Based on our review of the petition Evaluation of a Petition To List the getula meansi); Florida and sources cited in the petition, we Alligator Snapping Turtle as an find that the petition presents Endangered or Threatened Species Petition History substantial scientific or commercial Under the Act On July 11, 2012, we received a information indicating that the petition dated July 11, 2012, from The Additional information regarding our petitioned action may be warranted for Center for Biological Diversity, review of this petition can be found as the Arizona toad (Anaxyrus requesting that 53 species of reptiles an appendix at http:// microscaphus) based on Factor E. and amphibians, including the www.regulations.gov under Docket No. However, during our status review we Apalachicola kingsnake, be listed as FWS–R4–ES–2015–0038 under the will thoroughly evaluate all potential endangered or threatened and critical Supporting Documents section. threats to the species. habitat be designated under the Act. The Species and Range petition clearly identified itself as such Thus, for the Arizona toad, the Alligator snapping turtle and included the requisite identification Service requests information on the five (Macrochelys temminckii; previously information for the petitioner, required listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of Macroclemys temminckii); Alabama, at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding the Act, including the factors identified Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, addresses the petition. in this finding (see Request for Information, above). Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Finding Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Evaluation of a Petition To List the Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. Based on our review of the petition Blanding’s Turtle as an Endangered or and sources cited in the petition, we Threatened Species Under the Act Petition History find that the petition presents On July 11, 2012, we received a substantial scientific or commercial Additional information regarding our petition dated July 11, 2012, from The information indicating that the review of this petition can be found as Center for Biological Diversity, petitioned action may be warranted for an appendix at http:// requesting that 53 species of reptiles the Apalachicola kingsnake www.regulations.gov under Docket No. and amphibians, including the alligator (Lampropeltis getula meansi) based on FWS–R3–ES–2015–0041 under the snapping turtle, be listed as endangered Factor A. However, during our status Supporting Documents section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37572 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Species and Range and included the requisite identification ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. Blanding’s turtle (Emydoidea information for the petitioner, required However, we ask that the public submit blandingii); Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, New at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding to us any new information that becomes Hampshire, New York, Maine, addresses the petition. available concerning the status of, or threats to, the Caddo Mountain Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Finding Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Pennsylvania, salamander or its habitat at any time South Dakota, and Wisconsin, United Based on our review of the petition (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). and sources cited in the petition, we States; Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Evaluation of a Petition To List the Scotia, Canada. find that the petition does not provide substantial information indicating that California Giant Salamander as an Petition History listing the species may be warranted. Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Act On July 11, 2012, we received a We are not initiating a status review of petition dated July 11, 2012, from the this species in response to the petition. Additional information regarding our Center for Biological Diversity Our justification for this finding can be review of this petition can be found as requesting that 53 species of reptiles found as an appendix at http:// an appendix at http:// and amphibians, including the www.regulations.gov under Docket No. www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Blanding’s turtle, be listed as FWS–R4–ES–2015–0042 under the FWS–R8–ES–2015–0044 under the endangered or threatened and critical ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. Supporting Documents section. However, we ask that the public submit habitat be designated under the Act. The Species and Range petition clearly identified itself as such to us any new information that becomes and included the requisite identification available concerning the status of, or California giant salamander information for the petitioner, required threats to, the Blue Ridge gray-cheeked (Dicamptodon ensatus); California at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding salamander salamander or its habitat at Petition History addresses the petition. any time (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). On July 11, 2012, we received a Finding petition dated July 11, 2012, from the Evaluation of a Petition To List the Based on our review of the petition Center for Biological Diversity Caddo Mountain Salamander as an and sources cited in the petition, we requesting that 53 species of reptiles Endangered or Threatened Species find that the petition presents and amphibians, including the Under the Act substantial scientific or commercial California giant salamander, be listed as information indicating that the Additional information regarding our endangered or threatened and critical petitioned action may be warranted for review of this petition can be found as habitat be designated under the Act. The the Blanding’s turtle (Emydoidea an appendix at http:// petition clearly identified itself as such blandingii) based on Factors A, B, C, D, www.regulations.gov under Docket No. and included the requisite identification and E. However, during our status FWS–R4–ES–2015–0043 under the information for the petitioner, required review we will thoroughly evaluate all Supporting Documents section. at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. potential threats to the species. Species and Range Thus, for the Blanding’s turtle, the Finding Service requests information on the five Caddo Mountain salamander listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of (Plethodon caddoensis); Arkansas Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we the Act, including the factors identified Petition History in this finding (see Request for find that the petition does not provide Information, above). On July 11, 2012, we received a substantial scientific or commercial petition dated July 11, 2012, from the information indicating that the Evaluation of a Petition To List the Blue Center for Biological Diversity, petitioned action may be warranted. We Ridge Gray-Cheeked Salamander as an requesting that 53 species of amphibians are not initiating a status review of this Endangered or Threatened Species and reptiles, including the Caddo species in response to the petition. Our Under the Act Mountain salamander, be listed as justification for this finding can be Additional information regarding our endangered or threatened and critical found as an appendix at http:// review of this petition can be found as habitat be designated under the Act. The www.regulations.gov under Docket No. an appendix at http:// petition clearly identified itself as such FWS–R8–ES–2015–0044 under the www.regulations.gov under Docket No. and included the requisite identification ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0042 under the information for the petitioner, required However, we ask that the public submit Supporting Documents section. at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding to us any new information that becomes addresses the petition. available concerning the status of, or Species and Range threats to, the California giant Finding Blue Ridge gray-cheeked salamander salamander or its habitat at any time (Plethodon amplus); North Carolina Based on our review of the petition (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). and sources cited in the petition, we Petition History find that the petition does not provide Evaluation of a Petition To List the On July 11, 2012, we received a substantial scientific or commercial Cascade Caverns Salamander as an petition dated July 11, 2012, from the information indicating that the Endangered or Threatened Species Center for Biological Diversity, petitioned action may be warranted. We Under the Act requesting that 53 species of amphibians are not initiating a status review of this Additional information regarding our and reptiles, including the Blue Ridge species in response to the petition. Our review of this petition can be found as gray-cheeked salamander, be listed as justification for this finding can be an appendix at http:// endangered or threatened and critical found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. habitat be designated under the Act. The www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2015–0045 under the petition clearly identified itself as such FWS–R4–ES–2015–0043 under the Supporting Documents section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37573
Species and Range Finding Evaluation of a Petition To List the Colorado Checkered Whiptail as an Cascade Caverns salamander (Eurycea Based on our review of the petition Endangered or Threatened Species latitans); Texas and sources cited in the petition, we Under the Act find that the petition presents Petition History substantial scientific or commercial Additional information regarding our On July 11, 2012, we received a information indicating that the review of this petition can be found as petition dated July 11, 2012 from the petitioned action may be warranted for an appendix at http:// Center for Biological Diversity, the Cascades frog (Rana cascadae) based www.regulations.gov under Docket No. requesting that 53 species of reptiles on Factors A, C, and E. However, during FWS–R6–ES–2015–0048 under the and amphibians, including the Cascade our status review we will thoroughly Supporting Documents section. evaluate all potential threats to the Caverns salamander, be listed as Species and Range endangered or threatened and critical species. habitat be designated under the Act. The Thus, for the Cascades frog, the Colorado checkered whiptail petition clearly identified itself as such Service requests information on the five (Aspidoscelis neotesselata); Colorado and included the requisite identification listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of Petition History information for the petitioner, required the Act, including the factors identified at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding in this finding (see Request for On July 11, 2012, we received a addresses the petition. Information, above). petition dated July 11, 2012, from the Finding Evaluation of a Petition To List the Center for Biological Diversity, Cedar Key Mole Skink as an requesting that 53 species of amphibians Based on our review of the petition Endangered or Threatened Species and reptiles, including the Colorado and sources cited in the petition, we Under the Act checkered whiptail, be listed as find that the petition presents endangered or threatened and critical substantial scientific or commercial Additional information regarding our habitat be designated under the Act. The information indicating that the review of this petition can be found as petition clearly identified itself as such petitioned action may be warranted for an appendix at http:// and included the requisite identification the Cascade Caverns salamander www.regulations.gov under Docket No. information for the petitioner, required (Eurycea latitans) based on Factor A. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0047 under the at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding However, during our status review we Supporting Documents section. addresses the petition. will thoroughly evaluate all potential Species and Range threats to the species. Finding Thus, for the Cascade Caverns Cedar Key mole skink (Plestiodon Based on our review of the petition salamander, the Service requests egregius insularis); Florida and sources cited in the petition, we information on the five listing factors Petition History find that the petition does not provide under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, substantial scientific or commercial including the factors identified in this On July 11, 2012, we received a information indicating that the finding (see Request for Information, petition dated July 11, 2012, from the petitioned action may be warranted. We above). Center for Biological Diversity are not initiating a status review of this requesting that 53 species of reptiles species in response to the petition. Our Evaluation of a Petition To List the and amphibians, including the Cedar justification for this finding can be Cascades Frog as an Endangered or Key mole skink, be listed as endangered found as an appendix at http:// Threatened Species Under the Act or threatened and critical habitat be www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Additional information regarding our designated under the Act. The petition FWS–R6–ES–2015–0048 under the review of this petition can be found as clearly identified itself as such and ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. an appendix at http:// included the requisite identification However, we ask that the public submit www.regulations.gov under Docket No. information for the petitioner, required to us any new information that becomes FWS–R1–ES–2015–0046 under the at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding available concerning the status of, or Supporting Documents section. addresses the petition. threats to, the Colorado checkered whiptail or its habitat at any time (see Species and Range Finding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Based on our review of the petition Cascades frog (Rana cascadae); Evaluation of a Petition To List the and sources cited in the petition, we California, Oregon, and Washington Distinct Population Segment of North find that the petition presents American Wild Horse as an Petition History substantial scientific or commercial Endangered or Threatened Species information indicating that the On July 11, 2012, we received a Under the Act petition dated July 11, 2012, from the petitioned action may be warranted for Center for Biological Diversity the Cedar Key mole skink (Plestiodon Additional information regarding our requesting that 53 species of reptiles egregius insularis) based on Factors A, review of this petition can be found as and amphibians, including the Cascades B, and E. However, during our status an appendix at http:// frog, be listed as endangered or review we will thoroughly evaluate all www.regulations.gov under Docket No. threatened and critical habitat be potential threats to the species. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0049 under the designated under the Act. The petition Thus, for the Cedar Key mole skink, Supporting Documents section. clearly identified itself as such and the Service requests information on the Species and Range included the requisite identification five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) information for the petitioner, required of the Act, including the factors North American wild horse at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding identified in this finding (see Request (population of the species Equus addresses the petition. for Information, above). caballus); U.S. Federal public lands
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37574 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Petition History and amphibians, including the foothill thoroughly evaluate all potential threats On June 17, 2014, we received a yellow-legged frog, be listed as to the species. petition, dated June 10, 2014, from endangered or threatened and critical Thus, for the gopher frog, the Service Friends of Animals and The Cloud habitat be designated under the Act. The requests information on the five listing Foundation, requesting that the distinct petition clearly identified itself as such factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, population segment (DPS) of North and included the requisite identification including the factors identified in this American wild horses on all U.S. federal information for the petitioner, required finding (see Request for Information, public lands be listed as an endangered at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding above). or threatened species under the Act. The addresses the petition. Evaluation of a Petition To Reclassify petition clearly identified itself as such Finding and included the requisite identification the Gray Wolf, Excluding Mexican information for the petitioner(s), as Based on our review of the petition Wolf, in the Conterminous U.S. as a required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). In an and sources cited in the petition, we Threatened Species Under the Act October 3, 2014, letter to the petitioner, find that the petition presents we responded that we reviewed the substantial scientific or commercial Additional information regarding our information presented in the petition information indicating that the review of this petition can be found as and did not find that the petition petitioned action may be warranted for an appendix at http:// warranted an emergency listing. This the foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana www.regulations.gov under Docket No. finding addresses the petition. boylii) based on Factors A and E. FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0072 under the However, during our status review we Supporting Documents section. Finding will thoroughly evaluate all potential Species and Range Based on our review of the petition threats to the species. and sources cited in the petition, we Thus, for the foothill yellow-legged Gray wolf, excluding the Mexican find that the petition does not provide frog, the Service requests information on wolf (population of the species Canis substantial information indicating the the five listing factors under section lupus); conterminous United States. petitioned entity may qualify as a DPS 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors and, therefore, a listable entity under identified in this finding (see Request Petition History section 3(16) of the Act. The petition for Information, above). On January 27, 2015, we received a does not present substantial information Evaluation of a Petition To List the supporting the characterization of North petition dated January 27, 2015, from Gopher Frog as an Endangered or the Humane Society of the United States American wild horses on all U.S. Threatened Species Under the Act Federal public lands as a DPS, because (HSUS) and twenty-two undersigned the discreteness criteria were not met. Additional information regarding our petitioners (The Center for Biological Therefore, this population is not a valid review of this petition can be found as Diversity, The Fund for Animals, Born listable entity under section 3(16) of the an appendix at http:// Free USA, Friends of Animals and Their Act, and we are not initiating a status www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Environment, Help Our Wolves Live, review in response to the petition. Our FWS–R4–ES–2015–0051 under the The Detroit Zoological Society, Midwest justification for this finding can be Supporting Documents section. Environmental Advocates, Predator found as an appendix at http:// Species and Range Defense, National Wolfwatcher www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Coalition, Northwoods Alliance, FWS–R8–ES–2015–0049 under the Gopher frog (Lithobates capito); Wisconsin Federated Humane Societies, ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, Minnesota Humane Society, Howling However, we ask that the public submit South Carolina, and North Carolina for Wolves, Detroit Audubon Society, to us any new information that becomes Petition History Sault Sainte Marie Tribe of Chippewa available concerning the status of, or Indians, Wildlife Public Trust and On July 11, 2012, we received a threats to, the North American wild Coexistence, Minnesota Voters for petition dated July 11, 2012, from the horse or its habitat at any time (see FOR Animal Protection, Friends of the Center for Biological Diversity FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). requesting that 53 species of reptiles Wisconsin Wolf, Wolves of Douglas Evaluation of a Petition To List the and amphibians, including the gopher County Wisconsin, Justice for Wolves, Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog as an frog, be listed as endangered or and Wildwoods (Minnesota)), Endangered or Threatened Species threatened and critical habitat be requesting that the gray wolf, excluding Under the Act designated under the Act. The petition the Mexican wolf subspecies, be reclassified as threatened throughout Additional information regarding our clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification the conterminous United States (U.S.) review of this petition can be found as under the Act. The petition clearly an appendix at http:// information for the petitioner, required identified itself as such and included www.regulations.gov under Docket No. at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding the requisite identification information FWS–R8–ES–2015–0050 under the addresses the petition. for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR Supporting Documents section. Finding 424.14(a). On March 10, 2015, we Species and Range Based on our review of the petition received electronic copies of the Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana and sources cited in the petition, we published references cited in the boylii); Oregon and California find that the petition presents January, 27, 2015 petition from HSUS. substantial scientific or commercial In a March 27, 2015, letter to HSUS, we Petition History information indicating that the responded that we reviewed the On July 11, 2012, we received a petitioned action may be warranted for information presented in the petition petition dated July 11, 2012, from the the gopher frog (Lithobates capito) based and did not find that the petition Center for Biological Diversity on Factors A, C, D, and E. However, warranted an emergency listing. This requesting that 53 species of reptiles during our status review we will finding addresses the petition.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37575
Finding Our justification for this finding can FWS–R3–ES–2015–0053 under the be found as an appendix at http:// Supporting Documents section. Based on our review of the petition, www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Species and Range we find the petition does not provide FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0072 under the substantial scientific or commercial ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. Illinois chorus frog (Pseudacris information indicating the petitioned However, we ask that the public submit illinoensis or Pseudacris streckeri entity may qualify as a DPS and, to us any new information that becomes illinoensis); Illinois, Missouri, and therefore, a listable entity under section available concerning the status of, or Arkansas 3(16) of the Act. Although any further threats to, the gray wolf or its habitat at Petition History evaluation of the petition was any time (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION unnecessary because this is a sound CONTACT). On July 11, 2012, we received a basis for a not-substantial finding, due petition dated July 11, 2012, from the to the level of controversy surrounding Evaluation of a Petition To List the Center for Biological Diversity the legal status of gray wolf under the Green Salamander as an Endangered or requesting that 53 species of reptiles Act and the high interest in this petition Threatened Species Under the Act and amphibians, including the Illinois specifically we further evaluated the Additional information regarding our chorus frog, be listed as endangered or petition by analyzing the five listing review of this petition can be found as threatened and critical habitat be factors under section 4(a)(1). Based on an appendix at http:// designated under the Act. The petition our review of the petition, sources cited www.regulations.gov under Docket No. clearly identified itself as such and in the petition, and our files we find the FWS–R4–ES–2015–0052 under the included the requisite identification petition does not provide substantial Supporting Documents section. information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding scientific or commercial information Species and Range indicating that gray wolves, excluding addresses the petition. Green salamander (Aneides aeneus); Mexican wolves, in the coterminous Finding U.S. may be likely to become an Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, endangered species within the Mississippi, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Based on our review of the petition foreseeable future (a threatened species) Carolina, and South Carolina. and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition presents due to any one of the five listing factors. Petition History We come to the same conclusion when substantial scientific or commercial we consider whether collective On July 11, 2012, we received a information indicating that the information presented in the petition petition dated July 11, 2012, from the petitioned action may be warranted for Center for Biological Diversity, represents substantial information. The the Illinois chorus frog (Pseudacris requesting that 53 species of amphibians petitioner’s information with respect to illinoensis or Pseudacris streckeri and reptiles, including the green unoccupied suitable habitat is based on illinoensis) based on Factors A and E. salamander, be listed as endangered or a misinterpretation of the Act. However, during our status review we threatened and critical habitat be Moreover, despite making allegations will thoroughly evaluate all potential designated under the Act. The petition with respect to disease, and small threats to the species. clearly identified itself as such and Thus, for the Illinois chorus frog, the population size, the petitioners included the requisite identification Service requests information on the five provided no information to support information for the petitioner, required listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of their claim. Inadequate existing at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding the Act, including the factors identified regulatory mechanisms are not an addresses the petition. in this finding (see Request for independent source of threat, but relate Information, above). to amelioration of threats under the Finding other factors. Therefore, the petition Based on our review of the petition Evaluation of a Petition To List the only provides information with respect and sources cited in the petition, we Kern Canyon Slender Salamander as an to possible overutilization from find that the petition presents Endangered or Threatened Species recreational hunting and trapping, and substantial scientific or commercial Under the Act the information is not substantial. Thus information indicating that the Additional information regarding our the petition provides no information to petitioned action may be warranted for review of this petition can be found as combine with the information regarding the green salamander (Aneides aeneus) an appendix at http:// possible overutilization from based on Factors A, B, C, D, and E. www.regulations.gov under Docket No. recreational hunting and trapping. In However, during our status review we FWS–R8–ES–2015–0054 under the any case, even if the petition had will thoroughly evaluate all potential Supporting Documents section. presented information with respect to threats to the species. other sources of mortality, the existing Thus, for the green salamander, the Species and Range state plans regulating take of wolves Service requests information on the five Kern Canyon slender salamander only allow take above certain listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of (Batrachoseps simatus); California population thresholds, such that if the the Act, including the factors identified Petition History other causes of mortality increased in this finding (see Request for above certain levels, hunting and Information, above). On July 11, 2012, we received a trapping would be reduced to prevent petition dated July 11, 2012, from the the population from dipping below Evaluation of a Petition To List the Center for Biological Diversity, those thresholds. So those plans have a Illinois Chorus Frog as an Endangered requesting that 53 species of amphibians built-in response to possible concerns or Threatened Species Under the Act and reptiles, including the Kern Canyon relating to cumulative impacts. Additional information regarding our slender salamander, be listed as Accordingly, we are not initiating a review of this petition can be found as endangered or threatened and critical status review in response to this an appendix at http:// habitat be designated under the Act. The petition. www.regulations.gov under Docket No. petition clearly identified itself as such
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37576 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
and included the requisite identification the Act, including the factors identified Species and Range information for the petitioner, required in this finding (see Request for Oregon slender salamander at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding Information, above). (Batrachoseps wrighti; previously B. addresses the petition. Evaluation of a Petition To List the wrightorum); Oregon Finding Olympic Torrent Salamander as an Petition History Based on our review of the petition Endangered or Threatened Species On July 11, 2012, we received a and sources cited in the petition, we Under the Act petition dated July 11, 2012, from the find that the petition presents Additional information regarding our Center for Biological Diversity substantial scientific or commercial requesting that 53 species of reptiles review of this petition can be found as information indicating that the and amphibians, including the Oregon an appendix at http:// petitioned action may be warranted for slender salamander, be listed as www.regulations.gov under Docket No. the Kern Canyon slender salamander endangered or threatened and critical (Batrachoseps simatus) based on Factors FWS–R1–ES–2015–0056 under the habitat be designated under the Act. The A, D, and E. However, during our status Supporting Documents section. petition clearly identified itself as such review we will thoroughly evaluate all Species and Range and included the requisite identification potential threats to the species. information for the petitioner, required Thus, for the Kern Canyon slender Olympic torrent salamander at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding salamander, the Service requests (Rhyacotriton olympicus); Washington addresses the petition. information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, Petition History Finding including the factors identified in this Based on our review of the petition On July 11, 2012, we received a finding (see Request for Information, and sources cited in the petition, we petition dated July 11, 2012, from the above). find that the petition presents Center for Biological Diversity Evaluation of a Petition To List the Key substantial scientific or commercial requesting that 53 species of reptiles information indicating that the Ringneck Snake as an Endangered or and amphibians, including the Olympic Threatened Species Under the Act petitioned action may be warranted for torrent salamander, be listed as the Oregon slender salamander Additional information regarding our endangered or threatened and critical (Batrachoseps wrighti) based on Factors review of this petition can be found as habitat be designated under the Act. The A and E. However, during our status an appendix at http:// petition clearly identified itself as such review we will thoroughly evaluate all www.regulations.gov under Docket No. and included the requisite identification potential threats to the species. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0055 under the information for the petitioner, required Thus, for the Oregon slender Supporting Documents section. at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding salamander, the Service requests Species and Range addresses the petition. information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, Key ringneck snake (Diadophis Finding including the factors identified in this punctatus acricus); Florida Based on our review of the petition finding (see Request for Information, Petition History and sources cited in the petition, we above). On July 11, 2012, we received a find that the petition does not provide Evaluation of a Petition To List the petition dated July 11, 2012, from the substantial scientific or commercial Pigeon Mountain Salamander as an Center for Biological Diversity, information indicating that the Endangered or Threatened Species requesting that 53 species of amphibians petitioned action may be warranted. We Under the Act and reptiles, including the Key ringneck are not initiating a status review of this Additional information regarding our snake, be listed as endangered or species in response to the petition. Our review of this petition can be found as threatened and critical habitat be justification for this finding can be an appendix at http:// designated under the Act. The petition found as an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. clearly identified itself as such and www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0058 under the included the requisite identification FWS–R1–ES–2015–0056 under the Supporting Documents section. information for the petitioner, required ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding However, we ask that the public submit Species and Range addresses the petition. to us any new information that becomes Pigeon Mountain salamander (Plethodon petraeus); Georgia Finding available concerning the status of, or threats to, the Olympic torrent Petition History Based on our review of the petition salamander or its habitat at any time and sources cited in the petition, we On July 11, 2012, we received a (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). find that the petition presents petition dated July 11, 2012, from the substantial scientific or commercial Evaluation of a Petition To List the Center for Biological Diversity, information indicating that the Oregon Slender Salamander as an requesting that 53 species of amphibians petitioned action may be warranted for Endangered or Threatened Species and reptiles, including the Pigeon the Key ringneck snake (Diadophis Under the Act Mountain salamander, be listed as punctatus acricus) based on Factors A endangered or threatened and critical and E. However, during our status Additional information regarding our habitat be designated under the Act. The review we will thoroughly evaluate all review of this petition can be found as petition clearly identified itself as such potential threats to the species. an appendix at http:// and included the requisite identification Thus, for the Key ringneck snake, the www.regulations.gov under Docket No. information for the petitioner, required Service requests information on the five FWS–R1–ES–2015–0057 under the at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of Supporting Documents section. addresses the petition.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37577
Finding finding (see Request for Information, Center for Biological Diversity, above). Based on our review of the petition requesting that 53 species of reptiles and amphibians, including the Rio and sources cited in the petition, we Evaluation of a Petition To List the Rim Grande cooter, be listed as endangered find that the petition does not provide Rock Crowned Snake as an Endangered or threatened and critical habitat be substantial scientific or commercial or Threatened Species Under the Act information indicating that the designated under the Act. The petition Additional information regarding our clearly identified itself as such and petitioned action may be warranted. We review of this petition can be found as are not initiating a status review of this included the requisite identification an appendix at http:// information for the petitioner, required species in response to the petition. Our www.regulations.gov under Docket No. justification for this finding can be at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding FWS–R4–ES–2015–0060 under the addresses the petition. found as an appendix at http:// Supporting Documents section. www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Finding Species and Range FWS–R4–ES–2015–0058 under the Based on our review of the petition ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. Rim Rock crowned snake (Tantilla and sources cited in the petition, we However, we ask that the public submit oolitica); Florida find that the petition presents to us any new information that becomes Petition History substantial scientific or commercial available concerning the status of, or information indicating that the On July 11, 2012, we received a threats to, the Pigeon Mountain petitioned action may be warranted for petition dated July 11, 2012, from The salamander or its habitat at any time the Rio Grande cooter (Pseudemys (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Center for Biological Diversity, requesting that 53 species of reptiles gorzugi) based on Factors A, B, and D. Evaluation of a Petition To List the and amphibians, including the Rim However, during our status review we Relictual Slender Salamander as an Rock crowned snake, be listed as will thoroughly evaluate all potential Endangered or Threatened Species endangered or threatened and critical threats to the species. Under the Act habitat be designated under the Act. The Thus, for the Rio Grande cooter, the Service requests information on the five Additional information regarding our petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of review of this petition can be found as the Act, including the factors identified an appendix at http:// information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding in this finding (see Request for www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Information, above). FWS–R8–ES–2015–0059 under the addresses the petition. Supporting Documents section. Finding Evaluation of a Petition To List Silvery Phacelia as an Endangered or Species and Range Based on our review of the petition Threatened Species Under the Act and sources cited in the petition, we Relictual slender salamander Additional information regarding our (Batrachoseps relictus); California find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial review of this petition can be found as Petition History information indicating that the an appendix at http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket No. On July 11, 2012, we received a petitioned action may be warranted for the Rim Rock crowned snake (Tantilla FWS–R1–ES–2015–0062 under the petition dated July 11, 2012, from the Supporting Documents section. Center for Biological Diversity, oolitica) based on Factors A and E. requesting that 53 species of amphibians However, during our status review we Species and Range and reptiles, including the relictual will thoroughly evaluate all potential threats to the species. Silvery phacelia (Phacelia argentea); slender salamander, be listed as Oregon and California endangered or threatened and critical Thus, for the Rim Rock crowned habitat be designated under the Act. The snake, the Service requests information Petition History on the five listing factors under section petition clearly identified itself as such On March 7, 2014, we received a 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors and included the requisite identification petition dated March 7, 2014, from The identified in this finding (see Request information for the petitioner, required Center for Biological Diversity, Oregon for Information, above). at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding Wild, Friends of Del Norte, Oregon addresses the petition. Evaluation of a Petition To List the Rio Coast Alliance, The Native Plant Society Grande Cooter as an Endangered or Finding of Oregon, The California Native Plant Threatened Species Under the Act Society, The Environmental Protection Based on our review of the petition Additional information regarding our Information Center, and Klamath- and sources cited in the petition, we review of this petition can be found as Siskiyou Wildlands Center (the find that the petition presents an appendix at http:// petitioners), requesting that silvery substantial scientific or commercial www.regulations.gov under Docket No. phacelia be listed as an endangered or information indicating that the FWS–R2–ES–2015–0061 under the threatened species and, if applicable, petitioned action may be warranted for Supporting Documents section. critical habitat be designated for this the relictual slender salamander species under the Act. The petition (Batrachoseps relictus) based on Factors Species and Range clearly identified itself as such and A, D, and E. However, during our status Rio Grande cooter or Western River included the requisite identification review we will thoroughly evaluate all cooter (Pseudemys gorzugi); Texas and information for the petitioner, required potential threats to the species. New Mexico, United States; Coahuila, at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding Thus, for the relictual slender Neuvo Leon, and Tamaulipas, Mexico addresses the petition. salamander, the Service requests information on the five listing factors Petition History Finding under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, On July 11, 2012, we received a Based on our review of the petition including the factors identified in this petition dated July 11, 2012, from The and sources cited in the petition, we
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37578 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules
find that the petition presents Evaluation of a Petition To List the Petition History substantial scientific or commercial Spotted Turtle as an Endangered or information indicating that the Threatened Species Under the Act On July 11, 2012, we received a petition dated July 11, 2012, from the petitioned action may be warranted for Additional information regarding our Center for Biological Diversity, the silvery phacelia (Phacelia argentea) review of this petition can be found as requesting that 53 species of amphibians based on Factors A and D. However, an appendix at http:// and reptiles, including the Weller’s during our status review we will www.regulations.gov under Docket No. salamander, be listed as endangered or thoroughly evaluate all potential threats FWS–R5–ES–2015–0064 under the threatened and critical habitat be to the species. Supporting Documents section. designated under the Act. The petition Thus, for the silvery phacelia, the clearly identified itself as such and Species and Range Service requests information on the five included the requisite identification listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of Spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata); information for the petitioner, required the Act, including the factors identified Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding in this finding (see Request for Illinois, Maine, Maryland, addresses the petition. Massachusetts, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Information, above). Finding New Hampshire, New York, North Evaluation of a Petition To List the Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Based on our review of the petition Southern Hog-Nosed Snake as an Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia and sources cited in the petition, we Endangered or Threatened Species Petition History find that the petition does not provide Under the Act substantial scientific or commercial Additional information regarding our On July 11, 2012, we received a information indicating that the review of this petition can be found as petition dated July 11, 2012, from the petitioned action may be warranted. We an appendix at http:// Center for Biological Diversity are not initiating a status review of this www.regulations.gov under Docket No. requesting that 53 species of reptiles species in response to the petition. Our and amphibians, including the spotted justification for this finding can be FWS–R4–ES–2015–0063 under the turtle, be listed as endangered or found as an appendix at http:// Supporting Documents section. threatened and critical habitat be www.regulations.gov under Docket No. Species and Range designated under the Act. The petition FWS–R4–ES–2015–0065 under the clearly identified itself as such and ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. Southern hog-nosed snake (Heterodon included the requisite identification However, we ask that the public submit simus); North Carolina, South Carolina, information for the petitioner, required to us any new information that becomes Georgia, and Florida at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding available concerning the status of, or Petition History addresses the petition. threats to, the Weller’s salamander or its habitat at any time (see FOR FURTHER Finding On July 11, 2012, we received a INFORMATION CONTACT). petition dated July 11, 2012, from The Based on our review of the petition Evaluation of a Petition To List the Center for Biological Diversity, and sources cited in the petition, we Western Spadefoot Toad as an requesting that 53 species of reptiles find that the petition presents Endangered or Threatened Species and amphibians, including the southern substantial scientific or commercial Under the Act hog-nosed snake, be listed as information indicating that the endangered or threatened and critical petitioned action may be warranted for Additional information regarding our habitat be designated under the Act. The the spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) review of this petition can be found as petition clearly identified itself as such based on Factors A, B, D, and E. an appendix at http:// and included the requisite identification However, during our status review we www.regulations.gov under Docket No. information for the petitioner, required will thoroughly evaluate all potential FWS–R8–ES–2015–0066 under the at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding threats to the species. Supporting Documents section. addresses the petition. Thus, for the spotted turtle, the Species and Range Service requests information on the five Finding listing factors under section 4(a)(1) of Western spadefoot toad (Spea the Act, including the factors identified hammondii or Scaphiopus hammondii); Based on our review of the petition in this finding (see Request for California, United States; Northwestern and sources cited in the petition, we Information, above). Baja California, Mexico find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial Evaluation of a Petition To List the Petition History information indicating that the Weller’s Salamander as an Endangered On July 11, 2012, we received a petitioned action may be warranted for or Threatened Species Under the Act petition dated July 11, 2012, from the the southern hog-nosed snake Additional information regarding our Center for Biological Diversity (Heterodon simus) based on Factors A review of this petition can be found as requesting that 53 species of reptiles and E. However, during our status an appendix at http:// and amphibians, including the western review we will thoroughly evaluate all www.regulations.gov under Docket No. spadefoot toad, be listed as endangered potential threats to the species. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0065 under the or threatened and critical habitat be Thus, for the southern hog-nosed Supporting Documents section. designated under the Act. The petition snake, the Service requests information Species and Range clearly identified itself as such and on the five listing factors under section included the requisite identification 4(a)(1) of the Act, including the factors Weller’s salamander (Plethodon information for the petitioner, required identified in this finding (see Request welleri, 1931); North Carolina, at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding for Information, above). Tennessee, and Virginia addresses the petition.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37579
Finding found as an appendix at http:// petitioned actions may be warranted, we Based on our review of the petition www.regulations.gov under Docket No. are initiating status reviews to and sources cited in the petition, we FWS–R4–ES–2015–0067 under the determine whether these actions under find that the petition presents ‘‘Supporting Documents’’ section. the Act are warranted. At the conclusion substantial scientific or commercial However, we ask that the public submit of the status reviews, we will issue a 12- information indicating that the to us any new information that becomes month finding in accordance with petitioned action may be warranted for available concerning the status of, or section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as to the western spadefoot toad (Spea threats to, the wingtail crayfish or its whether or not the Service believes hammondii or Scaphiopus hammondii) habitat at any time (see FOR FURTHER listing is warranted. based on Factors A and E. However, INFORMATION CONTACT). It is important to note that the during our status review we will Conclusion ‘‘substantial information’’ standard for a thoroughly evaluate all potential threats 90-day finding as to whether the On the basis of our evaluation of the petitioned action may be warranted to the species. information presented under section Thus, for the western spadefoot toad, differs from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have the Service requests information on the and commercial data’’ standard that determined that the petitions applies to the Service’s determination in five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) summarized above for the Blue Ridge of the Act, including the factors a 12-month finding as to whether a gray-cheeked salamander, Caddo petitioned action is in fact warranted. A identified in this finding (see Request Mountain salamander, California giant for Information, above). 90-day finding is not based on a status salamander, Colorado checkered review. In a 12-month finding, we will Evaluation of a Petition To List the whiptail, the distinct population determine whether a petitioned action is Wingtail Crayfish as an Endangered or segment of North American wild horse, warranted after we have completed a Threatened Species Under the Act gray wolf, excluding Mexican wolf, in thorough status review of the species, Additional information regarding our the conterminous U.S., Olympic torrent which is conducted following a review of this petition can be found as salamander, Pigeon Mountain substantial 90-day finding. Because the an appendix at http:// salamander, Weller’s salamander, and Act’s standards for 90-day and 12- www.regulations.gov under Docket No. wingtail crayfish do not present month findings are different, as FWS–R4–ES–2015–0067 under the substantial scientific or commercial described above, a substantial 90-day Supporting Documents section. information indicating that the finding does not mean that the 12- requested actions may be warranted. month finding will result in a warranted Species and Range Therefore, we are not initiating status finding. Wingtail crayfish (Procambarus reviews for these species. (Leconticambarus) latipleurum); Florida On the basis of our evaluation of the References Cited information presented under section A complete list of references cited is Petition History 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have available on the Internet at http:// determined that the petitions On January 6, 2014, we received a www.regulations.gov and upon request summarized above for alligator petition dated January 6, 2014, from the from the appropriate lead field offices snapping turtle, Apalachicola Center for Biological Diversity, (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). requesting that the wingtail crayfish be kingsnake, Arizona toad, Blanding’s listed as an endangered or threatened turtle, Cascade Caverns salamander, Authors species under the Act. The petition Cascades frog, Cedar Key mole skink, The primary authors of this document clearly identified itself as such and foothill yellow-legged frog, gopher frog, are the staff members of the Branch of included the requisite identification green salamander, Illinois chorus frog, Listing, Ecological Services Program, information for the petitioner, required Kern Canyon slender salamander, Key U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. at 50 CFR 424.14(a). ringneck snake, Oregon slender salamander, relictual slender Authority Finding salamander, Rim Rock crowned snake, The authority for these actions is the Based on our review of the petition Rio Grande cooter, silvery phacelia, Endangered Species Act of 1973, as and sources cited in the petition, we southern hog-nosed snake, spotted amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). find that the petition does not provide turtle, and western spadefoot toad substantial scientific or commercial present substantial scientific or Dated: June 22, 2015. information indicating that the commercial information indicating that Stephen Guertin, petitioned action may be warranted. We the requested actions may be warranted. Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife are not initiating a status review of this Because we have found that the Service. species in response to the petition. Our petitions present substantial [FR Doc. 2015–16001 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] justification for this finding can be information indicating that the BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 37580
Notices Federal Register Vol. 80, No. 126
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER FGIS, QACD, 10383 North Ambassador In Indiana contains documents other than rules or Drive, Kansas City, MO 64153. Bounded on the North by the northern proposed rules that are applicable to the • Fax: Eric J. Jabs, 816–872–1257. Fulton County line. public. Notices of hearings and investigations, • committee meetings, agency decisions and Email: [email protected]. Bounded on the East by the eastern rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Read Applications and Comments: Fulton County line south to State Route petitions and applications and agency All applications and comments will be 19; State Route 19 south to State Route statements of organization and functions are available for public inspection at the 114; State Route 114 southeast to the examples of documents appearing in this office above during regular business eastern Fulton and Miami County lines; section. hours (7 CFR 1.27(c)). the northern Grant County line east to County Highway 900E; County Highway FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric J. Jabs, 816–659–8408 or Eric.J.Jabs@ 900E south to State Route 18; State DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Route 18 east to the Grant County line; usda.gov. the eastern and southern Grant County Grain Inspection, Packers and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section lines; the eastern Tipton County line; Stockyards Administration 79(f) of the United States Grain the eastern Hamilton County line south Standards Act (USGSA) authorizes the to State Route 32. Opportunity for Designation in the Secretary to designate a qualified Bounded on the South by State Route West Sacramento, CA; Frankfort, IN; applicant to provide official services in 32 west to the Boone County line; the and Richmond, VA Areas; Request for a specified area after determining that eastern and southern Boone County Comments on the Official Agencies the applicant is better able than any lines; the southern Montgomery County Servicing These Areas other applicant to provide such official line. AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and services (7 U.S.C. 79 (f)). Under section Bounded on the West by the western Stockyards Administration, USDA. 79(g) of the USGSA, designations of and northern Montgomery County lines; ACTION: Notice. official agencies are effective for three the western Clinton County line; the years unless terminated by the western Carroll County line north to SUMMARY: The designations of the Secretary, but may be renewed State Route 25; State Route 25 northeast official agencies listed below will end according to the criteria and procedures to Cass County; the western Cass and on September 30, 2015. We are asking prescribed in section 79(f) of the Fulton County lines. persons or governmental agencies USGSA. The following grain elevators are not interested in providing official services part of this geographic area assignment in the areas presently served by these Areas Open for Designation and are assigned to: Titus Grain agencies to submit an application for California-Agri Inspection, Inc.: The Andersons, Delphi, designation. In addition, we are asking Carroll County; Frick Services, Inc., for comments on the quality of services Pursuant to Section 79(f)(2) of the Leiters Ford, Fulton County; and Cargill, provided by the following designated USGSA, the following geographic area, Inc., Linden, Montgomery County, agencies: California Agri Inspection Co., in the State of California, is assigned to Indiana. this official agency. Ltd. (California-Agri), Frankfort Grain Virginia Inspection, Inc. (Frankfort), and Virginia In California Department of Agriculture and Pursuant to Section 79(f)(2) of the Consumer Services (Virginia). Bounded on the North by the northern USGSA, the following geographic area, California State line east to the eastern in the State of Virginia. DATES: Applications and comments California State line. must be received by July 31, 2015. In Virginia Bounded on the East by the eastern ADDRESSES: Submit applications and California State line south to the The entire State of Virginia. comments concerning this Notice using southern San Bernardino County line. any of the following methods: Opportunity for Designation • Applying for Designation on the Bounded on the South by the Interested persons or governmental Internet: Use FGISonline (https:// southern San Bernardino and Orange agencies may apply for designation to fgis.gipsa.usda.gov/default_home_ County lines west to the western provide official services in the FGIS.aspx) and then click on the California State line. geographic areas specified above under Delegations/Designations and Export Bounded on the West by the western the provisions of section 79(f) of the Registrations (DDR) link. You will need California State line north to the USGSA and 7 CFR 800.196. Designation to obtain an FGISonline customer northern California State line. in the specified geographic areas is for number and USDA eAuthentication California Agri’s assigned geographic the period beginning January 1, 2016 username and password prior to area does not include the export port and ending December 31, 2018. To applying. locations inside California Agri’s area, apply for designation or for more • Submit Comments Using the which are serviced by GIPSA. information, contact Eric J. Jabs at the Internet: Go to Regulations.gov (http:// Frankfort address listed above or visit GIPSA’s www.regulations.gov). Instructions for Web site at http://www.gipsa.usda.gov. submitting and reading comments are Pursuant to Section 79(f)(2) of the detailed on the site. USGSA, the following geographic area, Request for Comments • Mail, Courier or Hand Delivery: Eric in the State of Indiana, is assigned to We are publishing this Notice to J. Jabs, Deputy Director, USDA, GIPSA, this official agency. provide interested persons the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37581
opportunity to comment on the quality • An FGISonline customer number Route 109 south of the Western of services provided by the California- and USDA eAuthentication username Kentucky Parkway), Logan, Todd, Agri, Frankfort, and Virginia official and password prior to applying. Union, and Webster (west of Alternate agencies. In the designation process, we • Submit Comments Using the U.S. Route 41 and State Route 814) are particularly interested in receiving Internet: Go to Regulations.gov (http:// Counties. comments citing reasons and pertinent www.regulations.gov). Instructions for data supporting or objecting to the submitting and reading comments are In Tennessee designation of the applicants. Submit all detailed on the site. Cheatham, Davidson, and Robertson • Mail, Courier or Hand Delivery: Eric comments to Eric J. Jabs at the above Counties. address or at http:// J. Jabs, Deputy Director, USDA, GIPSA, www.regulations.gov. FGIS, QACD, 10383 North Ambassador Utah We consider applications, comments, Drive, Kansas City, MO 64153 • and other available information when Fax: Eric J. Jabs, 816–872–1257 Pursuant to Section 79(f)(2) of the • determining which applicants will be Email: [email protected] USGSA, the following geographic area, designated. Read Applications and Comments: All in the State of Utah, is assigned to this applications and comments will be official agency. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71–87k. available for public inspection at the In Utah Larry Mitchell, office above during regular business Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and hours (7 CFR 1.27(c)). The entire State of Utah. Stockyards Administration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric [FR Doc. 2015–16163 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] J. Jabs, 816–659–8408 or Eric.J.Jabs@ South Carolina BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P usda.gov. Pursuant to Section 79(f)(2) of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section USGSA, the following geographic area, 79(f) of the United States Grain in the State of South Carolina, is DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Standards Act (USGSA) authorizes the assigned to this official agency. Secretary to designate a qualified Grain Inspection, Packers and In South Carolina Stockyards Administration applicant to provide official services in a specified area after determining that The entire State of South Carolina. Opportunity for Designation in the the applicant is better able than any Pocatello, ID; Evansville, IN; Salt Lake other applicant to provide such official Opportunity for Designation City, UT; and Columbia, SC Areas; services (7 U.S.C. 79 (f)). Under section Interested persons or governmental Request for Comments on the Official 79(g) of the USGSA, designations of agencies may apply for designation to Agencies Servicing These Areas official agencies are effective for three years unless terminated by the provide official services in the AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Secretary, but may be renewed geographic areas specified above under Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), according to the criteria and procedures the provisions of section 79(f) of the USDA. prescribed in section 79(f) of the USGSA and 7 CFR 800.196. Designation in the specified geographic areas for ACTION: Notice. USGSA. Idaho, Ohio Valley, and Utah is for the Areas Open for Designation SUMMARY: The designations of the period beginning October 1, 2015, and official agencies listed below will end Idaho ending September 30, 2018. Designation in the specified geographic area for on September 30, 2015. We are asking Pursuant to Section 79(f)(2) of the South Carolina is for the period persons or governmental agencies USGSA, the following geographic area, beginning October 1, 2015, and ending interested in providing official services in the State of Idaho, is assigned to this in the areas presently served by these official agency. September 30, 2017. To apply for agencies to submit an application for designation or for more information, designation. In addition, we are asking In Idaho contact Eric J. Jabs at the address listed for comments on the quality of services The southern half of the State of Idaho above or visit GIPSA’s Web site at provided by the following designated up to the northern boundaries of http://www.gipsa.usda.gov. agencies: Idaho Grain Inspection Service Adams, Valley, and Lemhi Counties. Request for Comments (Idaho); Ohio Valley Grain Inspection, Ohio Valley Inc. (Ohio Valley); Utah Department of We are publishing this Notice to Agriculture and Food (Utah); and South Pursuant to Section 79(f)(2) of the provide interested persons the Carolina Department of Agriculture USGSA, the following geographic area, opportunity to comment on the quality (South Carolina). in the States of Indiana, Kentucky, and of services provided by the Idaho, Ohio DATES: Applications and comments Tennessee, is assigned to this official Valley, and Utah official agencies. In the must be received by July 31, 2015. agency. designation process, we are particularly ADDRESSES: Submit applications and In Indiana interested in receiving comments citing reasons and pertinent data supporting or comments concerning this Notice using Daviess, Dubois, Gibson, Knox (except objecting to the designation of the any of the following methods: the area west of U.S. Route 41 (150) applicants. Submit all comments to Eric • Applying for Designation on the from Sullivan County south to U.S. J. Jabs at the above address or at http:// Internet: Use FGISonline (https:// Route 50), Pike, Posey, Vanderburgh, www.regulations.gov. fgis.gipsa.usda.gov/default_home_ and Warrick Counties. FGIS.aspx) and then click on the We consider applications, comments, Delegations/Designations and Export In Kentucky and other available information when Registrations (DDR) link. You will need Caldwell, Christian, Crittenden, determining which applicants will be to obtain Henderson, Hopkins (west of State designated.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37582 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71–87k. to provide official services under the designation to provide official services Larry Mitchell, United States Grain Standards Act in these areas. As a result, GIPSA did (USGSA), as amended. not ask for additional comments. Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration. DATES: Effective Date: July 1, 2015. GIPSA evaluated the designation criteria in section 79(f) of the USGSA (7 [FR Doc. 2015–16123 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: Eric J. Jabs, Deputy Director, U.S.C. 79(f)) and determined that BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P USDA, GIPSA, FGIS, QACD, 10383 North Ambassador Drive, Kansas City, Kansas, Minot, and Tri-State are MO 64153. qualified to provide official services in DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE the geographic area specified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Federal Register on February 11, 2015. Grain Inspection, Packers and J. Jabs, 816–659–8408 or Eric.J.Jabs@ This designation action to provide Stockyards Administration usda.gov. official services in these specified areas Read Applications: All applications is effective July 1, 2015, to June 30, Designation for the Topeka, KS; Cedar and comments will be available for 2018. Rapids, IA; Minot, ND; and Cincinnati, public inspection at the office above After completing an initial quality OH Areas during regular business hours (7 CFR management review of Mid-Iowa, 1.27(c)). AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and GIPSA determined that a follow-up Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the review should be conducted. USDA. February 11, 2015, Federal Register (80 Accordingly, GIPSA is designating Mid- Iowa to provide services in this ACTION: Notice. FR 7564), GIPSA requested applications for designation to provide official specified area for one year, effective July SUMMARY: GIPSA is announcing the services in the geographic areas 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016. During this designation of Kansas Grain Inspection presently serviced by Kansas, Mid-Iowa, timeframe, such a review will be Service, Inc. (Kansas); Mid-Iowa Grain Minot, and Tri-State. Applications were conducted. Inspection, Inc. (Mid-Iowa); Minot Grain due by March 13, 2015. Interested persons may obtain official Inspection, Inc. (Minot); and Tri-State Kansas, Mid-Iowa, Minot, and Tri- services by contacting these agencies at Grain Inspection Service, Inc. (Tri-State) State were the sole applicants for the following telephone numbers:
Designation Designation Official agency Headquarters location and telephone start end
Kansas ...... Topeka, KS(785) 233–7063 ...... 7/1/2015 6/30/2018 Mid-Iowa ...... Cedar Rapids, IA(319) 363–0239 ...... 7/1/2015 6/30/2016 Minot ...... Minot, ND(701) 838–1734 ...... 7/1/2015 6/30/2018 Tri-State ...... Cincinnati, OH(513) 251–6571 ...... 7/1/2015 6/30/2018
Section 79(f) of the USGSA authorizes DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (OFPP). OFPP’s guidance is available at the Secretary to designate a qualified http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/ applicant to provide official services in Office of Procurement and Property default/files/omb/procurement/memo/ a specified area after determining that Management service-contract-inventories-guidance- the applicant is better able than any 11052010.pdf. Public Availability of FY 2014 Service other applicant to provide such official Contract Inventories The U.S. Department of Agriculture services (7 U.S.C. 79 (f)). has posted its inventory and a summary Under section 79(g) of the USGSA, AGENCY: Office of Procurement and of the inventory on the Office of designations of official agencies are Property Management, Departmental Procurement and Property Management effective for no longer than three years Management, U.S. Department of homepage at the following link: http:// unless terminated by the Secretary; Agriculture www.dm.usda.gov/procurement/. however, designations may be renewed ACTION: Notice of public availability of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: according to the criteria and procedures FY 2014 Service Contract inventories Crandall Watson, Office of Procurement prescribed in section 79(f) of the and Property Management (OPPM), at USGSA. SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the Consolidated (202) 720–7529, or by mail at OPPM, Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71–87k. Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. MAIL STOP 9304, U.S. Department of Larry Mitchell, 111–117), U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250–9303. Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Agriculture is publishing this notice to Please cite ‘‘2014 Service Contract Stockyards Administration. advise the public of the availability of the FY 2014 Service Contract inventory. Inventory’’ in all correspondence. [FR Doc. 2015–16124 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] This inventory provides information on BILLING CODE 3410–EN–P Signed in Washington, DC, on June 23, FY 2014 service contract actions over 2015. $25,000. The information is organized Lisa M. Wilusz, by function to show how contracted resources are distributed throughout the Director, Office of Procurement and Property agency. The inventory has been Management. developed in accordance with guidance [FR Doc. 2015–16266 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] issued on November 5, 2010, by the BILLING CODE 3410–TX–P Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Federal Procurement Policy
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37583
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Census covering the manufacturing (including hours and cost) of the sector and the Annual Survey of proposed collection of information; (c) Census Bureau Manufactures (ASM) provide annual ways to enhance the quality, utility, and benchmarks for the shipments and clarity of the information to be Proposed Information Collection; inventory data in this monthly survey. collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Comment Request; Manufacturers’ The Manufacturers’ Unfilled Orders burden of the collection of information Unfilled Orders Survey Survey, the subject of this notice, on respondents, including through the AGENCY: U.S. Census Bureau, provides an annual benchmark for use of automated collection techniques Commerce. unfilled orders. or other forms of information ACTION: Notice. The Census Bureau uses this data to technology. develop universe estimates of unfilled Comments submitted in response to SUMMARY: The Department of orders as of the end of the calendar year this notice will be summarized and/or Commerce, as part of its continuing and to adjust the monthly M3 data on included in the request for OMB effort to reduce paperwork and unfilled orders to these levels on the approval of this information collection; respondent burden, invites the general North American Industrial they also will become a matter of public public and other Federal agencies to Classification System (NAICS) basis. record. take this opportunity to comment on The benchmarked unfilled orders levels Sheleen Dumas, proposed and/or continuing information are used to derive estimates of new collections, as required by the orders received by manufacturers. The Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. survey data are also used to determine [FR Doc. 2015–16158 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] DATES: To ensure consideration, written whether it is necessary to collect comments must be submitted on or unfilled orders data for specific BILLING CODE 3510–07–P before August 31, 2015. industries on a monthly basis; some ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments industries are not requested to provide DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental unfilled orders data on the M3 Survey. Paperwork Clearance Officer, There are no changes to the MA–3000 International Trade Administration Department of Commerce, Room 6616, form. Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., II. Method of Collection Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Order, Finding, or Suspended Internet at [email protected]). The Census Bureau will use mail out/ Investigation; Opportunity To Request FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: mail back survey forms to collect the Administrative Review data with online reporting encouraged. Requests for additional information or AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, copies of the information collection Online response for the survey is typically just under 60 percent. International Trade Administration, instrument(s) and instructions should Department of Commerce. be directed to Mary Catherine Potter, Companies are asked to respond to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. Census Bureau, Economic survey within 30 days of receipt. Letters Brenda E. Waters, Office of AD/CVD Indicators Division, 4600 Silver Hill encouraging participation are mailed to Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, Road, Room 7K157, Washington, DC companies that have not responded by Enforcement and Compliance, 20233–6913, (301) 763–4207, or the designated time. Telephone follow- International Trade Administration, (via the internet at up is conducted to obtain response from U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th [email protected].) delinquent companies. Street and Constitution Avenue NW., SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: III. Data Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) I. Abstract OMB Control Number: 0607–0561. 482–4735. Form Number(s): MA–3000. The Manufacturers’ Shipments, Type of Review: Regular submission. Background Inventories, and Orders (M3) survey Affected Public: Manufacturing Each year during the anniversary collects monthly data on the value of Businesses, large and small, or other for- month of the publication of an shipments, inventories, and new and profit organizations. antidumping or countervailing duty unfilled orders from manufacturing Estimated Number of Respondents: order, finding, or suspended companies. The orders, as well as the 6,000. investigation, an interested party, as shipments and inventory data, are Estimated Time per Response: .50 defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff valuable tools for analysts of business hour. Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), cycle conditions. The Bureau of Estimated Total Annual Burden may request, in accordance with 19 CFR Economic Analysis, the Counsel of Hours: 3,000. 351.213, that the Department of Economic Advisors, the Federal Reserve Estimated Total Annual Cost to Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) conduct Board, the Conference Board, and Public: $0. an administrative review of that members of the business community Respondents Obligation: Mandatory. antidumping or countervailing duty such as the National Association of Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C., order, finding, or suspended Manufacturers, Wall Street Journal, Sections 131, 182, 224 and 225. investigation. Market Watch, and Bloomberg business IV. Request for Comments All deadlines for the submission of analysts, use the data. comments or actions by the Department The monthly M3 Survey estimates are Comments are invited on: (a) Whether discussed below refer to the number of based on a relatively small sample that the proposed collection of information calendar days from the applicable primarily reflects the month-to-month is necessary for the proper performance starting date. changes of large companies. There is a of the functions of the agency, including clear need for periodic benchmarking of whether the information shall have Respondent Selection the M3 estimates to reflect the practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the In the event the Department limits the manufacturing universe. The Economic agency’s estimate of the burden number of respondents for individual
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37584 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
examination for administrative reviews the respondent selection phase of this Deadline for Withdrawal of Request for initiated pursuant to requests made for review and will not collapse companies Administrative Review the orders identified below, the at the respondent selection phase unless Department intends to select there has been a determination to Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a respondents based on U.S. Customs and collapse certain companies in a party that requests a review may Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) data for U.S. previous segment of this antidumping withdraw that request within 90 days of imports during the period of review. We proceeding (i.e., investigation, the date of publication of the notice of intend to release the CBP data under administrative review, new shipper initiation of the requested review. The Administrative Protective Order review or changed circumstances regulation provides that the Department (‘‘APO’’) to all parties having an APO review). For any company subject to this may extend this time if it is reasonable within five days of publication of the review, if the Department determined, to do so. In order to provide parties initiation notice and to make our or continued to treat, that company as additional certainty with respect to decision regarding respondent selection collapsed with others, the Department when the Department will exercise its within 21 days of publication of the will assume that such companies discretion to extend this 90-day initiation Federal Register notice. continue to operate in the same manner deadline, interested parties are advised Therefore, we encourage all parties and will collapse them for respondent that, with regard to reviews requested interested in commenting on respondent selection purposes. Otherwise, the on the basis of anniversary months on selection to submit their APO Department will not collapse companies or after July 2015, the Department does applications on the date of publication for purposes of respondent selection. not intend to extend the 90-day of the initiation notice, or as soon Parties are requested to (a) identify deadline unless the requestor thereafter as possible. The Department demonstrates that an extraordinary which companies subject to review invites comments regarding the CBP circumstance prevented it from previously were collapsed, and (b) data and respondent selection within submitting a timely withdrawal request. provide a citation to the proceeding in five days of placement of the CBP data Determinations by the Department to which they were collapsed. Further, if on the record of the review. extend the 90-day deadline will be companies are requested to complete In the event the Department decides made on a case-by-case basis. it is necessary to limit individual the Quantity and Value Questionnaire The Department is providing this examination of respondents and for purposes of respondent selection, in notice on its Web site, as well as in its conduct respondent selection under general each company must report section 777A(c)(2) of the Act: volume and value data separately for ‘‘Opportunity to Request Administrative In general, the Department finds that itself. Parties should not include data Review’’ notices, so that interested determinations concerning whether for any other party, even if they believe parties will be aware of the manner in particular companies should be they should be treated as a single entity which the Department intends to ‘‘collapsed’’ (i.e., treated as a single with that other party. If a company was exercise its discretion in the future. entity for purposes of calculating collapsed with another company or Opportunity to Request a Review: Not antidumping duty rates) require a companies in the most recently later than the last day of July 2015,1 substantial amount of detailed completed segment of this proceeding interested parties may request information and analysis, which often where the Department considered administrative review of the following require follow-up questions and collapsing that entity, complete quantity orders, findings, or suspended analysis. Accordingly, the Department and value data for that collapsed entity investigations, with anniversary dates in will not conduct collapsing analyses at must be submitted. July for the following periods:
Period of review
Antidumping Duty Proceedings FINLAND: Carboxymethylcellulose, A–405–803 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 INDIA: Polyethylene Terephthalate (Pet) Film, A–533–824 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 IRAN: In-Shell Pistachios, A–507–502 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 ITALY: Certain Pasta, A–475–818 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 JAPAN: Clad Steel Plate, A–588–838 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Polyvinyl Alcohol, A–588–861 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils, A–588–845 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 MALAYSIA: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe, A–557–815 ...... 1/7/14–6/30/15 NETHERLANDS: Carboxymethylcellulose, A–421–811 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 REPUBLIC OF KOREA: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils, A–580–834 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 RUSSIA: Solid Urea, A–821–801 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM: Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe, A–552–816 ...... 1/7/14–6/30/15 TAIWAN: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, A–583–837 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils, A–583–831 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 THAILAND: Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings, A–549–807 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Welded Stainless Pressure Pipe, A–549–830 ...... 1/7/14–6/30/15 THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings, A–570–814 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Certain Potassium Phosphate Salts, A–570–962 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Certain Steel Grating, A–570–947 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15
1 Or the next business day, if the deadline falls on a weekend, federal holiday or any other day when the Department is closed.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37585
Period of review
Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe, A–570–910 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Persulfates, A–570–847 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Xanthan Gum, A–570–985 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 TURKEY: Certain Pasta, A–489–805 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 UKRAINE: Solid Urea, A–823–801 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15 Countervailing Duty Proceedings INDIA: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, C–533–825 ...... 1/1/14–12/31/14 ITALY: Certain Pasta, C–475–819 ...... 1/1/14–12/31/14 THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Certain Potassium Phosphate Salts, C–570–963 ...... 1/1/14–12/31/14 Certain Steel Grating, C–570–948 ...... 1/1/14–12/31/14 Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe, C–570–911 ...... 1/1/14–12/31/14 Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand, C–570–946 ...... 1/1/14–12/31/14 TURKEY: Certain Pasta, C–489–806 ...... 1/1/14–12/31/14 Suspension Agreements UKRAINE: Oil Country Tubular Goods, A–823–815 ...... 7/1/14–6/30/15
In accordance with 19 CFR As explained in Antidumping and review was initiated does not qualify for 351.213(b), an interested party as Countervailing Duty Proceedings: a separate rate, the Department will defined by section 771(9) of the Act may Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 issue a final decision indicating that the request in writing that the Secretary FR 23954 (May 6, 2003), and Non- company in question is part of the NME conduct an administrative review. For Market Economy Antidumping entity. However, in that situation, both antidumping and countervailing Proceedings: Assessment of because no review of the NME entity duty reviews, the interested party must Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 was conducted, the NME entity’s entries specify the individual producers or (October 24, 2011) the Department were not subject to the review and the exporters covered by an antidumping clarified its practice with respect to the rate for the NME entity is not subject to finding or an antidumping or collection of final antidumping duties change as a result of that review countervailing duty order or suspension on imports of merchandise where (although the rate for the individual agreement for which it is requesting a intermediate firms are involved. The exporter may change as a function of the review. In addition, a domestic public should be aware of this finding that the exporter is part of the interested party or an interested party clarification in determining whether to NME entity). request an administrative review of described in section 771(9)(B) of the Act Following initiation of an merchandise subject to antidumping must state why it desires the Secretary antidumping administrative review findings and orders.2 when there is no review requested of the to review those particular producers or Further, as explained in Antidumping exporters. If the interested party intends NME entity, the Department will Proceedings: Announcement of Change instruct CBP to liquidate entries for all for the Secretary to review sales of in Department Practice for Respondent merchandise by an exporter (or a exporters not named in the initiation Selection in Antidumping Duty notice, including those that were producer if that producer also exports Proceedings and Conditional Review of suspended at the NME entity rate. merchandise from other suppliers) the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME All requests must be filed which was produced in more than one Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR electronically in Enforcement and country of origin and each country of 65963 (November 4, 2013), the Compliance’s Antidumping and origin is subject to a separate order, then Department clarified its practice with Countervailing Duty Centralized the interested party must state regard to the conditional review of the Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’) specifically, on an order-by-order basis, non-market economy (NME) entity in on Enforcement and Compliance’s which exporter(s) the request is administrative reviews of antidumping ACCESS Web site at http:// intended to cover. duty orders. The Department will no access.trade.gov.4 Further, in Note that, for any party the longer consider the NME entity as an accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(l)(i), Department was unable to locate in exporter conditionally subject to a copy of each request must be served prior segments, the Department will not administrative reviews. Accordingly, on the petitioner and each exporter or accept a request for an administrative the NME entity will not be under review producer specified in the request. review of that party absent new unless the Department specifically The Department will publish in the information as to the party’s location. receives a request for, or self-initiates, a Federal Register a notice of ‘‘Initiation review of the NME entity.3 Moreover, if the interested party who In of Administrative Review of administrative reviews of antidumping files a request for review is unable to Antidumping or Countervailing Duty duty orders on merchandise from NME locate the producer or exporter for Order, Finding, or Suspended countries where a review of the NME which it requested the review, the Investigation’’ for requests received by entity has not been initiated, but where the last day of July 2015. If the interested party must provide an an individual exporter for which a explanation of the attempts it made to Department does not receive, by the last day of July 2015, a request for review of locate the producer or exporter at the 2 See also the Enforcement and Compliance Web same time it files its request for review, site at http://trade.gov/enforcement/. entries covered by an order, finding, or in order for the Secretary to determine 3 In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1), parties if the interested party’s attempts were should specify that they are requesting a review of 4 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty entries from exporters comprising the entity, and to Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; reasonable, pursuant to 19 CFR the extent possible, include the names of such Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 351.303(f)(3)(ii). exporters in their request. 39263 (July 6, 2011).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37586 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
suspended investigation listed in this DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE For information from the Commission notice and for the period identified contact Mary Messer, Office of above, the Department will instruct CBP International Trade Administration Investigations, U.S. International Trade to assess antidumping or countervailing Commission at (202) 205–3193. duties on those entries at a rate equal to Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the cash deposit of (or bond for) Review estimated antidumping or AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, Background countervailing duties required on those International Trade Administration, entries at the time of entry, or Department of Commerce. The Department’s procedures for the withdrawal from warehouse, for SUMMARY: In accordance with section conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth consumption and to continue to collect 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as in its Procedures for Conducting Five- the cash deposit previously ordered. amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department of Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews of For the first administrative review of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is Antidumping and Countervailing Duty any order, there will be no assessment automatically initiating the five-year Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) of antidumping or countervailing duties review (‘‘Sunset Review’’) of the and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). on entries of subject merchandise antidumping and countervailing duty Guidance on methodological or entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, (‘‘AD/CVD’’) orders listed below. The analytical issues relevant to the for consumption during the relevant International Trade Commission (‘‘the Department’s conduct of Sunset provisional-measures ‘‘gap’’ period of Commission’’) is publishing Reviews is set forth in Antidumping the order, if such a gap period is concurrently with this notice its notice Proceedings: Calculation of the applicable to the period of review. of Institution of Five-Year Review which Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and covers the same orders. Assessment Rate in Certain This notice is not required by statute DATES: Effective Date: July 1, 2015. Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final but is published as a service to the Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, international trading community. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Department official identified in the 2012). Dated: June 25, 2015. Initiation of Review section below at Initiation of Review Christian Marsh, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping Compliance, International Trade In accordance with 19 CFR and Countervailing Duty Operations. Administration, U.S. Department of 351.218(c), we are initiating Sunset [FR Doc. 2015–16203 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Reviews of the following antidumping BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. and countervailing duty orders:
DOC case No. ITC case No. Country Product Department contact
A–570–951 ...... 731–TA–1163 ...... PRC ...... Woven Electric Blankets (1st Re- Matthew Renkey (202) 482–2312. view).
Filing Information Revised Factual Information 2013), which modified two regulations Requirements related to antidumping and As a courtesy, we are making This notice serves as a reminder that countervailing duty proceedings: The information related to sunset any party submitting factual information definition of factual information (19 proceedings, including copies of the in an AD/CVD proceeding must certify CFR 351.102(b)(21), and the time limits pertinent statute and Department’s to the accuracy and completeness of that for the submission of factual regulations, the Department’s schedule information.2 Parties are hereby information (19 CFR 351.301). The final for Sunset Reviews, a listing of past reminded that revised certification rule identifies five categories of factual revocations and continuations, and requirements are in effect for company/ information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21), current service lists, available to the government officials as well as their which are summarized as follows: (i) public on the Department’s Web site at representatives in all AD/CVD Evidence submitted in response to the following address: ‘‘http:// investigations or proceedings initiated questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted enforcement.trade.gov/sunset/.’’ All on or after August 16, 2013.3 The in support of allegations; (iii) publicly submissions in these Sunset Reviews formats for the revised certifications are available information to value factors must be filed in accordance with the provided at the end of the Final Rule. under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure Department’s regulations regarding The Department intends to reject factual the adequacy of remuneration under 19 format, translation, and service of submissions if the submitting party does CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed documents. These rules, including not comply with the revised on the record by the Department; and (v) electronic filing requirements via certification requirements. evidence other than factual information Enforcement and Compliance’s On April 10, 2013, the Department described in (i)–(iv). The final rule Antidumping and Countervailing Duty published Definition of Factual requires any party, when submitting Centralized Electronic Service System Information and Time Limits for factual information, to specify under (‘‘ACCESS’’), can be found at 19 CFR Submission of Factual Information: which subsection of 19 CFR 351.303.1 Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted and, if the information is 2 See section 782(b) of the Act. submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct 3 See Certification of Factual Information To 1 factual information already on the See also Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Import Administration During Antidumping and Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July record, to provide an explanation Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 17, 2013) (‘‘Final Rule’’) (amending 19 CFR identifying the information already on 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011). 351.303(g)). the record that the factual information
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37587
seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The 22853.htm, prior to submitting factual response, on an order-specific basis, are final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 information in these segments. set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements so that, rather than providing general Letters of Appearance and differ for respondent and domestic time limits, there are specific time limits Administrative Protective Orders based on the type of factual information parties. Also, note that the Department’s being submitted. These modifications Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(d), the information requirements are distinct are effective for all segments initiated on Department will maintain and make from the Commission’s information or after May 10, 2013. Review the final available a public service list for these requirements. Consult the Department’s rule, available at http:// proceedings. Parties wishing to regulations for information regarding enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/ participate in any of these five-year the Department’s conduct of Sunset 1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to reviews must file letters of appearance Reviews. Consult the Department’s submitting factual information in this as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d). To regulations at 19 CFR part 351 for segment. To the extent that other facilitate the timely preparation of the definitions of terms and for other regulations govern the submission of public service list, it is requested that general information concerning those seeking recognition as interested factual information in a segment (such antidumping and countervailing duty parties to a proceeding submit an entry as 19 CFR 351.218), these time limits proceedings at the Department. of appearance within 10 days of the will continue to be applied. This notice of initiation is being publication of the Notice of Initiation. published in accordance with section Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews Revised Extension of Time Limits 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c). Regulation can be very short, we urge interested parties who want access to proprietary Dated: June 15, 2015. On September 20, 2013, the information under administrative Christian Marsh, Department modified its regulation at 19 protective order (‘‘APO’’) to file an APO Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping CFR 351.302(c) concerning the application immediately following and Countervailing Duty Operations. extension of time limits for submissions publication in the Federal Register of [FR Doc. 2015–16250 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] in antidumping and countervailing duty this notice of initiation. The BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P proceedings: Extension of Time Limits, Department’s regulations on submission 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013). The of proprietary information and modification clarifies that parties may eligibility to receive access to business DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE request an extension of time limits proprietary information under APO can before a time limit established under be found at 19 CFR 351.304–306. International Trade Administration part 351 of the Department’s regulations Information Required From Interested Antidumping or Countervailing Duty expires, or as otherwise specified by the Parties Order, Finding, or Suspended Secretary. In general, an extension Domestic interested parties, as Investigation; Advance Notification of request will be considered untimely if it Sunset Reviews is filed after the time limit established defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and (G) of the Act and 19 CFR under part 351 expires. For submissions AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 351.102(b), wishing to participate in a which are due from multiple parties International Trade Administration, Sunset Review must respond not later simultaneously, an extension request Department of Commerce. than 15 days after the date of will be considered untimely if it is filed publication in the Federal Register of after 10:00 a.m. on the due date. Under Background this notice of initiation by filing a notice certain circumstances, the Department Every five years, pursuant to section of intent to participate. The required may elect to specify a different time 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as contents of the notice of intent to limit by which extension requests will amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department of participate are set forth at 19 CFR Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) and the be considered untimely for submissions 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with the International Trade Commission which are due from multiple parties Department’s regulations, if we do not automatically initiate and conduct a simultaneously. In such a case, the receive a notice of intent to participate review to determine whether revocation Department will inform parties in the from at least one domestic interested of a countervailing or antidumping duty letter or memorandum setting forth the party by the 15-day deadline, the deadline (including a specified time) by Department will automatically revoke order or termination of an investigation which extension requests must be filed the order without further review.4 suspended under section 704 or 734 of to be considered timely. This If we receive an order-specific notice the Act would be likely to lead to modification also requires that an of intent to participate from a domestic continuation or recurrence of dumping extension request must be made in a interested party, the Department’s or a countervailable subsidy (as the case separate, stand-alone submission, and regulations provide that all parties may be) and of material injury. clarifies the circumstances under which wishing to participate in a Sunset Upcoming Sunset Reviews for August the Department will grant untimely- Review must file complete substantive 2015 filed requests for the extension of time responses not later than 30 days after limits. These modifications are effective the date of publication in the Federal The following Sunset Reviews are for all segments initiated on or after Register of this notice of initiation. The scheduled for initiation in August 2015 October 21, 2013. Review the final rule, required contents of a substantive and will appear in that month’s Notice available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ of Initiation of Five-Year Sunset Review pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013- 4 See 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(iii). (‘‘Sunset Review’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37588 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Department contact
Antidumping Duty Proceedings
Magnesia Carbon Bricks from China (A–570–954) (1st Review) ...... Matthew Renkey (202) 482–2312. Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from China (A–570–952) (1st Review) ...... Matthew Renkey (202) 482–2312. Magnesia Carbon Bricks from Mexico (A–201–837) (1st Review) ...... Matthew Renkey (202) 482–2312. Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan (A–583–844) (1st Review) ...... Matthew Renkey (202) 482–2312.
Countervailing Duty Proceedings
Magnesia Carbon Bricks from China (C–570–955) (1st Review) ...... Jacqueline Arrowsmith (202) 482– 5255. Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from China (C–570–953) (1st Review) ...... David Goldberger (202) 482–4136.
Suspended Investigations
No Sunset Review of suspended investigations is scheduled for initiation in August 2015.
The Department’s procedures for the SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce verification in accordance with section conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth (‘‘the Department’’) has received 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as in 19 CFR 351.218. The Notice of requests to conduct administrative amended (‘‘the Act’’). Further, in Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) reviews of various antidumping and accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(1)(i), Reviews provides further information countervailing duty orders and findings a copy must be served on every party on regarding what is required of all parties with May anniversary dates. In the Department’s service list. to participate in Sunset Reviews. accordance with the Department’s Respondent Selection Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), the regulations, we are initiating those Department will maintain and make administrative reviews. In the event the Department limits the available a service list for these DATES: Effective Date: July 1, 2015. number of respondents for individual proceedings. To facilitate the timely FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: examination for administrative reviews, preparation of the service list(s), it is Brenda E. Waters, Office of AD/CVD the Department intends to select requested that those seeking recognition Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, respondents based on U.S. Customs and as interested parties to a proceeding Enforcement and Compliance, Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) data for U.S. contact the Department in writing International Trade Administration, imports during the POR. We intend to within 10 days of the publication of the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th release the CBP data under Notice of Initiation. Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Administrative Protective Order Please note that if the Department Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) (‘‘APO’’) to all parties having an APO receives a Notice of Intent to Participate 482–4735. within seven days of publication of this from a member of the domestic industry SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: initiation notice and to make our within 15 days of the date of initiation, decision regarding respondent selection the review will continue. Thereafter, Background within 21 days of publication of this any interested party wishing to The Department has received timely Federal Register notice. The participate in the Sunset Review must requests, in accordance with 19 CFR Department invites comments regarding provide substantive comments in 351.213(b), for administrative reviews of the CBP data and respondent selection response to the notice of initiation no various antidumping and countervailing within five days of placement of the later than 30 days after the date of duty orders and findings with May CBP data on the record of the applicable initiation. anniversary dates. review. Rebuttal comments will be due This notice is not required by statute All deadlines for the submission of five days after submission of initial but is published as a service to the various types of information, comments. international trading community. certifications, or comments or actions by In the event the Department decides the Department discussed below refer to it is necessary to limit individual Dated: June 15, 2015. the number of calendar days from the examination of respondents and Christian Marsh, applicable starting time. conduct respondent selection under Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping section 777A(c)(2) of the Act: and Countervailing Duty Operations. Notice of No Sales In general, the Department has found [FR Doc. 2015–16257 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] If a producer or exporter named in that determinations concerning whether BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P this notice of initiation had no exports, particular companies should be sales, or entries during the period of ‘‘collapsed’’ (i.e., treated as a single review (‘‘POR’’), it must notify the entity for purposes of calculating DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Department within 30 days of antidumping duty rates) require a publication of this notice in the Federal substantial amount of detailed International Trade Administration Register. All submissions must be filed information and analysis, which often electronically at http://access.trade.gov Initiation of Antidumping and require follow-up questions and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303.1 Countervailing Duty Administrative analysis. Accordingly, the Department Such submissions are subject to Reviews will not conduct collapsing analyses at the respondent selection phase of this 1 AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty review and will not collapse companies Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; International Trade Administration, Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR at the respondent selection phase unless Department of Commerce. 39263 (July 6, 2011). there has been a determination to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37589
collapse certain companies in a applicable deadline if they desire to be sufficiently independent so as to be previous segment of this antidumping included in the pool of companies from entitled to a separate rate. proceeding (i.e., investigation, which the Department will select To establish whether a firm is administrative review, new shipper mandatory respondents. The Q&V sufficiently independent from review or changed circumstances questionnaire will be available on the government control of its export review). For any company subject to this Department’s Web site at http:// activities to be entitled to a separate review, if the Department determined, trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp on the rate, the Department analyzes each or continued to treat, that company as date of publication of this notice in the entity exporting the subject collapsed with others, the Department Federal Register. The responses to the merchandise under a test arising from will assume that such companies Q&V questionnaire must be received by the Final Determination of Sales at Less continue to operate in the same manner the Department within 14 days of Than Fair Value: Sparklers from the and will collapse them for respondent publication of this notice. Please be People’s Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 selection purposes. Otherwise, the advised that due to the time constraints (May 6, 1991), as amplified by Final Department will not collapse companies imposed by the statutory and regulatory Determination of Sales at Less Than for purposes of respondent selection. deadlines for antidumping duty Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the Parties are requested to (a) identify administrative reviews, the Department People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 which companies subject to review does not intend to grant any extensions (May 2, 1994). In accordance with the previously were collapsed, and (b) for the submission of responses to the separate rates criteria, the Department provide a citation to the proceeding in Q&V questionnaire. Parties will be given assigns separate rates to companies in which they were collapsed. Further, if the opportunity to comment on the CBP NME cases only if respondents can companies are requested to complete data used by the Department to limit the demonstrate the absence of both de jure the Quantity and Value (‘‘Q&V’’) number of Q&V questionnaires issued. and de facto government control over Questionnaire for purposes of We intend to release the CBP data under export activities. respondent selection, in general each APO to all parties having an APO All firms listed below that wish to company must report volume and value within seven days of publication of this qualify for separate rate status in the data separately for itself. Parties should notice in the Federal Register. The administrative reviews involving NME not include data for any other party, Department invites comments regarding countries must complete, as even if they believe they should be CBP data and respondent selection appropriate, either a separate rate treated as a single entity with that other within five days of placement of the application or certification, as described party. If a company was collapsed with CBP data on the record. below. For these administrative reviews, another company or companies in the in order to demonstrate separate rate most recently completed segment of this Deadline for Withdrawal of Request for eligibility, the Department requires proceeding where the Department Administrative Review entities for whom a review was considered collapsing that entity, Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a requested, that were assigned a separate complete Q&V data for that collapsed party that has requested a review may rate in the most recent segment of this entity must be submitted. withdraw that request within 90 days of proceeding in which they participated, Respondent Selection—Aluminum the date of publication of the notice of to certify that they continue to meet the Extrusions From the People’s Republic initiation of the requested review. The criteria for obtaining a separate rate. The of China regulation provides that the Department Separate Rate Certification form will be available on the Department’s Web site In the event the Department limits the may extend this time if it is reasonable at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/ number of respondents for individual to do so. In order to provide parties nme-sep-rate.html on the date of examination in the administrative additional certainty with respect to publication of this Federal Register review of the antidumping duty order when the Department will exercise its notice. In responding to the on aluminum extrusions from the discretion to extend this 90-day certification, please follow the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), the deadline, interested parties are advised ‘‘Instructions for Filing the Department intends to select that the Department does not intend to Certification’’ in the Separate Rate respondents based on volume data extend the 90-day deadline unless the Certification. Separate Rate contained in responses to Q&V requestor demonstrates that an Certifications are due to the Department questionnaires. Further, the Department extraordinary circumstance has intends to limit the number of Q&V prevented it from submitting a timely no later than 30 calendar days after questionnaires issued in the review withdrawal request. Determinations by publication of this Federal Register based on CBP data for U.S. imports of the Department to extend the 90-day notice. The deadline and requirement aluminum extrusions from the PRC. The deadline will be made on a case-by-case for submitting a Certification applies extremely wide variety of individual basis. equally to NME-owned firms, wholly foreign-owned firms, and foreign sellers types of aluminum extrusion products Separate Rates included in the scope of the order on who purchase and export subject aluminum extrusions would preclude In proceedings involving non-market merchandise to the United States. meaningful results in attempting to economy (‘‘NME’’) countries, the Entities that currently do not have a determine the largest PRC exporters of Department begins with a rebuttable separate rate from a completed segment 2 subject merchandise by volume. presumption that all companies within of the proceeding should timely file a Therefore, the Department will limit the the country are subject to government 2 Such entities include entities that have not number of Q&V questionnaires issued control and, thus, should be assigned a participated in the proceeding, entities that were based on the import values in CBP data single antidumping duty deposit rate. It preliminarily granted a separate rate in any which will serve as a proxy for imported is the Department’s policy to assign all currently incomplete segment of the proceeding quantities. Parties subject to the review exporters of merchandise subject to an (e.g., an ongoing administrative review, new shipper review, etc.) and entities that lost their to which the Department does not send administrative review in an NME separate rate in the most recently completed a Q&V questionnaire may file a response country this single rate unless an segment of the proceeding in which they to the Q&V questionnaire by the exporter can demonstrate that it is participated.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37590 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Separate Rate Application to publication of this Federal Register selected as mandatory respondents, demonstrate eligibility for a separate notice. In responding to the Separate these exporters and producers will no rate in this proceeding. In addition, Rate Status Application, refer to the longer be eligible for separate rate status companies that received a separate rate instructions contained in the unless they respond to all parts of the in a completed segment of the application. Separate Rate Status questionnaire as mandatory proceeding that have subsequently Applications are due to the Department respondents. made changes, including, but not no later than 30 calendar days of limited to, changes to corporate publication of this Federal Register Initiation of Reviews structure, acquisitions of new notice. The deadline and requirement companies or facilities, or changes to for submitting a Separate Rate Status In accordance with 19 CFR their official company name,3 should Application applies equally to NME- 351.221(c)(1)(i), we are initiating timely file a Separate Rate Application owned firms, wholly foreign-owned administrative reviews of the following to demonstrate eligibility for a separate firms, and foreign sellers that purchase antidumping and countervailing duty rate in this proceeding. The Separate and export subject merchandise to the orders and findings. We intend to issue Rate Status Application will be United States. the final results of these reviews not available on the Department’s Web site For exporters and producers who later than May 31, 2016. at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/ submit a separate-rate status application nme-sep-rate.html on the date of or certification and subsequently are
Period to be reviewed
Antidumping Duty Proceedings Canada: Citric Acid and Certain Citric Salts, A–122–853 5/1/14–4/30/15 Jungbunzlauer Canada Inc. India: Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipe and Tubes, A–533–502 5/1/14–4/30/15 Lloyds Metals & Engineers Limited and Lloyds Line Pipe Ltd. Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd. Jindal Pipes Limited. Maharashtra Seamless Limited. Ratnamani Metals Tubes Ltd. Tata Iron and Steel Co., Ltd. India: Silicomanganese, A–533–823 5/1/14–4/30/15 Nava Bharat Ventures Limited. Universal Ferro and Allied Chemicals, Ltd. Japan: Diffusion-Annealed Nickel-Plated Flat-Rolled Steel Products, A–588–869 11/19/13–4/30/15 Toyo Kohan Co., Ltd. Kazakhstan: Silicomanganese, A–834–807 5/1/14–4/30/15 Alloy 2000, S.A. Aksu Ferroalloy Plant. Considar, Inc. Transnational Co. Kazuchrome. Republic of Korea: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber, A–580–839 5/1/14–4/30/15 Toray Chemical Korea, Inc. (formerly known as Woongjin Chemical Company, Ltd.). Taiwan: Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents, A–583–848 ...... 5/1/14–4/30/15 Teh Fong Min International Co., Ltd. Taiwan: Polyester Staple Fiber, A–583–833 5/1/14–4/30/15 Far Eastern New Century Corporation. The People’s Republic of China: Aluminum Extrusions, A–570–967 5/1/14–4/30/15 Acro Import and Export Co. Activa International Inc. Allied Maker Limited. Alnan Aluminium Co., Ltd. Aluminicaste Fundicion de Mexico. Atlas Integrated Manufacturing Ltd. Belton (Asia) Development Ltd. Birchwoods (Lin’an) Leisure Products Co., Ltd. Bracalente Metal Products (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. Changshu Changsheng Aluminium Products Co., Ltd. Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd. Changzhou Tenglong Auto Parts Co., Ltd. China Zhongwang Holdings, Ltd. Chiping One Stop Industrial & Trade Co., Ltd. Classic & Contemporary Inc. Clear Sky Inc. Cosco (J.M.) Aluminium Co., Ltd. Danfoss Micro Channel Heat Exchanger (Jia Xing) Co., Ltd. Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd. Dongguan Dazhan Metal Co., Ltd. Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.
3 Only changes to the official company name, a Separate Rate Application. Information regarding new trade names may be submitted via a Separate rather than trade names, need to be addressed via Rate Certification.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37591
Period to be reviewed
Dragonluxe Limited. Dynamic Technologies China Ltd. Dynabright Int’l Group (HK) Limited. Ever Extend Ent. Ltd. Fenghua Metal Product Factory. First Union Property Limited. FookShing Metal & Plastic Co. Ltd. Foreign Trade Co. of Suzhou New & High-Tech Industrial Development Zone. Foshan City Nanhai Hongjia Aluminum Alloy Co., Ltd. Foshan Golden Source Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. Foshan Guangcheng Aluminium Co., Ltd. Foshan Jinlan Aluminum Co. Ltd. Foshan JMA Aluminum Company Limited. Foshan Sanshui Fenglu Aluminium Co., Ltd. Foshan Shunde Aoneng Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. Foshan Yong Li Jian Aluminum Co., Ltd. Fujian Sanchuan Aluminum Co., Ltd. Genimex Shanghai, Ltd. Global PMX Dongguan Co., Ltd. Global Point Technology (Far East) Limited. Gold Mountain International Development Limited. Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc. Gran Cabrio Capital Pte. Ltd. Gree Electric Appliances. GT88 Capital Pte. Ltd. Guang Ya Aluminium Industries (Hong Kong) Ltd. Guang Ya Aluminium Industries Co., Ltd. Guangdong Hao Mei Aluminium Co., Ltd. Guangdong Jianmei Aluminum Profile Company Limited. Guangdong JMA Aluminum Profile Factory (Group) Co., Ltd. Guangdong Nanhai Foodstuffs Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. Guangdong Weiye Aluminum Factory Co., Ltd. Guangdong Whirlpool Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. Guangdong Xingfa Aluminium Co., Ltd. Guangdong Xin Wei Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. Guangdong Yonglijian Aluminum Co., Ltd. Guangdong Zhongya Aluminum Company Limited. Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. Guangzhou Mingcan Die-Casting Hardware Products Co., Ltd. Hangzhou Xingyi Metal Products Co., Ltd. Hanwood Enterprises Limited. Hanyung Alcoba Co., Ltd. Hanyung Alcobis Co., Ltd. Hanyung Metal (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. Hao Mei Aluminum Co., Ltd. Hao Mei Aluminum International Co., Ltd. Hebei Xusen Wire Mesh Products Co., Ltd. Henan New Kelong Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. Hong Kong Gree Electric Appliances Sales Limited. Honsense Development Company. Hui Mei Gao Aluminum Foshan Co., Ltd. IDEX Dinglee Technology (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. IDEX Technology Suzhou Co., Ltd. IDEX Health. Innovative Aluminium (Hong Kong) Limited. iSource Asia. Jackson Travel Products Co., Ltd. Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd. Jiangmen Qunxing Hardware Diecasting Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Changfa Refrigeration Co., Ltd. Jiangyin Trust International Inc. Jiangyin Xinhong Doors and Windows Co., Ltd. Jiaxing Jackson Travel Products Co., Ltd. Jiaxing Taixin Metal Products Co., Ltd. Jiuyan Co., Ltd. JMA (HK) Company Limited. Justhere Co., Ltd. Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn. Bhd. Kanal Precision Aluminum Product Co., Ltd. Karlton Aluminum Company Ltd. Kong Ah International Company Limited. Kromet International, Inc. Kunshan Giant Light Metal Technology Co., Ltd.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37592 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Period to be reviewed
Liaoning Zhongwang Group Co., Ltd. Liaoyang Zhongwang Aluminum Profile Co. Ltd. Longkou Donghai Trade Co., Ltd. Metaltek Group Co., Ltd. Metaltek Metal Industry Co., Ltd. Midea Air Conditioning Equipment Co., Ltd. Midea International Training Co., Ltd./Midea International Trading Co., Ltd. Miland Luck Limited. Nanhai Textiles Import & Export Co., Ltd. New Asia Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd. New Zhongya Aluminum Factory. Nidec Sankyo (Zhejang) Corporation. Nidec Sankyo Singapore Pte. Ltd. Ningbo Coaster International Co., Ltd. Ningbo Hi Tech Reliable Manufacturing Company. Ningbo Ivy Daily Commodity Co., Ltd. Ningbo Yili Import and Export Co., Ltd. North China Aluminum Co., Ltd. North Fenghua Aluminum Ltd. Northern States Metals. PanAsia Aluminium (China) Limited. Pengcheng Aluminum Enterprise Inc. Permasteelisa Hong Kong Limited. Permasteelisa South China Factory. Pingguo Aluminum Company Limited. Pingguo Asia Aluminum Co., Ltd. Popular Plastics Co., Ltd. Press Metal International Ltd. Samuel, Son & Co., Ltd. Sanchuan Aluminum Co., Ltd. Shangdong Huasheng Pesticide Machinery Co. Shangdong Nanshan Aluminum Co., Ltd. Shanghai Automobile Air-Conditioner Accessories Co., Ltd. Shanghai Canghai Aluminum Tube Packaging Co., Ltd. Shanghai Dongsheng Metal. Shanghai Shen Hang Imp & Exp Co., Ltd. Shanghai Tongtai Precise Aluminum Alloy Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Shenyang Yuanda Aluminium Industry Engineering Co. Ltd. Shenzhen Hudson Technology Development Co. Shenzhen Jiuyuan Co., Ltd. Sihui Shi Guo Yao Aluminum Co., Ltd. Sincere Profit Limited. Skyline Exhibit Systems (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. Southwest Aluminum (Group) Co., Ltd. Suzhou JRP Import & Export Co., Ltd. Suzhou NewHongJi Precision Part Co., Ltd. TAI–AO Aluminium (Taishan) Co., Ltd. Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd. Taizhou Lifeng Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Taizhou United Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. Tianjin Ganglv Nonferrous Metal Materials Co., Ltd. Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., Ltd. Tianjin Ruixin Electric Heat Transmission Technology, Ltd. Tianjin Xiandai Plastic & Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. Tiazhou Lifeng Manufacturing Corporation/Taizhou Lifeng Manufacturing Corporation, Ltd. Top-Wok Metal Co., Ltd. Traffic Brick Network, LLC. Union Aluminum (SIP) Co. Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd. USA Worldwide Door Components (PINGHU) Co., Ltd. Wenzhou Shengbo Decoration & Hardware. Whirlpool (Guangdong). Whirlpool Canada L.P.. Whirlpool Microwave Products Development Ltd. WTI Building Products, Ltd. Xin Wei Aluminum Co. Xin Wei Aluminum Company Limited. Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd. Zahoqing China Square Industry Limited/Zhaoqing China Square Industry Limited. Zhaoqing Asia Aluminum Factory Company Ltd. Zhaoqing China Square Industrial Ltd. Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37593
Period to be reviewed
Zhejiang Anji Xinxiang Aluminum Co., Ltd. Zhejiang Yongkang Listar Aluminium Industry Co., Ltd. Zhejiang Zhengte Group Co., Ltd. Zhenjiang Xinlong Group Co., Ltd. Zhongshan Daya Hardware Co., Ltd. Zhongshan Gold Mountain Aluminium Factory Ltd. Zhongya Shaped Aluminium (HK) Holding Limited. Zhuhai Runxingtai Electrical Equipment Co., Ltd. The People’s Republic of China: Certain Activated Carbon 4, A–570–904 4/1/14–3/31/15 Jacobi Carbons Industry (Tianjin). The People’s Republic of China: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts, A–570–937 5/1/14–4/30/15 Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd. RZBC Co., Ltd. RZBC Import & Export Co., Ltd. RZBC (Juxian) Co., Ltd. The People’s Republic of China: Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks 5, A–570–983 4/1/14–3/31/15 Zhuhai Kohler Kitchen & Bathroom Products Co., Ltd. The People’s Republic of China: Pure Magnesium, A–570–832 5/1/14–4/30/15 Tianjin Magnesium International Co., Ltd. (‘‘TMI’’). Tianjin Magnesium Metal Co., Ltd. (‘‘TMM’’). Turkey: Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes, A–489–501 5/1/14–4/30/15 Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. Borusan Birlesik Boru Fabrikalari San ve Tic. Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. Borusan Gemlik Boru Tesisleri A.S. Borusan Iharcat Ithalat ve Dagitim A.S. Borusan Ithicat ve Dagitim A.S. Tubeco Pipe and Steel Corporation. Erbosan Erciyas Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. Toscelik Metal Ticaret A.S. Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S. Yucel Boru ve Profil Endustrisi A.S. Yucelboru Ihracat Ithalat ve Pazarlama A.S. Caryirova Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. Turkey: Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube, A–489–815 5/1/14–4/30/15 Agir Haddecilik A.S. United Arab Emirates: Certain Steel Nails, A–520–804 5/1/14–4/30/15 Dubai Wire FZE. Oman Fasteners LLC. Overseas Distribution Services Inc. Overseas International Steel Industry LLC. Precision Fasteners LLC. Venezuela: Silicomanganese, A–307–820 5/1/14–4/30/15 FerroAtlantica S.A. FerroAtlantica de Venezuela. Hornos Electricos de Venezuela. Countervailing Duty Proceedings The People’s Republic of China: Aluminum Extrusions, C–570–968 1/1/14–12/31/14 A-Plus Industries Ltd. Acro Import and Export Co. Activa International Inc. Allied Maker Limited. Alnan Aluminium Co., Ltd. Aluminicaste Fundicion de Mexico. Asia Pacific Industrial (Group) Co., Ltd. Birchwoods (Lin’an) Leisure Products Co., Ltd. Bracalente Metal Products (Suzhou) Co. Ltd. Changshu Changsheng Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. Changzhou Changzhen Evaporator Co., Ltd. Changzhou Jinxi Machinery Co., Ltd. Changzhou Tenglong Auto Parts Co., Ltd. China Zhongwang Holdings, Ltd. Chiping One Stop Industrial & Trade Co., Ltd. Classic & Contemporary Inc. Clear Sky Inc. Cosco (J.M.) Aluminum Co., Ltd. Danfoss Micro Channel Heat Exchanger (Jia Xing) Co. Ltd. Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd. Dongguan Dazhan Metal Co., Ltd. Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd. Dragonluxe Limited.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37594 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Period to be reviewed
Dynabright International Group (HK) Limited. Dynamic Technologies China. Ever Extend Ent. Ltd. ETLA Technology (Wuxi) Co., Ltd. Fenghua Metal Product Factory. First Union Property Limited. Foreign Trade Co. of Suzhou New & Hi-Tech Industrial Development Zone. Foshan City Nanhai Hongjia Aluminum Alloy Co., Ltd. Foshan Golden Source Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. Foshan Guancheng Aluminium Co., Ltd. Foshan Jinlan Aluminum Co. Ltd. Foshan JMA Aluminum Company Limited. Foshan Shanshui Fenglu Aluminum Co., Ltd. Foshan Shunde Aoneng Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. Foshan Yong Li Jian Aluminum Co., Ltd. Fujian Sanchuan Aluminum Co., Ltd. Genimex Shanghai, Ltd. Global Hi-Tek Precision Limited. Global PMX Dongguan Co., Ltd. Global Point Technology (Far East) Limited. Gold Mountain International Development, Ltd. Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc. Gran Cabrio Capital Pte. Ltd. Gree Electric Appliances. GT88 Capital Pte. Ltd. Guang Ya Aluminium Industries (HK) Ltd. Guang Ya Aluminium Industries Co., Ltd. Guangdong Hao Mei Aluminum Co., Ltd. Guangdong Jianmei Aluminum Profile Company Limited. Guangdong JMA Aluminum Profile Factory (Group) Co., Ltd. Guangdong Nanhai Foodstuffs Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. Guangdong Weiye Aluminum Factory Co., Ltd. Guangdong Whirlpool Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. Guangdong Xingfa Aluminum Co., Ltd. Guangdong Xin Wei Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. Guangdong Yonglijian Aluminum Co., Ltd. Guangdong Zhongya Aluminum Company Limited. Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. Guangzhou Mingcan Die-Casting Hardware Products Co., Ltd. Hangzhou Xingyi Metal Products Co., Ltd. Hanwood Enterprises Limited. Hanyung Alcoba Co., Ltd. Hanyung Alcobis Co., Ltd. Hanyung Metal (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. Hao Mei Aluminum Co., Ltd. Hao Mei Aluminum International Co., Ltd. Hebei Xusen Wire Mesh Products Co., Ltd. Henan New Kelong Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. Hong Kong Gree Electric Appliances Sales Limited. Honsense Development Company. Hui Mei Gao Aluminum Foshan Co., Ltd. Idex Dinglee Technology (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. Idex Health. IDEX Technology Suzhou Co., Ltd. Innovative Aluminum (Hong Kong) Limited. iSource Asia. Jackson Travel Products Co., Ltd. Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd. Jiangmen Qunxing Hardware Diecasting Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Changfa Refrigeration Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Susun Group (HK) Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Zhenhexiang New Material Technology Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Shengrun Industry Co, Ltd. Jiangyin Trust International Inc. Jiangyin Xinhong Doors and Windows Co., Ltd. Jiaxing Jackson Travel Products Co., Ltd. Jiaxing Taixin Metal Products Co., Ltd. Jiuyan Co., Ltd. JMA (HK) Company Limited. Johnson Precision Engineering (Suzhou) Co Ltd. Justhere Co., Ltd. Kam Kiu Aluminum Products Sdn Bhd. Kanal Precision Aluminum Product Co., Ltd.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37595
Period to be reviewed
Karlton Aluminum Company Ltd. Kong Ah International Company Limited. Kromet International Inc. Kunshan Giant Light Metal Technology Co., Ltd. Liaoning Zhongwang Group Co., Ltd. Liaoyang Zhongwang Aluminum Profile Co. Ltd. Longkou Donghai Trade Co., Ltd. Markem Imaje China (China) Co. Ltd. Metaltek Group Co., Ltd. Metaltek Metal Industry Co., Ltd. Midea Air Conditioning Equipment Co., Ltd. Midea International Training Co., Ltd./Midea International Trading Co., Ltd. Miland Luck Limited. Nanhai Textiles Import & Export Co., Ltd. New Asia Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd. New Zhongya Aluminum Factory. Nidec Sankyo Singapore Pte. Ltd. Nidec Sankyo (Zhejiang) Corporation. Ningbo Coaster International Co., Ltd. Ningbo Haina Machine Co., Ltd. Ningbo Hi Tech Reliable Manufacturing Company. Ningbo Innopower Tengda Machinery Co., Ltd. Ningbo Ivy Daily Commodity Co., Ltd. Ningbo Yili Import and Export Co., Ltd. Ningbo Yinzhou Sanhua Electric Machine Factory. North China Aluminum Co., Ltd. North Fenghua Aluminum Ltd. Northern States Metals. PanAsia Aluminum (China) Limited. Pengcheng Aluminum Enterprise Inc. Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd. Permasteelisa South China Factory. Pingguo Aluminum Company Limited. Pingguo Asia Aluminum Co., Ltd. Popular Plastics Company Limited. Precision Metal Works LTD. Press Metal International Ltd. Samuel, Son & Co., Ltd. Sanchuan Aluminum Co., Ltd. Sapa Profiles (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. Shangdong Huasheng Pesticide Machinery Co. Shangdong Nanshan Aluminum Co., Ltd. Shanghai Automobile Air-Conditioner Accessories Co., Ltd. Shanghai Canghai Aluminum Tube Packaging Co., Ltd. Shanghai Dongsheng Metal. Shanghai Shen Hang Imp & Exp Co., Ltd. Shanghai Tongtai Precise Aluminum Alloy Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Shenyang Yuanda Aluminum Industry Engineering Co., Ltd. Shenzhen Hudson Technology Development Co., Ltd. Shenzhen Jiuyuan Co., Ltd. Shunhai International (HK) Limited. Sihui Shi Guo Yao Aluminum Co., Ltd. Sincere Profit Limited. Summit Heat Sinks Metal Co., Ltd. Skyline Exhibit Systems (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. Suzhou JRP Import & Export Co., Ltd. Suzhou New Hongji Precision Part Co. Tai-Ao Aluminum (Taishan) Co. Ltd. Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd. Taizhou Lifeng Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Taizhou United Imp. & Exp. Co. Ltd. tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. Tianjin Ganglv Nonferrous Metal Materials Co., Ltd. Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., Ltd. Tianjin Ruxin Electric Heat Transmission Technology Co., Ltd. Tianjin Xiandai Plastic & Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. Tiazhou Lifeng Manufacturing Corporation/Taizhou Lifeng Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Top-Wok Metal Co., Ltd. Traffic Brick Network, LLC. Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd. USA Worldwide Door Components (Pinghu) Co., Ltd. Wenzhou Shengbo Decoration & Hardware. Whirlpool (Guangdong).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37596 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Period to be reviewed
Whirlpool Canada. Whirlpool Microwave Products Development Ltd. WTI Building Products, Ltd. Wuxi Huida Aluminum Co., Ltd. Xin Wei Aluminum Co. Xin Wei Aluminum Company Limited. Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd. Yongji Guanghai Aluminium Industry Co., Ltd. Zahoqing China Square Industry Limited/Zhaoqing China Square Industry Limited. Zhaoqing Asia Aluminum Factory Company Ltd. Zhaoqing China Square Industrial Ltd. Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. Zhejiang Anji Xinxiang Aluminum Co., Ltd. Zhejiang Dongfeng Refrigeration Components Co., Ltd. Zhejiang Yongkang Listar Aluminum Industry Co., Ltd.. Zhejiang Zhengte Group Co., Ltd. Zhenjiang Xinlong Group Co., Ltd. Zhongshan Daya Hardware Co., Ltd. Zhongshan Gold Mountain Aluminum Factory Ltd. Zhongya Shaped Aluminum (HK) Holding Limited. Zhuhai Runxingtai Electrical Equipment Co., Ltd. The People’s Republic of China: Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks 6, C–570–955 1/1/13–12/31/13 Fengchi Mining Co., Ltd. of Haicheng City. The People’s Republic of China: Citric Acid and Certain Salts, C–570–938 1/1/14–12/31/14 Laiwu Taihe Biochemistry Co., Ltd. RZBC Group Shareholding Co., Ltd. RZBC Co., Ltd. RZBC Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. RZBC (Juxian) Co., Ltd. Suspension Agreements None.
Duty Absorption Reviews include the name(s) of the exporter or Revised Factual Information During any administrative review producer for which the inquiry is Requirements covering all or part of a period falling requested. On April 10, 2013, the Department between the first and second or third Gap Period Liquidation published Definition of Factual and fourth anniversary of the For the first administrative review of Information and Time Limits for publication of an antidumping duty any order, there will be no assessment Submission of Factual Information: order under 19 CFR 351.211 or a of antidumping or countervailing duties Final Rule, 78 FR 21246 (April 10, determination under 19 CFR on entries of subject merchandise 2013), which modified two regulations 351.218(f)(4) to continue an order or entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, related to antidumping and suspended investigation (after sunset for consumption during the relevant countervailing duty proceedings: The review), the Secretary, if requested by a provisional-measures ‘‘gap’’ period, of definition of factual information (19 domestic interested party within 30 the order, if such a gap period is CFR 351.102(b)(21)), and the time limits days of the date of publication of the applicable to the POR. for the submission of factual notice of initiation of the review, will information (19 CFR 351.301). The final determine, consistent with FAG Italia v. Administrative Protective Orders and rule identifies five categories of factual United States, 291 F.3d 806 (Fed Cir. Letters of Appearance information in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21), 2002), as appropriate, whether Interested parties must submit which are summarized as follows: (i) antidumping duties have been absorbed applications for disclosure under Evidence submitted in response to by an exporter or producer subject to the administrative protective orders in questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted review if the subject merchandise is accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On in support of allegations; (iii) publicly sold in the United States through an January 22, 2008, the Department available information to value factors importer that is affiliated with such published Antidumping and under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure exporter or producer. The request must Countervailing Duty Proceedings: the adequacy of remuneration under 19 Documents Submission Procedures; CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed 4 The company listed above was inadvertently not APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January on the record by the Department; and (v) included in the initiation notice that published on 22, 2008). Those procedures apply to evidence other than factual information May 26, 2015 (80 FR 30041). administrative reviews included in this described in (i)–(iv). The final rule 5 The name of the company listed below was misspelled in the initiation notice that published on notice of initiation. Parties wishing to requires any party, when submitting May 26, 2015 (80 FR 30041). The correct spelling participate in any of these factual information, to specify under of the company name is listed in this notice. administrative reviews should ensure which subsection of 19 CFR 6 The name of the company listed below was that they meet the requirements of these 351.102(b)(21) the information is being misspelled in the initiation notice that published on November 10, 2014 (79 FR 66694). The correct procedures (e.g., the filing of separate submitted and, if the information is spelling of the company name is listed in this letters of appearance as discussed at 19 submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct notice. CFR 351.103(d)). factual information already on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37597
record, to provide an explanation the adequacy of remuneration under 19 overview of the history of MBDA, identifying the information already on CFR 351.511(a)(2), filed pursuant to 19 MBDA’s Federal Funding the record that the factual information CFR 351.301(c)(3) and rebuttal, Opportunities, tips on writing grant seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct. The clarification and correction filed applications, guidance on preparing final rule also modified 19 CFR 351.301 pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(iv); (3) budgets and budget justifications, and so that, rather than providing general comments concerning the selection of a information regarding audit and time limits, there are specific time limits surrogate country and surrogate values compliance rules. based on the type of factual information and rebuttal; (4) comments concerning being submitted. These modifications U.S. Customs and Border Protection DATES: The public meeting will be held are effective for all segments initiated on data; and (5) quantity and value on Thursday, July 23, 2015; 1:00 p.m.– or after May 10, 2013. Please review the questionnaires. Under certain 3:30 p.m. EST. The meeting will be final rule, available at http:// circumstances, the Department may available via webinar. Please submit enforcement.trade.gov/frn/2013/ elect to specify a different time limit by your written questions to Nakita Y. 1304frn/2013-08227.txt, prior to which extension requests will be Chambers (See FOR FURTHER submitting factual information in this considered untimely for submissions INFORMATION CONTACT) no later than July segment. which are due from multiple parties 10, 2015. Any party submitting factual simultaneously. In such a case, the information in an antidumping duty or Department will inform parties in the ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be countervailing duty proceeding must letter or memorandum setting forth the held at: The Westin Canal Place, 100 certify to the accuracy and completeness deadline (including a specified time) by Rue Iberville, New Orleans, Louisiana, of that information.7 Parties are hereby which extension requests must be filed 70130. Participants may register for the reminded that revised certification to be considered timely. This webinar online at www.mbda.gov. requirements are in effect for company/ modification also requires that an FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For government officials as well as their extension request must be made in a additional information please contact: representatives. All segments of any separate, stand-alone submission, and antidumping duty or countervailing clarifies the circumstances under which Ms. Nakita Y. Chambers, Program duty proceedings initiated on or after the Department will grant untimely- Manager, Telephone (202) 482–0065, August 16, 2013, should use the formats filed requests for the extension of time email [email protected]. Anyone for the revised certifications provided at limits. These modifications are effective who requires special assistance, such as the end of the Final Rule.8 The for all segments initiated on or after sign language interpretation or other Department intends to reject factual October 21, 2013. Please review the reasonable accommodations, should submissions in any proceeding final rule, available at http:// contact Nakita Chambers no later than segments if the submitting party does www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/ July 17, 2015. html/2013-22853.htm, prior to not comply with applicable revised SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In submitting factual information in these certification requirements. accordance with Executive Order 11625, segments. Revised Extension of Time Limits These initiations and this notice are the Minority Business Development Regulation in accordance with section 751(a) of the Agency is authorized provide federal On September 20, 2013, the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR financial assistance to public and Department modified its regulation 351.221(c)(1)(i). private organizations so that they may render technical and business concerning the extension of time limits Dated: June 25, 2015. management services to minority for submissions in antidumping and Christian Marsh, countervailing duty proceedings: Final business enterprises. MBDA provides Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping federal financial assistance to Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013). and Countervailing Duty Operations. The modification clarifies that parties organizations through grants and [FR Doc. 2015–16248 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] may request an extension of time limits cooperative agreements. The purpose of before a time limit established under BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P the public meeting is to provide general part 351 expires, or as otherwise information to prospective grant specified by the Secretary. In general, an DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE applicants interested in MBDA business extension request will be considered development grant programs on writing untimely if it is filed after the time limit Minority Business Development a competitive grant application, established under part 351 expires. For Agency preparing budgets and budget submissions which are due from [Docket No: 150623548–5548–01] justifications, and generally reviewing multiple parties simultaneously, an single audit readiness and compliance extension request will be considered Guidance on MBDA Applications for regulations. untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. on Federal Funding the due date. Examples include, but are This meeting is open to the public. not limited to: (1) Case and rebuttal AGENCY: Minority Business Josephine Arnold, briefs, filed pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309; Development Agency, Department of Chief Counsel. (2) factual information to value factors Commerce [FR Doc. 2015–16188 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] under 19 CFR 351.408(c), or to measure ACTION: Notice of public meeting. BILLING CODE 3510–21–P 7 See section 782(b) of the Act. SUMMARY: The Minority Business 8 See Certification of Factual Information To Development Agency (MBDA) publishes Import Administration During Antidumping and this notice to announce a public Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July meeting to be held during the MBDA 17, 2013) (‘‘Final Rule’’); see also the frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available National Training Conference on July at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ 23, 2015. The public meeting will info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. provide general information and an
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37598 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Grid deployment and operations. The Gaithersburg, MD 20899–8200; Committee advises the Director of NIST telephone 301–975–2254, fax 301–948– National Institute of Standards and in carrying out duties authorized by 5668; or via email at cuong.nguyen@ Technology section 1305 of the Energy nist.gov. Independence and Security Act of 2007 All visitors to the NIST site are National Institute of Standards and (Pub. L. 110–140). The Committee required to pre-register to be admitted. Technology (NIST) Smart Grid provides input to NIST on Smart Grid Anyone wishing to attend this meeting Advisory Committee Meeting standards, priorities, and gaps, on the must register by 5:00 p.m. Eastern time, AGENCY: National Institute of Standards overall direction, status, and health of Friday, July 24, 2015, in order to attend. and Technology, Department of the Smart Grid implementation by the Please submit your full name, time of Commerce. Smart Grid industry, and on Smart Grid arrival, email address, and phone Interoperability Panel activities, number to Cuong Nguyen. Non-U.S. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. including the direction of research and citizens must submit additional SUMMARY: The National Institute of standards activities. Background information; please contact Mr. Nguyen. Standards and Technology (NIST) Smart information on the Committee is Mr. Nguyen’s email address is Grid Advisory Committee (SGAC or available at http://www.nist.gov/ [email protected] and his phone Committee), will meet in open session smartgrid/committee.cfm. number is (301) 975–2254. Also, please on Thursday, July 30, 2015 from 8:30 Pursuant to the Federal Advisory note that under the REAL ID Act of 2005 Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time and (Pub. L. 109–13), federal agencies, App., notice is hereby given that the Friday, July 31, 2015 from 8:30 a.m. to including NIST, can only accept a state- NIST Smart Grid Advisory Committee 12:00 p.m. Eastern time. This meeting issued driver’s license or identification (SGAC or Committee) will meet in open was originally scheduled for March 10– card for access to federal facilities if session on Thursday, July 30, 2015 from 11, 2015 and was rescheduled for issued by states that are REAL ID 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time and administrative reasons. The primary compliant or have an extension. NIST Friday, July 31, 2015 from 8:30 a.m. to purposes of this meeting are to discuss also currently accepts other forms of 12:00 p.m. Eastern time. The meeting the Grid 3.0 Strategic Planning Effort federal-issued identification in lieu of a will be open to the public and held in and NIST Transactive Energy, state-issued driver’s license. For the Executive Conference Room, detailed information please contact Mr. Distributed Energy Resources, Building 101 (Administration) at NIST Microgrid, and Smart City activities. Nguyen or visit: http://www.nist.gov/ in Gaithersburg, Maryland. The primary public_affairs/visitor/. The agenda may change to purposes of this meeting are to discuss accommodate Committee business. The the Grid 3.0 Strategic Planning Effort Richard Cavanagh, final agenda will be posted on the Smart and NIST Transactive Energy, Acting Associate Director for Laboratory Grid Web site at http://www.nist.gov/ Distributed Energy Resources, Programs. smartgrid. Microgrid, and Smart City activities. [FR Doc. 2015–16190 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] DATES: The SGAC will meet on The agenda may change to BILLING CODE 3510–13–P Thursday, July 30, 2015 from 8:30 a.m. accommodate Committee business. The to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time and Friday, final agenda will be posted on the Smart July 31, 2015 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 Grid Web site at http://www.nist.gov/ DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE p.m. Eastern time. smartgrid. National Oceanic and Atmospheric ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in Individuals and representatives of Administration the Executive Conference Room, organizations who would like to offer Building 101 (Administration), National comments and suggestions related to the RIN 0648–XD990 Institute of Standards and Technology Committee’s affairs are invited to (NIST), 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, request a place on the agenda by Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Maryland 20899. Please note admittance submitting their request to Cuong Essential Fish Habitat Final 5-Year instructions under the SUPPLEMENTARY Nguyen at [email protected] or Review (301) 975–2254 no later than 5:00 p.m. INFORMATION section of this notice. Eastern time, Friday, July 24, 2015. On AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Friday, July 31, 2015, approximately Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Cuong Nguyen, Smart Grid and Cyber- one-half hour will be reserved at the end Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Physical Systems Program Office, of the meeting for public comments, and Commerce. National Institute of Standards and speaking times will be assigned on a ACTION: Notice of availability; notice of Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail first-come, first-serve basis. The amount intent. Stop 8200, Gaithersburg, MD 20899– of time per speaker will be determined 8200; telephone 301–975–2254, fax by the number of requests received, but SUMMARY: NMFS announces the 301–948–5668; or via email at is likely to be about three minutes each. availability of the Final Atlantic Highly [email protected]. Questions from the public will not be Migratory Species (HMS) Essential Fish SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The considered during this period. Speakers Habitat (EFH) 5-Year Review and intent Committee was established in who wish to expand upon their oral to initiate an amendment to the 2006 accordance with the Federal Advisory statements, those who had wished to Consolidated Atlantic HMS Fishery Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. speak but could not be accommodated Management Plan (FMP) to revise App. The Committee is composed of on the agenda, and those who were Atlantic HMS EFH descriptions and nine to fifteen members, appointed by unable to attend in person are invited to designations. The purpose of the the Director of NIST, who were selected submit written statements to Mr. Cuong Atlantic HMS EFH 5-Year Review was on the basis of established records of Nguyen, Smart Grid and Cyber-Physical to gather relevant new information and distinguished service in their Systems Program Office, National determine whether revisions to existing professional community and their Institute of Standards and Technology, EFH descriptions and designations are knowledge of issues affecting Smart 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8200, warranted, in compliance with the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37599
requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens 2015 (80 FR 11981). The public Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq., and 1801 Fishery Conservation and Management comment period for the draft EFH 5- et seq. Act and implementing regulations. Year Review ended on April 6, 2015. Dated: June 26, 2015. NMFS has determined that revisions to The final EFH 5-Year Review for Emily H. Menashes, EFH descriptions and designations are Atlantic HMS includes tunas (bluefin, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable warranted, and an amendment to the bigeye, albacore, yellowfin, and Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP skipjack), oceanic sharks, swordfish, [FR Doc. 2015–16191 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] will be initiated. and billfishes (blue marlin, white BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DATES: The Final Atlantic HMS EFH 5- marlin, sailfish, roundscale spearfish, Year Review will be available on July 1, and longbill spearfish). The Atlantic 2015. HMS EFH 5-Year Review considers data DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the regarding Atlantic HMS and their Draft Atlantic HMS EFH 5-Year Review habitats that have become available National Oceanic and Atmospheric may be obtained on the internet at: since 2009 that were not included in Administration http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ Final Amendment 1 to the 2006 RIN 0648–XE021 documents/2015_final_efh_review.pdf. Consolidated Atlantic HMS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (Amendment 1; June 1, 2010, 75 FR Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Peter Cooper at 301–427–8503, or 30484); Final Environmental Impact General Provisions for Domestic Jennifer Cudney at 727–824–5399. Statement for Amendment 3 to the 2006 Fisheries; Application for Exempted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Consolidated HMS FMP (June 1, 2010, Fishing Permits 75 FR 30484); and the interpretive rule Magnuson-Stevens Fishery AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries that described EFH for roundscale Conservation and Management Act Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and spearfish (September 22, 2010, 75 FR (Magnuson-Stevens Act) includes Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 57698). provisions concerning the identification Commerce. NMFS analyzed the information and conservation of EFH (16 U.S.C. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. 1801 et seq.). EFH is defined in 50 CFR gathered through the EFH review 600.10 as ‘‘those waters and substrate process in this final 5-year review and SUMMARY: The Assistant Regional necessary to fish for spawning, determined that revision of EFH is Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, breeding, feeding, or growth to warranted, and an amendment to the Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS, has maturity.’’ NMFS must identify and 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP made a preliminary determination that describe EFH, minimize to the extent will be undertaken. In reviewing an Exempted Fishing Permit application practicable the adverse effects of fishing literature since 2009, new data emerged contains all of the required information on EFH, and identify other actions to for certain Atlantic HMS that warrant and warrants further consideration. This encourage the conservation and revision to those species’ EFH Exempted Fishing Permit would allow enhancement of EFH (§ 600.815(a)). EFH geographic boundaries. For other eight commercial fishing vessels to fish maps are presented online in the NMFS Atlantic HMS, new data were either outside of the limited access sea scallop EFH Mapper (http:// unavailable or it was determined that regulations in support of a study on www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/ the new data did not warrant revisions seasonal bycatch distribution and habitatmapper.html). Federal agencies to their EFH geographic boundaries. optimal scallop meat yield on Georges that authorize, fund, or undertake However, in the upcoming amendment, Bank. actions that may adversely affect EFH new observer, survey, and tag/recapture Regulations under the Magnuson- must consult with NMFS, and NMFS data collected since 2009 will be used Stevens Fishery Conservation and must provide conservation to revise EFH geographic boundaries for Management Act require publication of recommendations to Federal and state all species. The current EFH this notification to provide interested agencies regarding any such actions methodology to designate EFH parties the opportunity to comment on (§ 600.815(a)(9)). geographic boundaries for Atlantic HMS applications for proposed Exempted In addition to identifying and was first applied in Amendment 1, and Fishing Permits. describing EFH for managed fish Atlantic HMS EFH geographic DATES: Comments must be received on species, a review of EFH must be boundaries have not since been updated or before July 16, 2015. conducted every 5 years, and EFH using this methodology. It is unknown ADDRESSES: You may submit written provisions must be revised or amended, how data that have been consistently comments by any of the following as warranted, based on the best collected since 2009 (e.g., observer, methods: available scientific information. The survey, tag/recapture) will impact EFH • Email: [email protected]. EFH 5-Year Review evaluates published geographic boundaries. Therefore, all Include in the subject line ‘‘DA15–036 scientific literature, unpublished Atlantic HMS EFH geographic CFF Georges Bank Optimization Study scientific reports, information solicited boundaries will be updated to see how EFP.’’ from interested parties, and previously these data will impact EFH geographic • Mail: John K. Bullard, Regional unavailable or inaccessible data. NMFS boundaries, even for species where Administrator, NMFS, Greater Atlantic announced the initiation of this review there was limited or no new EFH data Regional Fisheries Office, 55 Great and solicited information for this review found in the literature review. Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. from the public in a Federal Register The upcoming EFH amendment will Mark the outside of the envelope notice on March 24, 2014 (79 FR 15959). consider all 10 EFH components, ‘‘DA15–036 CFF Georges Bank The initial public review/submission including individual species EFH Optimization Study EFP.’’ period ended on May 23, 2014. The descriptions, EFH conservation and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: draft EFH 5-Year Review was made enhancement recommendations for Shannah Jaburek, Fisheries Management available in March 2015 and public fishing and non-fishing effects on EFH, Specialist, 978–282–8456. comments on the draft were solicited in and identification of HAPCs, as well as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NOAA a Federal Register notice on March 5, scientific feedback and public comment. awarded the Coonamesset Farm
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37600 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Foundation (CFF) a grant through the place in the central portion situated All tows would be conducted with 2015 Atlantic sea scallop research set- below the Closed Area II Habitat Closure two tandem 15-foot (4.57-meter) turtle aside program, in support of a project Area of the Atlantic Sea Scallop Closed deflector dredges for a duration of 30 titled, ‘‘Optimizing the Georges Bank Area II Rotational Closed Area. Open minutes using an average tow speed of Scallop Fishery by Maximizing Meat area tows would be conducted on the 4.8 knots. One dredge would be rigged Yield and Minimizing Bycatch.’’ northern half of Georges Bank west of with a 7-row apron and twine top CFF submitted a complete application the boundary of Closed Area II. CFF hanging ratio of 2:1, while the other for an EFP on June 4, 2015. The project proposed tow locations inside the dredge would be rigged with a 5-row would look primarily at seasonal Closed Area II Habitat Closure Area. apron and 1.5:1 twine top hanging ratio. distribution of bycatch in relation to sea NOAA Fisheries does not believe that Both dredge frames would be rigged scallop meat weight yield while access to this area should be granted with identical rock and tickler chain minimizing impacts to other stocks. until a final outcome from the Omnibus Additional objectives include continued Habitat Amendment II is determined, configurations, 10-inch (25.4-cm) twine testing of a modified dredge bag design which is currently under development. top, and 4-inch (10.16-cm) ring bag. to reduce flatfish bycatch and collecting NOAA Fisheries recognizes there is a For all tows the entire sea scallop biological samples to examine scallop potential for gear conflict with lobster catch would be counted into baskets meat quality and yellowtail flounder gear in the central portion of CAII. In an and weighed. One basket from each liver disease. CFF is requesting effort to help mitigate gear interactions, dredge would be randomly selected and exemptions that would allow eight the project coordinator would distribute the scallops would be measured in 5- commercial fishing vessels be exempt the time and location of stations to the mm increments to determine size from the Atlantic sea scallop days-at-sea lobster industry, work only during selectivity. All finfish catch would be (DAS) allocations at 50 CFR 648.53(b); daylight hours, post an extra lookout to sorted by species and then counted and Closed Area II scallop gear restrictions avoid gear, and conduct fishing measured. Weight, sex, and operations in a way that avoids tangling specified at § 648.81(b); access area reproductive state would be determined program requirements at § 648.60(a)(4); in stationary gear. The lobster industry for a random subsample (n=10) of crew size restrictions at § 648.51(c); and in relation to other actions has also yellowtail, winter, and windowpane possession limits and minimum size expressed concern about the potential flounders. Lobsters would be measured, requirements specified in 50 CFR part harvest of egg-bearing female lobsters in 648, subsections B and D through O, for this area during the months of June- sexed, and evaluated for damage and sampling purposes only. October. We do not expect the DAS, shell disease. Maximum catch estimates Eight vessels would conduct scallop crew size or possession limits and for lobster for the project would be dredging in a year-round seasonal study minimum size exemptions to generate approximately 283 individuals. With on a total of eight 7-day trips, for a total any controversy or concern. We will the exception of samples retained for of 56 DAS. Each trip would complete send the EFP notice to the Offshore further processing, no catch would be approximately 70 paired tows per trip Lobster association to ensure they are retained for longer than needed to for an overall total of 560 tows for the provided adequate opportunity to conduct sampling and no catch would project. Closed Area II tows would take provide comment. be landed for sale.
PROJECT CATCH ESTIMATES
Species Minimum Maximum American Lobster — 283 individuals lbs mt lbs mt
Scallops ...... 30,300 13.74 124,400 56.43 Yellowtail ...... 2,900 1.32 5,300 2.40 Winter Flounder ...... 1,700 0.77 2,700 1.22 Windowpane Flounder ...... 4,000 1.81 4,900 2.22 Monkfish ...... 12,600 5.72 18,400 8.35 Other Fish ...... 3,000 1.36 3,300 1.50 Barndoor Skate ...... 5,700 2.59 5,900 2.68 NE Skate Complex ...... 81,200 36.83 106,900 48.49
CFF needs these exemptions to allow may be granted without further notice if Dated: June 26, 2015. them to conduct experimental dredge they are deemed essential to facilitate Emily H. Menashes, towing without being charged DAS, as completion of the proposed research Acting Director, Office of Sustainable well as deploy gear in areas that are and have minimal impacts that do not Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. currently closed to scallop fishing. change the scope or impact of the [FR Doc. 2015–16189 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Participating vessels need crew size initially approved EFP request. Any BILLING CODE 3510–22–P waivers to accommodate science fishing activity conducted outside the personnel and possession waivers will scope of the exempted fishing activity enable them to conduct finfish sampling would be prohibited. activities. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. If approved, the applicant may request minor modifications and extensions to the EFP throughout the year. EFP modifications and extensions
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37601
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE of International Affairs and Seafood • Form of the product; and Inspection; 301–427–8308. • Quantity and/or weight of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March product. Administration 15, 2015, the Presidential Task Force on (3) Where and when was the fish harvested and landed? RIN 0648–XD991 Combating IUU Fishing and Seafood • Fraud (Task Force), co-chaired by the Area of wild-capture or aquaculture Presidential Task Force on Combating harvest; Departments of Commerce and State, • Illegal Unreported and Unregulated Harvest date(s); published its Action Plan for • (IUU) Fishing and Seafood Fraud Implementing the Task Force Name and location of aquaculture facility; Action Plan for Implementing Recommendations (http:// • Recommendations 14/15; Determining www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/iuu/ Point of first landing; • Date of first landing; Types of Information and Operational taskforce.html). The Committee also believes the Standards Related to Data Collection The Action Plan articulates the steps following information logically should that Federal agencies will take to AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries be considered: implement the recommendations the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and (4) What was the chain of custody of Task Force made to the President in Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the fish or fish product through the December 2014 on a comprehensive Commerce. supply chain to point of entry into U.S. framework of integrated programs to ACTION: Notice; request for comments. commerce including: combat IUU fishing and seafood fraud. • Transshipment of product; and, SUMMARY: The National Ocean Council The plan identifies actions that will • Processing, re-processing, or co- Committee on IUU Fishing and Seafood strengthen enforcement, create and mingling of product Fraud (NOC Committee) is seeking expand partnerships with state and The Committee seeks comment public input on the minimum types of local governments, industry, and non- regarding the information needed to information necessary for an effective governmental organizations, and create answer the four questions posed above, seafood traceability program to combat a risk-based traceability program to as well as any additional information IUU fishing and seafood fraud, as well track seafood from harvest to point of necessary for the implementation of an as the operational standards related to entry into U.S. commerce, including the effective risk-based seafood traceability collecting, verifying and securing that use of existing traceability mechanisms. program. An effective traceability data. The work initiated by the Task Force is system must be capable of capturing a now under the oversight of a National complex supply chain which may DATES: Comments must be received by Ocean Council (NOC) Committee. The July 31, 2015. involve reprocessing, mixed species, design of the traceability program will cold storage holding, trans-shipments, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments be led by an interagency working group. etc., as well as the simple harvest of a on this document, identified by NOAA– This notice is among the first steps in single species. NMFS–2014–0090, by either of the implementing Task Force Given the scope of the traceability following methods: Recommendations 14 and 15, • system anticipated in the Action Plan, Electronic Submission: Submit all specifically, developing types of additional data required for fish electronic public comments via the information and operational standards harvested in U.S. domestic fisheries is Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to related to data collection. The data minimal because domestically harvested www.regulations.gov/ collected will establish a foundation for fish enters U.S. commerce at its first #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014- the risk-based seafood traceability point of landing and, to a large extent, 0090, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, program to combat IUU fishing and relevant data are already generated and complete the required fields, and enter seafood fraud from harvest (wild- reported through existing state and or attach your comments. capture or aquaculture) to point of entry • federal permitting, catch monitoring, Mail: Submit written comments to into U.S. commerce, as described in the and landing reports implemented under Melissa Beaudry, Quality Officer, Office Task Force Action Plan. This data is federal and state fishery management of International Affairs and Seafood being collected for use by appropriate plans. At-risk species that are harvested Inspection, 1315 East-West Highway, government officials. domestically, exported for reprocessing, Suite 9511, Silver Spring, MD 20910. With this notice, the Committee is and then re-imported to the U.S. may Instructions: Comments sent by any soliciting comments on the minimum require traceability throughout that other method, to any other address or types of information that should be entire supply chain. individual, or received after the collected and the operational standards The Operational standards to apply to comment period, may not be to be applied to this data. The data the data collected may include, but are considered. All comments received are collected should include, but is not not limited to, the following: part of the public record and will limited to, the following information: • How the data are to be collected; generally be posted for public viewing (1) Who harvested or produced the • Interoperability with existing on www.regulations.gov without change. fish? traceability systems; All personal identifying information • Name of harvesting vessel; • Who has responsibility for (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential • Flag State of harvesting vessel; collecting the data; business information, or otherwise • Name of farm or aquaculture • How the data will be verified; and sensitive information submitted facility; • Data security. voluntarily by the sender will be • Name of processor; and publicly accessible. Anonymous • Type of fishing gear. Who harvested or produced the fish? comments will be accepted (enter ‘‘N/ (2) What fish was harvested and This information establishes the A’’ in the required field if you wish to processed? starting point of the traceability process. remain anonymous.) • Species of fish; Although this information is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: • Product description; straightforward in many cases, Melissa Beaudry, Quality Officer, Office • Name of product; operational characteristics of some
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37602 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
fisheries present challenges. What fish was harvested and from an aquaculture source. The Traceability of an operation in which processed? Committee seeks comments on the easily identified, individual vessels A traceability system to combat IUU adequacy of this information for deliver directly to a buyer or processor fishing and seafood fraud requires identifying where and when fish is may be relatively simple. However in a certain minimal information, including harvested, alternative data that may be fishery with tender vessels taking the species of the fish, the quantity and/ useful in tracing product to time and deliveries from many smaller harvesting or weight of the catch, and the form of place of harvest, and methods for boats, collection of this information the product. The state of the shipment verifying the accuracy of data used for could become burdensome. In this (live, raw/fresh, or frozen) and the type this purpose. instance, the Committee currently of product informs the calculation of the What was the chain of custody through anticipates requiring only the name of actual amount of fish harvested, as well the supply chain to point of entry into the tender vessels making traceable as the potential risk for fraud associated U.S. commerce? deliveries to a buyer or processor. with the product. The Committee As described above, identifying the Comments are requested as to what therefore intends to request this point of harvest within an area or information, if any, is necessary information and seeks comments aquaculture facility is relatively regarding the harvesting vessel name regarding its use for traceability straightforward. However, the global and flag state and authorization to purposes as well as suggestions for market for fish and seafood products harvest the species in question for the alternative approaches to trace fish and supports complex supply chains, implementation of an effective seafood products in various forms. including transshipment to one or more traceability program. The Committee is considering a range locations prior to entry into U.S. Aquacultured species are easier to of options with respect to species commerce. Shipments may be co- trace back to a particular pond or region, identification, including scientific mingled with similar species from other and the Action Plan states that the names, names on the U.S. Food and locations, complicating the process of traceability process shall start at the Drug Administration approved list, and traceability to point of harvest. An common or market names. Use of point of harvest. It is therefore unlikely effective traceability system will require scientific names may minimize that facility information for the raising information on each point of landing, confusion at the border. As common or of the breeders or the fingerlings, transshipment and processing market names tend to group similar depending upon the fishery, will be throughout the fish or seafood product’s species, requiring the scientific name included in the traceability program. chain of custody to point of entry into could dramatically increase the number Also, the body of water for a farm-raised U.S. commerce. This would include not of species names listed, thereby only the harvest for each shipment, but species could have several aquaculture increasing the possibility of reporting facilities in place by different information regarding any further error. However, using common or processing and transshipment that companies. The Committee requests market names could be used to mask the occurred prior to entry into U.S. comments addressing the whether the import of a species at risk of IUU fishing Commerce. Comments are requested as aquaculture facility or the body of water or seafood fraud. The U.S. Food and to the level of detailed information that is appropriate point of origin in a Drug Administration approved list of should be required for country of traceability system for aquacultured fish names for labeling of fish in the harvest, transshipment, processing and species. United States may not cover all fish re-processing, and co-mingling of Processor and gear type are common entering the United States and adding a product or species. The Committee elements in many fishery traceability market or common name to that list may requests comments regarding the systems. Processors may already be take time. Comments are requested as to appropriate data and standards for required to trace their products through whether scientific names, common, effective traceability at each stage of the some portion of the supply chain. The usual, or market names, or some supply chain from harvest to point of Committee considers information combination, should serve as the basis entry into U.S. commerce. for species identification in the related to processing and/or How the data are to be collected? reprocessing of product to be critical to traceability program and be utilized for tracking chain-of-custody, notes that identifying imported product at the The Committee recommends use of this information is required for existing point of entry into U.S. commerce. the International Trade Data System global traceability programs, and (ITDS) as the data collection portal for Where and when was the fish harvested imports of species identified as at-risk of anticipates the requirement of such data and landed? as a part of this traceability program. IUU fishing and seafood fraud. In an This would include information about Collection of information identifying effort to streamline the import and export process, President Obama signed primary processors and secondary the area of harvest or the region in which an aquaculture facility is located, an Executive Order in February 2014 processors who maintained custody of and the time at which the harvest took that requires ITDS to be completed and the shipment prior to entering the place, represents the initial ‘‘link’’ in the fully utilized by government agencies by United States. supply chain. It represents the action December 2016. ITDS is a ‘‘single In the context of seafood traceability, back to which the at-risk species window’’ system which allows gear information helps to link specific entering U.S. commerce will be traced. businesses to communicate with U.S. vessels to the fishery in which they For wild-capture fisheries, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) participate and the species they harvest. Committee intends to identify area of and its Partner Government Agencies The Committee intends to require gear harvest by FAO catch area designation (PGAs) when importing and exporting type information for the proposed or comparable designation of fresh- goods, eliminating the often duplicative traceability system and requests water sources. The Committee has and paper-based processes used comments as to whether and what gear identified area or body of water and previously. With ITDS, companies type information should be collected for facility as data required for establishing submit their information electronically, traceability. where and when fish was harvested and the data elements can then be
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37603
quickly and efficiently retrieved and operational standards must also ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments used by the Federal agencies that incorporate a system of data checks and to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental require them. More information on ITDS periodic auditing. A system of trace- Paperwork Clearance Officer, can be found at www.itds.gov. back audits would determine the quality Department of Commerce, Room 6616, and accuracy of the data submitted and 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Consistency Across Federal Agencies and Interoperability With Existing identify missing information and Washington, DC 20230 (or via the International, Federal, State, and Non- discrepancies. Comments are requested Internet at [email protected]). Governmental Information Systems regarding a system of audits of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: documentation system for quality and Requests for additional information or Data at the border is currently accuracy. copies of the information collection collected both in electronic and hard instrument and instructions should be copy formats. Hard copies are often Data Security directed to Adam Bailey, National scanned and then stored for future use. As the additional data elements will Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Use of the ITDS will not only simplify be submitted through the Automated Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th the collection of data by utilizing an Commercial Environment (ACE)/ITDS Ave. S, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, (727) electronic format, but interoperability of single window as part of an entry filing, 824–5305, [email protected]. information is assured between all the supplemental data will only be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal agencies as only one data accessible to the entry filer, CBP, and system is employed. The Committee Federal agencies with authorization to I. Abstract anticipates the collection of data in review entry filings for the designated electronic format using ITDS for ease of This request is for revision and commodities. Consequently, data extension of a currently approved collection. With respect to security concerns are minimal. interoperability of data captured and information collection. Comments regarding additional The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery utilized by existing information considerations with respect to data systems, it is the Committee’s intent to Conservation and Management Act security are requested. authorizes the Gulf of Mexico Fishery avoid, to the extent practicable, the Following the public comment establishment of redundant data Management Council (Gulf Council) and period, the NOC Committee will take South Atlantic Fishery Management collection processes or protocols that the input received into consideration undermine the function and Council (South Atlantic Council) to while finalizing recommendations that prepare and amend fishery management effectiveness of existing systems. While will be sent forward for appropriate it is unlikely that ITDS will be capable plans for any fishery in Federal waters agency action by September 2015, as under their respective jurisdictions. of automatically ‘‘retrieving’’ data from outlined in the implementation plan for existing databases, the Committee is NMFS and the Gulf Council manage the Task Force Recommendations 14 and reef fish fishery in the Gulf of Mexico interested in comments describing 15. methods that will facilitate the use of (Gulf) under the Reef Fish Fishery Dated: June 26, 2015. existing systems to provide data Management Plan (FMP). NMFS and the identified in future traceability rule John Henderschedt, South Atlantic Council manage the making. Comments are also requested Director, Office for International Affairs and fishery for rock shrimp in the South regarding the proposed use of the ITDS, Seafood Inspection, National Marine Atlantic under the Shrimp FMP. The Fisheries Service. the potential use of other systems the vessel monitoring system (VMS) Federal agencies should consider at the [FR Doc. 2015–16185 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] regulations for the Gulf reef fish fishery border, and if there are any barriers, BILLING CODE 3510–22–P and the South Atlantic rock shrimp known or perceived, in using the ITDS fishery may be found at 50 CFR 622.28 system. and 622.205, respectively. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The FMPs contains several area- Who would collect the data? specific regulations where fishing is National Oceanic and Atmospheric Use of the ITDS system to collect restricted or prohibited in order to Administration proposed data elements for imports of protect habitat or spawning aggregations, or to control fishing species identified as at risk of IUU Proposed Information Collection; pressure. Unlike size, bag, and trip fishing and seafood fraud would require Comment Request; Southeast Region limits, where the catch can be the importer (or exporter to the USA) to Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) and monitored on shore when a vessel enter the information along with any Related Requirements necessary supporting documentation. returns to port, area restrictions require The importer would be responsible for AGENCY: National Oceanic and at-sea enforcement. However, at-sea ensuring that the necessary data Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), enforcement of offshore area restrictions elements are collected along the supply Commerce. is difficult due to the distance from chain and provided to CBP through ACTION: Notice. shore and the limited number of patrol ITDS at the point of entry. vessels, resulting in a need to improve SUMMARY: The Department of enforceability of area fishing restrictions How will the data be verified? Commerce, as part of its continuing through remote sensing methods. In A key element of these operational effort to reduce paperwork and addition, all fishing gears are subject to standards is data verification. The respondent burden, invites the general some area fishing restrictions. Because operational standards must provide public and other Federal agencies to of the sizes of these areas and the relevant Federal agencies the ability to take this opportunity to comment on distances from shore, the effectiveness verify that documentation for at-risk proposed and/or continuing information of enforcement through over flights and seafood products is complete and collections, as required by the at-sea interception is limited. An accurate upon entry into U.S. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. electronic VMS allows a more effective commerce, and validate country-specific DATES: Written comments must be means to monitor vessels for intrusions documents and certifications. The submitted on or before August 31, 2015. into restricted areas.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37604 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
The VMS provides effort data and collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Regulations, the Department of the significantly aids in enforcement of burden of the collection of information Army announces a meeting of the Army areas closed to fishing. All position on respondents, including through the Science Board. reports are treated in accordance with use of automated collection techniques FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: NMFS existing guidelines for or other forms of information Army Science Board, Designated confidential data. As a condition of technology. Federal Officer, 2530 Crystal Drive, authorized fishing for or possession of Comments submitted in response to Suite 7098, Arlington, VA 22202; LTC reef fish or rock shrimp in or from the this notice will be summarized and/or Stephen K. Barker, the committee’s Gulf exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or included in the request for OMB Designated Federal Officer (DFO), at South Atlantic EEZ, respectively, vessel approval of this information collection; (703) 545–8652 or email: owners or operators subject to VMS they also will become a matter of public [email protected], or Mr. requirements must allow NMFS, the record. Paul Woodward at (703) 695–8344 or United States Coast Guard (USCG), and Dated: June 25, 2015. email: [email protected]. their authorized officers and designees, Sarah Brabson, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant access to the vessel’s position data NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. to the Federal Advisory Committee Act obtained from the VMS. of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as NMFS would like to move the [FR Doc. 2015–16092 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P amended), the Government in the collection of information requirement Sunshine Act of 1976 (U.S.C. 552b, as for VMS applicable to vessels with amended) and 41 Code of Federal limited access endorsements for South COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS Regulations (CFR) § 102–3.140 through Atlantic rock shrimp under OMB 160, the Department of the Army Control No. 0648–0205 to this Notice of Meeting announces the following committee collection. The burden estimates have meeting: changed due to inclusion of the The next meeting of the U.S. Name of Committee: Army Science applicable burden from OMB Control Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled Board (ASB) Summer Voting Session. No. 0648–0205. for 16 July 2015, at 9 a.m. in the Date: Thursday, July 16, 2015. II. Method of Collection Commission offices at the National Time: 0800–1630. Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Locations: Respondents have a choice of either Square, 401 F Street NW., Washington, Open portion: Antlers Hilton, Four electronic or paper forms. Methods of DC 20001–2728. Items of discussion South Cascade, Colorado Springs, CO submittal include email of electronic may include buildings, parks and 80903–1685 from 0830–1200. forms, and mail and facsimile memorials. Closed portion: Fort Carson Colorado, transmission of paper forms. Draft agendas and additional Room 107, Building 1435, 6150 Wetzel III. Data information regarding the Commission Ave, Fort Carson, CO 80913 from 1400– OMB Control Number: 0648–0544. are available on our Web site: 1630. Form Number(s): None. www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding the Purpose of Meeting: The purpose of Type of Review: Regular (revision and agenda and requests to submit written the meeting is for ASB members to extension of a current information or oral statements should be addressed review, deliberate, and vote on the collection). to Thomas Luebke, Secretary, U.S. findings and recommendations Affected Public: Business or other for- Commission of Fine Arts, at the above presented for the Board’s five Fiscal profit organizations. address; by emailing [email protected]; or by Year 2015 (FY15) studies. Estimated Number of Respondents: calling 202–504–2200. Individuals Agenda: The board will present 894. requiring sign language interpretation findings and recommendations for Estimated Time Per Response: for the hearing impaired should contact deliberation and vote on the following Installation, 4 hours; installation and the Secretary at least 10 days before the five FY15 studies: activation checklist, 15 minutes; power- meeting date. Army Cyber at the Tactical Edge. This down exemption requests, 5 minutes; Dated: June 19, 2015, in Washington, DC. study is classified and will be presented transmission of fishing activity reports, Thomas Luebke, in the closed meeting. The purpose of this study is to further identify the 1 minute; and annual maintenance, 2 Secretary. hours. challenges, both technical and doctrinal, [FR Doc. 2015–15853 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Estimated Total Annual Burden unique to Army tactical edge cyber Hours: 2,719. BILLING CODE 6330–01–M operations at the Corps-level and below, Estimated Total Annual Cost to and to propose what technical Public: $1,011,121 in start-up, transfer, capabilities, new processes, training and operations, and maintenance costs. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE policy changes are required to ensure the Army is postured to fight and win IV. Request for Comments Department of the Army in cyber space from the tactical edge. Comments are invited on: (a) whether Army Science Board Partially Closed Army Science & Technology for Army the proposed collection of information Meeting Notice Aviation 2025–2040. This study is necessary for the proper performance contains classified and unclassified of the functions of the agency, including AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. material and will be presented in the whether the information shall have ACTION: Notice of a partially closed open and closed portions of the practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the meeting. meeting. The objective of this study is agency’s estimate of the burden to identify and assess Science and (including hours and cost) of the SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Technology (S&T) enhancements proposed collection of information; (c) Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the capable of being fielded during the ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Government in the Sunshine Act of 2025–2040 timeframe that will increase clarity of the information to be 1976 and title 41 of the Code of Federal Army Aviation’s expeditionary
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37605
capabilities to support full-spectrum Public’s Accessibility to the Meeting: DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION military operations and reduce its Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR [Docket No. ED–2015–ICCD–0027] sustainment tails and logistics footprint. 102–3.140 through 3.165, and the Strategies to Optimize Army availability of space, the open portion of Agency Information Collection Operating and Generating Forces for this meeting is open to the public. Activities; Submission to the Office of 2025 & Beyond. This study contains Seating is on a first-come basis. The Management and Budget for Review classified and unclassified material and Antlers Hilton is fully handicapped and Approval; Comment Request; will be presented in the open and closed accessible. For additional information Student Messaging in GEAR UP portions of the meeting. The purpose of about public access procedures, contact Demonstration the study is to develop strategies for LTC Stephen Barker at the telephone rebalancing the Army operating and number or email address listed in the AGENCY: Institute of Education Sciences/ generating force to retain or gain FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT National Center for Education Statistics capabilities in the mid-term (2025) and section. (IES), Department of Education (ED). beyond (2030–2040). This study will ACTION: Notice. identify opportunities to improve the Brenda S. Bowen, efficiency of operating force combat Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 service support and generating force [FR Doc. 2015–16167 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is capabilities to help provide the means BILLING CODE 3710–08–P to invest in core operational proposing a new information collection. capabilities. DATES: Interested persons are invited to Human Interaction and Behavioral DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE submit comments on or before July 31, Enhancement. This study is not 2015. classified and will be presented in the Department of the Army, Corps of ADDRESSES: Comments submitted in open portion of the meeting. The Engineers response to this notice should be purpose of this study is to identify and submitted electronically through the asses methods and techniques to Extension of Comment Period for the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// understand, interact and influence South Shore of Staten Island (SSSI) www.regulations.gov by selecting human behavior in support of Army Draft Environmental Impact Statement Docket ID number ED–2015–ICCD–0027 missions. or via postal mail, commercial delivery, Force 2025 and Beyond. This study is AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or hand delivery. If the regulations.gov not classified and will be presented in DoD. site is not available to the public for any reason, ED will temporarily accept the open portion of the meeting. This ACTION: Notice of availability; extension comments at [email protected]. study will provide findings and of review period. recommendations for operational Please note that comments submitted by concepts and advanced technologies fax or email and those submitted after SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of along with the associated force designs the comment period will not be Engineers, New York District, has for improving and maintaining accepted; ED will ONLY accept readiness, designing and conducting prepared the South Shore of Staten comments during the comment period training, and aligning the required Island (SSSI) Draft Environmental in this mailbox when the logistics investments. Impact Statement (EIS No. 20150175). A regulations.gov site is not available. Filing Written Statement: Pursuant to notice of availability was published in Written requests for information or 41 CFR 102–3.140d, the Committee is the June 19, 2015, issue of the Federal comments submitted by postal mail or not obligated to allow the public to Register (80 FR 35356). The New York delivery should be addressed to the speak; however, interested persons may District is extending the review period Director of the Information Collection submit a written statement for for an additional 30 days. Clearance Division, U.S. Department of consideration by the Board. Individuals DATES: Comments on the draft Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., submitting a written statement must environmental impact statement are due LBJ, Mailstop L–OM–2–2E319, Room submit their statement to the DFO at the by September 9, 2015. 2E105, Washington, DC 20202. address listed above. Written statements FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For not received at least 10 calendar days ADDRESSES: The U.S. Army Corps of specific questions related to collection prior to the meeting may not be Engineers, New York District Planning activities, please contact Marsha considered by the Board prior to its Division-Environmental Brach (ATTN: Silverberg, 202 208–7178. scheduled meeting. Ms. Catherine Alcoba) 26 Federal Plaza, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The The DFO will review all timely New York, NY 10278–0090. Comments Department of Education (ED), in submissions with the Board’s executive may also be submitted by email to accordance with the Paperwork committee and ensure they are provided [email protected]. Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. to the specific study members as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general necessary before, during, or after the Frank Verga at Frank.Verga@ public and Federal agencies with an meeting. After reviewing written usace.army.mil. opportunity to comment on proposed, comments, the study chairs and the revised, and continuing collections of DFO may choose to invite the submitter SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None. information. This helps the Department of the comments to orally present their assess the impact of its information Dated: June 24, 2015. issue during a future open meeting. collection requirements and minimize The DFO, in consultation with the Peter Weppler, the public’s reporting burden. It also executive committee, may allot a Chief, Environmental Analysis Branch, helps the public understand the specific amount of time for members of Planning Division, New York District. Department’s information collection the public to present their issues for [FR Doc. 2015–16262 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] requirements and provide the requested discussion. BILLING CODE 3720–58–P data in the desired format. ED is
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37606 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
soliciting comments on the proposed college-related outcomes (i.e., college Department of Energy, 1000 information collection request (ICR) that enrollment and FAFSA completion). Independence Ave. SW., Washington, is described below. The Department of The second report will be available in DC 20585; Telephone: (202) 586–4618; Education is especially interested in early 2020, and will investigate college email: [email protected]. public comment addressing the persistence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: following issues: (1) Is this collection Dated: June 25, 2015. necessary to the proper functions of the I. Background Stephanie Valentine, Department; (2) will this information be With the release of Presidential Policy processed and used in a timely manner; Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Directive 21 (PPD–21), the nation has (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; Officer, Office of Management. started to focus in earnest on the (4) how might the Department enhance resilience of our critical infrastructure. the quality, utility, and clarity of the [FR Doc. 2015–16107 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000–01–P In the face of the increasing extreme information to be collected; and (5) how weather events and other stresses or might the Department minimize the disturbances, the resilience of critical burden of this collection on the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY infrastructure, especially the energy respondents, including through the use infrastructure, has become paramount. of information technology. Please note Electric Grid Resilience Self- Building upon the insights that have that written comments received in Assessment Tool for Distribution been gained through the development of response to this notice will be System the Cybersecurity Capability Maturity considered public records. Model, the Electricity Subsector Title of Collection: Student Messaging AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery Cybersecurity Capability Maturity in GEAR UP Demonstration. and Energy Reliability, U.S. Department Model, and the Smart Grid Maturity OMB Control Number: 1850–NEW. of Energy. Model, DOE–OE would like to build a Type of Review: A new information ACTION: Request for Information. complementary capability regarding the collection. Respondents/Affected Public: resilience of electric distribution SUMMARY: The Department of Energy infrastructure. Individuals or Households. (DOE) Office of Electricity Delivery and Total Estimated Number of Annual For the purposes of this RFI, the Energy Reliability (OE) is seeking definition of resilience is ‘‘the ability of Responses: 5,360. comments and information from Total Estimated Number of Annual an entity—e.g., asset, organization, interested parties to inform the Burden Hours: 1,386. community, region—to anticipate, Abstract: The Student Messaging in development of a pilot project resist, absorb, respond to, adapt to, and GEAR UP Demonstration, sponsored by concerning an interactive self- recover from a disturbance.’’ 1 the Institute of Education Sciences assessment tool to understand the This definition provides the (IES), U.S. Department of Education relative resilience level of national framework for four domains that can be (ED), is being conducted to test the electric grid distribution systems to used to understand the current level of effectiveness of a promising strategy to extreme weather events. An interactive resilience of distribution system improve college-related outcomes in the tool could be used by distribution infrastructure. Through these domains, federal college access program Gaining utilities to identify opportunities for distribution utilities will be able to Early Awareness and Readiness for enhancing resilience with new make informed decisions on Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). technologies and/or procedures to strengthening resiliency, based on The demonstration will use a support investment planning and identifiable areas where future randomized controlled trial (RCT) related tariff filings. The focus of this investments in new technologies and design to test the effectiveness of Request for Information (RFI) is on the operating procedures could be made. sending customized messaging to design and implementation of the The four domains are: students, first during the summer after interactive self-assessment resilience Preparedness: Activities undertaken high school graduation, and then in the tool. by an entity in anticipation of the fall and spring of their expected first DATES: Comments must be received on threats/hazards, and the possible year of college. Students within high or before August 17, 2015. consequences, to which it is subject. schools that volunteer for the ADDRESSES: Comments can be submitted Mitigation Measures: Characterize the demonstration will be randomly by any of the following methods and facility’s capabilities to resist a threat/ assigned to either receive the messages must be identified by ‘‘EGRtool’’. By hazard or to absorb the consequences or not. This ICR requests clearance for email: [email protected] . Include from the threat/hazard. the collection of GEAR UP student ‘‘EGRtool’’ in the subject line of the Response Capabilities: Immediate and rosters and administration of a baseline message. By mail: Dan Ton, Office of ongoing activities, tasks, programs, and survey. In addition to the baseline Electricity Delivery and Energy systems that have been undertaken or survey data that will be collected from Reliability, U.S. Department of Energy, developed to respond and adapt to the students, college-related outcome data Forrestal Building, Room 6E–092, 1000 adverse effects of an event. will be extracted from national datasets Independence Avenue SW., Recovery Mechanisms: Activities and (National Student Clearinghouse Data Washington, DC 20585. Note: Delivery programs designed to be effective and (NSC) and the Federal Student Aid of the U.S. Postal Service mail to DOE efficient in returning operating (FSA) database). Impact and descriptive may be delayed by several weeks due to conditions to a level that is acceptable analyses will be conducted to answer security screening. DOE, therefore, to the entity. the study research questions. The encourages those wishing to comment to evaluation plans call for two reports. submit comments electronically by 1 Carlson, L., et al., 2012, Resilience Theory and The first, published in summer 2018, email. Applications, Argonne National Laboratory, Decision and Information Sciences Division, ANL/ will be based on data collected through For additional information, please DIS–12–1, Argonne, Ill, USA, available at http:// 2017 that will look at college advising contact Dan Ton, Office of Electricity www.dis.anl.gov/pubs/72218.pdf (accessed April 9, received in high school and early Delivery and Energy Reliability, U.S. 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37607
Underneath all four domains lie c. Response Capabilities: Internal States to Canada pursuant to section questions that contains specific Capabilities and External Capabilities. 202(e) of the Federal Power Act. information for each of the domains. d. Recovery Mechanisms: Resource DATES: Comments, protests, or motions Examples of questions that can be asked Restoration Agreements and Utility to intervene must be submitted on or with specific reference to resilience are: Service Restoration. before July 31, 2015. —What procedures are included in your (3) Do these components and ADDRESSES: Comments, protests, emergency action plan? subcomponents make sense as motions to intervene, or requests for [Preparedness] contributors to electric distribution more information should be addressed —To date, what smart grid technologies system resilience? to: Office of Electricity Delivery and (4) What is missing, or should be have you incorporated into your Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE–20, taken away? distribution system? [Mitigation U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Measures] C. Data Protection Independence Avenue SW, Washington, —Does the control and dispatch center DC 20585–0350. Because of delays in use a distribution management (5) What are your concerns about data protection if asked to submit handling conventional mail, it is system? [Response Capabilities] recommended that documents be —What service restoration method(s) anonymous aggregate data for a national average for electric distribution transmitted by overnight mail, by does the utility use? [Recovery electronic mail to Electricity.Exports@ Mechanisms] resilience? (6) Data protection is recognized as an hq.doe.gov, or by facsimile to 202–586– For each of these questions there will 8008. be a set of distinct answers. This important consideration for utility SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of method of construction allows participation in such an assessment electricity from the United States to a consistent, objective information model. What are your opinions and foreign country are regulated by the collection for all entities interested in recommendations on data protection? Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to using the model. In cooperation with D. Working Group Participation sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the the utility industry, a working group (7) Would your utility be willing to Department of Energy Organization Act will be created to assist in determining participate in a working group intent on (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require the direction of the program. constructing the relative importance of authorization under section 202(e) of II. Request for Information the different components and the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. In order to develop this pilot project, subcomponents to the overall resilience 824a(e)). DOE would like input from resilience of the system? Who would be the On May 29, 2015, DOE received an experts in the electric distribution appropriate person within your utility application from Targray for authority to industry to gauge the interest and to participate in such a working group? transmit electric energy from the United usefulness of the proposed decision (8) Are there others who you would States to Canada as a power marketer for support tool. This RFI provides the suggest to provide early feedback on five years using existing international public and industry stakeholders with tool development? transmission facilities. (9) Is your utility interested in being the opportunity to provide their view on In its application, Targray states that part of a demonstration or pilot during the development of a resilience tool. it does not own or control any electric early testing? The intent of this RFI is to solicit generation or transmission facilities, and it does not have a franchised service information pertinent to the need and E. Other Feedback viability of the resilience assessment area. Targray states that it has applied Additional comments that may not be for market-based rate authority from the tool. The information obtained is meant captured in replies these questions, but to be used by DOE for tool design and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are considered relevant by respondents (FERC) to engage in the sale and strategy development purposes. In your are highly encouraged. comments, please reference the purchase of electric energy to and from question(s) to which you are Authority: Presidential Policy Directive-21. Independent System Operators and Regional Transmission Organizations. responding, as well as provide other Issued at Washington, DC, on June 25, pertinent information. 2015. As such, the electric energy that Targray Patricia A. Hoffman, proposes to export to Canada would be A. Resilience Assessment Tool Need surplus energy purchased from third Assistant Secretary, Department of Energy, (1) Would a resilience assessment tool Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy parties such as power marketers, be of interest for electric distribution Reliability. independent power producers, electric utilities, and Federal power marketing utilities? [FR Doc. 2015–16186 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] agencies pursuant to voluntary (2) What would you like to see in BILLING CODE 6450–01–P such a model should it exist (i.e., agreements. The existing international functionality, presentation, transmission facilities to be utilized by accessibility?) DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Targray have previously been authorized by Presidential permits B. Resilience Tool Criteria/Domains [OE Docket No. EA–411] issued pursuant to Executive Order There are four key domains proposed 10485, as amended, and are appropriate Application to Export Electric Energy; for resilience: preparedness, mitigation for open access transmission by third Targray Americas Inc. measures, response and recovery. Each parties. of these components has AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery Procedural Matters: Any person subcomponents as detailed below: and Energy Reliability, DOE. desiring to be heard in this proceeding a. Preparedness: Awareness and ACTION: Notice of application. should file a comment or protest to the Planning. application at the address provided b. Mitigation Measures: Extreme SUMMARY: Targray Americas Inc. above. Protests should be filed in Weather Mitigation, Utility Mitigation, (Targray) has applied for authority to accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal and Dependencies Mitigation. transmit electric energy from the United Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37608 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 ADDRESSES: Comments, protests, to intervene should be sent to the CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to motions to intervene, or requests for address provided above on or before the become a party to these proceedings more information should be addressed date listed above. should file a motion to intervene at the to: Office of Electricity Delivery and Comments and other filings above address in accordance with FERC Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE–20, concerning Powerex’s application to Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five copies U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 export electric energy to Canada should of such comments, protests, or motions Independence Avenue SW., be clearly marked with OE Docket No. to intervene should be sent to the Washington, DC 20585–0350. Because EA–171–D. An additional copy is to be address provided above on or before the of delays in handling conventional mail, provided directly to both Mike date listed above. it is recommended that documents be MacDougall and Karen McDonald, Comments and other filings transmitted by overnight mail, by Powerex Corp., 666 Burrard Street, Suite concerning the Targray application to electronic mail to Electricity.Exports@ 1300, Vancouver, British Columbia export electric energy to Canada should hq.doe.gov, or by facsimile to 202–586– Canada V6C 2X8 and to both Deanna be clearly marked with OE Docket No. 8008. King and Tracey Bradley, Bracewell and EA–411. An additional copy is to be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of Giuliani LLP, 2000 K Street NW., Suite provided directly to Ruta Kalvaitis electricity from the United States to a 500, Washington, DC 20006. Skucas, Pierce Atwood LLC, 900 17th foreign country are regulated by the A final decision will be made on this St., NW., Suite 350, Washington, DC Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to application after the environmental 20006 and to Karen Roberge, Targray sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the impacts have been evaluated pursuant Technology International Inc., 18105 Department of Energy Organization Act to DOE’s National Environmental Policy Transcanadienne, Kirkland QC, H9J 3Z4 (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Canada. authorization under section 202(e) of part 1021) and after a determination is A final decision will be made on this the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. made by DOE that the proposed action application after the environmental 824a(e)). will not have an adverse impact on the impacts have been evaluated pursuant On November 17, 2010, DOE issued sufficiency of supply or reliability of the to DOE’s National Environmental Policy Order No. EA–171–C to Powerex Corp., U.S. electric power supply system. Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR which authorized the Applicant to Copies of this application will be part 1021) and after a determination is transmit electric energy from the United made available, upon request, for public made by DOE that the proposed action States to Canada as a power marketer for inspection and copying at the address will not have an adverse impact on the a five-year term using existing provided above, by accessing the sufficiency of supply or reliability of the international transmission facilities. program Web site at http://energy.gov/ U.S. electric power supply system. That authority expires on November 17, node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy Copies of this application will be 2015. On May 19, 2015, Powerex filed at [email protected]. made available, upon request, for public an application with DOE for renewal of Issued in Washington, DC, on June 25, inspection and copying at the address the export authority contained in Order 2015. provided above, by accessing the No. EA–171–C for an additional five- Brian Mills, program Web site at http://energy.gov/ year term. Director, Permitting and Siting Office of node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy In its application, Powerex states that Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. at [email protected]. it does not own or operate any electric [FR Doc. 2015–16233 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Issued in Washington, DC, on June 25, generation or transmission facilities, BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 2015. and it does not have a franchised service Brian Mills, area. The electric energy that Powerex Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of proposes to export to Canada would be Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. surplus energy purchased from third ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FR Doc. 2015–16187 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] parties such as electric utilities and BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Federal power marketing agencies pursuant to voluntary agreements. The [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2003–0004; FRL–9929–17] existing international transmission Access to Confidential Business DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY facilities to be utilized by Powerex have Information by Science Applications previously been authorized by International Corporation and Its Presidential permits issued pursuant to [OE Docket No. EA–171–D] Identified Subcontractor, Solutions by Executive Order 10485, as amended, Design II, LLC Application To Export Electric Energy; and are appropriate for open access Powerex Corp. transmission by third parties. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Procedural Matters: Any person Agency (EPA). AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery desiring to be heard in this proceeding ACTION: Notice. and Energy Reliability, DOE. should file a comment or protest to the ACTION: Notice of Application. application at the address provided SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its above. Protests should be filed in contractor, Science Applications SUMMARY: Powerex Corp. (Applicant or accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal International Corporation of McLean, Powerex) has applied to renew its Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) VA, and its identified subcontractor, authority to transmit electric energy Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 Solutions by Design II, LLC of Vienna, from the United States to Canada CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to VA, to access information which has pursuant to section 202(e) of the Federal become a party to these proceedings been submitted to EPA under all Power Act. should file a motion to intervene at the sections of the Toxic Substances Control DATES: Comments, protests, or motions above address in accordance with FERC Act (TSCA). Some of the information to intervene must be submitted on or Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five copies may be claimed or determined to be before July 31, 2015. of such comments, protests, or motions Confidential Business Information (CBI).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37609
DATES: Access to the confidential data In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), times are approximate; the conference occurred on or about March 25, 2015. EPA has determined that under EPA call may adjourn early if all business is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: contract number GS–35F–486BA, order finished or may adjourn late if For technical information contact: number EP–G15H–01095, SAIC and its additional time is needed. Written Scott Sherlock, Environmental subcontractor required access to CBI comments and requests for the draft Assistance Division (7408M), Office of submitted to EPA under all sections of agenda or for making oral presentations Pollution Prevention and Toxics, TSCA to perform successfully the duties at the meeting will be accepted up to Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 specified under the contract. SAIC and one business day before the meeting. Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, its subcontractor’s personnel were given ADDRESSES: Participation in the DC 20460–0001; telephone number: access to information submitted to EPA conference call will be by (202) 564–8257; email address: under all sections of TSCA. Some of the teleconference only; meeting rooms will [email protected]. information may be claimed or not be used. Members of the public may For general information contact: The determined to be CBI. obtain the call-in number and access TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 EPA is issuing this notice to inform code for the call from Tim Benner, the South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY all submitters of information under all Designated Federal Officer, via any of 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– sections of TSCA that EPA has provided the contact methods listed in the FOR 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@ SAIC and its subcontractor access to FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section epa.gov. these CBI materials on a need-to-know below. basis only. All access to TSCA CBI Submitting Comments: Submit your SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: under this contract is taking place at comments, identified by Docket ID No. I. General Information EPA Headquarters in accordance with EPA–HQ–ORD–2015–0365, by one of EPA’s TSCA CBI Protection Manual. the following methods: A. Does this action apply to me? Access to TSCA data, including CBI, • www.regulations.gov: Follow the This action is directed to the public will continue until March 26, 2018. If on-line instructions for submitting in general. This action may, however, be the contract is extended, this access will comments. of interest to all who manufacture, also continue for the duration of the • Email: Send comments by process, or distribute industrial extended contract without further electronic mail (email) to: ORD.Docket@ chemicals. Since other entities may also notice. epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. EPA– be interested, the Agency has not SAIC and its subcontractor’s HQ–ORD–2015–0365. attempted to describe all the specific personnel have signed nondisclosure • Fax: Fax comments to: (202) 566– entities that may be affected by this agreements and were briefed on 0224, Attention Docket ID No. EPA– action. appropriate security procedures before HQ–ORD–2015–0365. they were permitted access to TSCA • Mail: Send comments by mail to: B. How can I get copies of this document CBI. Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) and other related information? Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. Air, Climate, and Energy Subcommittee The docket for this action, identified Dated: June 19, 2015. Docket, Mail Code: 2822T, 1301 by docket identification (ID) number Pamela S. Myrick, Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC, 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2003–0004, is available Acting Director, Information Management at http://www.regulations.gov or at the EPA–HQ–ORD–2015–0365. Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and • Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), [FR Doc. 2015–16226 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/ Environmental Protection Agency DC), Room 3334, William Jefferson BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Clinton West Building, 1301 Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DC, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– DC. The Public Reading Room is open AGENCY ORD–2015–0365. Note: this is not a from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday mailing address. Deliveries are only through Friday, excluding legal [EPA–HQ–ORD–2015–0365; FRL–9929–88– accepted during the docket’s normal holidays. The telephone number for the ORD] hours of operation, and special Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) arrangements should be made for and the telephone number for the OPPT Air, Climate, and Energy deliveries of boxed information. Docket is (202) 566–0280. Please review Subcommittee Meeting—July 2015 Instructions: Direct your comments to the visitor instructions and additional Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–ORD–2015– information about the docket available AGENCY: Environmental Protection 0365. The EPA’s policy is that all at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. Agency (EPA). comments received will be included in ACTION: Notice of meeting. the public docket without change and II. What action is the Agency taking? may be made available online at Under EPA contract number GS–35F– SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal www.regulations.gov, including any 486BA, order number EP–G15H–01095, Advisory Committee Act, Public Law personal information provided, unless contractor SAIC of 1701 SAIC Drive, 92–463, the U.S. Environmental the comment includes information McLean, VA; and Solutions by Design II, Protection Agency, Office of Research claimed to be Confidential Business LLC of 1953 Gallows Road, Suite 870, and Development (ORD), gives notice of Information (CBI) or other information Vienna, VA, are assisting OPPT in a meeting (via conference call) of the whose disclosure is restricted by statute. developing, enhancing, maintaining and Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Do not submit information that you operating a variety of EPA databases and Air, Climate, and Energy Subcommittee. consider to be CBI or otherwise applications. They will also assist in the DATES: The conference call will be held protected through www.regulations.gov interfaces and linkages to other on Monday, July 20, 2015, from 3:00 or email. The www.regulations.gov Web applications. p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time. These site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37610 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
which means the EPA will not know Benner, the Designated Federal Officer, • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// your identity or contact information via any of the contact methods listed in www.regulations.gov. Follow the online unless you provide it in the body of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT instructions for submitting comments. your comment. If you send an email section above. In general, each Do not submit electronically any comment directly to the EPA without individual making an oral presentation information you consider to be going through www.regulations.gov, will be limited to a total of three Confidential Business Information (CBI) your email address will be minutes. Proposed agenda items for the or other information whose disclosure is automatically captured and included as meeting include, but are not limited to, restricted by statute. part of the comment that is placed in the the following: presentation and • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental public docket and made available on the discussion of the subcommittee’s draft Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ Internet. If you submit an electronic responses to the charge questions and DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. comment, the EPA recommends that approval of the final draft letter report NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. you include your name and other prior to its submission to the BOSC • Hand Delivery: To make special contact information in the body of your Executive Committee. arrangements for hand delivery or comment and with any disk or CD–ROM Information on Services for delivery of boxed information, please you submit. If the EPA cannot read your Individuals with Disabilities: For follow the instructions at comment due to technical difficulties information on access or services for http://www.epa.gov/dockets/ and cannot contact you for clarification, individuals with disabilities, please contacts.html. the EPA may not be able to consider contact Tim Benner at (202) 564–6769 Additional instructions on your comment. Electronic files should or [email protected]. To request commenting or visiting the docket, avoid the use of special characters, any accommodation of a disability, please along with more information about form of encryption, and be free of any contact Tim Benner, preferably at least dockets generally, is available at http:// defects or viruses. For additional ten days prior to the conference call, to www.epa.gov/dockets. information about the EPA’s public give the EPA as much time as possible FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: docket visit the EPA Docket Center to process your request. Steven Weiss, Antimicrobials Division homepage at http://www.epa.gov/ Dated: June 24, 2015. (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 dockets/. Fred S. Hauchman, Docket: All documents in the docket Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, are listed in the www.regulations.gov Director, Office of Science Policy. DC 20460–0001; main telephone index. Although listed in the index, [FR Doc. 2015–16199 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] number: (703) 308–8293; email address: some information is not publicly BILLING CODE 6560–50–P [email protected]. available, e.g., CBI or other information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: whose disclosure is restricted by statute. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Certain other material, such as I. General Information AGENCY copyrighted material, will be publicly A. Does this action apply to me? available only in hard copy. Publicly [EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0302; FRL–9929–42] You may be affected by this action if available docket materials are available you are a producer of pesticide products either electronically in Proposed Antimicrobial Pesticide Use (NAICS 32532), antifoulants (NAICS www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Site Index; Notice of Availability and 32551), antimicrobial pesticides (NAICS the Board of Scientific Counselors Request for Comment 32561), or wood preservatives (NAICS (BOSC) Air, Climate, and Energy 32519), importers of such products, or AGENCY: Environmental Protection Subcommittee Docket, EPA/DC, William any person or company who seeks to Agency (EPA). Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room register an antimicrobial, antifoulant 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., ACTION: Notice. coating, ballast water treatment, or Washington, DC. The Public Reading wood preservative pesticide or to obtain SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 a tolerance for such a pesticide. The p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding availability of and requesting public comment on a proposed guidance North American Industrial legal holidays. The telephone number Classification System (NAICS) codes for the Public Reading Room is (202) document called the Antimicrobial Pesticide Use Site Index (USI). The have been provided to assist you and 566–1744, and the telephone number for others in determining whether this the ORD Docket is (202) 566–1752. Agency developed this document to provide guidance about antimicrobial action might apply to certain entities. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The This listing is not intended to be Designated Federal Officer via mail at: pesticide use sites and general antimicrobial pesticide use patterns. exhaustive, but rather provides a guide Tim Benner, Mail Code 8104R, Office of for readers regarding entities likely to be Science Policy, Office of Research and This guidance document is intended to assist antimicrobial pesticide applicants affected by this action. Other types of Development, U.S. Environmental entities not listed could also be affected. Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania and registrants by helping them to Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; via identify the 40 CFR part 158 subpart W B. What should I consider as I prepare phone/voice mail at: (202) 564–6769; data requirements that are necessary to my comments for EPA? via fax at: (202) 565–2911; or via email register their product(s), and will 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this at: [email protected]. likewise be used by Agency staff information to EPA through evaluating pesticide applications. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark General Information: The conference DATES: Comments must be received on the part or all of the information that call is open to the public. Any member or before July 31, 2015. you claim to be CBI. For CBI of the public interested in receiving a ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, information in a disk or CD–ROM that draft agenda, attending the conference identified by docket identification (ID) you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the call, or making a presentation during the number EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0302, by disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then conference call may contact Tim one of the following methods: identify electronically within the disk or
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37611
CD–ROM the specific information that pattern should be viewed as a the Montreal Protocol permit the use. is claimed as CBI. In addition to one recommendation only and is not to be All entities interested in obtaining a complete version of the comment that construed as binding on either EPA or critical use exemption must provide includes information claimed as CBI, a any outside parties. EPA may depart EPA with the technical and economic copy of the comment that does not from the guidance where circumstances information outlined in this notice to contain the information claimed as CBI warrant and without prior notice. support a ‘‘critical use’’ claim by the must be submitted for inclusion in the The posting of this proposed guidance deadline specified in this notice, even if public docket. Information so marked document for public comment satisfies they have applied for an exemption in will not be disclosed except in a condition of the March 2, 2015, previous years. accordance with procedures set forth in settlement agreement between EPA and DATES: Applications for critical use 40 CFR part 2. the American Chemistry Council (ACC), exemptions must be submitted to EPA 2. Tips for preparing your comments. which followed ACC’s July 2013 no later than September 15 of the When preparing and submitting your initiation of a legal challenge to the data calendar year three years prior to the comments, see the commenting tips at requirements regulation (subpart 158W calendar year for which the exemption http://www.epa.gov/dockets/ of Title 40 of the Code of Federal is sought. An application for a critical comments.html. Regulations) in the U.S. Court of use exemption for calendar year 2018, C. How can I get copies of this Appeals for the District of Columbia for example, must be submitted by document and other related Circuit. Under that settlement September 15, 2015. information? agreement, the Agency committed to ADDRESSES: Application forms are taking comment on this proposed available at www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/ A copy of the proposed guidance guidance document within 4 months of document is available in the docket cueinfo.html. EPA encourages users to the effective date of the settlement submit applications electronically to under docket ID number EPA–HQ– agreement. OPP–2015–0302. [email protected]. Users can also Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136–136y and 21 submit applications by U.S. mail to: II. What action is the Agency taking? U.S.C. 346a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Agency is making available for Dated: June 24, 2015. Office of Air and Radiation, comment a proposed guidance Jim Jones, Stratospheric Protection Division, document called the ‘‘Antimicrobial Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Attention Methyl Bromide Team, Mail Pesticide Use Site Index.’’ In the Safety and Pollution Prevention. Code 6205J, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. Federal Register on May 8, 2013 (78 FR [FR Doc. 2015–16232 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] NW., Washington, DC 20460. Confidentiality: Application materials 26936) (FRL–8886–5), the Agency BILLING CODE 6560–50–P published a final rule amending 40 CFR that are confidential should be part 158, the section of the regulations submitted under separate cover and be setting forth the data requirements that ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION clearly identified as ‘‘confidential support an application to register a AGENCY business information.’’ Information pesticide product. The final rule, which covered by a claim of business is codified as 40 CFR part 158 subpart [FRL–9929–86–OAR] confidentiality will be treated in accordance with the procedures for W (158W), contains the data Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: requirements specifically applicable to handling such information under 40 Request for Methyl Bromide Critical CFR part 2, subpart B, and will be antimicrobial pesticides. The rule Use Exemption Applications became effective July 8, 2013. disclosed only to the extent and by The proposed guidance document AGENCY: Environmental Protection means of the procedures set forth in that serves as a compilation of the specific Agency (EPA). subpart. If no claim of confidentiality use sites that are commonly listed on ACTION: Notice. accompanies the information when it is antimicrobial labels. The specific use received by EPA, the information may sites are further organized into SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection be made available to the public by EPA categories of twelve general use Agency (EPA) is providing notice of the without further notice to the submitter patterns. The general use patterns are process for submitting applications for (40 CFR 2.203). EPA may place a copy broad designations and are used as critical use exemptions for 2018 and of Worksheet 6 from the application in columns in the antimicrobial data subsequent years. Critical use the public domain. Any information on requirements tables to identify which exemptions are exceptions to the Worksheet 6 shall not be considered data requirements might be pertinent to phaseout of production and import of confidential and will not be treated as the particular pesticide use site. The methyl bromide, a controlled class I such by the Agency. Agency has developed the proposed ozone-depleting substance. Critical use FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: guidance document to provide exemptions must be permitted by the General Information: U.S. EPA additional information about these use Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Stratospheric Ozone Information inbox, patterns. This guidance document is Substances that Deplete the Ozone [email protected]; also intended to assist antimicrobial Layer and must also be in accordance www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr. pesticide applicants and registrants by with the Clean Air Act and EPA Technical Information: Bill Chism, helping them to identify the data regulations. Applications received in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, requirements that are necessary to response to this notice will be Office of Pesticide Programs (7503P), register their product(s), and will considered as the basis for submitting 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., likewise be used by Agency staff potential nominations for critical use Washington, DC 20460, 703–308–8136. evaluating antimicrobial pesticide exemptions to future Meetings of the Email: [email protected]. applications. Parties to the Montreal Protocol. Critical Regulatory Information: Jeremy As a guidance document, the use exemptions allow production, Arling, U.S. Environmental Protection association of a particular antimicrobial import, and use of methyl bromide in Agency, Stratospheric Protection use site with a general antimicrobial use the specific year for which the Parties to Division (6205T), 1200 Pennsylvania
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37612 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, 202– evaluate, commercialize and secure producing critical use crops and 343–9055. EPA encourages users to national regulatory approval of commodities, applicants must fill out submit their applications electronically alternatives and substitutes, taking into the application form completely. to [email protected]. consideration the circumstances of the Upon receipt of applications, EPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: particular nomination . . . Non-Article will review the information and work 5 Parties [which includes the U.S.] must with other interested Federal agencies I. Background on the Critical Use demonstrate that research programs are as required in section 604 of the Clean Exemption in place to develop and deploy Air Act to determine whether the The Montreal Protocol on Substances alternatives and substitutes. candidate use satisfies Clean Air Act that Deplete the Ozone Layer is the In 1998, Congress amended the Clean requirements, and whether it meets the international agreement aimed at Air Act to require EPA to conform the critical use criteria adopted by the protecting the ozone layer by reducing U.S. phaseout schedule for methyl Parties to the Montreal Protocol and and eliminating the production and bromide to the provisions of the warrants nomination by the United consumption of stratospheric ozone- Protocol and to allow EPA to provide a States for an exemption. depleting substances. Methyl bromide critical use exemption. These All Parties, including the United was added to the Protocol as an ozone- amendments were codified in Section States, choosing to submit nominations depleting substance in 1992 through the 604 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. to the UNEP Ozone Secretariat must do Copenhagen Amendment. 7671c. Under EPA implementing so by January 24 to be considered by the While the Protocol requires developed regulations, the production and Parties at their annual meeting later that countries like the United States to phase consumption of methyl bromide were year. The UNEP Ozone Secretariat out the production and consumption of phased out as of January 1, 2005. forwards nominations to the Montreal Methyl Bromide in 2005, it also states Section 604(d)(6), as added in 1998, Protocol’s Technical and Economic that the Parties may exempt from that allows EPA to exempt the production Assessment Panel (TEAP) and the phaseout ‘‘the level of production or and import of methyl bromide from the Methyl Bromide Technical Options consumption that is necessary to satisfy phaseout for critical uses, to the extent Committee (MBTOC). The MBTOC and uses agreed by them to be critical uses’’ consistent with the Montreal Protocol. the TEAP review the nominations to (Art. 2H para 5). The Parties to the EPA has defined ‘‘critical use’’ at 40 determine whether they meet the Protocol included this language in the CFR 82.3 based on the criteria in criteria for a critical use established by treaty’s methyl bromide phaseout paragraph (a) of Decision IX/6. Decision IX/6, and to make provisions in recognition that EPA regulations at 40 CFR 82.4 recommendations to the Parties for alternatives might not be available by prohibit the production and import of critical use exemptions. The Parties the 2005 phaseout date for certain uses methyl bromide in excess of the amount then consider those recommendations at agreed by the Parties to be ‘‘critical of unexpended critical use allowances their annual meeting before making a uses.’’ held by the producer or importer, unless final decision. If the Parties determine In their Ninth Meeting (1997), the authorized under a separate exemption. that a specified use of methyl bromide Parties agreed to Decision IX/6, setting The use of methyl bromide that was is critical and permit an exemption from forth the following criteria for a ‘‘critical produced or imported through the the Protocol’s production and use’’ determination and an exemption expenditure of production or consumption phaseout for that year, from the production and consumption consumption allowances prior to 2005, EPA may then take domestic action to phaseout: while not confined to critical uses under allow the production and consumption (a) That a use of methyl bromide EPA’s phaseout regulations, is subject to to the extent consistent with the Clean should qualify as ‘‘critical’’ only if the the labeling restrictions under FIFRA as Air Act. specified in the product labeling. nominating Party determines that: III. Information Required for Critical (i) The specific use is critical because II. Critical Use Nomination Process Use Applications the lack of availability of methyl bromide for that use would result in a Entities requesting critical use In prior years, EPA issued an annual significant market disruption; and exemptions should send a completed notice requesting applications for (ii) There are no technically and application to EPA on the candidate use critical use exemptions. Through this economically feasible alternatives or by September 15, three years prior to the action, EPA provides the information substitutes available to the user that are year of the intended use. This timing is necessary to enable applications to be acceptable from the standpoint of necessary for the U.S. Government to submitted for critical use exemptions for environment and health and are suitable complete its consideration for methyl bromide for all future control to the crops and circumstances of the nomination to the United Nations periods (calendar years). Entities nomination. Environment Programme and the Parties interested in obtaining a critical use (b) That production and consumption, to the Montreal Protocol in a timely exemption must complete the if any, of methyl bromide for a critical manner; for the Parties to reach a application form available at use should be permitted only if: decision on the nomination; and for www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/cueinfo.html. (i) All technically and economically EPA to undertake notice-and-comment Applications requesting critical use feasible steps have been taken to rulemaking. For example, applications allowances should include information minimize the critical use and any for the 2018 growing season must be that U.S. Government agencies and the associated emission of methyl bromide; submitted by September 15, 2015. Parties to the Protocol can use to (ii) Methyl bromide is not available in Critical use exemptions are valid for evaluate the candidate use according to sufficient quantity and quality from only one year and do not automatically the criteria in Decision IX/6 described existing stocks of banked or recycled renew. All users wanting to obtain an above. Applications that fail to include methyl bromide, also bearing in mind exemption must apply to EPA annually sufficient information may not be the developing countries’ need for even if they have applied for critical nominated. methyl bromide; uses in prior years. Because of the Specifically, applications should (iii) It is demonstrated that an potential for changes to registration include the information requested in the appropriate effort is being made to status, costs, and economic aspects of current version of the TEAP Handbook
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37613
on Critical Use Nominations. The anyone interested in obtaining a critical bromide is used for fumigation, handbook is available electronically at use exemption may apply. However, the including information on the size of http://ozone.unep.org/Assessment_ language and spirit of controls on ozone fumigation chambers where methyl Panels/TEAP/Reports/MBTOC/ depleting substances under the bromide is used, the percent of Handbook%20CUN-version5- Montreal Protocol envision a phaseout commodity fumigated under tarps, the 27Nov06.pdf. EPA requests that of methyl bromide and for the critical length of the harvest season, peak of the applications contain the following use exemption to be a ‘‘temporary harvest season and duration, and information, as described in the derogation’’ from that phaseout. Over volume of commodity treated daily at handbook, in order for the U.S. to the last decade, the research, the harvest peak. provide sufficient information to the registration, and adoption of alternatives Where applicable, also provide Montreal Protocol’s technical review has allowed many sectors to examples of specific customer requests bodies within the nomination: successfully transition from methyl regarding pest infestation and examples • A clear statement on the specific bromide. The number of sectors of any phytosanitary requirements of circumstances of the nomination which nominated has declined from seventeen foreign markets (e.g., import describe the critical need for methyl for 2006 to one for 2017. Below is requirements of other countries) that bromide and quantity of methyl information on how the agency may necessitate use of methyl bromide bromide requested; evaluated recent applications for accompanied by explanation of why the • Data on the availability and specific uses when considering methyl bromide quarantine and technical and economic feasibility of nominations for critical uses, as well as preshipment (QPS) exemption may not alternatives to the proposed methyl specific information needed for the be applicable for this purpose. In bromide use; United States to successfully defend any addition, include information on what • A review of the comparative future nominations for critical uses. pest control practices organic producers performance of methyl bromide and are using for their commodity. Commodities Such as Dried Fruit and Applicants should also address their alternatives including control of target Nuts pests in research and commercial scale efforts to secure and use stockpiled up studies; 1 Data reviewed by EPA for methyl bromide. • commodities such as dried fruit and A description of all technically and Dried Cured Pork economically feasible steps taken by the nuts indicate that sulfuryl fluoride is applicant to minimize methyl bromide effective against key pests. The industry Applicants should list how many use and emissions; has mostly converted to sulfuryl facilities have been fumigated with • Data on the use and availability of fluoride and no market disruption has methyl bromide over the last three stockpiled methyl bromide; occurred. Rapid fumigation is not a years; the rate, volume, and target • A description of efforts made to critical condition for this sector and concentration over time [CT] of methyl test, register, and commercially adopt therefore, products can be treated with bromide at each location; volume of alternatives; sulfuryl fluoride or phosphine and be each facility; number of fumigations per • Plans for phase-out of critical uses held for relatively long periods of time year; and the materials from which the of methyl bromide; and without a significant economic impact. facility was constructed. It is important To support a nomination, applicants • The methodology used to provide for applicants in this sector to specify should address potential economic economic comparisons. research plans into alternatives and losses due to pest pressures, changes in EPA’s Web site (www.epa.gov/ozone/ alternative practices that support the quality, changes in timing, and any mbr/alts.html) contains a list of current transition from methyl bromide, as well other economic implications for and potential alternatives. To support as information on the technical and producers when converting to the assertion that a specific use of economic feasibility of using recapture alternatives. Alternatives for which such methyl bromide meets the requirements technologies. Applicants should also information is needed are: Sulfuryl address their efforts to secure and use of the critical use exemption, applicants fluoride, propylene oxide (PPO), must demonstrate that none of the listed stockpiled methyl bromide. This is phosphine, and controlled atmosphere/ particularly important for this sector alternatives are technically and temperature treatment systems. economically feasible for that use. In given the low volume of methyl Applicants should include the costs bromide usage. addition, applicants should describe to retrofit equipment or design and research plans which include the construct new fumigation chambers for Cucurbits, Eggplant, Pepper, and pest(s), chemical(s), or management these alternatives. For the economic Tomato practice(s) they will be testing to assessment applicants should provide: EPA found in its review of support their transition from methyl The amount of fumigant gas used (for applications for cucurbits, eggplant, bromide. both methyl bromide and alternatives, pepper, and tomato that although no The Office of Management and Budget which may include heat), price per single alternative is effective for all pest (OMB) has approved the information pound of the fumigant gas from the most problems, multiple year data indicates collection requirements contained in recent use season, application rates, that the alternatives in various this notice under the provisions of the differences in time required for combinations provide control equal or Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. fumigation, differences in labor inputs superior to methyl bromide plus 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB (i.e., hours and wages) associated with chloropicrin. Several research studies control number 2060–0482. alternatives, the amount of commodity show that the three-way mixture of 1,3- Since neither the Protocol nor the treated with each fumigant/treatment dichloropene plus chloropicrin plus Clean Air Act establish a specific end and the value of the commodity being metam sodium can effectively suppress date for Critical Use Exemptions, treated/produced. Applicants should pathogens (P. capsici, F. oxysporum) also provide information on changes in and nematodes. 1 Where an alternative is not registered for use in a particular jurisdiction, growers in that jurisdiction costs for any other practices or To support a nomination, applicants need not address the performance of that particular equipment used (e.g., sanitation and should address potential changes to alternative. IPM) that are not needed when methyl yield, quality, and timing when
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37614 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
converting to alternatives, including: for growers and their region’s Ornamentals The mixture of 1,3-dichloropropene production of these crops using these EPA found in its review of plus chloropicrin, the three-way alternatives, including the costs to applications for ornamentals that while mixture of 1,3-dichloropropene plus retrofit equipment and the differential no single alternative is effective for all chloropicrin plus metam (sodium or impact of buffers for methyl bromide pest problems, multiple-year data potassium) or allyl isothiocyanate plus chloropicrin compared to the indicate that the alternatives in various TM (Dominus ) used in place of metam, alternatives. For the economic combinations provide control equal or dimethyl disulfide (DMDS), and any assessment, applicants should provide superior to methyl bromide plus fumigationless system (if data are the following: Price per pound of chloropicrin. Research demonstrates available). fumigant gas used (both methyl bromide that 1,3-dichloropene plus chloropicrin, Applications should address and alternatives) from the most recent the three way mixture of 1,3- regulatory and economic implications use season; application rates; value of dichloropene plus chloropicrin plus for growers and your region’s the crop being produced; differences in metam sodium, and dimethyl disulfide production of these crops using these labor inputs (i.e., hours and wages); and plus chloropicrin all show excellent alternatives, including the costs to any differences in equipment costs or results. To support a nomination, retrofit equipment and the differential time needed to operate equipment impact of buffers for methyl bromide applicants should address potential associated with alternatives. Applicants changes to yield, quality, and timing plus chloropicrin compared to the should also address their efforts to alternatives. For the economic when converting to alternatives, secure and use stockpiled methyl including: The mixture of 1,3- assessment, applicants should provide bromide. the following: Price per pound of dichloropropene plus chloropicrin, the fumigant gas used (both methyl bromide Orchard Replant three way mixture of 1,3- dichloropropene plus chloropicrin plus and alternatives) from the most recent Data reviewed by EPA for orchard use season; application rates; value of metam (sodium or potassium) or allyl replant indicate that while no single isothiocyanate (DominusTM) used in the crop being produced; differences in alternative is effective for all pest labor inputs (i.e., hours and wages); and place of metam, dimethyl disulfide problems, numerous field trials indicate (DMDS), and steam. any differences in equipment costs or alternatives to methyl bromide are time needed to operate equipment Applications should address effective. Therefore, EPA has concluded regulatory and economic implications associated with alternatives. Applicants that transitioning to the alternatives is should also address their efforts to for growers and their region’s feasible without substantial losses. production of these crops using these secure and use stockpiled methyl Registered alternatives are available for bromide. alternatives, including the costs to individual-hole treatments, and soil retrofit equipment and the differential Strawberry Fruit preparation procedures are available to impact of buffers for methyl bromide Based on EPA’s review of information enable effective treatment with plus chloropicrin compared to the as part of the 2016 nomination process, alternatives even in soils with high alternatives. For the economic EPA believes alternatives are available moisture content. assessment, applicants should provide as advances have been made: (1) In To support a nomination, applicants the following: Price per pound of safely applying 100% chloropicrin, (2) should address potential changes to fumigant gas used (both methyl bromide in strategies to improve efficacy in yield, quality, and timing when and alternatives) from the most recent applying 1,3-dichloropropene, or converting to alternatives, including: use season; application rates; value of mixtures of 1,3-dichloropropene plus The mixture of 1,3-dichloropropene the crop being produced; differences in chloropicrin, (3) in using the three-way plus chloropicrin, the three way- labor inputs (i.e., hours and wages); and mixture of 1,3-dichloropropene plus mixture of 1,3-dichloropropene plus any differences in equipment costs or chloropicrin plus metam (sodium or chloropicrin plus metam (sodium or time needed to operate equipment potassium) or allyl isothiocyanate potassium), dimethyl disulfide (DMDS), associated with alternatives. Applicants (DominusTM) used in place of metam in and steam. should also address their efforts to states other than California, and (4) in Applications should address secure and use stockpiled methyl transitioning from experimental to regulatory and economic implications bromide. for growers and your region’s commercial use of non-chemical tools, Nurseries such as steam, anaerobic soil production of these crops using these disinfestations, and substrate alternatives, including the costs to In considering this sector in the 2016 production. retrofit equipment and the differential nomination process, EPA noted that a To support a nomination, applicants impact of buffers for methyl bromide Special Local Need label allows Telone should address potential changes to plus chloropicrin compared to the II to be used in accordance with yield, quality, and timing when alternatives. For the economic certification standards for propagative converting to alternatives, including: assessment, applicants should provide material.2 Straight chloropicrin, the mixture of 1,3- the following: Price per pound of To support a nomination, applicants dichloropropene plus chloropicrin, the fumigant gas used (for both methyl should address potential changes to three-way mixture of 1,3- bromide and alternatives) from the most yield, quality, and timing when dichloropropene plus chloropicrin plus recent use season; application rates; converting to alternatives, including: metam (sodium or potassium) or allyl value of the crop being produced; The mixture of 1,3-dichloropropene isothiocyanate (DominusTM) used in differences in labor inputs (i.e., hours plus chloropicrin, the three-way place of metam in states other than and wages); and any differences in mixture of 1,3-dichloropropene plus California, or dimethyl disulfide equipment costs or time needed to (DMDS), and any fumigationless system operate equipment associated with 2 EPA also noted that growers can use a combination of methyl bromide for quarantine (if data are available). alternatives. Applicants should also situations and 1,3-D plus chloropicrin for non- Applications should address address their efforts to secure and use quarantine situations to meet certification regulatory and economic implications stockpiled methyl bromide. requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37615
chloropicrin plus metam (sodium or Applicants should also address their technical advice to the Administrator on potassium) or allyl isothiocyanate efforts to secure and use stockpiled the technical basis for Agency positions (DominusTM) used in place of metam in methyl bromide. and regulations. The SAB is a Federal states other than California, dimethyl Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671– Advisory Committee chartered under disulfide (DMDS), and steam. 7671q. the Federal Advisory Committee Act Applications should address (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. The SAB will regulatory and economic implications Dated: June 23, 2015. comply with the provisions of FACA for growers and your region’s Sarah Dunham, and all appropriate SAB Staff Office production of these crops using these Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs. procedural policies. Pursuant to FACA alternatives, including the costs to [FR Doc. 2015–16044 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] and EPA policy, notice is hereby given retrofit equipment and the differential BILLING CODE 6560–50–P that the SAB CAAC—Benzo[a]pyrene impact of buffers for methyl bromide Panel will hold public teleconferences plus chloropicrin compared to the to discuss its draft report regarding the alternatives. For the economic ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION draft IRIS Toxicological Review of assessment, applicants should provide AGENCY Benzo[a]pyrene (September 2014 the following: Price per pound of [FRL–9929–87–OA] External Review Draft). The EPA SAB fumigant gas used (for both methyl Staff Office augmented the SAB CAAC bromide and alternatives) from the most Notification of Two Public with subject matter experts to provide recent use season; application rates; Teleconferences of the Science advice through the chartered SAB value of the crop being produced; Advisory Board Chemical Assessment regarding this IRIS assessment. differences in labor inputs (i.e., hours Advisory Committee Augmented for The SAB CAAC—Benzo[a]pyrene and wages); and any differences in the Review of EPA’s Draft Panel held a public meeting on April equipment costs or time needed to Benzo[a]pyrene Assessment 15–17, 2015. The purpose of that operate equipment associated with meeting was to develop responses to the alternatives. Applicants should also AGENCY: Environmental Protection peer review charge on the agency’s draft address their efforts to secure and use Agency (EPA). IRIS Toxicological Review of stockpiled methyl bromide. ACTION: Notice. Benzo[a]pyrene (September 2014 External Review Draft). The purpose of Golf Courses SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection these public teleconferences is for the EPA has not found that a significant Agency (EPA or Agency) Science Panel to discuss its draft report peer market disruption would occur in the Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office reviewing the agency’s draft golf industry in the absence of methyl announces two public teleconferences toxicological review. The two public bromide. To support a nomination, of the SAB Chemical Assessment teleconferences will be conducted as applicants should address potential Advisory Committee Augmented for the one complete meeting, beginning on changes to quality when converting to Review of the Draft Benzo[a]pyrene August 21, 2015 and if necessary, will alternatives, including: Basamid, Assessment (CAAC-Benzo[a]pyrene continue on September 2, 2015. chloropicrin, 1,3-dichloropene, 1,3- Panel) to discuss its draft report Availability of Meeting Materials: dichloropene plus chloropicrin, metam concerning EPA’s draft Integrated Risk Additional background on this SAB sodium, or allyl isothiocyanate Information System (IRIS) Toxicological activity, the teleconference agenda, draft (DominusTM), and steam. Non-fumigant Review of Benzo[a]pyrene (September, report, and other materials for the alternatives currently in use (e.g., 2014 External Review Draft). teleconferences will be posted on the additional pesticides, fertilizers, DATES: The public teleconferences will SAB Web site at http:// different cultural practices, and be held on Friday August 21, 2015 and yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ increased management) should also be Wednesday September 2, 2015. The fedrgstr_activites/IRIS%20BaP?Open described. teleconferences will be held from 1:00 Document Applications should address p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Time) on both Procedures for Providing Public Input: regulatory and economic implications days. Public comment for consideration by for growers using these alternatives, EPA’s federal advisory committees and ADDRESSES: The public teleconference including the costs to retrofit equipment panels has a different purpose from will be conducted by telephone only. and the differential impact of buffers for public comment provided to EPA methyl bromide compared to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any program offices. Therefore, the process alternatives. For the economic member of the public wishing further for submitting comments to a federal assessment, applicants should provide information concerning the advisory committee is different from the the following: Price per pound of teleconferences may contact Dr. Diana process used to submit comments to an fumigant gas used (both methyl bromide Wong, Designated Federal Officer EPA program office. Federal advisory and alternatives) from the most recent (DFO), SAB Staff Office, by telephone/ committees and panels, including use season; application rates; economic voice mail at (202) 564–2049; or via scientific advisory committees, provide impact for the golf course from a email at [email protected]. independent advice to the EPA. transition to alternatives (e.g., downtime General information concerning the EPA Members of the public can submit when resurfacing, years between Science Advisory Board can be found at relevant comments pertaining to the fumigations); differences in labor inputs the EPA SAB Web site at http:// meeting materials or the group (i.e., hours and wages); and any www.epa.gov/sab. conducting this SAB activity. Input differences in equipment costs or time SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: from the public to the SAB will have the needed to operate equipment associated Background: The SAB was most impact if it consists of comments with alternatives. Supporting evidence established pursuant to the that provide specific scientific or could be included that would Environmental Research, Development, technical information or analysis for demonstrate that alternatives lead to and Demonstration Authorization Act SAB committees and panels to consider more frequent resurfacing and therefore, (ERDAA) codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to or if it relates to the clarity or accuracy greater adverse economic impacts. provide independent scientific and of the technical information. Members
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37616 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
of the public wishing to provide information collection request (ICR), functions of the Agency, including comment should contact the DFO ‘‘Water Quality Standards Regulation whether the information will have directly. (Renewal)’’ (EPA ICR No. 0988.12, OMB practical utility; (ii) evaluate the Oral Statements: In general, Control No. 2040–0049) to the Office of accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the individuals or groups requesting an oral Management and Budget (OMB) for burden of the proposed collection of presentation on a public teleconference review and approval in accordance with information, including the validity of will be limited to three minutes per the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. the methodology and assumptions used; speaker. Interested parties wishing to 3501 et seq.). Before doing so, EPA is (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and provide comments should contact Dr. soliciting public comments on specific clarity of the information to be Diana Wong, DFO (preferably via email), aspects of the proposed information collected; and (iv) minimize the burden at the contact information noted above, collection as described below. This is a of the collection of information on those by August 14, 2015 to be placed on the proposed extension of the ICR, which is who are to respond, including through list of public speakers for the currently approved through December the use of appropriate automated teleconference. Written Statements: 31, 2015. An Agency may not conduct electronic, mechanical, or other Written statements for these or sponsor and a person is not required technological collection techniques or teleconferences should be received in to respond to a collection of information other forms of information technology, the SAB Staff Office by the same unless it displays a currently valid OMB e.g., permitting electronic submission of deadlines given above for requesting control number. responses. EPA will consider the oral comments. Written statements DATES: Comments must be submitted on comments received and amend the ICR should be supplied to the DFO via or before August 31, 2015. as appropriate. The final ICR package email. It is the SAB Staff Office general ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, will then be submitted to OMB for policy to post written comments on the referencing Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– review and approval. At that time, EPA Web page for the advisory meeting or OW–2011–0465, online using will issue another Federal Register teleconference. Submitters are requested www.regulations.gov (our preferred notice to announce the submission of to provide an unsigned version of each method), by email to ow-docket@ the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to document because the SAB Staff Office epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket submit additional comments to OMB. Abstract: Water quality standards are does not publish documents with Center, Environmental Protection provisions of state,1 tribal, and federal signatures on its Web sites. Members of Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 law that consist of designated uses for the public should be aware that their Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, waters of the United States, water personal contact information, if DC 20460. included in any written comments, may EPA’s policy is that all comments quality criteria to protect the designated be posted to the SAB Web site. received will be included in the public uses, and an antidegradation policy. Copyrighted material will not be posted docket without change including any Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act without explicit permission of the personal information provided, unless requires states and authorized tribes to copyright holder. the comment includes profanity, threats, establish water quality standards, and to review and, if appropriate, revise their Accessibility: For information on information claimed to be Confidential water quality standards once every three access or services for individuals with Business Information (CBI) or other years. The Act also requires EPA to disabilities, please contact Dr. Diana information whose disclosure is review and either approve or disapprove Wong at (202) 564–2049 or wong.diana- restricted by statute. the new or revised standards, and to [email protected]. To request accommodation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: promulgate replacement federal of a disability, please contact Dr. Wong Tangela Cooper, Office of Water, Office standards if necessary. Section 118(c)(2) preferably at least ten days prior to the of Science and Technology, Standards of the Act specifies additional water teleconferences, to give EPA as much and Health Protection Division, (4305T), quality standards requirements for time as possible to process your request. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 waters of the Great Lakes system. Dated: June 24, 2015. Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, The Water Quality Standards Thomas H. Brennan, DC 20460; telephone number: 202–566– regulation (40 CFR part 131 and Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board 0369; fax number: 202–566–0409; email portions of part 132) governs national Staff Office. address: [email protected]. implementation of the water quality [FR Doc. 2015–16197 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: standards program. The regulation BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Supporting documents which explain in describes requirements and procedures detail the information that the EPA will for states and authorized tribes to be collecting are available in the public develop, review, and revise their water ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION docket for this ICR. The docket can be quality standards, and EPA procedures AGENCY viewed online at www.regulations.gov for reviewing and approving the water or in person at the EPA Docket Center, quality standards. The regulation [EPA–HQ–OW–2011–0465; FRL–9930–00– WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 requires the development and OW] Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, submission of information to EPA, Proposed Information Collection DC. The telephone number for the including: Request; Comment Request; Water Docket Center is 202–566–1744. For —The minimum elements in water Quality Standards Regulation additional information about EPA’s quality standards that each state or (Renewal) public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/ tribe must submit to EPA for review, dockets. including any new or revised water AGENCY: Environmental Protection Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of Agency (EPA). the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments 1 The Clean Water Act defines the term ‘‘state’’ to ACTION: Notice. and information to enable it to: (i) mean the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Evaluate whether the proposed specific territories including Guam, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection collection of information is necessary American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Agency (EPA) is planning to submit an for the proper performance of the Northern Mariana Islands.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37617
quality standards resulting from the Requests for the National Pollutant ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION jurisdiction’s triennial review (40 CFR Discharge Elimination System program. AGENCY 131.6 and 131.20). The elements Form Numbers: None. [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2003–0004; FRL–9929–26] include use designations for specific Respondents/affected entities: The water bodies; methods used and Water Quality Standards regulation Access to Confidential Business analyses conducted to support water requires reporting at least once every Information by Vision Technologies, quality standards revisions; three years from 96 jurisdictions: 56 Inc., and Its Identified Subcontractor, supporting analysis for use states and territories, and Indian tribes Computer Sciences Corporation attainability analyses; water quality with EPA-approved standards (40 tribes criteria sufficient to protect the as of May 2015). The respondents AGENCY: Environmental Protection designated uses; methodologies for affected by this collection activity are in Agency (EPA). site-specific criteria development; an North American Industry Classification ACTION: Notice. antidegradation policy; certification System (NAICS) code 92411 by the jurisdiction’s Attorney General ‘‘Administration of Air and Water SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its or other appropriate legal authority Resources and Solid Waste Management contractor, Vision Technologies, Inc., of that the water quality standards were Programs,’’ formerly SIC code #9511. Glen Burnie, MD, and Computer duly adopted pursuant to state or Additionally water dischargers subject Sciences Corporation (CSC) of Falls tribal law; information that will aid to certain requirements related to the Church, VA, its identified subcontractor EPA in determining the adequacy of WQS in the Great Lakes System include to access information which has been the scientific basis for the standards; dischargers in the following NAICS submitted to EPA under all sections of and information on general policies codes: Mining (except oil and gas) (212), the Toxic Substances Control Act that may affect the implementation of Food manufacturing (311), Paper (TSCA). Some of the information may be the standards. manufacturing (322), Chemical claimed or determined to be Confidential Business Information (CBI). —Information that an Indian tribe must manufacturing (325), Petroleum DATES: Access to the confidential data submit to EPA in order to determine refineries (32411), Primary metal will occur no sooner than July 8, 2015. whether a tribe is qualified to manufacturing (331), Fabricated metal administer the water quality product manufacturing (332), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For standards program (40 CFR 131.8). Machinery manufacturing (333), technical information contact: Scott Computer and electronic product Sherlock, Environmental Assistance —Information a state or tribe must manufacturing (334), Electrical Division (7408M), Office of Pollution submit if it chooses to exercise a equipment, appliance, and component Prevention and Toxics, Environmental dispute resolution mechanism for manufacturing (335), Transportation Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania disputes between states and tribes equipment manufacturing (336), Electric Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; over water quality standards on power generation, transmission, and telephone number: (202) 564–8257; fax common water bodies (40 CFR 131.7). distribution (2211), and Sewage number: (202) 564–8251; email address: —Information related to public treatment facilities (22132). [email protected]. participation requirements during Respondent’s obligation to respond: For general information contact: The state and tribal review and revision of Voluntary. TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 water quality standards (40 CFR Estimated number of potential South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 131.20). States and tribes must hold respondents: 96 jurisdictions plus 2,323 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– public hearings as part of their Great Lakes dischargers. 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@ triennial reviews, and make any Frequency of response: On occasion. epa.gov. Total estimated burden: 286,981 proposed standards and supporting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: analyses available to the public before hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 the hearing. CFR 1320.03(b). I. General Information Total estimated cost: $13,359,089 (per A. Does this action apply to me? The regulation establishes specific year). There are no annualized capital or additional requirements for water operation & maintenance costs. This action is directed to the public quality standards and their Changes in Estimates: There is an in general. This action may, however, be implementation in the waters of the increase of 10,000 hours in the total of interest to all who manufacture, Great Lakes system, contained in the estimated respondent burden compared process, or distribute industrial Water Quality Guidance for the Great with the ICR currently approved by chemicals. Since other entities may also Lakes System (40 CFR part 132). This OMB. This increase reflects an increase be interested, the Agency has not portion of the regulation includes the in the estimated number of respondents attempted to describe all the specific following requirements for information to reflect EPA’s approval of water entities that may be affected by this collection: Bioassay tests to support the quality standards for four additional action. development of water quality criteria; tribes. These estimates could change studies to identify and provide B. How can I get copies of this document further if, for example, EPA approves and other related information? information on antidegradation control water quality standards for additional measures that will guard against the tribes, or if there are changes in the The docket for this action, identified reduction of water quality in the Great burden related to expected NPDES by docket identification (ID) number Lakes system; and information permit activities in the Great Lakes EPA–HQ–OPPT–2003–0004 is available collection and record keeping activities basin covered by the ICR. at http://www.regulations.gov or at the associated with analyses and reporting Office of Pollution Prevention and to request regulatory relief from Dated: June 24, 2015. Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Guidance requirements. The Guidance Elizabeth Southerland, Environmental Protection Agency includes additional information Director, Office of Science and Technology. Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William collections that are addressed in [FR Doc. 2015–16234 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 separate Information Collection BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37618 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
DC. The Public Reading Room is open ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION through Friday, excluding legal from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday AGENCY holidays. The telephone number for the through Friday, excluding legal [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2003–0004; FRL–9929–67] Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, holidays. The telephone number for the and the telephone number for the OPPT Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, Access to Confidential Business Docket is (202) 566–0280. Please review and the telephone number for the OPPT Information by Eastern Research the visitor instructions and additional Docket is (202) 566–0280. Please review Group, Inc. information about the docket available the visitor instructions and additional at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. information about the docket available AGENCY: Environmental Protection at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. Agency (EPA). II. What action is the agency taking? ACTION: Notice. II. What action is the agency taking? Under EPA contract number EP–D– SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its 11–006, contractor ERG of 110 Hartwell Under EPA contract number GS–06F– contractor, Eastern Research Group, Inc. Ave., Suite 1, Lexington, MA, will assist 0535Z, order number 0015, contractor (ERG) of Lexington, MA, to access the Office of Pollution Prevention and Vision Technologies, Inc., of 530 information which has been submitted Toxics (OPPT) in the performance of McCormick Drive, Suite 6, Glen Burnie, to EPA under all sections of the Toxic MD, and CSC, 3170 Fairview Park Drive, work related to source characterization. Substances Control Act (TSCA). Some of The contractor will also assist in Falls Church, VA, will assist EPA’s the information may be claimed or Office of Research and Development by identifying information to characterize determined to be Confidential Business lifecycle inventory unit process flows supporting the desktop systems on Information (CBI). which the CBI will reside. The associated with certain chemical DATES: contractor will also provide information Access to the confidential data categories. will occur no sooner than July 8, 2015. technology support and solutions to In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: enhance science and research results. EPA has determined that under EPA For technical information contact: In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), Scott Sherlock, Environmental contract number EP–D–11–006, ERG EPA has determined that under EPA Assistance Division (7408M), Office of will require access to CBI submitted to contract number GS–06F–0535Z, order Pollution Prevention and Toxics, EPA under all sections of TSCA to number 0015, Vision Technologies and Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 perform successfully the duties CSC will require access to CBI Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, specified under the contract. ERG’s submitted to EPA under all sections of DC 20460–0001; telephone number: personnel will be given access to TSCA to perform successfully the duties (202) 564–8257; fax number: (202) 564– information submitted to EPA under all specified under the contract. Vision 8251; email address: sherlock.scott@ sections of TSCA. Some of the Technologies and CSC personnel will be epa.gov. information may be claimed or given access to information submitted to For general information contact: The determined to be CBI. EPA under all sections of TSCA. Some TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 EPA is issuing this notice to inform of the information may be claimed or South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY determined to be CBI. all submitters of information under all 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– sections of TSCA that EPA may provide 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@ EPA is issuing this notice to inform ERG access to these CBI materials on a epa.gov. all submitters of information under all need-to-know basis only. All access to sections of TSCA that EPA may provide SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TSCA CBI under this contract will take Vision Technologies and CSC access to place at EPA Headquarters and ERG’s these CBI materials on a need-to-know I. General Information site located at 14555 Avion Parkway, basis only. All access to TSCA CBI A. Does this action apply to me? under this contract will take place at Suite 200, Chantilly, VA, in accordance EPA Headquarters in accordance with This action is directed to the public with EPA’s TSCA CBI Protection TSCA CBI Protection Manual. in general. This action may, however, be Manual. of interest to all who manufacture, Access to TSCA data, including CBI, Access to TSCA data, including CBI, process, or distribute industrial will continue until March 31, 2016. If will continue until October 21, 2016. If chemicals. Since other entities may also the contract is extended, this access will the contract is extended, this access will be interested, the Agency has not also continue for the duration of the also continue for the duration of the attempted to describe all the specific extended contract without further entities that may be affected by this extended contract without further notice. action. notice. Vision Technologies and CSC ERG personnel will be required to B. How can I get copies of this document personnel will be required to sign sign nondisclosure agreements and will and other related information? nondisclosure agreements and will be be briefed on appropriate security briefed on appropriate security The docket for this action, identified procedures before they are permitted procedures before they are permitted by docket identification (ID) number access to TSCA CBI. access to TSCA CBI. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2003–0004 is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. Office of Pollution Prevention and Dated: June 24, 2015. Dated: June 19, 2015. Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Pamela S. Myrick, Pamela S. Myrick, Environmental Protection Agency Acting Director, Information Management Acting Director, Information Management Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Toxics. Toxics. Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, [FR Doc. 2015–16229 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2015–16228 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] DC. The Public Reading Room is open BILLING CODE 6560–50–P BILLING CODE 6560–50–P from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37619
EXPORT-IMPORT BANK financial institution and Ex-Im Bank address. These additional pieces of that the financed export transaction information will allow Ex-Im Bank to [Public Notice 2015–6015] results in a valid, enforceable, and better track the extent to which its Agency Information Collection performing debt obligation. Exporter support assists U.S. small businesses. Activities: Final Collection; Comment policy holders need this form to obtain The other change that Ex-Im Bank has Request financing for their medium term export made is to require the financial sales. institution to indicate whether the AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the Affected Public: This form affects exporter is a minority-owned business, United States. entities involved in the export of U.S. women-owned business and/or veteran- ACTION: Submission for OMB Review goods and services. owned business. Although answers to and Comments Request. Annual Number of Respondents: 50. the questions are mandatory, the Estimated Time per Respondent: 10 company may choose any one of the Form Title: EIB 94–08 Notification minutes. three answers: Yes/No/Decline to and Assignment by Insured to Financial Annual Burden Hours: 8.3 hours. Answer. The option of ‘‘Decline to Institution of Medium Term Export Frequency of Reporting or Use: As Answer’’ allows a company to Credit Insurance Policy. needed. consciously decline to answer the SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of Government Expenses: specific question should they not wish the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a part Reviewing time per year: 12 hours. to provide that information. The form of its continuing effort to reduce Average Wages per Hour: $42.50. can be viewed at: http://www.exim.gov/ paperwork and respondent burden, Average Cost per Year: $510 (time * sites/default/files/pub/pending/eib03- invites the general public and other wages). 02_0.pdf. Federal Agencies to comment on the Benefits and Overhead: 20%. proposed information collection, as Total Government Cost: $612. DATES: Comments should be received on required by the Paperwork Reduction or before August 31, 2015, to be assured Act of 1995. This collection of Bonita Jones-McNeil, of consideration. Agency Clearance Officer. information is necessary, pursuant to 12 ADDRESSES: Comments may be U.S.C. Sec. 635(a)(1), to determine [FR Doc. 2015–16052 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] submitted electronically on http:// where insurance proceeds should be BILLING CODE 6690–01–P www.regulations.gov (EIB:03–02) or by sent and to determine which exporters mail to Michele Kuester, Export-Import require lender financing of their insured Bank of the United States, 811 Vermont receivables. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK Ave NW., Washington, DC 20571. Ex-Im Bank’s exporter policy holders, [Public Notice: 2015–6013] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: along with the financial institution providing it with financing, provide this Agency Information Collection Titles and Form Number: EIB 03–02, form to Ex-Im Bank. The form transfers Activities: Comment Request Application for Medium Term the duties and obligations of the insured Insurance or Guarantee. AGENCY: exporter to the financial institution. It Export-Import Bank of the OMB Number: 3048–0014. also provides certifications to the United States. Type of Review: Regular. financial institution and Ex-Im Bank ACTION: Submission for OMB review and Need and Use: The purpose of this that the financed export transaction comments request. collection is to gather information results in a valid, enforceable, and Form Title: EIB 03–02, Application necessary to make a determination of performing debt obligation. Exporter for Medium Term Insurance or eligibility of a transaction for Ex-Im policy holders need this form to obtain Guarantee Bank assistance under its medium-term financing for their medium term export SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of guarantee and insurance program. sales. the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a part Affected Public: This form affects The form can be viewed at http:// of its continuing effort to reduce entities involved in the export of U.S. www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/ paperwork and respondent burden, goods and services. pending/eib94–08.pdf. invites the general public and other Annual Number of Respondents: 400. DATES: Comments should be received on Federal Agencies to comment on the Estimated Time per Respondent: 1.2 or before August 31, 2015 to be assured proposed information collection, as hour. of consideration. required by the Paperwork Reduction Annual Burden Hours: 480 hours. ADDRESSES: Comments may be Act of 1995. Frequency of Reporting or Use: As submitted electronically on The purpose of this collection is to needed. www.regulations.gov or by mail to gather information necessary to make a Michele Kuester, Export-Import Bank of determination of eligibility of a Government Expenses: the United States, 811 Vermont Ave. transaction for Ex-Im Bank assistance Reviewing Time per Year: 700 hours. NW., Washington, DC 20571. under its medium-term guarantee and Average Wages per Hour: $42.50. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: insurance program. Average Cost per Year: $29,750 Titles and Form Number: EIB 94–08 The Export-Import Bank has made a (time*wages). Notification and Assignment by Insured change to the report to have the Benefits and Overhead: 20%. to Financial Institution of Medium Term financial institution provide specific Total Government Cost: $35,700. Export Credit Insurance Policy. information (industry code, number of OMB Number: 3048–0040. employees and annual sales volume) Bonita Jones-McNeil, Type of Review: Regular. needed to make a determination as to Agency Clearance Officer, Records Need and Use: The form transfers the whether or not the exporter meets the Management Division, Office of the Chief duties and obligations of the insured SBA’s definition of a small business. Information Officer. exporter to the financial institution. It The financial institution already [FR Doc. 2015–16065 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] also provides certifications to the provides the exporter’s name and BILLING CODE 6690–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37620 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE DCL authority may use this form as the Attention: Receivership Oversight UNITED STATES sole source or one piece among several Department 32.1, 1601 Bryan Street, sources of credit information for their Dallas, TX 75201. [Public Notice 2015–6016] internal foreign buyer credit decision No comments concerning the Agency Information Collection which, in turn, commits Ex-Im’s termination of this receivership will be Activities: Final Collection; Comment insurance. considered which are not sent within Request Affected Public: This form affects this time frame. entities involved in the export of U.S. AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the goods and services. Dated: June 26, 2015. United States. Annual Number of Respondents: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. ACTION: Submission for OMB review and 6,500. Robert E. Feldman, comments request. Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 Executive Secretary. minutes. [FR Doc. 2015–16159 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Form Title: EIB 99–14 Export-Import Annual Burden Hours: 1,625 hours. Bank Trade Reference form. Frequency of Reporting or Use: As BILLING CODE 6714–01–P SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of needed. the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a part Government Expenses: FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE of its continuing effort to reduce Reviewing time per year: 1,625 hours. CORPORATION paperwork and respondent burden, Average Wages per Hour: $42.50. invites the general public and other Average Cost per Year: $69,062 (time Notice to All Interested Parties of the Federal Agencies to comment on the * wages). Termination of the Receivership of proposed information collection, as Benefits and Overhead: 20%. 10466 Hometown Community Bank, required by the Paperwork Reduction Total Government Cost: $82,875. Braselton, GA Act of 1995. This collection of information is necessary, pursuant to 12 Bonita Jones-McNeil, Agency Clearance Officer, Records Notice is hereby given that the Federal U.S.C. Sec. 635(a)(1), to determine Deposit Insurance Corporation (‘‘FDIC’’) whether or not a company has a good Management Division, Office of the Chief Information Officer. as Receiver for Hometown Community payment history. Bank, Braselton, Georgia (‘‘the This form will enable Ex-Im Bank to [FR Doc. 2015–16066 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Receiver’’) intends to terminate its make a credit decision on a foreign BILLING CODE 6690–01–P receivership for said institution. The buyer credit limit request submitted by FDIC was appointed receiver of a new or existing policy holder. Hometown Community Bank on Additionally, this form is used by those FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE November 16, 2012. The liquidation of Ex-Im Bank policy holders granted CORPORATION the receivership assets has been delegated authority to commit the Bank completed. To the extent permitted by to a foreign buyer credit limit. Notice to All Interested Parties of the The form can be viewed at http:// Termination of the Receivership of available funds and in accordance with www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/ 10112, First Bank of Kansas City, law, the Receiver will be making a final pending/eib99-14.pdf. Kansas City, Missouri dividend payment to proven creditors. DATES: Comments should be received on NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Based upon the foregoing, the or before August 31, 2015, to be assured Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Receiver has determined that the of consideration. (‘‘FDIC’’) as Receiver for First Bank of continued existence of the receivership ADDRESSES: Comments may be Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri (‘‘the will serve no useful purpose. submitted electronically on Receiver’’) intends to terminate its Consequently, notice is given that the WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV or by mail receivership for said institution. The receivership shall be terminated, to be to Michele Kuester, Export-Import Bank FDIC was appointed receiver of First effective no sooner than thirty days after of the United States, 811 Vermont Ave Bank of Kansas City on September 04, the date of this Notice. If any person NW., Washington, DC 20571. 2009. The liquidation of the wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: receivership assets has been completed. Titles and Form Number: EIB 99–14 To the extent permitted by available comment must be made in writing and Export-Import Bank Trade Reference funds and in accordance with law, the sent within thirty days of the date of form. Receiver will be making a final dividend this Notice to: Federal Deposit OMB Number: 3048–0042. payment to proven creditors. Insurance Corporation, Division of Type of Review: Regular. Based upon the foregoing, the Resolutions and Receiverships, Need and Use: This form provides Receiver has determined that the Attention: Receivership Oversight essential credit information used by Ex- continued existence of the receivership Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Im Bank credit officers when analyzing will serve no useful purpose. Dallas, TX 75201. requests for export credit insurance/ Consequently, notice is given that the No comments concerning the financing support, both short-term (360 receivership shall be terminated, to be termination of this receivership will be days and less) and medium-term (longer effective no sooner than thirty days after considered which are not sent within than 360 days), for the export of their the date of this Notice. If any person this time frame. U.S. goods and services. Additionally, wishes to comment concerning the Dated: June 26, 2015. this form is an integral part of the short termination of the receivership, such Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. term Multi-Buyer export credit comment must be made in writing and insurance policy for those policy sent within thirty days of the date of Robert E. Feldman, holders granted foreign buyer this Notice to: Federal Deposit Executive Secretary. discretionary credit limit authority Insurance Corporation, Division of [FR Doc. 2015–16160 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] (DCL). Multi-Buyer policy holders given Resolutions and Receiverships, BILLING CODE 6714–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37621
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND CORPORATION (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part HUMAN SERVICES 225), and all other applicable statutes Notice to All Interested Parties of the and regulations to become a bank Administration for Children and Termination of the Receivership of holding company and/or to acquire the Families 10304, The First National Bank of assets or the ownership of, control of, or Barnesville, Barnesville, GA the power to vote shares of a bank or Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request Notice is hereby given that the Federal bank holding company and all of the Deposit Insurance Corporation (‘‘FDIC’’) banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, Title: Goal-Oriented Adult Learning in as Receiver for The First National Bank Self-Sufficiency Study. of Barnesville, Barnesville, GA (‘‘the including the companies listed below. Receiver’’) intends to terminate its The applications listed below, as well OMB No.: New Collection. receivership for said institution. The as other related filings required by the Description: The Administration for FDIC was appointed receiver of The Board, are available for immediate Children and Families (ACF) is First National Bank of Barnesville on inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank proposing a data collection activity as October 22, 2010. The liquidation of the indicated. The applications will also be part of the Goal-Oriented Adult receivership assets has been completed. available for inspection at the offices of Learning in Self-Sufficiency (GOALS) To the extent permitted by available the Board of Governors. Interested study. The purpose of the GOALS funds and in accordance with law, the persons may express their views in project is to address the nexus between Receiver will be making a final dividend writing on the standards enumerated in the growing knowledge base in the payment to proven creditors. the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the psychological sciences and long- Based upon the foregoing, the proposal also involves the acquisition of standing approaches to self-sufficiency Receiver has determined that the a nonbanking company, the review also programs targeted to adults and young continued existence of the receivership includes whether the acquisition of the adults. The project will explore the will serve no useful purpose. nonbanking company complies with the programmatic implications of existing Consequently, notice is given that the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act research on psychological processes receivership shall be terminated, to be (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise associated with goal-directed behaviors, noted, nonbanking activities will be effective no sooner than thirty days after including socio-emotional regulation conducted throughout the United States. the date of this Notice. If any person and cognitive skills, executive wishes to comment concerning the Unless otherwise noted, comments functioning, and related areas. The termination of the receivership, such regarding each of these applications project will synthesize current research comment must be made in writing and must be received at the Reserve Bank on these topics; address how insights sent within thirty days of the date of indicated or the offices of the Board of gained from research can be used to this Notice to: Federal Deposit Governors not later than July 27, 2015. promote economic advancement among Insurance Corporation, Division of A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta low-income populations, identify Resolutions and Receiverships, (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice promising strategies, or strengthen Attention: Receivership Oversight President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., underlying skills in these areas; and Department 32.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30309: inform measurement of changes and Dallas, TX 75201. 1. Atlantic Capital Bancshares, Inc., developments in skill acquisition. No comments concerning the Atlanta, Georgia; to merge with First termination of this receivership will be The proposed information collection Security Group, Inc., and thereby activity consists of exploratory calls considered which are not sent within acquire FSGBank, NA, both in this time frame. with program directors and Chattanooga, Tennessee. administrators, semi-structured Dated: June 26, 2015. In connection with this applicantion, interviews with key program staff and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Atlantic Capital Bancshares’ parent community partner organization staff, Robert E. Feldman, companies BankCap Equity Fund, LLC; and focus group discussions with Executive Secretary. BankCap Partners GP L.P.; BankCap program participants. ACF seeks to gain [FR Doc. 2015–16161 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Partners Fund I, L.P.; and BCP Fund I an in-depth, systematic understanding BILLING CODE 6714–01–P Southeast Holdings, LLC, all in Dallas, of program administration and Texas, will indirectly acquire First implementation, service delivery and Security Group, Inc., and FSGBank, NA, operation, outputs and outcomes, and FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM both in Chattanooga, Tennessee. identify promising practices and other Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve areas for further study. Formations of, Acquisitions by, and System, June 26, 2015. Mergers of Bank Holding Companies Respondents: Key program directors Margaret McCloskey Shanks, and administrators, program staff and The companies listed in this notice Deputy Secretary of the Board. community partner organization staff, have applied to the Board for approval, [FR Doc. 2015–16157 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] and program participants at selected pursuant to the Bank Holding Company BILLING CODE 6210–01–P program sites.
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Total Number Annual Num- Number of Re- Average Bur- Instrument of Respond- ber of Re- sponses per den Hours per Annual Burden ents spondents Respondent Response Hours
Exploratory telephone call semi-structured interview—pro- gram directors and administrators ...... 24 12 1 1 12
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37622 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES—Continued
Total Number Annual Num- Number of Re- Average Bur- Instrument of Respond- ber of Re- sponses per den Hours per Annual Burden ents spondents Respondent Response Hours
Site visit semi-structured interview—program staff and community partner organization staff ...... 180 90 1 1.25 113 Site visit group discussion—program participants ...... 84 42 1 1.25 53
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours ...... 178
In compliance with the requirements DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Registration of Producers of Drugs and of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the HUMAN SERVICES Listing of Drugs in Commercial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Distribution—21 CFR Part 207 Food and Drug Administration Administration for Children and OMB Control Number 0910–0045— Families is soliciting public comment Extension on the specific aspects of the [Docket No. FDA–2011–N–0742] information collection described above. Requirements for drug establishment Copies of the proposed collection of Agency Information Collection registration and drug listing are set forth information can be obtained and Activities; Submission for Office of in section 510 of the Federal Food, comments may be forwarded by writing Management and Budget Review; Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) to the Administration for Children and Comment Request; Registration of (21 U.S.C. 360), section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. Families, Office of Planning, Research Producers of Drugs and Listing of 262), and part 207 (21 CFR part 207). and Evaluation, 370 L’Enfant Drugs in Commercial Distribution Fundamental to FDA’s mission to Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, AGENCY: protect the public health is the Attn: OPRE Reports Clearance Officer. Food and Drug Administration, HHS. collection of this information, which is Email address: OPREinfocollection@ used for important activities such as acf.hhs.gov. All requests should be ACTION: Notice. postmarket surveillance for serious identified by the title of the information adverse drug reactions, inspection of collection. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug drug manufacturing and processing The Department specifically requests Administration (FDA) is announcing facilities, and monitoring of drug comments on (a) whether the proposed that a proposed collection of products imported into the United collection of information is necessary information has been submitted to the States. Comprehensive, accurate, and up for the proper performance of the Office of Management and Budget to date information is critical to functions of the agency, including (OMB) for review and clearance under conducting these activities with whether the information shall have the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. efficiency and effectiveness. Under section 510 of the FD&C Act, practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the DATES: Fax written comments on the agency’s estimate of the burden of the collection of information by July 31, FDA is authorized to establish a system for registration of producers of drugs proposed collection of information; (c) 2015. the quality, utility, and clarity of the and for listing of drugs in commercial information to be collected; and (d) ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on distribution. To implement section 510 of the FD&C Act, FDA issued part 207. ways to minimize the burden of the the information collection are received, Under current § 207.20, manufacturers, collection of information on OMB recommends that written repackers, and relabelers that engage in respondents, including through the use comments be faxed to the Office of the manufacture, preparation, of automated collection techniques or Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: propagation, compounding, or other forms of information technology. _ processing of human or veterinary drugs Consideration will be given to 202–395–7285, or emailed to oira [email protected]. All and biological products, including bulk comments and suggestions submitted drug substances and bulk drug within 60 days of this publication. comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910–0045. Also substances for prescription Karl Koerper, include the FDA docket number found compounding, and drug premixes as well as finished dosage forms, whether Reports Clearance Officer. in brackets in the heading of this document. prescription or over-the-counter, are [FR Doc. 2015–16073 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] required to register their establishment. BILLING CODE 4184–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA In addition, manufacturers, repackers, PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and relabelers are required to submit a and Drug Administration, 8455 listing of every drug or biological Colesville Rd., COLE–14526, Silver product in commercial distribution. Spring, MD 20993–0002, PRAStaff@ Owners or operators of establishments fda.hhs.gov. that distribute under their own label or trade name a drug product SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In manufactured by a registered compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA establishment are not required either to has submitted the following proposed register or list. However, distributors collection of information to OMB for may elect to submit drug listing review and clearance. information in lieu of the registered
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37623
establishment that manufactures the establishment, that a listed drug or information electronically, FDA may drug product. Foreign drug biological product is not subject to grant a waiver from the electronic establishments must also comply with marketing or licensing approval format requirement. the establishment registration and requirements; and a list of certain drugs In the Federal Register of June 1, 2009 product listing requirements if they or biological products containing a (74 FR 26248), FDA announced the import or offer for import their products particular ingredient. FDA may also availability of a guidance for industry into the United States. request, but not require, the submission entitled ‘‘Providing Regulatory Under current § 207.21, of a qualitative listing of the inactive Submissions in Electronic Format— establishments, both domestic and ingredients for all listed drugs or Drug Establishment Registration and foreign, must register with FDA within biological products, and a quantitative Drug Listing’’ (the 2009 guidance). The 5 days after beginning the manufacture listing of the active ingredients for all document provides guidance to industry of drugs or biologicals, or within 5 days listed drugs or biological products on the statutory requirement to submit after the submission of a drug subject to an approved application or electronically drug establishment application or biological license license. registration and drug listing application. In addition, establishments Under § 207.30, establishments must information. The guidance describes the must register annually. Changes in update their product listing information types of information to include for individual ownership, corporate or every June and December or, at the purposes of drug establishment partnership structure, location, or drug discretion of the establishment, when registration and drug listing and how to handling activity must be submitted as any change occurs. These updates must prepare and submit the information in amendments to registration under include the following information: (1) A an electronic format (Structured Product current § 207.26 within 5 days of such listing of all drug or biological products Labeling (SPL) files) that FDA can changes. Under § 207.20(b), private label introduced for commercial distribution process, review, and archive. In distributors may request their own that have not been included in any addition to the information that labeler code and elect to submit drug previously submitted list; (2) all drug or previously was collected on the FDA listing information to FDA. In such biological products formerly listed for Forms, the guidance addresses instances, at the time of submitting or which commercial distribution has been electronic submission of other required updating drug listing information, discontinued; (3) all drug or biological information as follows: private label distributors must certify to products for which a notice of • For registered foreign drug the registered establishment that discontinuance was submitted and for establishments, the name, address, and manufactured, prepared, propagated, which commercial distribution has been telephone number of its U.S. agent compounded, or processed (which resumed; and (4) any material change in (§ 207.40(c)); includes, among other things, any information previously submitted. • the name of each importer that is repackaging and relabeling) the listed No update is required if no changes known to the establishment (the U.S. drug that the drug listing submission have occurred since the previously company or individual in the United was made. Establishments must, within submitted list. States that is an owner, consignee, or 5 days of beginning the manufacture of Historically, drug establishment recipient of the foreign establishment’s drugs or biologicals, submit to FDA a registration and drug listing information drug that is imported into the United listing for every drug or biological have been submitted in paper form States. An importer does not include the product in commercial distribution at using Form FDA 2656 (Registration of consumer or patient who ultimately that time. Private label distributors may Drug Establishment/Labeler Code purchases, receives, or is administered elect to submit to FDA a listing of every Assignment), Form FDA 2657 (Drug the drug, unless the foreign drug product they place in commercial Product Listing), and Form FDA 2658 establishment ships the drug directly to distribution. Registered establishments (Registered Establishments’ Report of the consumer or the patient) (section must submit to FDA drug product Private Label Distributors) (collectively 510(i)(1)(A) of the FD&C Act); and listing for those private label referred to as FDA Forms). Changes in • the name of each person who distributors who do not elect to submit the FD&C Act resulting from enactment imports or offers for import (the name listing information. of the Food and Drug Administration of each agent, broker, or other entity, Under § 207.25, product listing Amendments Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110– other than a carrier, that the foreign information submitted to FDA by 85) (FDAAA) require that drug drug establishment uses to facilitate the domestic and foreign manufacturers establishment registration and drug import of their drug into the United must, depending on the type of product listing information be submitted States) (section 510(i)(1)(A) of the FD&C being listed, include any new drug electronically unless a waiver is Act). application number or biological granted. Before the enactment of FDA also recommends the voluntary establishment license number, copies of FDAAA, section 510(p) of the FD&C Act submission of the following additional current labeling and a sampling of expressly provided for electronic information, when applicable: advertisements, a quantitative listing of submission of drug establishment • To facilitate correspondence the active ingredient for each drug or registration information upon a finding between foreign establishments and biological product not subject to an that electronic receipt was feasible, and FDA, the email address for the U.S. approved application or license, the section 510(j) of the FD&C Act provided agent, and the telephone number(s) and national drug code (NDC) number, and that drug listing information be email address for the importer and any drug imprinting information. submitted in the form and manner person who imports or offers for import In addition to the product listing prescribed by FDA. Section 224 of their drug; information required, FDA may also FDAAA, which amends section 510(p) • a site-specific Data Universal require, under § 207.31, a copy of all of the FD&C Act, now expressly, Numbering System number for each advertisements and a quantitative listing requires electronic drug listing in entity (e.g., the registrant, of all ingredients for each listed drug or addition to drug establishment establishments, U.S. agent, importer); biological product not subject to an registration. In certain cases, if it is • the NDC product code for the approved application or license; the unreasonable to expect a person to source drug that is repacked or basis for a determination, by the submit registration and listing relabeled;
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37624 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
• distinctive characteristics of certain creating and uploading the SPL file. listings are necessary.’’ The comment listed drugs, i.e., the flavor, the color, Although most firms will already have also recommended that all drug listings and image of the actual solid dosage prepared an SOP for the electronic should include the marketing category form; and submission of drug establishment of the drug. • registrants may indicate that they registration and drug listing FDA Response: Under section 510 of view as confidential the registrant’s information, each year additional firms the FD&C Act and part 207, contract business relationship with an will need to create an SOP. As provided manufacturers (registered establishment, or an inactive ingredient. in Table 2, FDA estimates that establishments) are required to list their In addition to this collection of approximately 1,000 firms will have to products with FDA under their own information, there is an additional expend a one-time burden to prepare, labeler code. To properly identify such burden for the following activities: review, and approve an SOP, and the • a listing, contract manufacturers should preparing a standard operating Agency estimates that it will take 40 list products manufactured for a private procedure (SOP) for the electronic hours per recordkeeper to create 1,000 label distributor by using one of submission of drug establishment new SOPs for a total of 40,000 hours. following marketing categories: (1) registration and drug listing In the Federal Register of March 23, Approved Drug Product Manufactured 2015 (80 FR 15214), FDA published a information; Exclusively For Private Label • 60-day notice requesting public creating the SPL file, including Distributor; (2) OTC Monograph Drug comment on the proposed collection of accessing and reviewing the technical Product Manufactured Exclusively For information. FDA received one specifications and instructional Private Label Distributor; (3) comment. documents provided by FDA (accessible Unapproved Drug Product The comment noted that under at http://www.fda.gov/oc/datacouncil/ Manufactured Exclusively For Private § 207.20(a), manufacturers, repackers, spl.html); Label Distributor. Contract • and relabelers are required to register reviewing and selecting appropriate manufacturers may also include the their establishment and submit a listing terms and codes used to create the SPL private label distributor’s labeling with of every drug or biological product in file (accessible at http://www.fda.gov/ the listing submission. oc/datacouncil/spl.html); commercial distribution. Under • obtaining the digital certificate used § 207.20(b), owners or operators of Additionally, § 207.20(b) requires that with FDA’s electronic submission establishments that distribute under the private label distributor have its gateway and uploading the SPL file for their own label or trade name a drug product listed under its own labeler submission (accessible at http:// product manufactured by a registered code (using whatever marketing www.fda.gov/esg/default.htm); and establishment are not required either to category is appropriate to the finished • requests for waivers from the register or list but may elect to submit product (e.g., NDA, OTC Monograph, electronic submission process as drug listing information in lieu of the Unapproved Drug)). The private label described in the draft guidance. registered establishment that distributor may elect to do this on its When FDA published the 2009 manufactures the drug product. The own. If the private label distributor guidance on submitting establishment comment said that although the burden elects not to do this, then the registration and drug listing information of listing private label drugs rests on the responsibility for submitting the in electronic format, the Agency also manufacturer, the standard industry additional listing falls on the registered amended its burden estimates for OMB practice has been to submit two separate establishment (the contract control number 0910–0045 to include listings under different marketing manufacturer). the additional burden for the collection categories. The comment said that these In Tables 1 and 2, the information of information that had not been listings are submitted either by the collection requirements of the drug submitted using the FDA forms, and to private label distributor or by the establishment registration and drug create and upload the SPL file. The manufacturer and ‘‘in order for the listing requirements have been grouped amended burden estimates included the necessary information to be provided to according to the information collection one-time preparation of an SOP for FDA (all Offices and Centers) both areas of the requirements.
TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1
Number of Activity Number of responses per re- Total annual Average burden per Total hours respondents spondent responses response
New registrations, including new la- beler codes requests ...... 1,400 2 2,800 4 .5 12,600 Annual updates of registration infor- mation ...... 10,000 1 10,000 4 .5 45,000 New drug listings ...... 1,567 7 11,000 4 .5 49,500 New listings for private label dis- tributor ...... 146 10.06 1,469 4 .5 6,611 June and December updates of all drug listing information ...... 5,300 20 106,000 4 .5 477,000 Waiver requests ...... 1 1 1 1 1
Total ...... 590,712 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37625
TABLE 2—ESTIMATED ANNUAL RECORDKEEPING BURDEN 1
Activity resulting from Section 510(p) of Number of record- Number of records Total annual Average burden the FD&C Act as amended by FDAAA keepers per recordkeeper records per recordkeeping Total hours
One-time preparation of SOP ...... 1,000 1 1,000 40 40,000 SOP maintenance ...... 3,295 1 3,295 1 3,295 Total ...... 43,295 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with the collection of information.
Dated: June 25, 2015. DATES: The Authorization is effective as Homeland Security that there is a Leslie Kux, of May 12, 2015. domestic emergency, or a significant Associate Commissioner for Policy. ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for potential for a domestic emergency, [FR Doc. 2015–16129 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] single copies of the EUA to the Office involving a heightened risk of attack BILLING CODE 4164–01–P of Counterterrorism and Emerging with a biological, chemical, radiological, Threats, Food and Drug Administration, or nuclear agent or agents; (2) a 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, determination by the Secretary of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Rm. 4338, Silver Spring, MD 20993– Defense that there is a military HUMAN SERVICES 0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive emergency, or a significant potential for label to assist that office in processing a military emergency, involving a Food and Drug Administration your request or include a fax number to heightened risk to U.S. military forces of which the Authorization may be sent. attack with a biological, chemical, [Docket No. FDA–2015–N–2044] See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION radiological, or nuclear agent or agents; section for electronic access to the (3) a determination by the Secretary of Authorization of Emergency Use of an Authorization. HHS that there is a public health In Vitro Diagnostic Device for emergency, or a significant potential for Detection of Enterovirus D68; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: a public health emergency, that affects, Availability Carmen Maher, Acting Assistant or has a significant potential to affect, Commissioner for Counterterrorism national security or the health and AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Policy and Acting Director, Office of security of U.S. citizens living abroad, HHS. Counterterrorism and Emerging Threats, and that involves a biological, chemical, ACTION: Notice. Food and Drug Administration, 10903 radiological, or nuclear agent or agents, New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. or a disease or condition that may be SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 4347, Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, attributable to such agent or agents; or Administration (FDA) is announcing the 301–796–8510. (4) the identification of a material threat issuance of an Emergency Use SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: by the Secretary of Homeland Security Authorization (EUA) (the Authorization) under section 319F–2 of the Public I. Background for in an vitro diagnostic device for Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. detection of Enterovirus D68 (EV–D68) Section 564 of the FD&C Act (21 247d–6b) sufficient to affect national strains detected in North America in U.S.C. 360bbb–3) as amended by the security or the health and security of 2014. FDA issued this Authorization Project BioShield Act of 2004 (Pub. L. U.S. citizens living abroad. under the Federal Food, Drug, and 108–276) and the Pandemic and All- Once the Secretary of HHS has Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), as Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization declared that circumstances exist requested by the Centers for Disease Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113–5) allows FDA justifying an authorization under Control and Prevention (CDC). The to strengthen the public health section 564 of the FD&C Act, FDA may Authorization contains, among other protections against biological, chemical, authorize the emergency use of a drug, things, conditions on the emergency use nuclear, and radiological agents. Among device, or biological product if the of the authorized in vitro diagnostic other things, section 564 of the FD&C Agency concludes that the statutory device. The Authorization follows the Act allows FDA to authorize the use of criteria are satisfied. Under section February 6, 2015, determination by the an unapproved medical product or an 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act, FDA is Department of Health and Human unapproved use of an approved medical required to publish in the Federal Services (HHS) Secretary that there is a product in certain situations. With this Register a notice of each authorization, significant potential for a public health EUA authority, FDA can help assure and each termination or revocation of an emergency that has a significant that medical countermeasures may be authorization, and an explanation of the potential to affect national security or used in emergencies to diagnose, treat, reasons for the action. Section 564 of the the health and security of U.S. citizens or prevent serious or life-threatening FD&C Act permits FDA to authorize the living abroad and that involves EV–D68. diseases or conditions caused by introduction into interstate commerce of On the basis of such determination, the biological, chemical, nuclear, or a drug, device, or biological product Secretary of HHS also declared on radiological agents when there are no intended for use when the Secretary of February 6, 2015, that circumstances adequate, approved, and available HHS has declared that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of alternatives. exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of in vitro diagnostic Section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act emergency use. Products appropriate for devices for detection of EV–D68 subject provides that, before an EUA may be emergency use may include products to the terms of any authorization issued issued, the Secretary of HHS must and uses that are not approved, cleared, under the FD&C Act. The Authorization, declare that circumstances exist or licensed under sections 505, 510(k), which includes an explanation of the justifying the authorization based on or 515 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355, reasons for issuance, is reprinted in this one of the following grounds: (1) A 360(k), and 360e) or section 351 of the document. determination by the Secretary of PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37626 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
FDA may issue an EUA only if, after into consideration the material threat vitro diagnostics for detection of EV– consultation with the HHS Assistant posed by the agent or agents identified D68, subject to the terms of any Secretary for Preparedness and in a declaration under section authorization issued under section 564 Response, the Director of the National 564(b)(1)(D) of the FD&C Act, if of the FD&C Act. Notice of the Institutes of Health, and the Director of applicable; (3) that there is no adequate, determination and declaration of the CDC (to the extent feasible and approved, and available alternative to Secretary was published in the Federal appropriate given the applicable the product for diagnosing, preventing, Register on February 27, 2015 (80 FR circumstances), FDA 1 concludes: (1) or treating such disease or condition; 10685). On April 24, 2015, CDC That an agent referred to in a and (4) that such other criteria as may requested, and on May 12, 2015, FDA declaration of emergency or threat can be prescribed by regulation are satisfied. issued, an EUA for the CDC EV–D68 cause a serious or life-threatening No other criteria for issuance have 2014 Real-time RT–PCR Assay, subject disease or condition; (2) that, based on been prescribed by regulation under to the terms of the Authorization. the totality of scientific evidence section 564(c)(4) of the FD&C Act. available to FDA, including data from Because the statute is self-executing, III. Electronic Access adequate and well-controlled clinical regulations or guidance are not required An electronic version of this trials, if available, it is reasonable to for FDA to implement the EUA document and the full text of the believe that: (A) The product may be authority. Authorization are available on the effective in diagnosing, treating, or II. EUA Request for an In Vitro Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. preventing (i) such disease or condition; Diagnostic Device for Detection of IV. The Authorization or (ii) a serious or life-threatening EV–D68 disease or condition caused by a Having concluded that the criteria for product authorized under section 564, On February 6, 2015, under section 564(b)(1)(C) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. issuance of the Authorization under approved or cleared under the FD&C section 564(c) of the FD&C Act are met, Act, or licensed under section 351 of the 360bbb–3(b)(1)(C)), the Secretary of HHS determined that there is a FDA has authorized the emergency use PHS Act, for diagnosing, treating, or of an in vitro diagnostic device for preventing such a disease or condition significant potential for a public health emergency that has a significant detection of EV–D68 strains detected in caused by such an agent; and (B) the North America in 2014 subject to the known and potential benefits of the potential to affect national security or the health and security of U.S. citizens terms of the Authorization. The product, when used to diagnose, Authorization in its entirety (not prevent, or treat such disease or living abroad and that involves EV–D68. Also on February 6, 2015, under section including the authorized versions of the condition, outweigh the known and fact sheets and other written materials) potential risks of the product, taking 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act and on the basis of such determination, the follows and provides an explanation of the reasons for its issuance, as required 1 The Secretary of HHS has delegated the Secretary of HHS declared that authority to issue an EUA under section 564 of the circumstances exist justifying the by section 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act: FD&C Act to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs. authorization of emergency use of in BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37627
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Prevention
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN01JY15.005 37628 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Prevention
I. Criteria for Issuance of Autllorization
L a or
2.
3. There is no to the emergency use D68 4
II. Scope of Authorization
Authorized Enterovirus D68 2014 Real~time RT~PCR Assay
under section of the Act
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN01JY15.006 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37629
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN01JY15.007 37630 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices
Prevention
PCR may be effective in the of Act
This EUA cease to be PTTPPTH!t> to the EUA is tenninated under section under Act.
III. Waiver of Certain Requirements
lam rRT-PCR of EUA;
"""'~'"r"~" requirements, including the TP 809.IO(b)(l2). IV. Conditions of Authorization CDC and Any Authorized Distributor(s) the authorized EV-D68 2014 rRT Htu'"""" ... ' as may revised only by CDC in consultation with u•• ..:>,tJ<.IHttwu by CDC. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN01JY15.008 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37631 CDC VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN01JY15.009 37632 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices for Disease Control and Prevention •·urmu~+ the addition of other extraction methods rRT-PCR. Such will be made CDC FDA. the addition of other real-time PCR rRT-PCR. Such concurrence 0. CDC adverse events and to 21 CDC P. S. CDC T. and Promotion the ofthe autno:nzfxt EV-D68 2014 rRT-PCR shall be consistent with the Fact Sheets and "'"'"'"'"~".'as well a.<> the tenns set forth in this EUA and the ")JIJH'-'"'-'''" "'"'"'"'"T" set forth in the Act and FDA and Lit \J'U"IH\J'U<'l fiP<:rri:ntT,!P EV-D68 2014 rRT-PCR shal1 • This test not been FDA cleared or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN01JY15.010 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37633 Dated: June 25, 2015. availability of the guidance entitled information on electronic access to the Leslie Kux, ‘‘Intent to Exempt Certain Unclassified, guidance. Submit written requests for a Associate Commissioner for Policy. Class II, and Class I Reserved Medical single hard copy of the guidance [FR Doc. 2015–16125 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Devices from Premarket Notification document entitled ‘‘Intent to Exempt BILLING CODE 4164–01–C Requirements.’’ This guidance describes Certain Unclassified, Class II, and Class FDA’s intent to exempt certain I Reserved Medical Devices from unclassified medical devices (that FDA Premarket Notification Requirements’’ DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND intends to classify into class I or II), to the Office of the Center Director, HUMAN SERVICES certain class II medical devices, and Guidance and Policy Development, certain class I medical devices from Center for Devices and Radiological Food and Drug Administration premarket notification requirements. Health, Food and Drug Administration, [Docket No. FDA–2014–D–0967] FDA believes the devices identified in 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, this guidance document are sufficiently Rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993– Intent to Exempt Certain Unclassified, well understood and do not require 0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive Class II, and Class I Reserved Medical premarket notification to assure their label to assist that office in processing Devices From Premarket Notification safety and effectiveness. your request. Requirements; Guidance for Industry DATES: Submit either electronic or Submit electronic comments on the and Food and Drug Administration written comments on this guidance at guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Staff; Availability any time. General comments on Agency Submit written comments to the guidance documents are welcome at any AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Division of Dockets Management (HFA– HHS. time. 305), Food and Drug Administration, ACTION: Notice. ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, guidance document is available for MD 20852. Identify comments with the SUMMARY: The Food and Drug download from the Internet. See the docket number found in brackets in the Administration (FDA) is announcing the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for heading of this document. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN01JY15.011 37634 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Operated or Non-Patient); KLX— marketed predicate device. Finally, Angela C. Krueger, Center for Devices Electroglottograph; LZI—Device, CDRH changed the product code listed and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Assistive Listening; LRL—Cushion, in the guidance document for Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Hemorrhoid; KMJ—Lubricant, Patient; Ophthalmic Cameras (21 CFR 886.1120) Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1666, Silver Spring, OYS—Patient Bed with Canopy/ from HKI—Camera, Ophthalmic, AC- MD 20993–0002, 301–796–6380. Restraint (see above); HCD—Cannula, Powered to PJZ—Camera, Ophthalmic, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Ventricular; GYK—Instrument, Shunt AC-Powered, General Use to clarify the System Implantation; LHM—System, type of AC-powered Ophthalmic I. Background Thermographic, Liquid Crystal; KYA— Camera CDRH intended to exempt. In the commitment letter (section 1.G System, Thermographic, Liquid Crystal, CDRH also removed LQX—Device, of the Performance Goals and Nonpowered (Adjunctive Use); NUR— Finger-Sucking (21 CFR 890.3475) from Procedures) that was drafted as part of Pad, Interlabial; and LZW—Monitor, the final guidance because this device the reauthorization process for the Spine Curvature. type is already classified as class I Medical Device User Fee Amendments Additionally, CDRH reviewed the (general controls) and exempt from of 2012, part of the Food and Drug device types (product codes) included premarket notification. Finger-sucking Administration Safety and Innovation in the draft guidance document and devices (LQX) and cranioplasty plates Act (Pub. L. 112–144), FDA committed determined that two device types (GWO) were unintentionally included to identifying low-risk medical devices (product codes) originally proposed in in the draft guidance. to exempt from premarket notification the draft guidance document should not III. Significance of Guidance requirements. This guidance describes be included in the final guidance as FDA’s intent to exempt certain devices for which FDA intends to This guidance is being issued unclassified medical devices (that FDA exempt from premarket notification consistent with FDA’s good guidance intends to classify into class I or II), requirements: FLL—Thermometer, practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). certain class II medical devices, and Electrical, Clinical (21 CFR 880.2910); The guidance represents the current certain class I medical devices (that no and GWO—Plate, Cranioplasty, thinking of the FDA on the Intent to longer meet the ‘‘reserved’’ criteria in Preformed, Alterable (21 CFR 882.5320). Exempt Certain Unclassified, Class II, section 510(l) of the Federal Food, Drug, CDRH determined that premarket and Class I Reserved Medical Devices and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 notification (510(k)) is necessary to from Premarket Notification U.S.C. 360(l))) from premarket assure the safety and effectiveness of Requirements. It does not establish any notification requirements. FDA believes these devices. Notably, the FLL product rights for any person and is not binding the devices identified in this guidance code currently covers thermometers on FDA or the public. You can use an document are sufficiently well alternative approach if it satisfies the understood and do not require 510(k) with a range of technologies and intended uses, including those used to requirements of the applicable statutes notification to assure their safety and and regulations. effectiveness. screen for potential pandemic The draft of this guidance was made contagious diseases. CDRH believes that IV. Electronic Access available in the Federal Register on some thermometer types may be August 1, 2014 (79 FR 44804). The candidates for exemption from Persons interested in obtaining a copy comment period closed on September premarket notification requirements at a of the guidance may do so by 30, 2014. FDA received one comment on later date, but that thermometers should downloading an electronic copy from the draft guidance requesting that first be further categorized by the Internet. A search capability for all devices classified under 21 CFR technology and/or intended use into CDRH guidance documents is available 880.6760 (Protective restraint, product distinct product codes. CDRH is actively at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ code OYS, Patient Bed with Canopy/ reviewing this issue and will further DeviceRegulationandGuidance/ Restraints) be considered for inclusion consider which of the sub-types may be GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. in the guidance document. FDA appropriate to exempt from premarket Guidance documents are also available considered the comment and notification requirements. In addition, at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons determined it was appropriate to add CDRH believes that premarket unable to download an electronic copy this device type to the final guidance. notification (510(k)) is necessary to of ‘‘Intent to Exempt Certain In the process of finalizing the provide a reasonable assurance of safety Unclassified, Class II, and Class I guidance document, the Center for and effectiveness for cranioplasty plates Reserved Medical Devices from Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) (GWO), which are permanent implants Premarket Notification Requirements’’ reviewed additional medical device and may be constructed of polymeric may send an email request to CDRH- product codes not included in the draft materials and/or may be resorbable, [email protected] to receive an guidance and determined that there because FDA must evaluate the material electronic copy of the document. Please were additional device types which are properties and resorption rate in use the document number 1300046 to sufficiently well understood and do not relation to bone healing. CDRH identify the guidance you are require premarket notification (510(k)) recognizes that manufacturers may not requesting. to assure their safety and effectiveness. have submitted a 510(k) for these two V. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 As a result, the following device types device types following publication of (product codes) were added to the final the draft guidance. As a result, CDRH is This guidance refers to previously guidance document: EIB—Syringe, providing such manufacturers 90 days approved collections of information Irrigating (Dental); EWD—Protector, following the publication of this notice found in FDA regulations. These Hearing (Insert); EWE—Protector, to submit a 510(k) for these device collections of information are subject to Hearing (Circumaural); LEZ—Aids, types; however, distribution and review by the Office of Management and Speech Training for the Hearing marketing of such devices must cease if Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Impaired (AC-Powered and Patient- a manufacturer receives an order from Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Contact); LFA—Aids, Speech Training FDA declaring the device to be not 3520). The collections of information in for the Hearing Impaired (Battery- substantially equivalent to any legally 21 CFR part 807, subpart E, have been VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37635 approved under OMB control number Colesville Rd., COLE–14526, Silver section 351(k)(4) of the PHS Act.) 0910–0120. Spring, MD 20993–0002, PRAStaff@ Interchangeable products may be fda.hhs.gov. substituted for the reference product VI. Comments SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In without the intervention of the Interested persons may submit either prescribing health care provider. (See electronic comments regarding this compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed section 351(i)(3) of the PHS Act.) document to http://www.regulations.gov In estimating the information collection of information to OMB for or written comments to the Division of collection burden for 351(k) review and clearance. Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It applications, we reviewed the number is only necessary to send one set of General Licensing Provisions; Section of 351(k) applications FDA has received comments. Identify comments with the 351(k) Biosimilar Applications OMB through fiscal year (FY) 2014, as well as docket number found in brackets in the Control Number 0910–0719—Extension the collection of information regarding heading of this document. Received The Patient Protection and Affordable the general licensing provisions for comments may be seen in the Division Care Act (Affordable Care Act) (Pub. L. biologics license applications under of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. 111–148) contains a subtitle called the section 351(a) of the PHS Act submitted and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and to OMB (approved under OMB control Biologics Price Competition and will be posted to the docket at http:// number 0910–0338). For the Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act), www.regulations.gov. information collection burden for 351(a) which amends the Public Health Service applications, FDA described § 601.2(a) Dated: June 26, 2015. Act (PHS Act) and establishes an (21 CFR 601.2(a)) as requiring a Leslie Kux, abbreviated licensure pathway for manufacturer of a biological product to Associate Commissioner for Policy. biological products shown to be submit an application on forms biosimilar to, or interchangeable with, [FR Doc. 2015–16150 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] prescribed for such purpose with an FDA-licensed biological reference BILLING CODE 4164–01–P accompanying data and information product (See sections 7001 through including certain labeling information 7003 of the Affordable Care Act.) to FDA for approval to market a product DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Section 351(k) of the PHS Act (42 in interstate commerce. FDA also added HUMAN SERVICES U.S.C. 262(k)), added by the BPCI Act, in the burden estimate the container and sets forth the requirements for an Food and Drug Administration package labeling requirements provided application for a proposed biosimilar under §§ 610.60 through 610.65 (21 CFR [Docket No. FDA–2012–N–0129] product and an application or a 610.60 through 610.65). The estimated supplement for a proposed hours per response for § 601.2, and Agency Information Collection interchangeable product. Section 351(k) §§ 610.60 through 610.65, are 860 hours. Activities; Submission for Office of defines biosimilarity to mean ‘‘that the In addition, in submitting a 351(a) Management and Budget Review; biological product is highly similar to application, an applicant completes the Comment Request; General Licensing the reference product notwithstanding Form FDA 356h, ‘‘Application to Market Provisions; Section 351(k) Biosimilar minor differences in clinically inactive a New Drug, Biologic, or an Antibiotic Applications components’’ and that ‘‘there are no Drug for Human Use.’’ The application clinically meaningful differences AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, form serves primarily as a checklist for between the biological product and the HHS. firms to gather and submit certain reference product in terms of the safety, ACTION: Notice. information to FDA. The checklist helps purity, and potency of the product.’’ to ensure that the application is SUMMARY: The Food and Drug (See section 351(i)(2) of the PHS Act.) A complete and contains all the necessary Administration (FDA) is announcing 351(k) application must contain, among information so that delays due to lack of that a proposed collection of other things, information demonstrating information may be eliminated. The information has been submitted to the that the biological product is biosimilar form provides key information to FDA Office of Management and Budget to a reference product based upon data for efficient handling and distribution to (OMB) for review and clearance under derived from analytical studies, animal the appropriate staff for review. The the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. studies, and clinical studies, unless estimated burden hours for biological DATES: Fax written comments on the FDA determines, in its discretion, that product submissions using FDA Form collection of information by July 31, certain studies are unnecessary in a 356h are included under the applicable 2015. 351(k) application. (See section requirements approved under OMB 351(k)(2) of the PHS Act.) To control number 0910–0338. ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on demonstrate interchangeability, an To submit an application seeking the information collection are received, applicant must provide sufficient licensure of a proposed biosimilar OMB recommends that written information to demonstrate product under section 351(k)(2)(A)(i) comments be faxed to the Office of biosimilarity and that the biosimilar and (k)(2)(A)(iii) of the PHS Act, FDA Information and Regulatory Affairs, biological product can be expected to believes that the estimated burden hours OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: produce the same clinical result as the _ would be approximately the same as 202–395–7285, or emailed to oira reference product in any given patient noted under OMB control number [email protected]. All and, if the biosimilar biological product 0910–0338 for a 351(a) application—860 comments should be identified with the is administered more than once to an hours. The burden estimates for seeking OMB control number 0910–0719. Also individual, the risk in terms of safety or licensure of a proposed biosimilar include the FDA docket number found diminished efficacy of alternating or product that meets the standards for in brackets in the heading of this switching between the use of the interchangeability under section document. biosimilar biological product and the 351(k)(2)(B) and (k)(4) would also be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA reference product is not greater than the 860 hours. Until we gain more PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food risk of using the reference product experience with biosimilar applications, and Drug Administration, 8455 without such alternation or switch. (See FDA believes this estimate is VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37636 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices appropriate for 351(k) applications reference product or another biological mode of communication for FDA to because to determine biosimilarity or product. convey to the stakeholders any details interchangeability of a proposed 351(k) Under section 351(k)(2)(B) and (k)(4), on an unnecessary element under a product, the application and the a manufacturer may include information 351(k) application. information submitted is expected to be demonstrating that the biological (Response) FDA expects to issue a comparably as complex and technically product meets the standards for draft guidance, ‘‘Considerations in demanding as a proposed 351(a) interchangeability either in the Demonstrating Interchangeability to a application. FDA may determine, in its application to show biosimilarity or in Reference Product,’’ in 2015. FDA discretion, an element required under a a supplement to such an application. issued a draft guidance, ‘‘Formal 351(k) application to be unnecessary to The information submitted to meet the Meetings Between the FDA and support licensure of a biosimilar or standard for interchangeability must Biosimilar Biological Product Sponsors interchangeable product. In those cases, show that: (1) The biological product is or Applicants,’’ in 2013, which provides the number of hours per response may biosimilar to the reference product and recommendations to industry on formal be less than the hours estimated. can be expected to produce the same meetings between FDA and biosimilar A summary of the information clinical result as the reference product biological product sponsors or collection requirements in the in any given patient; and (2) for a applicants. submission of a 351(k) application as biological product that is administered (Comment) Another comment described under the BPCI Act follows: more than once to an individual, the requested FDA provide clarity on the Section 351(k)(2)(A)(i) requires risk in terms of safety or diminished factors for consideration in assessing manufactures of 351(k) products to efficacy of alternating or switching whether a proposed biosimilar is highly submit an application for FDA review between use of the biological product similar to a reference product to support and licensure before marketing a and the reference product is not greater a demonstration of biosimilarity— biosimilar product. An application than the risk of using the reference specifically, which product quality submitted under this section shall product without such alternation or attributes are considered critical to match (and how much difference is include information demonstrating that: switch. In addition to the collection of allowed). • The biological product is biosimilar information regarding the submission of (Response) FDA issued the final to a reference product based upon data a 351(k) application for a proposed guidance, ‘‘Quality Considerations in derived from analytical studies, animal biosimilar or interchangeable biological Demonstrating Biosimilarity of a studies (including toxicity), and a product, section 351(l) of the BPCI Act Therapeutic Protein Product to a clinical study or studies (including establishes procedures for identifying Reference Product,’’ in April 2015. This immunogenicity and pharmacokinetics and resolving patent disputes involving final guidance provides further or pharmacodynamics). The Secretary of applications submitted under section clarification on factors for consideration Health and Human Services (the 351(k) of the PHS Act. The burden in assessing whether products are Secretary) may determine that any of estimates for the patent provisions highly similar, including expression these elements is unnecessary; system, manufacturing process, • under section 351(l)(6)(C) of the BPCI The biological product and Act are included in table 1 of this impurities, reference product, and reference product utilize the same document and are based on the reference standards. mechanism or mechanisms of action for estimated number of 351(k) biosimilar (Comment) A third comment the condition or conditions of use respondents. Based on similar reporting supported approval and post-market prescribed, recommended, or suggested requirements, FDA estimates this policies that would allow healthcare in the proposed labeling, but only to the notification will take 2 hours. A practitioners to make informative extent the mechanism or mechanisms of summary of the collection of decisions when treating patients. action are known for the reference information requirements under section (Response) FDA issued the final product; 351(l)(6)(C) follows: guidance, ‘‘Scientific Considerations in • The condition or conditions of use Not later than 30 days after a Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a prescribed, recommended, or suggested complaint from the reference product Reference Product,’’ in April 2015. This in the labeling proposed for the sponsor is served to a 351(k) applicant guidance discusses a stepwise approach biological product have been previously in an action for patent infringement to demonstrating biosimilarity, the approved for the reference product; described under 351(l)(6), section totality-of-the-evidence approach that • The route of administration, the 351(l)(6)(C) requires that the 351(k) FDA will use to review applications for dosage form, and the strength of the applicant provide the Secretary with biosimilar products, as well as general biological product are the same as those notice and a copy of such complaint. scientific principles in conducting of the reference product; and The Secretary shall publish in the comparative structural and functional • The facility in which the biological Federal Register notice any complaint analyses, animal testing, and clinical product is manufactured, processed, received under section 351(l)(6)(C)(i). studies (including human packed, or held meets standards In the Federal Register of February 3, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic designed to assure that the biological 2015 (80 FR 5761), FDA published a 60- studies, clinical immunogenicity product continues to be safe, pure, and day notice requesting public comment assessment, and comparative clinical potent. on the proposed collection of studies). The guidance also provides Section 351(k)(2)(A)(iii) requires the information. FDA received three information on postmarketing safety application to include publicly available comments. monitoring considerations. information regarding the Secretary’s (Comment) One comment requested The comment also requested FDA previous determination that the FDA provide clarity and interpretation consider adding as part of a biosimilar reference product is safe, pure, and regarding the standards for or interchangeable product’s labeling potent. The application may include interchangeability (sections 351(k)(2)(B) instruction guidance on third party any additional information in support of and (k)(4) of the PHS Act). The substitution of biosimilars without the the application, including publicly comment also sought clarification knowledge of the healthcare provider. available information with respect to the regarding the timelines and the chosen As noted by the comment, these issues VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37637 are also subject to state laws and Based on the number of 351(k) into account, among other things, the regulations. Under the BPCI Act, a applications FDA received through FY expiration dates of patents that relate to biological product that has been 2014, we estimate that we will receive potential reference products and general approved as an ‘‘interchangeable’’ may approximately five 351(k) applications market interest in biological products be substituted for the reference product annually. The number of respondents that could be candidates for 351(k) without the intervention of the health submitting 351(k) applications is based applications. on the number of sponsors submitting care provider who prescribed the FDA estimates the burden of this reference product. 351(k) applications through FY 2014. In making these estimates, FDA has taken collection of information as follows: TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1 Number of Average 351(k) Applications (42 U.S.C. 262(k)) Number of responses per Total annual burden per Total hours respondents respondent responses response 351(k)(2)(A)(i) and 351(k)(2)(A)(iii) Biosimilar Product Ap- plications ...... 5 1 5 860 4,300 351(k)(2)(B) and (k)(4) Interchangeable Product Applica- tions or Supplements ...... 2 1 2 860 1,720 351(l)(6)(C) Patent Infringement Notifications ...... 5 1 5 2 10 Total ...... 6,030 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Dated: June 25, 2015. Division of Policy and Shortage administered by the Centers for Leslie Kux, Designation, Bureau of Health Medicare and Medicaid Services, Associate Commissioner for Policy. Workforce, Health Resources and certain qualified providers in [FR Doc. 2015–16128 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Services Administration, Mail Stop geographic area HPSAs are eligible for BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 11SWH03, Parklawn Building, 5600 increased levels of Medicare Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland reimbursement. 20857, (301) 594–5168. Development of the Designation and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Withdrawal Lists HUMAN SERVICES Background Criteria for designating HPSAs were Health Resources and Services Section 332 of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. published as final regulations (42 CFR Administration 254e, provides that the Secretary of HHS part 5) in 1980. Criteria then were shall designate HPSAs based on criteria defined for each of seven health Lists of Designated Primary Medical established by regulation. HPSAs are professional types (primary medical Care, Mental Health, and Dental Health defined in section 332 to include (1) care, dental, psychiatric, vision care, Professional Shortage Areas urban and rural geographic areas with podiatric, pharmacy, and veterinary shortages of health professionals, (2) AGENCY: care). The criteria for correctional Health Resources and Services population groups with such shortages, facility HPSAs were revised and Administration, HHS. and (3) facilities with such shortages. published on March 2, 1989 (54 FR ACTION: Notice. Section 332 further requires that the 8735). The criteria for psychiatric Secretary annually publish a list of the HPSAs were expanded to mental health SUMMARY: This notice advises the public designated geographic areas, population of the published lists of all geographic groups, and facilities. The lists of HPSAs on January 22, 1992 (57 FR areas, population groups, and facilities HPSAs are to be reviewed at least 2473). Currently funded PHS Act designated as primary medical care, annually and revised as necessary. programs use only the primary medical mental health, and dental health HRSA’s Bureau of Health Workforce care, mental health, or dental HPSA professional shortage areas (HPSAs) as (BHW) has the responsibility for designations. of May 29, 2015, available on the Health designating and updating HPSAs. Individual requests for designation or Resources and Services Administration Public or private nonprofit entities are withdrawal of a particular geographic (HRSA) Web site at http:// eligible to apply for assignment of area, population group, or a facility as www.hrsa.gov/shortage/. HPSAs are National Health Service Corps (NHSC) a HPSA are received and reviewed designated or withdrawn by the personnel to provide primary care, continuously by BHW. The majority of Secretary of Health and Human Services mental, or dental health services in or the requests come from the Primary Care (HHS) under the authority of section to these HPSAs. NHSC health Offices (PCO) in the State Health 332 of the Public Health Service (PHS) professionals with a service obligation Departments, who have access to the on- Act and 42 CFR part 5. may enter into service agreements to line application and review system. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: serve only in federally designated Requests that come from other sources Requests for further information on the HPSAs. Entities with clinical training are referred to the PCOs for their review HPSA designations listed on the HRSA sites located in HPSAs are eligible to and concurrence. In addition, interested Web site and requests for additional receive priority for certain residency parties, including the Governor, the designations, withdrawals, or training program grants administered by State Primary Care Association and state reapplication for designations should be the BHW. Many other federal programs professional associations are notified of submitted to Kae Brickerd, Ph.D., also utilize HPSA designations. For each request submitted for their Director, Shortage Designation Branch, example, under authorities comments and recommendations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37638 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Annually, lists of designated HPSAs not subject to update requirements. of the HPSA list and are currently are made available to all PCOs, state Each list of designated HPSAs (primary included in the daily updates posted on medical and dental societies and others, medical care, mental health, and dental) the HRSA Web site at http:// with a request to review and update the is arranged by state. Within each state, www.hrsa.gov/shortage/find.html. data on which the designations are the list is presented by county. If only Any designated HPSA listed on the based. Emphasis is placed on updating a portion (or portions) of a county is HRSA Web site is subject to withdrawal those designations that are more than 3 (are) designated, or if the county is part from designation if new information years old or where significant changes of a larger designated service area, or if received and confirmed by HRSA relevant to the designation criteria have a population group residing in the indicates that the relevant data for the occurred. county or a facility located in the county area involved have significantly Recommendations for possible has been designated, the name of the changed since its designation. The additions, continuations, revisions, or service area, population group, or effective date of such a withdrawal will withdrawals from a HPSA list are facility involved is listed under the be the next publication of a notice reviewed by BHW, and the review county name. Counties that have a regarding this list in the Federal findings are provided by letter to the whole county geographic HPSA are Register. agency or individual requesting action indicated by the ‘‘Entire county HPSA’’ All requests for new designations, or providing data, with copies to other notation following the county name. updates, or withdrawals should be interested organizations and Further details on the snapshot of based on the relevant criteria in individuals. These letters constitute the HPSAs listed can be found on the HRSA regulations published at 42 CFR part 5. official notice of designation as a HPSA, Web site at http://www.hrsa.gov/ Electronic Access Address rejection of recommendations for HPSA shortage/. designation, revision of a HPSA In addition to the specific listings The complete list of HPSAs designation, and/or advance notice of included in this notice, all Indian Tribes designated as of May 29, 2015, are pending withdrawals from the HPSA that meet the definition of such Tribes available on the HRSA Web site at list. Designations (or revisions of in the Indian Health Care Improvement http://www.hrsa.gov/shortage/. designations) are effective as of the date Act of 1976, 25 U.S.C. 1603(d), are Frequently updated information on on the notification letter from BHW. automatically designated as population HPSAs is also available at http:// Proposed withdrawals become effective groups with primary medical care and datawarehouse.hrsa.gov. only after interested parties in the area dental health professional shortages. Dated: June 25, 2015. affected have been afforded the The Health Care Safety Net James Macrae, opportunity to submit additional Amendments of 2002 also made the Acting Administrator. information to BHW in support of its following entities eligible for automatic continued or revised designation. If no facility HPSA designations: All federally [FR Doc. 2015–16168 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] new data are submitted, or if BHW qualified health centers (FQHCs) and BILLING CODE 4165–15–P review confirms the proposed rural health clinics that offer services withdrawal, the withdrawal becomes regardless of ability to pay. These DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND effective upon publication of the lists of entities include: FQHCs funded under HUMAN SERVICES designated HPSAs in the Federal section 330 of the PHS Act, FQHC Look- Register. In addition, lists of HPSAs are Alikes, and Tribal and urban Indian Health Resources and Services updated daily on the HRSA Web site at clinics operating under the Indian Self- Administration http://www.hrsa.gov/shortage/, so that Determination and Education Act of interested parties can access the most 1975 (25 U.S.C. 450) or the Indian Agency Information Collection accurate and timely information. Health Care Improvement Act. Many, Activities: Submission to OMB for but not all, of these entities are included Publication and Format of Lists Review and Approval; Public Comment on this listing. Exclusion from this list Request Due to the large volume of does not exclude them from HPSA designations, a printed version of the designation; any facilities eligible for AGENCY: Health Resources and Services list is no longer distributed. This notice automatic designation will be included Administration, HHS. serves to inform the public of the in the database as they are identified. ACTION: Notice. availability of the complete listings of designated HPSA on the HRSA Web Future Updates of Lists of Designated SUMMARY: In compliance with Section site. The three lists (primary medical HPSAs 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork care, mental health, and dental) of The lists of HPSAs on the HRSA Web Reduction Act of 1995, the Health designated HPSAs are available at a link site consist of all those that were Resources and Services Administration on the HRSA Web site at http:// designated as of May 29, 2015. It should (HRSA) has submitted an Information www.hrsa.gov/shortage/ and include a be noted that HPSAs are currently Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of snapshot of all geographic areas, updated on an ongoing basis based on Management and Budget (OMB) for population groups, and facilities that the identification of new areas, review and approval. Comments were designated HPSAs as of May 29, population groups, facilities, and sites submitted during the first public review 2015. This notice incorporates the most that meet the eligibility criteria or that of this ICR will be provided to OMB. recent annual reviews of designated no longer meet eligibility criteria and/or OMB will accept further comments from HPSAs and supersedes the HPSA lists are being replaced by another type of the public during the review and published in the Federal Register on designation. As such, additional HPSAs approval period. June 25, 2014 (Federal Register/Vol. 79, may have been designated by letter DATES: Comments on this ICR should be No. 122/Wednesday, June 25, 2014/ since that date. The appropriate received no later than July 31, 2015. Notices 36075). The lists also include agencies and individuals have been or ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, automatic facility HPSAs, designated as will be notified of these actions by including the Information Collection a result of the Health Care Safety Net letter. These newly designated HPSAs Request Title, to the desk officer for Amendments of 2002 (Pub. L. 107–251), will be included in the next publication HRSA, either by email to OIRA_ VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37639 [email protected] or by fax to radiogenic diseases and the importance Compensation Act programs; and (f) 202–395–5806. of early detection; screening eligible program outreach and education FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To individuals for cancer and other activities. These measures will speak to request a copy of the clearance requests radiogenic diseases; providing the Office’s progress toward meeting the submitted to OMB for review, email the appropriate referrals for medical goals set. A 60-day Federal Register HRSA Information Collection Clearance treatment; and facilitating Notice was published in 80 FR 9268 Officer at [email protected] or call documentation of Radiation Exposure (February 20, 2015). There were no (301) 443–1984. Compensation Act (RECA) claims. comments. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Need and Proposed Use of the Likely Respondents: RESEP award Information Collection Request Title: Information: For this program, recipients. Radiation Exposure Screening and performance measures were drafted to Burden Statement: Burden in this Education Program provide data useful to the program and context means the time expended by OMB No.: 0915-xxxx—NEW. to enable HRSA to provide aggregate persons to generate, maintain, retain, Abstract: The Radiation Exposure program data required by Congress disclose or provide the information Screening and Education Program under the Government Performance and requested. This includes the time (RESEP) is authorized by Section 417C Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 (Pub. L. needed to review instructions; to of the Public Health Service Act, Part C 103–62). These measures cover the develop, acquire, install and utilize of Title IV, Public Law 106–245 (42 principal topic areas of interest to the technology and systems for the purpose U.S.C. 285(a)-9). The purpose of RESEP Federal Office of Rural Health Policy, of collecting, validating and verifying is to assist individuals who live (or including: (a) Demographics for RESEP information, processing and lived) in areas where U.S. nuclear medical user patient population; (b) maintaining information, and disclosing weapons testing occurred and who are medical screening activities for cancers and providing information; to train diagnosed with cancer and other and other radiogenic diseases; (c) personnel and to be able to respond to radiogenic diseases caused by exposure exposure and presentation types for a collection of information; to search to nuclear fallout or nuclear materials eligible radiogenic malignant and non- data sources; to complete and review such as uranium. RESEP funds support malignant diseases; (d) referrals for the collection of information; and to eligible health care organizations in appropriate medical treatment; (e) transmit or otherwise disclose the implementing cancer screening eligibility counseling and referral information. The total annual burden programs; developing education assistance for the RECA and Energy hours estimated for this ICR are programs; disseminating information on Employees Occupational Illness summarized in the table below. TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN—HOURS Average bur- Number of Number of Total den per re- Total burden Form name respondents responses per responses sponse hours respondent (in hours) Radiation Exposure Screening and Education Program Performance Measures ...... 42 1 42 24 1,008 Total ...... 42 1 42 24 1,008 Jackie Painter, Services Administration (HRSA). Planning, Analysis and Evaluation Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat. Specifically, this notice: (1) Transfers (OPAE), Office of External Engagement [FR Doc. 2015–16136 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] the border health function from the (RA57); and (2) updates the functional BILLING CODE 4165–15–P Federal Office of Rural Health Policy, statement for the FOHRP, Office of the Office of the Associate Administrator Associate Administrator (RH). (RH) to the Office of Planning, Analysis DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND and Evaluation, Office of External Office of the Associate Administrator HUMAN SERVICES Engagement (RA57); and (2) updates the (RH) functional statement for the Federal The Federal Office of Rural Health Health Resources and Services Office of Rural Health Policy, Office of Policy (FORHP) is responsible for the Administration the Associate Administrator (RH) and overall leadership and management of the Office of Planning, Analysis and the office. FORHP serves as a focal point Statement of Organization, Functions Evaluation, Office of External and Delegations of Authority within the Department of Health and Engagement (RA57). Human Services (HHS) for rural health- This notice amends Part R of the Chapter RH—Federal Office of Rural related issues and as a principal source Statement of Organization, Functions Health Policy of advice to the Secretary for and Delegations of Authority of the coordinating efforts to strengthen and Department of Health and Human Section RH–20, Functions improve the delivery of health services Services (HHS), Health Resources and This notice reflects organizational to populations in the nation’s rural Services Administration (HRSA) (60 FR changes within the Federal Office of areas. FORHP provides leadership 56605, as amended November 6, 1995; Rural Health Policy. Specifically: (1) within HHS and with stakeholders in as last amended at 80 FR 3610 dated Transfers the border health function providing information and counsel January 23, 2015). from the Federal Office of Rural Health related to access to, and financing and This notice reflects organizational Policy (FORHP), Office of the Associate quality of, health care to rural changes in the Health Resources and Administrator (RH) to the Office of populations. Specifically, the Office of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37640 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices the Associate Administrator: (1) Association of State and Territorial Authority: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b). Provides staff support to the National Health Officials, National Association of 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C). Advisory Committee on Rural Health Counties, and National Association of On May 21, 2015, as provided for and Human Services; (2) stimulates and County and City Health Officials; (5) under 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C), the coordinates interaction on rural health interacts with various commissions Secretary of HHS designated the activities and programs in the Agency, such as the Delta Regional Authority, following class of employees as an Department and with other federal Appalachian Regional Commission, and addition to the SEC: agencies; (3) establishes and maintains a on the Denali Commission; (6) monitors HRSA’s border health activities and All Atomic Weapons Employer employees resource center for the collection and who worked for Dow Chemical Company in dissemination of the latest information investments to promote collaboration Pittsburg, California, from October 1, 1947, and research findings related to the and improve health care access to those through June 30, 1957, for a number of work delivery of health services in rural areas; living along the U.S.-Mexico border; (7) days aggregating at least 250 work days, (4) ensures successful dissemination of serves as the primary liaison to occurring either solely under this appropriate information technology Department intergovernmental staff; and employment or in combination with work advances, such as electronic health (8) serves as the Agency liaison to days within the parameters established for records systems; (5) monitors the health manage and coordinate study one or more other classes of employees information technology policy and engagements with the Government included in the Special Exposure Cohort. activities of other HHS components for Accountability Office and the HHS This designation became effective on useful application in rural areas; (6) Office of the Inspector General, Office of June 20, 2015. Therefore, beginning on provides overall direction and Evaluation and Inspections . June 20, 2015, members of this class of leadership over the management of Delegations of Authority employees, defined as reported in this nationwide community-based rural notice, became members of the SEC. All delegations of authority and re- health grants programs; (7) provides John Howard, overall direction and leadership over delegations of authority made to HRSA officials that were in effect immediately Director, National Institute for Occupational the management of a program of state Safety and Health. grants which supports collaboration prior to this reorganization, and that are [FR Doc. 2015–16276 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] within state offices of rural health; (8) consistent with this reorganization, provides overall direction and shall continue in effect pending further BILLING CODE 4163–19–P leadership over the management of re-delegation. This reorganization is effective upon programs to advance the use of date of signature. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND telehealth and coordination of health HUMAN SERVICES information technology; and (9) Dated: June 19, 2015. provides overall direction and James Macrae, Meeting of the Advisory Committee on leadership over the office’s Acting Administrator. Minority Health administrative and management [FR Doc. 2015–16169 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] AGENCY functions. BILLING CODE 4165–15–P : Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Chapter RA5—Office of Planning, Office of Minority Health. Analysis and Evaluation DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ACTION: Notice of meeting. Section RA5–20, Functions HUMAN SERVICES SUMMARY: As stipulated by the Federal This notice reflects organizational Final Effect of Designation of a Class Advisory Committee Act, the changes within the Office of Planning, of Employees for Addition to the Department of Health and Human Analysis and Evaluation. Specifically: Special Exposure Cohort Services (DHHS) is hereby giving notice (1) Transfers the border health function that the Advisory Committee on from the Federal Office of Rural Health AGENCY: National Institute for Minority Health (ACMH) will hold a Policy (FORHP), Office of the Associate Occupational Safety and Health meeting. This meeting will be open to Administrator (RH) to the Office of (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control the public. Preregistration is required Planning, Analysis and Evaluation and Prevention, Department of Health for both public attendance and (OPAE), Office of External Engagement and Human Services (HHS). comment. Any individual who wishes (RA57); and (2) updates the functional ACTION: Notice. to attend the meetings and/or statement for the OPAE, Office of participate in the public comment External Engagement (RA57). SUMMARY: HHS gives notice concerning the final effect of the HHS decision to session should email OMH–ACMH@ Office of External Engagement (RA57) designate a class of employees from the hhs.gov. (1) Serves as the principal Agency Dow Chemical Company in Pittsburg, DATES: The meeting will be held on resource for facilitating external California, as an addition to the Special Tuesday, July 21, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. engagement; (2) coordinates the Exposure Cohort (SEC) under the Energy to 5:00 p.m. and on Wednesday, July 22, Agency’s intergovernmental activities; Employees Occupational Illness 2015, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. (3) provides the Administrator with a Compensation Program Act of 2000. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at single point of contact on all activities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the Omni Shoreham Hotel, 2500 Calvert related to important state and local Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Director, Division St. NW., Washington, DC 20008. government, stakeholder association, of Compensation Analysis and Support, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. and interest group activities; (4) NIOSH, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, MS C– Rashida Dorsey, Designated Federal coordinates Agency cross-Bureau 46, Cincinnati, OH 45226–1938, Officer, ACMH; Tower Building, 1101 cooperative agreements and activities Telephone 877–222–7570. Information Wootton Parkway, Suite 600, Rockville, with organizations such as the National requests can also be submitted by email Maryland 20852. Phone: 240–453–8222, Governors Association, National to [email protected]. Fax: 240–453–8223; OMH–ACMH@ Conference of State Legislature, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: hhs.gov VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37641 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Grand Junction Facilities site in Grand FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: accordance with Public Law 105–392, Junction, Colorado, as an addition to the Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Director, Division the ACMH was established to provide Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) under of Compensation Analysis and Support, advice to the Deputy Assistant Secretary the Energy Employees Occupational NIOSH, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, MS C– for Minority Health in improving the Illness Compensation Program Act of 46, Cincinnati, OH 45226–1938, health of each racial and ethnic 2000. Telephone 877–222–7570. Information minority group and on the development requests can also be submitted by email FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of goals and specific program activities Stuart L. Hinnefeld, Director, Division to [email protected]. of the Office of Minority Health. of Compensation Analysis and Support, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Topics to be discussed during the NIOSH, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, MS C– Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b). 42 U.S.C. meeting will include strategies to 46, Cincinnati, OH 45226–1938, 7384l(14)(C). improve the health of racial and ethnic Telephone 877–222–7570. Information On May 20, 2015, as provided for minority populations through the requests can also be submitted by email under 42 U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C), the development of health policies and to [email protected]. Secretary of HHS designated the programs that will help eliminate health SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: following class of employees as an disparities, as well as other related addition to the SEC: issues. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7384q(b). 42 Public attendance at this meeting is U.S.C. 7384l(14)(C). On May 20, 2015, All employees of Department of Energy limited to space available. Individuals as provided for under 42 U.S.C. contractors and subcontractors (excluding employees of the following Hanford prime who plan to attend and need special 7384l(14)(C), the Secretary of HHS designated the following class of contractors during the specified time periods: assistance, such as sign language Battelle Memorial Institute, January 1, 1984, interpretation or other reasonable employees as an addition to the SEC: through December 31, 1990; Rockwell accommodations, should notify the All employees of the Department of Hanford Operations, January 1, 1984, through designated contact person at least Energy, its predecessor agencies, and its June 28, 1987; Boeing Computer Services fourteen (14) business days prior to the contractors and subcontractors who worked Richland, January 1, 1984, through June 28, meeting. Members of the public will at the Grand Junction Facilities site in Grand 1987; UNC Nuclear Industries, January 1, have an opportunity to provide Junction, Colorado, during the period from 1984, through June 28, 1987; Westinghouse comments at the meeting. Public February 1, 1975, through December 31, Hanford Company, January 1, 1984, through December 31, 1990; and Hanford comments will be limited to three 1985, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring either Environmental Health Foundation, January 1, minutes per speaker. Individuals who solely under this employment or in 1984, through December 31, 1990), who would like to submit written statements combination with work days within the worked at the Hanford site in Richland, should mail or fax their comments to parameters established for one or more other Washington, during the period from January the Office of Minority Health at least classes of employees in the Special Exposure 1, 1984, through December 31, 1990, for a seven (7) business days prior to the Cohort. number of work days aggregating at least 250 meeting. Any members of the public work days, occurring either solely under this This designation became effective on employment, or in combination with work who wish to have printed material June 19, 2015. Therefore, beginning on distributed to ACMH committee days within the parameters established for June 19, 2015, members of this class of one or more other classes of employees members should submit their materials employees, defined as reported in this included in the Special Exposure Cohort. to the Designated Federal Officer, notice, became members of the SEC. ACMH, Tower Building, 1101 Wootton This designation became effective on Parkway, Suite 600, Rockville, John Howard, June 21, 2015. Therefore, beginning on Maryland 20852, prior to close of Director, National Institute for Occupational June 21, 2015, members of this class of business on Tuesday, July 14, 2015. Safety and Health. employees, defined as reported in this notice, became members of the SEC. Dated: June 23, 2015. [FR Doc. 2015–16268 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Rashida Dorsey, BILLING CODE 4163–19–P John Howard, Designated Federal Officer, ACMH, Office of Director, National Institute for Occupational Minority Health, U.S. Department of Health Safety and Health. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND and Human Services. [FR Doc. 2015–16277 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] HUMAN SERVICES [FR Doc. 2015–16195 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163–19–P BILLING CODE 4150–29–P Final Effect of Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition to the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Special Exposure Cohort DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health National Institutes of Health Final Effect of Designation of a Class (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control Center for Scientific Review; Notice of of Employees for Addition to the and Prevention, Department of Health Closed Meetings Special Exposure Cohort and Human Services (HHS). AGENCY: National Institute for ACTION: Notice. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Occupational Safety and Health Federal Advisory Committee Act, as (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control SUMMARY: HHS gives notice concerning amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is and Prevention, Department of Health the final effect of the HHS decision to hereby given of the following meetings. and Human Services (HHS). designate a class of employees from the The meetings will be closed to the ACTION: Notice. Hanford site in Richland, Washington, public in accordance with the as an addition to the Special Exposure provisions set forth in sections SUMMARY: HHS gives notice concerning Cohort (SEC) under the Energy 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., the final effect of the HHS decision to Employees Occupational Illness as amended. The grant applications and designate a class of employees from the Compensation Program Act of 2000. the discussions could disclose VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37642 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices confidential trade secrets or commercial Name of Committee: Center for Scientific IITF will be omitted from subsequent property such as patentable material, Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member lists until such time as it is restored to and personal information concerning Conflict: Cancer Immunopathology and full certification under the Mandatory individuals associated with the grant Immunotherapy. Guidelines. Date: July 28, 2015. If any laboratory or IITF has applications, the disclosure of which Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Agenda: To review and evaluate grant withdrawn from the HHS National invasion of personal privacy. applications. Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) during the past month, it will be listed Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel; Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, at the end and will be omitted from the Metabolomics Core for the Undiagnosed (Telephone Conference Call). monthly listing thereafter. Diseases Network. Contact Person: Sharon K Gubanich, Ph.D., This notice is also available on the Date: July 14–15, 2015. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Internet at http://www.samhsa.gov/ Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Scientific Review, National Institutes of workplace. Agenda: To review and evaluate Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6195D, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: cooperative agreement applications. MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408– Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 9512, [email protected]. Giselle Hersh, Division of Workplace Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs, SAMHSA/CSAP, Room 7– (Virtual Meeting). Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 1051, One Choke Cherry Road, Contact Person: Rolf Jakobi, Ph.D., 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 240–276– Scientific Review Officer, Center for 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, 2600 (voice), 240–276–2610 (fax). Scientific Review, National Institutes of 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6187, Institutes of Health, HHS) Mandatory Guidelines were initially MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–495– developed in accordance with Executive 1718, [email protected]. Dated: June 25, 2015. Carolyn Baum, Order 12564 and section 503 of Public Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Law 100–71. The ‘‘Mandatory Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA Panel: Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Molecular and Cellular Substrates of Committee Policy. Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Complex Brain Disorders. [FR Doc. 2015–16063 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Testing Programs,’’ as amended in the revisions listed above, requires strict Date: July 24, 2015. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. standards that laboratories and IITFs Agenda: To review and evaluate grant must meet in order to conduct drug and applications. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND specimen validity tests on urine Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase HUMAN SERVICES specimens for federal agencies. Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW., To become certified, an applicant Washington, DC 20015. Substance Abuse and Mental Health laboratory or IITF must undergo three Contact Person: Deborah L Lewis, Ph.D., Services Administration rounds of performance testing plus an Scientific Review Officer, Center for on-site inspection. To maintain that Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4183, Current List of HHS-Certified certification, a laboratory or IITF must MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–408– Laboratories and Instrumented Initial participate in a quarterly performance 9129, [email protected]. Testing Facilities Which Meet Minimum testing program plus undergo periodic, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Standards To Engage in Urine Drug on-site inspections. Review Special Emphasis Panel; National Testing for Federal Agencies Laboratories and IITFs in the Primate Research Centers (P51) Revision applicant stage of certification are not to AGENCY: Substance Abuse and Mental Application. be considered as meeting the minimum Date: July 27, 2015. Health Services Administration, HHS. requirements described in the HHS Time: 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. ACTION: Notice. Mandatory Guidelines. A HHS-certified Agenda: To review and evaluate grant laboratory or IITF must have its letter of SUMMARY: The Department of Health and applications. certification from HHS/SAMHSA Human Services (HHS) notifies federal Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 (formerly: HHS/NIDA), which attests agencies of the laboratories and Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, that it has met minimum standards. (Telephone Conference Call). Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities Contact Person: Biao Tian, Ph.D., Scientific In accordance with the Mandatory (IITF) currently certified to meet the Guidelines dated November 25, 2008 Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, standards of the Mandatory Guidelines National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge (73 FR 71858), the following HHS- for Federal Workplace Drug Testing certified laboratories and IITFs meet the Drive, Room 3089B, MSC 7848, Bethesda, Programs (Mandatory Guidelines). The MD 20892, (301) 402–4411, tianbi@ minimum standards to conduct drug csr.nih.gov. Mandatory Guidelines were first and specimen validity tests on urine published in the Federal Register on Name of Committee: Center for Scientific specimens: Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11970), and Conflict: Cognition and Perception. subsequently revised in the Federal HHS-Certified Instrumented Initial Date: July 28–29, 2015. Register on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908); Testing Facilities Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118); Dynacare, 6628 50th Street NW., Agenda: To review and evaluate grant April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644); November Edmonton, AB Canada T6B 2N7, 780– applications. 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858); December 10, 784–1190, (Formerly: Gamma- Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 2008 (73 FR 75122); and on April 30, Dynacare Medical Laboratories). Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 2010 (75 FR 22809). (Virtual Meeting). A notice listing all currently HHS- HHS-Certified Laboratories Contact Person: Maribeth Champoux, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for certified laboratories and IITFs is ACM Medical Laboratory, Inc., 160 Scientific Review, National Institutes of published in the Federal Register Elmgrove Park, Rochester, NY 14624, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3170, during the first week of each month. If 585–429–2264. MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594– any laboratory or IITF certification is Aegis Analytical Laboratories, Inc., 345 3163, [email protected]. suspended or revoked, the laboratory or Hill Ave., Nashville, TN 37210, 615– VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37643 255–2400, (Formerly: Aegis Sciences Incorporated; LabOne, Inc.; Center for through that program were accredited to Corporation, Aegis Analytical Laboratory Services, a Division of conduct forensic urine drug testing as Laboratories, Inc., Aegis Analytical LabOne, Inc.). required by U.S. Department of Laboratories). MedTox Laboratories, Inc., 402 W. Transportation (DOT) regulations. As of that Alere Toxicology Services, 1111 Newton County Road D, St. Paul, MN 55112, date, the certification of those accredited Canadian laboratories will continue under St., Gretna, LA 70053, 504–361–8989/ 651–636–7466/800–832–3244. DOT authority. The responsibility for 800–433–3823, (Formerly: Kroll MetroLab-Legacy Laboratory Services, conducting quarterly performance testing Laboratory Specialists, Inc., 1225 NE 2nd Ave., Portland, OR plus periodic on-site inspections of those Laboratory Specialists, Inc.). 97232, 503–413–5295/800–950–5295. LAPSA-accredited laboratories was Alere Toxicology Services, 450 Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical transferred to the U.S. HHS, with the HHS’ Southlake Blvd., Richmond, VA Center, Forensic Toxicology NLCP contractor continuing to have an active 23236, 804–378–9130, (Formerly: Laboratory, 1 Veterans Drive, role in the performance testing and Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., Minneapolis, MN 55417, 612–725– laboratory inspection processes. Other Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc.; 2088. Canadian laboratories wishing to be Kroll Scientific Testing Laboratories, National Toxicology Laboratories, Inc., considered for the NLCP may apply directly to the NLCP contractor just as U.S. Inc.). 1100 California Ave., Bakersfield, CA laboratories do. Baptist Medical Center-Toxicology 93304, 661–322–4250/800–350–3515. Upon finding a Canadian laboratory to be Laboratory, 11401 I–30, Little Rock, One Source Toxicology Laboratory, Inc., qualified, HHS will recommend that DOT AR 72209–7056, 501–202–2783, 1213 Genoa-Red Bluff, Pasadena, TX certify the laboratory (Federal Register, July (Formerly: Forensic Toxicology 77504, 888–747–3774, (Formerly: 16, 1996) as meeting the minimum standards Laboratory Baptist Medical Center). University of Texas Medical Branch, of the Mandatory Guidelines published in the Clinical Reference Lab, 8433 Quivira Clinical Chemistry Division; UTMB Federal Register on April 30, 2010 (75 FR Road, Lenexa, KS 66215–2802, 800– Pathology-Toxicology Laboratory). 22809). After receiving DOT certification, the 445–6917. Pacific Toxicology Laboratories, 9348 laboratory will be included in the monthly DrugScan, Inc., 200 Precision Road, list of HHS-certified laboratories and DeSoto Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, participate in the NLCP certification Suite 200, Horsham, PA 19044, 800– 800–328–6942, (Formerly: Centinela maintenance program. 235–4890. Hospital Airport Toxicology Dynacare*, 245 Pall Mall Street, Laboratory). Janine Denis Cook, London, ONT, Canada N6A 1P4, 519– Pathology Associates Medical Chemist, Division of Workplace Programs, 679–1630, (Formerly: Gamma- Laboratories, 110 West Cliff Dr., Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Dynacare Medical Laboratories). Spokane, WA 99204, 509–755–8991/ SAMHSA. ElSohly Laboratories, Inc., 5 Industrial 800–541–7891x7. [FR Doc. 2015–16172 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Park Drive, Oxford, MS 38655, 662– Phamatech, Inc., 15175 Innovation BILLING CODE 4160–20–P 236–2609. Drive, San Diego, CA 92128, 888– Fortes Laboratories, Inc., 25749 SW 635–5840. Canyon Creek Road, Suite 600, Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 1777 ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC Wilsonville, OR 97070, 503–486– Montreal Circle, Tucker, GA 30084, PRESERVATION 1023. 800–729–6432, (Formerly: SmithKline Laboratory Corporation of America Beecham Clinical Laboratories; Notice of Advisory Council on Historic Holdings, 7207 N. Gessner Road, SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories). Preservation Quarterly Business Houston, TX 77040, 713–856–8288/ Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 400 Meeting 800–800–2387. Egypt Road, Norristown, PA 19403, Laboratory Corporation of America 610–631–4600/877–642–2216, AGENCY: Advisory Council on Historic Holdings, 69 First Ave., Raritan, NJ (Formerly: SmithKline Beecham Preservation. 08869, 908–526–2400/800–437–4986, Clinical Laboratories; SmithKline Bio- ACTION: Notice of Advisory Council on (Formerly: Roche Biomedical Science Laboratories). Historic Preservation Quarterly Business Laboratories, Inc.). Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 8401 Meeting. Laboratory Corporation of America Fallbrook Ave., West Hills, CA 91304, Holdings, 1904 Alexander Drive, 818–737–6370, (Formerly: SmithKline SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, Beecham Clinical Laboratories). the Advisory Council on Historic 919–572–6900/800–833–3984, Redwood Toxicology Laboratory, Preservation (ACHP) will hold its next (Formerly: LabCorp Occupational 3700650 Westwind Blvd., Santa Rosa, quarterly meeting on Wednesday, July Testing Services, Inc., CompuChem CA 95403, 800–255–2159. 15, 2015. The meeting will be held in Laboratories, Inc.; CompuChem Southwest Laboratories, 4625 E. Cotton Room SR325 at the Russell Senate Laboratories, Inc., A Subsidiary of Center Boulevard, Suite 177, Phoenix, Office Building at Constitution and Roche Biomedical Laboratory; Roche AZ 85040, 602–438–8507/800–279– Delaware Avenues NE., Washington, CompuChem Laboratories, Inc., A 0027. DC, starting at 9:00 a.m. DST. Member of the Roche Group). STERLING Reference Laboratories, 2617 DATES: The quarterly meeting will take Laboratory Corporation of America East L Street, Tacoma, Washington place on Wednesday, July 15, 2015, Holdings, 1120 Main Street, 98421, 800–442–0438. starting at 9:00 a.m. DST. Southaven, MS 38671, 866–827–8042/ US Army Forensic Toxicology Drug ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in 800–233–6339, (Formerly: LabCorp Testing Laboratory, 2490 Wilson St., Room SR325 at the Russell Senate Occupational Testing Services, Inc.; Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755– Office Building at Constitution and MedExpress/National Laboratory 5235, 301–677–7085. Delaware Avenues NE., Washington, Center). lllll DC. LabOne, Inc. d/b/a Quest Diagnostics, * The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) 10101 Renner Blvd., Lenexa, KS voted to end its Laboratory Accreditation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 66219, 913–888–3927/800–873–8845, Program for Substance Abuse (LAPSA) Cindy Bienvenue, 202–517–0202, (Formerly: Quest Diagnostics effective May 12, 1998. Laboratories certified [email protected]. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37644 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Advisory Council on Historic SECURITY SECURITY Preservation (ACHP) is an independent federal agency that promotes the Federal Emergency Management Federal Emergency Management preservation, enhancement, and Agency Agency sustainable use of our nation’s diverse [Docket ID FEMA–2015–0001] historic resources, and advises the [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4222– President and the Congress on national DR; Docket ID FEMA–2015–0002] Changes in Flood Hazard historic preservation policy. The goal of Determinations the National Historic Preservation Act Oklahoma; Amendment No. 6 to Notice (NHPA), which established the ACHP in of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY: Federal Emergency 1966, is to have federal agencies act as Management Agency, DHS. responsible stewards of our nation’s AGENCY: Federal Emergency ACTION: Final notice. resources when their actions affect Management Agency, DHS. SUMMARY: New or modified Base historic properties. The ACHP is the ACTION: Notice. (1-percent annual chance) Flood only entity with the legal responsibility Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, to encourage federal agencies to factor SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) historic preservation into federal project of a major disaster declaration for the boundaries or zone designations, and/or requirements. For more information on State of Oklahoma (FEMA–4222–DR), regulatory floodways (hereinafter the ACHP, please visit our Web site at dated May 26, 2015, and related referred to as flood hazard www.achp.gov. determinations. determinations) as shown on the The agenda for the upcoming indicated Letter of Map Revision quarterly meeting of the ACHP is the DATES: Effective Date: June 11, 2015. (LOMR) for each of the communities following: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: listed in the table below are finalized. Call to Order—9:00 a.m. Dean Webster, Office of Response and Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Recovery, Federal Emergency Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases I. Chairman’s Welcome the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, II. Swearing in Ceremony Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2833. currently in effect for the listed III. Section 106 Issues communities. The flood hazard A. Federal Agency Support for SHPOs and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice determinations modified by each LOMR THPOs of a major disaster declaration for the B. Amending ACHP Program Comment on will be used to calculate flood insurance Communication Facilities State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to premium rates for new buildings and IV. Historic Preservation Policy and Programs include the following areas among those their contents. A. Building a More Inclusive Preservation areas determined to have been adversely DATES: The effective date for each Program affected by the event declared a major LOMR is indicated in the table below. 1. Asian-American Pacific Islander disaster by the President in his ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for Initiative declaration of May 26, 2015. 2. American Latino Heritage Initiative inspection at both the respective Adair, Beckham, Caddo, Creek, Garvin, 3. ACHP Youth Initiatives Community Map Repository address B. Preservation 50 Jackson, Logan, Marshall, McIntosh, listed in the table below and online 1. ACHP Public Policy Initiative. Muskogee, Pushmataha, Sequoyah, and through the FEMA Map Service Center 2. ACHP 50th Anniversary Retrospective Washita Counties for Public Assistance. at www.msc.fema.gov. Comanche and McCurtain Counties for C. Historic Preservation Legislation in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis 114th Congress Public Assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance). Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering 1. Policy for Adoption of ACHP Legislative Management Branch, Federal Insurance Positions The following Catalog of Federal Domestic and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 2. ACHP Legislative Agenda-H.R. 2817, Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC Reauthorization of the Historic for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Preservation Fund Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora 20472, (202) 646–4064, or (email) D. Policy Statement on the Role of Historic Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; [email protected]; or visit Preservation in Rebuilding Resilient 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, the FEMA Map Information eXchange Communities Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); (FMIX) online at V. Native American Affairs Committee 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_ Activities 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to main.html. VI. New Business Individuals and Households In Presidentially VII. Adjourn SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Federal Emergency Management Agency The meetings of the ACHP are open Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— (FEMA) makes the final flood hazard Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals to the public. If you need special determinations as shown in the LOMRs and Households; 97.050 Presidentially accommodations due to a disability, Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals for each community listed in the table please contact Cindy Bienvenue, 202– and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, below. Notice of these modified flood 517–0202 or [email protected], at Disaster Grants—Public Assistance hazard determinations has been least seven (7) days prior to the meeting. (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, published in newspapers of local Authority: 54 U.S.C. 304102 Hazard Mitigation Grant. circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Dated: June 25, 2015. W. Craig Fugate, Associate Administrator for Mitigation Javier E. Marques, Administrator, Federal Emergency has resolved any appeals resulting from Associate General Counsel. Management Agency. this notification. [FR Doc. 2015–16134 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2015–16242 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] The modified flood hazard BILLING CODE 4310–K6–P BILLING CODE 9111–23–P determinations are made pursuant to VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37645 section 206 of the Flood Disaster This new or modified flood hazard premium rates for new buildings, and Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, information, together with the for the contents in those buildings. The and are in accordance with the National floodplain management criteria required changes in flood hazard determinations Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. are required. They should not be Interested lessees and owners of real For rating purposes, the currently construed to mean that the community property are encouraged to review the effective community number is shown must change any existing ordinances final flood hazard information available and must be used for all new policies that are more stringent in their at the address cited below for each and renewals. floodplain management requirements. community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at The new or modified flood hazard The community may at any time enact www.msc.fema.gov. information is the basis for the stricter requirements of its own or floodplain management measures that pursuant to policies established by other (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. the community is required either to Federal, State, or regional entities. 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) adopt or to show evidence of being This new or modified flood hazard Roy E. Wright, already in effect in order to remain determinations are used to meet the Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance qualified for participation in the floodplain management requirements of and Mitigation, Department of Homeland National Flood Insurance Program the NFIP and also are used to calculate Security, Federal Emergency Management (NFIP). the appropriate flood insurance Agency. Location and case Effective date of Community State and county No. Chief executive officer of community Community map repository modification No. Illinois: Cook (FEMA City of Palos The Honorable Robert Straz, Mayor, City Hall, 7607 West College September 19, 2014 ...... 170142 Docket No.: Heights (13–05– City of Palos Heights, 7607 West Col- Drive, Palos Heights, IL B–1420). 8093P). lege Drive, Palos Heights, IL 60463. 60463. DuPage (FEMA Village of Lisle (14– The Honorable Joseph J. Broda, Mayor, Village Hall, 925 Burlington September 10, 2014 ...... 170211 Docket No.: 05–2185P). Village of Lisle, 925 Burlington Ave- Avenue, Lisle, IL 60532. B–1420). nue, Lisle, IL 60532. Indiana: Marshall (FEMA City of Plymouth The Honorable Mark Senter, Mayor, City 124 North Michigan Street, September 11, 2014 ...... 180164 Docket No.: (14–05–0926P). of Plymouth, 124 North Michigan Plymouth, IN 46563. B–1420). Street, Plymouth, IN 46563. Marshall (FEMA Unincorporated The Honorable Kevin Overmyer, Mar- 112 West Jefferson, Plymouth, September 11, 2014 ...... 180443 Docket No.: Areas of Marshall shall County President, Board of Com- IN 46563. B–1420). County (14–05– missioners, 112 West Jefferson 0926P). Street, Room 205, Plymouth, IN 46563. Kansas: Lyon (FEMA City of Emporia The Honorable Rob Gilligan, Mayor, City 521 Market Street, Emporia, October 10, 2014 ...... 200203 Docket No.: B– (13–07–1700P). of Emporia, P.O. Box 928, Emporia, KS 66801. 1420). KS 66801. Minnesota: Olmsted (FEMA City of Rochester The Honorable Ardell F. Brede, Mayor, 2122 Campus Drive, Suite October 17, 2014 ...... 275246 Docket No.: (13–05–8106P). City of Rochester, 201 4th Street SE., 300, Rochester, MN 55904. B–1420). Room 281, Rochester, MN 55904. Pennington City of Thief River The Honorable Jim Dagg, Mayor, City of City Hall, 405 Third Street September 18, 2014 ...... 270344 (FEMA Docket Falls (14–05– Thief River Falls, 405 Third Street East, Thief River Falls, MN No.: B–1420). 0815P). East, Thief River Falls, MN 56701. 56701. Pennington Unincorporated The Honorable Neil Peterson, Pen- 201 Sherwood Avenue South, September 18, 2014 ...... 270651 (FEMA Docket Areas of Pen- nington County Chairman Board of Thief River Falls, MN No.: B–1420). nington County Commissioners, P.O. Box 616, Thief 56701. (14–05–0815P). River Falls, MN 56701. Missouri: Buchanan City of St. Joseph The Honorable Bill Falkner, Mayor, City 1100 Frederick Avenue, Room September 25, 2014 ...... 290043 (FEMA Docket (14–07–0148P). of Saint Joseph, 1100 Frederick Ave- 107, St. Joseph, MO 64506. No.: B–1420). nue, Room 309, St. Joseph, MO 64506. Cape Girardeau City of Cape The Honorable Harry Rediger, Mayor, 401 Independence Street, September 8, 2014 ...... 290458 (FEMA Docket Girardeau (14– City of Cape Girardeau, 401 Inde- Cape Girardeau, MO 63703. No.: B–1420). 07–0463P). pendence Street, Cape Girardeau, MO 63703. New Hampshire: City of Nashua (14– The Honorable Donnalee Lozeau, 229 Main Street, Nashua, NH September 19, 2014 ...... 330097 Hillsborough 01–0876P). Mayor, City of Nashua, 229 Main 03061. (FEMA Docket No.: Street, Nashua, NH 03061. B–1420). Ohio: Logan (FEMA City of Bellefontaine The Honorable Adam Brannon, Mayor, 135 North Detroit Street, September 19, 2014 ...... 390340 Docket No.: (14–05–4416P). City of Bellefontaine, 135 North Detroit Bellefontaine, OH 43311. B–1420). Street, Bellefontaine, OH 43311. Summit (FEMA City of Hudson (14– The Honorable William A. Currin, Mayor, 27 East Main Street, Hudson, September 22, 2014 ...... 390660 Docket No.: 05–3718P). City of Hudson, 115 Executive Park- OH 44236. B–1420). way, Suite 400, Hudson, OH 44236. Oregon: Jackson (FEMA City of Medford (13– The Honorable Gary Wheeler, Mayor, 411 West 8th Street, Medford, September 18, 2014 ...... 410096 Docket No.: 10–1490P). City of Medford, 411 West 8th Street, OR 97501. B–1420). Medford, OR 97501. Jackson (FEMA City of Medford (14– The Honorable Gary Wheeler, Mayor, 411 West 8th Street, Medford, September 15, 2014 ...... 410096 Docket No.: 10–0435P). City of Medford, 411 West 8th Street, OR 97501. B–1420). Medford, OR 97501. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37646 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Location and case Effective date of Community State and county No. Chief executive officer of community Community map repository modification No. Wisconsin: Chippewa City of Eau Claire Mr. Russell Van Gompel, City of Eau City Hall, 203 South Farwell September 12, 2014 ...... 550128 (FEMA Docket No.: (14–05–1736P). Claire, City Manager, 203 South Street Third Floor, Eau B–1420). Farwell Street, Third Floor, Eau Claire, Claire, WI 54701. WI 54701. [FR Doc. 2015–16225 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] inspection at both the online location provided in the tables below. Any BILLING CODE 9110–12–P and the respective Community Map request for reconsideration of the Repository address listed in the tables revised flood hazard information shown below. Additionally, the current on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND effective FIRM and FIS report for each that satisfies the data requirements SECURITY community are accessible online outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered through the FEMA Map Service Center an appeal. Comments unrelated to the Federal Emergency Management at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison. flood hazard determinations also will be Agency You may submit comments, identified considered before the FIRM and FIS [Docket ID FEMA–2015–0001; Internal by Docket No. FEMA–B–1520, to Luis report become effective. Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1520] Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel Management Branch, Federal Insurance (SRP) is available to communities in Proposed Flood Hazard and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, support of the appeal resolution Determinations 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC process. SRPs are independent panels of 20472, (202) 646–4064, or (email) experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and AGENCY: Federal Emergency [email protected]. Management Agency, DHS. other pertinent sciences established to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis ACTION: Notice. review conflicting scientific and Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering technical data and provide SUMMARY: Comments are requested on Management Branch, Federal Insurance recommendations for resolution. Use of proposed flood hazard determinations, and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, the SRP only may be exercised after 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC which may include additions or FEMA and local communities have been 20472, (202) 646–4064, or (email) modifications of any Base Flood engaged in a collaborative consultation [email protected]; or visit Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, process for at least 60 days without a the FEMA Map Information eXchange Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) mutually acceptable resolution of an (FMIX) online at boundary or zone designation, or appeal. Additional information www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_ regulatory floodway on the Flood regarding the SRP process can be found main.html. Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_ where applicable, in the supporting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA fact_sheet.pdf. proposes to make flood hazard Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for The watersheds and/or communities determinations for each community the communities listed in the table affected are listed in the tables below. listed below, in accordance with section below. The purpose of this notice is to The Preliminary FIRM, and where seek general information and comment 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR applicable, FIS report for each regarding the preliminary FIRM, and community are available for inspection where applicable, the FIS report that the 67.4(a). These proposed flood hazard at both the online location and the Federal Emergency Management Agency respective Community Map Repository (FEMA) has provided to the affected determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required address listed in the tables. For communities. The FIRM and FIS report communities with multiple ongoing are the basis of the floodplain by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be Preliminary studies, the studies will be management measures that the identified by the unique project number community is required either to adopt construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances and Preliminary FIRM date listed in the or to show evidence of having in effect tables. Additionally, the current in order to qualify or remain qualified that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. effective FIRM and FIS report for each for participation in the National Flood community are accessible online Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or through the FEMA Map Service Center the FIRM and FIS report, once effective, at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison. will be used by insurance agents and pursuant to policies established by other others to calculate appropriate flood Federal, State, or regional entities. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. insurance premium rates for new These flood hazard determinations are 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) used to meet the floodplain buildings and the contents of those Dated: June 16, 2015. buildings. management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the Roy E. Wright, DATES: Comments are to be submitted appropriate flood insurance premium Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance on or before September 29, 2015. rates for new buildings built after the and Mitigation, Department of Homeland ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and FIRM and FIS report become effective. Security, Federal Emergency Management where applicable, the FIS report for The communities affected by the Agency. each community are available for flood hazard determinations are I. Non-watershed-based studies: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37647 Community Local map repository address Montgomery County, Kansas, and Incorporated Areas Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata Project: 10–07–0013S Preliminary Date: October 17, 2014 City of Caney ...... City Hall, 100 West 4th Avenue, Caney, KS 67333. City of Cherryvale ...... City Hall, 123 West Main Street, Cherryvale, KS 67335. City of Coffeyville ...... Engineering Department, 11 East 2nd Street, Coffeyville, KS 67337. City of Dearing ...... City Hall, 306 South Independence Avenue, Dearing, KS 67340. City of Elk City ...... City Hall, 114 North Montgomery Avenue, Elk City, KS 67344. City of Havana ...... Montgomery County Judicial Center, 300 East Main Street, Lower Level, Independence, KS 67301. City of Independence ...... City Hall, 120 North 6th Street, Independence, KS 67301. City of Liberty ...... Montgomery County Judicial Center, 300 East Main Street, Lower Level, Independence, KS 67301. City of Tyro ...... Tyro City Clerk’s Office, 1655 County Road 2700, Caney, KS 67333. Unincorporated Areas of Montgomery County...... Montgomery County Judicial Center, 300 East Main Street, Lower Level, Independence, KS 67301. Camden County, NJ (All Jurisdictions) Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata Project: 13–02–0051S Preliminary Date: Septmeber 19, 2014 Borough of Audubon ...... Borough Hall, 606 West Nicholson Road, Audubon, NJ 08106. Borough of Audubon Park ...... Community Hall, 20 Road C, Audubon Park, NJ 08106. Borough of Bellmawr ...... Municipal Building, 21 East Browning Road, Bellmawr, NJ 08031. Borough of Brooklawn ...... Borough Hall, 301 Christiana Street, Brooklawn, NJ 08030. Borough of Collingswood ...... Borough Hall, 678 Haddon Avenue, Collingswood, NJ 08108. Borough of Mount Ephraim ...... Tax Office, 121 South Black Horse Pike, Mount Ephraim, NJ 08059. Borough of Oaklyn ...... Borough Hall, 500 White Horse Pike, Oaklyn, NJ 08107. Borough of Runnemede ...... Borough Hall, 24 North Black Horse Pike, Runnemede, NJ 08078. Borough of Woodlynne ...... Municipal Building, 200 Cooper Avenue, Woodlynne, NJ 08107. City of Camden ...... Planning Department, 520 Market Street, Suite 224, Camden, NJ 08101. City of Gloucester ...... Municipal Building, 512 Monmouth Street, Gloucester City, NJ 08030. Township of Gloucester ...... Municipal Building, 1261 Chews Landing Road, Laurel Springs, NJ 08021. Township of Haddon ...... Annex Building, 10 Reeve Avenue, Haddon Township, NJ 08108. Township of Pennsauken ...... Municipal Building, 5605 North Crescent Boulevard, Pennsauken, NJ 08110. Gloucester County, New Jersey (All Jurisdictions) Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata Project: 13–02–0052S Preliminary Date: September 19, 2014 Borough of National Park ...... Borough Hall, 7 South Grove Avenue, National Park, NJ 08063. Borough of Paulsboro ...... Administration Building, 1211 North Delaware Street, Paulsboro, NJ 08066. Borough of Swedesboro ...... Borough Hall, 1500 Kings Highway, Swedesboro, NJ 08085. Borough of Wenonah ...... 1 South West Avenue, Wenonah, NJ 08090. Borough of Westville ...... 165 Broadway, Westville, NJ 08093. City of Woodbury ...... City Hall, 33 Delaware Street, Woodbury, NJ 08096. Township of Deptford ...... Municipal Building, 1011 Cooper Street, Deptford, NJ 08096. Township of East Greenwich ...... East Greenwich Township Municipal Building, 159 Democrat Road, Mickleton, NJ 08056. Township of Greenwich ...... Greenwich Township Construction and Zoning Office, 403 West Broad Street, Gibbstown, NJ 08027. Township of Logan ...... 125 Main Street, Bridgeport, NJ 08014. Township of Mantua ...... Municipal Building, 401 Main Street, Mantua, NJ 08051. Township of West Deptford ...... 400 Crown Point Road, West Deptford, NJ 08086. Township of Woolwich ...... 121 Woodstown Road, Swedesboro, NJ 08085. [FR Doc. 2015–16227 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–12–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37648 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SECURITY SECURITY Purpose and Objective: The charter of the Homeland Security Science and [Docket No. DHS–2015–0026] Federal Emergency Management Technology Committee (HSSTAC) is Agency Homeland Security Science and being renewed in accordance with the Technology Advisory Committee provisions of the Federal Advisory [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4222– Charter Renewal Committee Act (FACA), Title 5 United DR; Docket ID FEMA–2015–0002] States Code, Appendix. The committee AGENCY: Homeland Security Science addresses science and technology needs Oklahoma; Amendment No. 7 to Notice and Technology Advisory Committee. and trends, management processes and of a Major Disaster Declaration (HSSTAC), Department of Homeland organizational constructs, and other Security. matters of special interest to the Under AGENCY: Federal Emergency ACTION: Committee management; notice Secretary of Science and Technology Management Agency, DHS. of Federal Advisory Committee charter and will ensure the identification of renewal. new technologies and application of ACTION: Notice. new technologies in those areas to SUMMARY: The Secretary of Homeland strengthen homeland security. Security has determined that the SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice Duration: The committee’s charter is renewal of the charter of the Homeland of a major disaster declaration for the effective June 15, 2015 and expires June Security Science and Technology State of Oklahoma (FEMA–4222–DR), 14, 2017. Advisory Committee (HSSTAC) is dated May 26, 2015, and related Responsible DHS Officials: Bishop necessary and in the public interest in determinations. Garrison, HSSTAC Executive Director, connection with the Department of Science and Technology Directorate, DATES: Effective Date: June 12, 2015. Homeland Security, Science and Technology Directorate’s performance of Department of Homeland Security, 245 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: its duties. This determination follows Murray Lane, IAO Stop 0205, Dean Webster, Office of Response and consultation with the Committee Washington, DC 20528–0205, 202–254– Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Secretariat, General 5617 (O), 202–254–6176 (F), Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Services Administration. [email protected]. Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2833. ADDRESSES: If you desire to submit Dated: June 23, 2015. Dr. Reginald Brothers, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice comments on this action, they must be of a major disaster declaration for the submitted by August 14, 2015. Under Secretary for Science and Technology. Comments must be identified by (DHS– State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to [FR Doc. 2015–16156 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 2015–0026) and may be submitted by include the following areas among those BILLING CODE 9110–9F–P one of the following methods: areas determined to have been adversely • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// affected by the event declared a major www.regulations.gov. Follow the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND disaster by the President in his instructions for submitting comments. SECURITY declaration of May 26, 2015. • Email: [email protected]. Wagoner County for Individual Assistance. Include the docket number in the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Beckham, Caddo, Canadian, Marshall, subject line of the message. Services • Fax: 202–254–6176. McIntosh, and Seminole Counties for • [OMB Control Number 1615–0114] Individual Assistance (already designated for Mail: Bishop Garrison, HSSTAC Public Assistance). Executive Director, Science and Technology Directorate, Department of Agency Information Collection The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane, Activities: Application for Civil Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used IAO Stop 0205, Washington, DC 20528– Surgeon Designation Registration, for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 0205 Form I–910; Revision of a Currently Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora • Instructions: All submissions Approved Collection Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; received must include the words AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, ‘‘Department of Homeland Security’’ Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); Immigration Services, Department of and DHS–2015–0026, the docket 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; Homeland Security. number for this action. Comments 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to ACTION: 60-Day Notice. received will be posted without Individuals and Households In Presidentially alteration at http://www.regulations.gov Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— including any personal information Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals provided. Immigration (USCIS) invites the general • Docket: For access to the docket to and Households; 97.050 Presidentially public and other Federal agencies to read background documents or Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals comment upon this proposed revision of and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, comments received, go to http:// a currently approved collection of Disaster Grants—Public Assistance www.regulations.gov. information. In accordance with the (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of Hazard Mitigation Grant. Bishop Garrison, HSSTAC Executive 1995, the information collection notice Director, Science and Technology is published in the Federal Register to W. Craig Fugate, Directorate, Department of Homeland obtain comments regarding the nature of Administrator, Federal Emergency Security, 245 Murray Lane, IAO Stop the information collection, the Management Agency. 0205, Washington, DC 20528–0205, categories of respondents, the estimated [FR Doc. 2015–16241 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 202–254–5866 (O) 202–254–6176 (F), burden (i.e. the time, effort, and BILLING CODE 9111–23–P [email protected]. resources used by the respondents to VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37649 respond), the estimated cost to the offensive. For additional information, respond: The estimated total number of respondent, and the actual information please read the Privacy Act notice that respondents for the information collection instruments. is available via the link in the footer of collection Form I–910 is 725 and the DATES: Comments are encouraged and http://www.regulations.gov. estimated hour burden per response is will be accepted for 60 days until Written comments and suggestions 2 hours. August 31, 2015. from the public and affected agencies (6) An estimate of the total public ADDRESSES: All submissions received should address one or more of the burden (in hours) associated with the must include the OMB Control Number following four points: collection: The total estimated annual 1615–0114 in the subject box, the (1) Evaluate whether the proposed hour burden associated with this agency name and Docket ID USCIS– collection of information is necessary collection is 1,450 hours. 2013–0002. To avoid duplicate for the proper performance of the (7) An estimate of the total public submissions, please use only one of the functions of the agency, including burden (in cost) associated with the following methods to submit comments: whether the information will have collection: The estimated total annual (1) Online. Submit comments via the practical utility; cost burden associated with this Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the collection of information is $3,625. agency’s estimate of the burden of the http://www.regulations.gov under e- Dated: June 25, 2015. proposed collection of information, Docket ID number USCIS–2013–0002; Laura Dawkins, (2) Email. Submit comments to including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, [email protected]; Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship (3) Mail. Submit written comments to (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be and Immigration Services, Department of DHS, USCIS, Office of Policy and Homeland Security. Strategy, Chief, Regulatory Coordination collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the [FR Doc. 2015–16120 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Division, 20 Massachusetts Avenue BILLING CODE 9111–97–P NW., Washington, DC 20529–2140. collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: use of appropriate automated, USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, electronic, mechanical, or other DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Regulatory Coordination Division, Laura technological collection techniques or URBAN DEVELOPMENT Dawkins, Chief, 20 Massachusetts other forms of information technology, Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529– e.g., permitting electronic submission of [Docket No. FR–5837–N–03] 2140, telephone number 202–272–8377 responses. (This is not a toll-free number. 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Comments are not accepted via Overview of This Information Collection: Evaluation of the Section telephone message). Please note contact Collection 811 Project Rental Assistance information provided here is solely for (1) Type of Information Collection: Program, Phase I questions regarding this notice. It is not Revision of a Currently Approved AGENCY: Office of Policy Development for individual case status inquiries. Collection. and Research, HUD. Applicants seeking information about (2) Title of the Form/Collection: ACTION: Notice of proposed information the status of their individual cases can Application for Civil Surgeon collection. check Case Status Online, available at Designation Registration. the USCIS Web site at http:// (3) Agency form number, if any, and SUMMARY: HUD is seeking approval from www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS the applicable component of the DHS the Office of Management and Budget National Customer Service Center at sponsoring the collection: I–910; USCIS. (OMB) for the information collection 800–375–5283 (TTY 800–767–1833). (4) Affected public who will be asked described below. In accordance with the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: or required to respond, as well as a brief Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is abstract: Primary: Business or other for- Comments requesting comment from all interested profit. Section 212(a)(1)(A) of the parties on the proposed collection of You may access the information Immigration and Nationality Act (Act) information. The purpose of this notice collection instrument with instructions, renders individuals inadmissible if the is to allow for 60 days of public or additional information by visiting the individual is afflicted with the comment. Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: statutorily mentioned diseases or http://www.regulations.gov and enter medical conditions. In order to establish DATES: Comments Due Date: August 31, USCIS–2013–0002 in the search box. that the individual is admissible when 2015. Regardless of the method used for seeking adjustment of status to a legal ADDRESSES: Interested persons are submitting comments or material, all permanent resident (and in certain cases invited to submit comments regarding submissions will be posted, without other aliens seeking an immigration this proposal. Comments should refer to change, to the Federal eRulemaking benefit), the individual must submit the proposal by name and/or OMB Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, Form I–693 (OMB Control Number Control Number and should be sent to: and will include any personal 1615–0033), Report of Medical Colette Pollard, Reports Management information you provide. Therefore, Examination and Vaccination Record, Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing submitting this information makes it that is completed by a civil surgeon, a and Urban Development, 451 7th Street public. You may wish to consider USCIS designated physician.’’ To be SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC limiting the amount of personal selected as a civil surgeon, the 20410–5000; telephone 202–402–3400 information that you provide in any physician has to demonstrate that he or (this is not a toll-free number) or email voluntary submission you make to DHS. she is a licensed physician with no less at [email protected] for a copy of DHS may withhold information than 4 years of professional experience. the proposed forms or other available provided in comments from public (5) An estimate of the total number of information. Persons with hearing or viewing that it determines may impact respondents and the amount of time speech impairments may access this the privacy of an individual or is estimated for an average respondent to number through TTY by calling the toll- VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37650 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877– Section 811 Supportive Housing for and Section 811 PRA Partner Agencies 8339. Persons with Disabilities (Section 811) (property owners or managers of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Project Rental Assistance (PRA) properties where Section 811 PRA Colette Pollard, Reports Management Program. The PRA Program is a new participants live and staff at Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing model of housing assistance authorized organizations that provide supportive and Urban Development, 451 7th Street in 2010 that provides project-based services to PRA participants). The SW., Washington, DC 20410; email rental assistance to state housing purpose of the interviews is to Colette Pollard at Colette.Pollard@ agencies for the development of document the implementation hud.gov or telephone 202–402–3400. supportive housing for extremely low- experience of the Section 811 PRA This is not a toll-free number. Persons income persons with disabilities. Program. Housing agencies must have a formal with hearing or speech impairments Respondents (i.e. affected public): partnership with the state health and may access this number through TTY by State housing agencies, state health and human service agency and the state calling the toll-free Federal Relay human service and Medicaid provider Service at (800) 877–8339. Medicaid provider to provide services and supports directly to residents living agencies, and Section 811 PRA Partner Copies of available documents Agencies. submitted to OMB may be obtained in units funded with Section 811 PRA. from Ms. Pollard. The Section 811 PRA program Total Estimated Burden: For the state housing agency staff, state health and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This authorizing statute requires HUD to notice informs the public that HUD is describe the assistance under the human service agency staff and state seeking approval from OMB for the program, to analyze its effectiveness, Medicaid agency staff, researchers will information collection described in and propose recommendations for administer interviews on the section A. future assistance under Section 811. implementation of the Section 811 PRA HUD is implementing a two-phase Program for a total of five hours. An A. Overview of Information Collection evaluation of the Section 811 PRA additional two hours will be needed to Title of Information Collection: program. The first phase of the compile material needed on the PRA Evaluation of the Section 811 Project evaluation is focused on a process program in order to answer the research Rental Assistance Program, Phase I. evaluation that will describe the questions. The total burden for state OMB Approval Number: N/A. implementation of the program in the housing agency and Medicaid Type of Request: New. first 12 states awarded Section 811 PRA respondents is 168 hours. The average Form Number: N/A. funds. The second phase will evaluate burden of interviews for Section 811 Description of the need for the the program effectiveness and its impact PRA Partner Agency staff is one hour, information and proposed use: The on residents. This request for OMB with an additional hour to compile Office of Policy Research and clearance covers the first phase of the information needed to complete the Development, U.S. Department of evaluation. Data collection includes in- interview. The total burden for PRA Housing and Urban Development person interviews with staffs at state Partner Agencies is 137.5 hours. The (HUD), is proposing a data collection agencies, (housing, health and human total burden for all respondents is 305.5 activity as part of the evaluation of the services and state Medicaid providers) hours. Average Average Total Number of Frequency of burden/ burden/ estimated Respondents respondents response response data collection burden (hours) (hours) (hours) State housing agencies implementing Section 811 PRA .... 12 1 5 2 84 Medicaid agencies implementing Section 811 PRA ...... 12 1 5 2 84 Section 811 PRA Partner Agencies ...... 55 1 1.5 1 137.5 Total Burden Hours ...... 305.5 B. Solicitation of Public Comment who are to respond, including through DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the use of appropriate automated This notice is soliciting comments U.S. Geological Survey from members of the public and affected collection techniques or other forms of parties concerning the collection of information technology, e.g., permitting [GX15LR000F60100] information described in section A on electronic submission of responses. the following: HUD encourages interested parties to Agency Information Collection (1) Whether the proposed collection submit comment in response to these Activities: Request for Comments of information is necessary for the questions. AGENCY: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), proper performance of the functions of Authority: 1701z–1 Research and Interior. the agency, including whether the Demonstrations; 12 U.S.C. chapter 13. ACTION: Notice of an extension and information will have practical utility; revision of a currently approved Dated: June 22, 2015. (2) The accuracy of the agency’s information collection (1028–0062). estimate of the burden of the proposed Katherine M. O’Regan, collection of information; Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy SUMMARY: We (the U.S. Geological (3) Ways to enhance the quality, Development and Research. Survey) will ask the Office of utility, and clarity of the information to [FR Doc. 2015–16202 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Management and Budget (OMB) to be collected; and BILLING CODE 4210–67–P approve the information collection (IC) (4) Ways to minimize the burden of described below. The collection will the collection of information on those consist of 38 forms. As part of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37651 requested extension we will make a Estimated Number of Annual ACTION: Notice of Acquisition of Land revision to the number of the associated Responses: 20,053. into Trust. collection instruments. This revision Estimated Time per Response: For includes deleting USGS Form 9–4002– each form, we will include an average SUMMARY: The United States has A and USGS Form 9–4019–A. As burden time ranging from 10 minutes to acquired approximately 1,553 acres of required by the Paperwork Reduction 5 hours. Federal land within the boundary of the Act (PRA) of 1995, and as part of our Annual Burden Hours: 14,004 hours. former Badger Army Ammunition Plant continuing efforts to reduce paperwork Estimated Reporting and near Baraboo, Wisconsin, in trust for the and respondent burden, we invite the Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’ Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin. The general public and other Federal Burden: There are no ‘‘non-hour cost’’ acquisition was effectuated by the agencies to take this opportunity to burdens associated with this collection National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. This notice provides comment on this IC. This collection is of information. a legal description of the property. scheduled to expire on November 30, Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA 2015. (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. agency may not conduct or sponsor a Michael Black, Director, Bureau of DATES: To ensure that your comments collection of information unless it Indian Affairs, MS–4606 MIB, 1849 C are considered, we must receive them Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240; on or before August 31, 2015. displays a currently valid OMB control number and current expiration date. Telephone (202) 208–5116. ADDRESSES: Please submit a copy of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On your comments to the Information III. Request for Comments December 12, 2014, Congress passed the Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. We are soliciting comments as to: (a) National Defense Authorization Act for Geological Survey, 807 National Center, Whether the proposed collection of Fiscal Year 2015 (Act), and on 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, Reston, VA information is necessary for the agency December 19, 2015, the President signed 20192 (mail); 703–648–7195 (fax); or gs- to perform its duties, including whether the Act into law. See Public Law 113– [email protected] (email). the information is useful; (b) the 291. The Act legislatively transferred Reference ‘Information Collection 1028– accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the approximately 1,553 acres located 0062, Industrial Minerals Surveys’ in all burden time to the proposed collection within the boundary of the former correspondence. of information; (c) how to enhance the Badger Army Ammunition Plant near FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: quality, usefulness, and clarity of the Baraboo, Wisconsin, to the Secretary of Elizabeth Sangine at 703–648–7720 information to be collected; and (d) how the Interior in trust for the Ho-Chunk (telephone); [email protected] to minimize the burden on the Nation of Wisconsin. The legislation (email); or by mail at U.S. Geological respondents, including the use of effectuated the acquisition of the land in Survey, 989 National Center, 12201 automated collection techniques or trust and clarified responsibility and Sunrise Valley Drive, Reston, VA 20192. other forms of information technology. liability with regard to conduct or activities that took place on the land SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please note that the comments submitted in response to this notice are before the transfer. 160 Cong. Rec. I. Abstract a matter of public record. Before S6722 (daily ed. Dec. 12, 2014) including your personal mailing (statement of Sen. Baldwin). Respondents to these forms supply The approximately 1,533 acres are the USGS with domestic production and address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable within the boundary of the former consumption data of industrial mineral Badger Army Ammunition Plan, near information in your comment, you commodities, some of which are Baraboo, Wisconsin, and the external should be aware that your entire considered strategic and critical. These boundary is described as follows: data and derived information will be comment, including your personally published as chapters in Minerals identifiable information, may be made BIA-Ho-Chunk Nation Reservation Yearbooks, monthly and quarterly publicly available at any time. While Trust Land Former Badger Army Mineral Industry Surveys, annual you can ask us in your comment to Ammunition Plant, Sauk Co. WI. Legal Mineral Commodity Summaries, and withhold your personally identifiable Description special publications, for use by information from public view, we A parcel of land located in the NW1⁄4 Government agencies, industry, cannot guarantee that we will be able to of the SE1⁄4, the NE1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4, the education programs, and the general do so. SE1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4 and the SW1⁄4 of the public. Michael J. Magyar, SE1⁄4 of Section 34, the NW1⁄4 of the 1 1 1 1 II. Data Associate Director, National Minerals SW ⁄4, the NE ⁄4 of the SW ⁄4, the SE ⁄4 Information Center, U.S. Geological Survey. of the SW1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 of the SW1⁄4, the OMB Control Number: 1028–0062. 1 1 1 [FR Doc. 2015–16126 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] NW ⁄4 of the SE ⁄4 and the SW ⁄4 of the Form Number: Various (38 forms). 1 4 BILLING CODE 4311–AM–P SE ⁄ of Section 35, all in T11N, R6E, Title: Industrial Minerals Surveys. Town of Sumpter, Sauk County, Type of Request: Extension and Wisconsin, the NW1⁄4 of the NW1⁄4, the revision of a currently approved DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SW1⁄4 of the NW1⁄4, the NW1⁄4 of the collection. SW1⁄4 and the SW1⁄4 of the SW1⁄4 of Affected Public: Business or Other- Bureau of Indian Affairs Section 1, the NE1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4, the For-Profit Institutions: U.S. nonfuel NW1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 of the [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/ minerals producers and consumers of NE1⁄4, the SE1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4, the NE1⁄4 A0A501010.999900 253G] industrial minerals. Public sector: State of the NW1⁄4, the NW1⁄4 of the NW1⁄4, 1 1 1 and local governments. Land Acquisition; Ho-Chunk Nation of the SW ⁄4 of the NW ⁄4, the SE ⁄4 of the 1 1 1 1 Respondent Obligation: None. Wisconsin NW ⁄4, the NE ⁄4 of the SW ⁄4, the NW ⁄4 Participation is voluntary. of the SW1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 of the SW1⁄4, the Frequency of Collection: Monthly, AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, SE1⁄4 of the SW1⁄4, the NE1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4, Quarterly, Semiannually, or Annually. Interior. the NW1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37652 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices SE1⁄4 and SE1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4 of Section 2, Ammunition Plant perimeter fence; of 541.22 ft.; thence southeasterly along the NE1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4, the NW1⁄4 of the THENCE S85°35′58″ E along said the arc of said curve, 487.36 ft. to a 3⁄4″ NE1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4, the SE1⁄4 boundary fence, 116.31 ft. to the top of solid round iron rod at the end of the of the NE1⁄4, the NE1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4, the a 5″ diameter iron pipe at a fence corner curve thereof, said curve having a long NW1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4 in the Badger Army Ammunition Plant chord bearing S30°08′16″ E, 471.06 ft. and SE1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4 of Section 3, the perimeter fence; THENCE N79°40′05″ E THENCE S04°19′32″ E, 186.91 ft. to a 1 1 1 NE ⁄4 of the NE ⁄4 and the SE ⁄4 of the along said boundary fence, 88.90 ft. to 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; THENCE 1 1 NE ⁄4 of Section 10, the NE ⁄4 of the a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; THENCE S02°46′22″ W, 2,101.76 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid NE1⁄4, the NW1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 N89°42′24″ E along said boundary fence, round iron rod; THENCE S02°46′15″ W, 1 1 1 of the NE ⁄4, the SE ⁄4 of the NE ⁄4, the 107.92 ft. to the top of a 5″ diameter iron 1,005.40 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod NE1⁄4 of the NW1⁄4, the NW1⁄4 of the pipe at a fence corner in the Badger at the point of curvature of a curve to NW1⁄4, the SW1⁄4 of the NW1⁄4, the SE1⁄4 Army Ammunition Plant perimeter the right having a central angle of of the NW1⁄4 of Section 11, all in T10N, fence; THENCE S03°55′57″ E along said 58°50′20″, and a radius of 695.87 ft.; R6E, Town of Sumpter, Sauk County, boundary fence, 538.07 ft. to the top of thence southwesterly along the arc of Wisconsin more particularly described a 5″ diameter iron pipe at a fence corner said curve, 714.61 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid as follows: in the Badger Army Ammunition Plant round iron rod at point of reverse Commencing at the north quarter perimeter fence; THENCE S01°03′37″ W curvature thereof, said curve having a corner of Section 3, T10N, R6E; thence along said boundary fence, 427.20 ft. to long chord bearing S32°57′32″ W, S52°06′02″ E, 865.88 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid the top of a 5″ diameter iron pipe at a 683.62 ft.; the point of reverse curvature round iron rod; thence N85°00′00″ E, fence corner in the Badger Army being in a curve to the left having a 35.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; Ammunition Plant perimeter fence; central angle of 57°26′32″ and a radius thence S5°00′00″ E, 35.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ THENCE S89°02′38″ E along said of 1,277.16 ft.; thence southeasterly solid round iron rod; thence S85°00′00″ boundary fence, 1,057.00 ft. to the top along the arc of said curve, 1,280.42 ft. W, 35.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron of a 5″ diameter iron pipe at a fence to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the end rod; thence N5°0′00″ W, 35.00 ft. to a corner in the Badger Army Ammunition of the curve thereof, said curve having 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; thence Plant perimeter fence; THENCE a long chord bearing S34°25′24″ W, N52°06′02″ W, 865.88 ft. to the north S89°02′38″ E, 107.85 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid 1,227.47 ft.; THENCE S84°20′38″ E, quarter corner of section 3, T10N, R6E; round iron rod; THENCE S29°57′32″ E, 30.01 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod THENCE N89°53′11″ E along the north 110.60 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; at the point of curvature of a curve to line of the NW1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4 of said THENCE S45°35′28″ E, 645.15 ft. to a the left having a central angle of Section 3, 20.16 ft. to the south quarter 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point of 02°26′12″ and a radius of 2,425.57 ft.; corner of Section 34, T11N, R6E; curvature of a curve to the right having thence southerly along the arc of said THENCE N89°56′52″ E along the south a central angle of 45°34′28″ and a radius curve, 103.16 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round line of the SW1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4 of said of 280.00 ft.; thence southerly along the iron rod at the end of the curve thereof, Section 34, 6.71 ft. to the centerline of arc of said curve, 222.72 ft. to the east said curve having a long chord bearing United States Highway ‘‘12’’; THENCE line of the SW1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4 of Section S03°19′53″ W, 103.15 ft.; THENCE N00°55′51″ E along said centerline, 35, T11N, R6E and the point of tangency S00°57′46″ W, 380.83 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid 940.81 ft. to the point of curvature of a thereof, said curve having a long chord round iron rod; THENCE N88°49′29″ W, curve to the right having a central angle bearing S22°48′14″ E, 216.89 ft.; 29.99 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; of 05°40′12″ and a radius of 1,910.00 ft.; THENCE S00°01′00″ E along the east THENCE S00°57′44″ W, 913.21 ft. to a thence northeasterly along the arc of line of said SW1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4, 983.91 ft. 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; THENCE said curve and said centerline, 189.02 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; thence N89°08′47″ W, 70.75 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid to the point of tangency thereof, said N88°28′32″ W, 358.22 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point of curvature curve having a long chord bearing round iron rod on the north line of the of a curve to the right having a central N03°45′57″ E, 188.94 ft.; THENCE NW1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4 of Section 2, T10N, angle of 28°51′22″ and a radius of N06°36′03″ E along said centerline, R6E; thence S89°57′01″ W along said 274.99 ft.; thence southerly along the arc 701.17 ft. to a westerly extension of the north line, 353.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round of said curve, 138.50 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid north boundary fence of the Badger iron rod; thence S0°17′43″ W, 316.48 ft. round iron rod at the point of tangency Army Ammunition Plant; THENCE to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; thence thereof, said curve having a long chord S89°01′57″ E along said boundary fence N89°57′01″ E, 353.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid bearing S15°16′53″ W, 137.04 ft.; extension, 121.59 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round round iron rod; thence N0°17′43″ E, THENCE S29°42′34″ W, 91.44 ft. to a 3⁄4″ iron rod on the east right-of-way line of 316.48 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod solid round iron rod at the point of said United States Highway ‘‘12’’; on the north line of the NW1⁄4 of the curvature of a curve to the left having THENCE S89°01′57″ E along said NE1⁄4 of Section 2, T10N, R6E; thence a central angle of 04°06′24″, and a boundary fence, 3,730.27 ft. to the top S88°28′32″ E, 358.22 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid radius of 1,902.00 ft.; thence southerly of a 5″ diameter iron pipe at a fence round iron rod; THENCE N89°47′45″ E, along the arc of said curve, 136.33 ft. to corner in the Badger Army Ammunition 1,770.12 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point Plant perimeter fence; THENCE at the point of curvature of a curve to of tangency thereof, said curve having a N01°49′33″ E along said boundary fence, the right having a central angle of long chord bearing S27°39′22″ W, 231.54 ft. to the top of a 5″ diameter iron 18°28′58″ and a radius of 656.00 ft.; 136.30 ft.; THENCE S25°36′10″ W, pipe at a fence corner in the Badger thence easterly along the arc of said 336.07 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; Army Ammunition Plant perimeter curve, 211.61 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round THENCE N89°00′17″ W, 2,293.93 ft. to fence; THENCE N37°02′42″ E along said iron rod at the point of compound a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point boundary fence, 522.84 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid curvature thereof, said curve having a of curvature of a curve to the left having round iron rod; THENCE N32°56′27″ E long chord bearing S80°57′46″ E, 210.70 a central angle of 32°47′08″ and a radius along said boundary fence, 349.60 ft. to ft.; said compound curvature being the of 171.64 ft.; thence westerly along the the top of a 5″ diameter iron pipe at a beginning of a curve to the right having arc of said curve, 98.21 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid fence corner in the Badger Army a central angle of 51°35′40″ and a radius round iron rod at the point of tangency VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37653 thereof, said curve having a long chord solid round iron rod at the point of N89°53′11″ E along the north line of the bearing S74°36′09″ W, 96.88 ft.; tangency thereof, said curve having a NE1⁄4 of said Section 3, 20.16 ft. to the THENCE S58°12′35″ W, 4.12 ft. to a 3⁄4″ long chord bearing N15°52′00.5″ W, north 1⁄4 corner of said Section 3; thence solid round iron rod at the point of 79.65 ft.; THENCE N30°16′44″ W, S52°06′02″ E, 865.88 ft. to a 3 curvature of a curve to the right having 103.56 ft. to a ⁄4″ solid round iron rod 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point of a central angle of 32°29′28″ and a radius at the point of curvature of a curve to beginning; thence N85°00′00″ E, 35.00 of 180.00 ft.; thence westerly along the the right having a central angle of ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; thence 3 ° ′ ″ arc of said curve, 102.07 ft. to a ⁄4″ solid 31 17 36 and a radius of 192.00 ft.; S5°00′00″ E, 35.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point of tangency thence northerly along the arc of said round iron rod; thence S50°00′00″ E, 3 ″ thereof, said curve having a long chord curve, 104.87 ft. to a ⁄4 solid round 127.28 ft.; thence S85°00′00″ W, 215.00 bearing S74°27′19″ W, 100.71 ft.; iron rod at the point of tangency thereof, ft.; thence N5°00′00″ W, 215.00 ft.; THENCE N89°17′57″ W, 380.98 ft. to a said curve having a long chord bearing thence N85°00′00″ E, 215.00 ft.; thence ° ′ ″ 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; THENCE N14 37 56 W, 103.57 ft.; THENCE S5°00′00″ E, 215.00 ft.; thence ° ′ ″ 3 ″ N86°54′50″ W, 831.39 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid N01 00 52 E, 62.79 ft. to a ⁄4 solid N50°00′00″ W, 127.28 ft.; thence ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ round iron rod; THENCE N89 53 10 W, round iron rod; THENCE N89 06 24 W, S85°00′00″ W, 35.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid 3 ″ 96.40 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod 380.04 ft. to a ⁄4 solid round iron rod; round iron rod; thence N5°00′00″ W, ° ′ ″ at the point of curvature of a curve to THENCE N00 17 32 W, 548.93 ft. to a 35.00 ft. to the point of beginning. the left having a central angle of 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; THENCE ° ′ ″ 3 ″ 64°36′08″ and a radius of 189.00 ft.; N01 03 16 E, 1,517.93 ft. to a ⁄4 solid Easement ‘‘B’’—90 Foot Easement thence southwesterly along the arc of round iron rod; THENCE N89°55′10″ W, Around Cemetery PARCEL ‘‘O6’’ 3 ″ 632.25 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod; said curve, 213.10 ft. to a ⁄4 solid 1 ° ′ ″ 3 ″ A parcel of land located in the NW ⁄4 round iron rod at the point of tangency THENCE N00 33 46 E, 93.42 ft. to a ⁄4 of the NE1⁄4 of Section 2, T10N, R6E and thereof, said curve having a long chord solid round iron rod at the point of in the SW1⁄4 of the SE1⁄4 of Section 35, bearing S57°48′46″ W, 201.99 ft.; curvature of a curve to the right having ° ′ ″ T11N, R6E all in the town of Sumpter, THENCE S25°30′42″ W, 24.98 ft. to a 3⁄4″ a central angle of 07 05 22 and a radius Sauk County, Wisconsin more solid round iron rod at the point of of 2,794.00 ft.; thence northerly along 3 ″ particularly described as follows: curvature of a curve to the right having the arc of said curve, 345.72 ft. to a ⁄4 a central angle of 66°27′44″ and a radius solid round iron rod at the point of Commencing at a Harrison monument of 63.00 ft.; thence westerly along the tangency thereof, said curve having a at the northeast corner of said Section 3 ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ arc of said curve, 73.08 ft. to a ⁄4″ solid long chord bearing N04 06 27 E, 345.50 2; thence S89 57 01 W along the north ° ′ ″ round iron rod at the point of tangency ft.; THENCE N07 39 08 E, 104.02 ft. to line of the NE1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4 and the 3 ″ thereof, said curve having a long chord a ⁄4 solid round iron rod at the point north line of the NW1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4 of bearing S58°44′34″ W, 69.05 ft.; of curvature of a curve to the left having said Section 2, 1667.80 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid THENCE N88°01′34″ W, 214.61 ft. to a a central angle of 07°14′40″ and a radius round iron rod at the point of beginning; 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point of of 1,012.00 ft.; thence northerly along thence S0°17′43″ W, 316.48 ft. to a 3⁄4″ 3 ″ curvature of a curve to the left having the arc of said curve, 127.96 ft. to a ⁄4 solid round iron rod; thence S44°52′38″ a central angle of 90°21′06″ and a radius solid round iron rod at the point of E, 126.90 ft.; thence N0°17′43″ E, 496.48 of 72.00 ft.; thence southerly along the tangency thereof, said curve having a ft.; thence S89°57′01″ W, 533.00 ft.; ° ′ ″ arc of said curve, 113.54 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid long chord bearing N04 01 48 E, 127.87 thence S0°17′43″ W, 496.48 ft.; thence ° ′ ″ round iron rod at the point of tangency ft.; THENCE N00 24 28 E, 210.33 ft. to N89°57′01″ E, 533.00 ft.; thence 3 ″ thereof, said curve having a long chord a ⁄4 solid round iron rod; THENCE N44°52′38″ W, 126.90 ft.; thence ° ′ ″ N89°06′46″ W, 1,056.52 ft. to the west bearing S46 47 53 W, 102.14 ft; S89°57′01″ W, 353.00 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid 1 1 THENCE S01°37′20″ W, 148.74 ft. to a line of the NW ⁄4 of the SE ⁄4 of Section round iron rod; thence N0°17′43″ E, 3 ″ 3, T10N, R6E; THENCE N00°36′25″ E ⁄4 solid round iron rod at the point of 316.48 ft. to a 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod along said west line, 970.26 ft. to the curvature of a curve to the right having 1 4 1 on the north line of the NW ⁄ of the a central angle of 89°03′28″ and a radius southwest corner of the NE ⁄4 of said 1 ° ′ ″ NE ⁄4 of said Section 2; thence of 61.00 ft.; thence westerly along the Section 3; THENCE N00 40 57 E along N89°57′01″ E along said north line, 3 ″ 1 4 arc of said curve, 94.82 ft. to a ⁄4 solid the west line of the NE ⁄ of said Section 353.00 ft. to the point of beginning. round iron rod at the point of tangency 3, 2,747.19 ft. to the point of beginning. thereof, said curve having a long chord Containing 67,650,480 square feet or In addition, pursuant to the Act, bearing S46°09′04″ W, 85.55 ft.; 1,553.04 acres more or less. federally-owned structures on the ° ′ ″ property have been transferred to the THENCE N89 19 12 W, 791.47 ft. to a Subject to the Following Easements to 3 ″ Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin in fee. ⁄4 solid round iron rod; THENCE the Town of Sumpter Around Existing ° ′ ″ 3 ″ The transfer of the property has been N01 18 03 E, 405.32 ft. to a ⁄4 solid Cemeteries round iron rod at the point of curvature recorded at the Land Title Records of a curve to the left having a central Easement ‘‘A’’—90 Foot Easement Office as BIA Land Titles and Records angle of 02°45′20″ and a radius of Around Cemetery PARCEL ‘‘O2’’ Tract ID #: 439 T 2170. 1,629.00 ft.; thence northerly along the A parcel of land located in the Authority 3 arc of said curve, 78.34 ft. to a ⁄4″ solid NW1⁄4 of the NE1⁄4 of Section 3, T10N, round iron rod at the point of tangency R6E, Town of Sumpter, Sauk County, This notice publishes the legal thereof, said curve having a long chord Wisconsin more particularly described description of the property in the bearing N00°04′37″ W, 78.33 ft. as follows: Federal Register. The Assistant THENCE N01°27′17″ W, 241.79 ft. to a Commencing at a Harrison monument Secretary—Indian Affairs is issuing this 3⁄4″ solid round iron rod at the point of at the northeast corner of said Section publication under authority delegated curvature of a curve to the left having 3; thence S89°56′52″ W along the north by the Secretary of the Interior by 209 a central angle of 28°49′27″ and a radius line of the NE1⁄4 of said Section 3, Departmental Manual 8.1, and with the of 160.00 ft.; thence northwesterly along 2618.20 ft. to the south 1⁄4 corner of concurrence of the Secretary of the the arc of said curve, 80.49 ft. to a 3⁄4″ Section 34, T11N, R6E; thence Army. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:39 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37654 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Dated: June 26, 2015. the work of the Review Committee 2. Affirm that the signatory is the Kevin K. Washburn, affecting such tribes or organizations; official authorized by the tribe or Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 6. Consulting with the Secretary of the organization to submit the nomination. [FR Doc. 2015–16196 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Interior in the development of 3. Nominations by a traditional regulations to carry out NAGPRA; and BILLING CODE 4337–15–P religious leader must explain that he or 7. Making recommendations regarding future care of repatriated cultural items. she is a traditional religious leader. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The Review Committee consists of 4. Include the nominee’s full legal seven members appointed by the name, home address, home telephone National Park Service Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary number, and email address. may not appoint Federal officers or 5. Include the nominee’s resume or a [NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–18374; employees to the Review Committee. PPWOCRADN0–PCU00RP15.R50000] brief biography of the nominee, in Three members are appointed from which the nominee’s NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection nominations submitted by Indian tribes, experience and ability to work as a and Repatriation Review Committee: Native Hawaiian organizations, and member of a Federal advisory Notice of Nomination Solicitation traditional Native American religious committee are addressed. leaders. At least two of these members AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. must be traditional Indian religious Dated: June 19, 2015. ACTION: Notice of request for leaders. Three members are appointed Alma Ripps, nominations. from nominations submitted by national Chief, Office of Policy. museum or scientific organizations. One [FR Doc. 2015–16103 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: The National Park Service is member is appointed from a list of BILLING CODE 4310–EE–P seeking nominations for one member of persons developed and consented to by the Native American Graves Protection all of the other members. and Repatriation Review Committee Members serve as Special DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (Review Committee). The Secretary of Governmental Employees, which the Interior will appoint the member requires completion of annual ethics National Park Service from nominations submitted by Indian training. Members are appointed for 4- tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, year terms and incumbent members may and traditional Native American be reappointed for 2-year terms. The [NPS–WASO–NRNHL–18569; PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] religious leaders. The nominee need not Review Committee’s work takes place be a traditional Indian religious leader. during public meetings. The Review National Register of Historic Places; DATES: Nominations must be received Committee normally meets in person Notification of Pending Nominations by August 31, 2015. two times per year, normally for two or and Related Actions ADDRESSES: Melanie O’Brien, Manager, three days. The Review Committee may National NAGPRA Program (2253), also hold one or more public Nominations for the following National Park Service, 1849 C Street teleconferences of several hours properties being considered for listing NW., Washington, DC 20240, or via duration. or related actions in the National Review Committee members serve email [email protected]. Register were received by the National without pay but shall be reimbursed for Park Service before May 30, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: each day the member participates in Pursuant to § 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, Melanie O’Brien, Manager, National Review Committee meetings. Review written comments are being accepted NAGPRA Program (2253), National Park Committee members are reimbursed for Service, 1849 C Street NW., travel expenses incurred in association concerning the significance of the Washington, DC 20240, or via email nominated properties under the _ with Review Committee meetings (25 nagpra [email protected]. U.S.C. 3006(b)(4)). Additional National Register criteria for evaluation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information regarding the Review Comments may be forwarded by United Review Committee was established by Committee, including the Review States Postal Service, to the National the Native American Graves Protection Committee’s charter, meeting protocol, Register of Historic Places, National and Repatriation Act of 1990 and dispute resolution procedures, is Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280, (NAGPRA), at 25 U.S.C. 3006, 5 U.S.C. available on the National NAGPRA Washington, DC 20240; by all other Appendix 2. Program Web site, at www.nps.gov/ carriers, National Register of Historic The Review Committee is responsible NAGPRA/REVIEW/. Places, National Park Service,1201 Eye for: Individuals who are federally St. NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC 1. Monitoring the NAGPRA inventory registered lobbyists are ineligible to 20005; or by fax, 202–371–6447. Written and identification process; serve on all FACA and non-FACA or faxed comments should be submitted 2. Reviewing and making findings boards, committees, or councils in an by July 16, 2015. Before including your related to the identity or cultural individual capacity. The term address, phone number, email address, affiliation of cultural items, or the return ‘‘individual capacity’’ refers to or other personal identifying of such items; individuals who are appointed to information in your comment, you 3. Facilitating the resolution of exercise their own individual best should be aware that your entire disputes; judgment on behalf of the government, comment—including your personal 4. Compiling an inventory of such as when they are designated identifying information—may be made culturally unidentifiable human Special Government Employees, rather publicly available at any time. While remains and developing a process for than being appointed to represent a you can ask us in your comment to disposition of such remains; particular interest. withhold your personal identifying 5. Consulting with Indian tribes and Nominations should: information from public review, we Native Hawaiian organizations and 1. Be submitted on the official cannot guarantee that we will be able to museums on matters within the scope of letterhead of the tribe or organization. do so. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:44 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37655 Dated: June 4, 2015. NEW JERSEY Piscataquis County J. Paul Loether, Cumberland County Burgess, Walter and Eva, Farm, 79 Shaw Rd., Macomber Corner, 97000312 Chief, National Register of Historic Places/ Remington, John and Elizabeth, House, 689 National Historic Landmarks Program. Roadstown Rd., Hopewell Township, NORTH DAKOTA 15000420 CALIFORNIA Eddy County Los Angeles County NORTH CAROLINA Myhre, Jens, Round Barn, (North Dakota University of Southern California Historic Carteret County Round Barns TR) ND 30, New Rockford, 86002749 District, Roughly bounded by W. Jefferson HMT BEDFORDSHIRE (shipwreck and & W. Exposition Blvds., S. Figueroa St. & remains), (World War II Shipwrecks along La Moure County McClintock Ave., Los Angeles, 15000408 the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico MPS) Rodman Octagonal Barn, (North Dakota COLORADO Offshore Beaufort, Beaufort, 15000421 Round Barns TR) ND 30, Edgeley, Logan County NORTH DAKOTA 86002753 Pantall Elementary School, 1215 N. 5th St., Dunn County McIntosh County Sterling, 15000409 Independence Congregational Church, BIA Wishek City Hall, Old, 21 Centennial St., CONNECTICUT Rd. 13, Mandaree, 15000422 Wishek, 05001141 Fairfield County OHIO Stark County Gerhardt Octagonal Pig House, (North Dakota Rowayton Depot Historic District, 1–23 Hamilton County Round Barns TR) ND 38, Gladstone, Cudlipp, 5–15 Dibble, 5–28 Hunt, 12,19 United States Playing Card Company 86002758 Jacob & 7–11 Thomes Sts., 1–44 Arnold Complex, 4590 Beech St., Norwood, Ln., 6–12 Belmont Pl., Norwalk, 15000410 15000044 [FR Doc. 2015–16162 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–51–P GEORGIA VERMONT Elbert County Windham County DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Elberton Commercial Historic District Vermont Academy Campus Historic District, (Boundary Increase and Additional (Educational Resources of Vermont MPS) National Park Service Documentation), N. McIntosh, Thomas, 10 Long Walk, Rockingham, 15000423 Church, & S. Oliver Sts., Elberton, WISCONSIN [NPS–PWR–TUSK–18335: 15000411 PX.XLKTUSK15.00.1] Fulton County Dane County Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Lindridge—Martin Manor Historic District, Holy Name Seminary, 702 S. High Point Rd., Roughly bounded by Armand Rd., NE., Madison, 15000424 Monument Advisory Council Lindridge, Melante, & Cardova Drs., NE., Rock County AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. Armand Ct., NE., Atlanta, 15000412 Goodrich, Ezra and Elizabeth, House, 742 E. ACTION: Establishment. KENTUCKY Madison Ave., Milton, 15000425 SUMMARY: The National Park Service, Fayette County Sauk County U.S. Department of the Interior, is Young, Charles, Park and Community Center, Spellman Granite Works, 615 Phillips Blvd., establishing the Tule Springs Fossil 540 E. 3rd St., Lexington, 15000413 Sauk City, 15000426 Beds National Monument Advisory LOUISIANA A request to move has been received for Council (Council). The purpose of the the following resource: Council is to provide the Secretary of Caddo Parish the Interior (Secretary) and National COLORADO Washington, Booker T., High School, 2104 Park Service (NPS) guidance for the Milam St., Shreveport, 15000414 El Paso County management of the Monument. MAINE Rio Grande Engine No. 168, 9 S. Sierra FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madre, Colorado Springs, 79000601 Androscoggin County Christie Vanover, Public Affairs Officer, Tule Springs Fossil Beds National Lewiston Mills and Water Power System A request for removal has been received for Historic District, Bounded by the following resources: Monument, 601 Nevada Way, Boulder Androscoggin R., Lisbon, Locust & Bates City, Nevada 89005, telephone (702) Sts., Lewiston, 15000415 MAINE 293–8691, or email tusk_information@ nps.gov. Cumberland County Androscoggin County Great Chebeague Golf Club, 16 Stone Wharf Bradford House, 54–56 Pine St., Lewiston, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NPS Rd., Chebeague Island, 15000416 78000154 is establishing the Tule Springs Fossil Aroostook County Beds National Monument Advisory Kennebec County Council in accordance with Section Hodgkins, Ella R., Intermediate School, 17 McElwain House, 2 Main St., Caribou, 82000739 3092 (a)(6) of Public Law 113–291, and Malta St., Augusta, 15000417 in accordance with the provisions of the Piscataquis County Cumberland County Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 Norton’s Corner School, 2373 Elliotsville Rd., First Baptist Church, 353 Congress St., U.S.C. Appendix 2. Willimantic, 15000418 Portland, 78000170 The Council provides the Secretary Franklin County and the NPS with guidance for the MISSOURI management of the Monument, New Sharon Bridge, S. of ME 2 over Sandy St. Louis County River, New Sharon, 99001189 including advice on the preparation and Jefferson Barracks VA Hospital, (United implementation of the management States Second Generation Veterans Knox County plan. Hospitals MPS) 1 Jefferson Barracks Dr., St. Crockett, Knott, House, 750 Main St., The Council is composed of 10 Louis, 15000419 Rockland, 93001112 members appointed by the Secretary, as VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37656 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices follows: (a) One member appointed findings concerning whether there is a On February 13, 2009, InterDigital among individuals recommended by the violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act moved for summary determination that County Commission; (b) one member of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 a domestic industry exists because its appointed among individuals (‘‘section 337’’). licensing activities in the United States recommended by the city council of Las satisfy the domestic industry FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vegas, Nevada; (c) one member requirement under 19 U.S.C. appointed among individuals Megan M. Valentine, Office of the 1337(a)(3)(C). On March 10, 2009, the recommended by the city council of General Counsel, U.S. International presiding Administrative Law Judge North Las Vegas, Nevada; (d) one Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., (‘‘ALJ’’) issued an initial determination member appointed among individuals Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 42) granting the recommended by the tribal council of 708–2301. Copies of non-confidential motion. On April 9, 2009, the the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe; (e) one documents filed in connection with this Commission determined not to review member of the conservation community investigation are or will be available for the ID. Notice (Apr. 9, 2009). in southern Nevada; (f) one member inspection during official business On August 14, 2009, the ALJ issued appointed among individuals hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the his final ID, finding no violation of recommended by Nellis Air Force Base; Office of the Secretary, U.S. section 337. In particular, he found that (g) one member appointed among International Trade Commission, 500 E the asserted claims of the patents-in-suit individuals recommended by the State Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, are not infringed and that they are not of Nevada; (h) one member who resides telephone (202) 205–2000. General invalid. The ALJ further found no in Clark County and has a background information concerning the Commission prosecution laches relating to the ‘004, that reflects the purposes for which the may also be obtained by accessing its ‘966, and ‘847 patents and that the ‘579 Monument was established; and (i) two Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. patent is not unenforceable. members who reside in Clark County or The public record for this investigation On October 16, 2009, the Commission adjacent counties, both of whom shall may be viewed on the Commission’s determined to review the final ID in have experience in the field of electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// part. 74 FR 55068–69 (Oct. 26, 2009) paleontology, obtained through higher edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired (‘‘Notice of Review’’). In particular, education, experience, or both. persons are advised that information on although the Commission affirmed the Members will be appointed by the this matter can be obtained by ID’s determination of no violation of Secretary for a term of three years. contacting the Commission’s TDD section 337 and terminated the Certification Statement: I hereby terminal on (202) 205–1810. investigation, the Commission reviewed certify that the establishment of the Tule and modified the ID’s claim SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The construction of the term ‘‘access signal’’ Springs Fossil Beds National Monument Commission instituted Inv. No. 337– Advisory Council is necessary and in found in the asserted claims of the ’847 TA–613 on September 11, 2007, based patent. The Commission also reviewed, the public interest in connection with on a complaint filed by InterDigital the performance of duties imposed on but took no position on, the ID’s Communications Corp. of King of construction of the term ‘‘synchronize’’ the Department of the Interior under Prussia, Pennsylvania and InterDigital Public Law 113–291, The Carl Levin found in the asserted claims of the ’847 Technology Corp. of Wilmington, patent. The Commission further and Howard ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon National Delaware (collectively, ‘‘InterDigital’’) Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal reviewed, but took no position on, on August 7, 2007. 72 FR 51838 (Sept. validity with respect to all of the Year 2015. 11, 2007). The complaint, as amended, asserted patents. The Commission did Dated: June 16, 2015. alleged violations of section 337 of the not review the ID’s construction of the Sally Jewell, Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in claim limitations ‘‘code’’ and ‘‘increased Secretary of the Interior. the importation into the United States, power level’’ in the asserted claims of [FR Doc. 2015–16109 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] the sale for importation, and the sale the ’966 and ’847 patents. BILLING CODE 4310–EE–P within the United States after InterDigital timely appealed the importation of certain 3G mobile Commission’s final determination of no handsets and components thereof by violation of section 337 as to claims 1, INTERNATIONAL TRADE reason of infringement of certain claims 3, 8, 9, and 11 of the ’966 patent and COMMISSION of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,117,004 (‘‘the ‘004 claim 5 of the ’847 patent to the Federal patent’’); 7,190,966 (‘‘the ‘966 patent’’); Circuit. Specifically, InterDigital [Investigation No. 337–TA–613 Remand] 7,286,847 (‘‘the ‘847 patent’’); and appealed the final ID’s unreviewed 6,693,579 (‘‘the ‘579 patent). The Notice constructions of the claim limitations Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and of Investigation named Nokia ‘‘code’’ and ‘‘increased power level’’ in Components Thereof; Commission Corporation of Espoo, Finland (‘‘Nokia’’) the ’966 and ’847 patents. Respondent Decision to Review in Part a Final and Nokia Inc. of Irving, Texas (‘‘Nokia Nokia, the intervenor on appeal, raised Initial Determination on Remand; Inc.’’) as respondents. The Office of as an alternate ground of affirmance the Request for Written Submissions Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) issue of whether the Commission AGENCY: U.S. International Trade was named as a participating party. The correctly determined that InterDigital Commission. Commission later amended the Notice has a license-based domestic industry. ACTION: Notice. of Investigation to substitute On August 1, 2012, the Federal complainant InterDigital Circuit reversed the Commission’s SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Communications, Inc. for InterDigital construction of the claim limitations the U.S. International Trade Communications Corp. Notice (Feb. 15, ‘‘code’’ and ‘‘increased power level’’ in Commission has determined to review 2015); Order No. 53 (Jan. 14, 2015). The the ’966 and ’847 patents, reversed the in part the presiding administrative law Commission also later amended the Commission’s determination of non- judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) final initial Notice of Investigation to add Microsoft infringement as to the asserted claims of determination on remand (‘‘RID’’) Mobile OY (‘‘MMO’’) as a party. 79 FR those patents, and remanded to the issued on April 27, 2015, making 43068–69 (July 24, 2014). Commission for further proceedings. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37657 InterDigital Commc’ns, LLC v. Int’l patent hold-up by InterDigital, but that petitions for review, and the responses Trade Comm’n., 690 F.3d 1318 (Fed. there is evidence of reverse hold-up by thereto, the Commission has determined Cir. 2012). In particular, the Court the respondents. The ALJ found that the to review the RID in part. rejected the final ID’s construction of public interest does not preclude Specifically, the Commission has the ‘‘code’’ limitation as being limited to issuance of an exclusion order. The ALJ determined to review the RID’s findings ‘‘a spreading code or a portion of a did not issue a Recommended concerning the application of the spreading code’’ and, instead, construed Determination on remedy or bonding. Commission’s prior construction in ‘‘code’’ as ‘‘a sequence of chips’’ and as On May 11, 2015, MMO and Nokia Certain Wireless Devices with 3G ‘‘broad enough to cover both a spreading Inc. (collectively, ‘‘MMO’’) filed a Capabilities and Components Thereof, code and a non-spreading code.’’ Id. at petition for review of certain aspects of Inv. No. 337–TA–800 (‘‘the 800 1323–27. The Court affirmed the the RID, including infringement, investigation’’) and Certain Wireless Commission’s determination that domestic industry, and the public Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities InterDigital has a domestic industry. Id. interest. Also on May 11, 2015, Nokia and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337– at 1329–30. Nokia subsequently filed a filed a petition for review of the RID TA–868 (‘‘the 868 investigation’’) of the combined petition for panel rehearing with respect to infringement, domestic claim limitation ‘‘successively and rehearing en banc on the issue of industry, and whether the Commission [transmits/transmitted] signals.’’ The domestic industry. On January 10, 2013, has jurisdiction over Nokia following Commission has also determined to the Court denied the petition and issued the sale of its handset business to MMO. review the RID with respect to whether an additional opinion addressing Further on May 11, 2015, the the accused products satisfy the claim several issues raised in Nokia’s petition Commission investigative attorney limitation ‘‘successively [transmits/ for rehearing. InterDigital Commc’ns, (‘‘IA’’) filed a petition for review of the transmitted] signals’’ as construed by LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 707 F.3d RID’s finding of infringement. the Commission in the 800 and 868 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The Court’s On May 19, 2015, InterDigital filed a investigations. The Commission has mandate issued on January 17, 2013, response to MMO’s and the IA’s further determined to review the RID’s returning jurisdiction to the petitions for review. Also on May 19, public interest findings. Commission. 2015, MMO filed a response to the IA’s The Commission has determined not On February 4, 2013, the Commission petition for review. Further on May 19, to review the remaining issues decided issued an Order directing the parties to 2015, the IA filed a response to MMO’s in the RID. submit comments regarding what and Nokia’s petitions for review. The parties are requested to brief their further proceedings must be conducted On June 3, 2015, InterDigital filed a positions on the issues under review to comply with the Federal Circuit’s statement on the public interest with reference to the applicable law and remand. Commission Order (Feb. 4, pursuant to Commission Rule the evidentiary record. In connection 2013). On February 12, 2014, the 210.50(a)(4). Also on June 3, 2015, with its review, the Commission Commission issued an Order and several non-parties filed responses to requests responses to the following Opinion deciding certain aspects of the the Commission Notice issued on May questions: investigation and remanding other 4, 2015, including: United States 1. Have Respondents waived any aspects to the Chief ALJ. 79 FR 9277– Senator Robert Casey, Jr. of reliance on the application of the 79 (Feb. 18, 2014); see also Comm’n Op. Pennsylvania; Microsoft Corporation; Commission’s construction in the 800 Remanding Investigation (Feb. 12, Intel Corporation, Cisco Systems, Inc., and 868 investigations of the limitation 2014); Comm’n Order Remanding Dell Inc., and Hewlett-Packard ‘‘successively [transmits/transmitted] Investigation (Feb. 12, 2014). On Company; Innovation Alliance; and signals?’’ February 24, 2014, Nokia petitioned for Ericsson Inc. See 80 FR 26295–96 (May 2. Do the Commission’s reconsideration of the Commission’s 7, 2015). On June 24, 2015, United determinations in the 800 and/or 868 remand Order and Opinion. On March States Senator Patrick J. Toomey of investigation constitute an intervening 24, 2014, the Commission granted in Pennsylvania also filed a response to the change of controlling legal authority part the petition for reconsideration and Commission’s May 4, 2015, notice. such that the Commission should apply issued a revised remand notice, order, On June 15, 2015, Respondents filed the construction of ‘‘successively and opinion. 79 FR 17571–73 (Mar. 28, a motion for leave to file a reply in [transmits/transmitted] signals’’ as 2014). support of their petition for review. found in those investigations in On April 27, 2015, the ALJ issued the Respondents Microsoft Mobile Oy and determining infringement in this RID. The ALJ found that the accused Nokia Inc.’s Motion for Leave to File investigation? Nokia handsets meet the limitations Reply of Respondents Microsoft Mobile 3. What evidence exists in the record ‘‘generated using a same code’’ and ‘‘the Oy and Nokia Inc. in Support of Petition of this investigation with respect to message being transmitted only for Review (June 15, 2015). On June 17, whether the accused products satisfy subsequent to the subscriber unit 2015, the IA filed a response, opposing the ‘‘successively [transmits/ receiving the indication’’ recited in the Respondents’ motion. Office of Unfair transmitted] signals’’ limitation as asserted claims of the ’966 and ’847 Import Investigation’s Response to construed by the Commission in the 800 patents. The ALJ also found that the Respondents Microsoft Mobile Oy and and 868 investigations? pilot signal (P–CPICH) in the 3GPP Nokia, Inc.’s Motion for Leave to File 4. Please state and explain your standard practiced by the accused Nokia Reply in Support of Petition to Review position on whether, for purposes of the handsets satisfies the limitation (June 17, 2015). On June 19, 2015, Commission’s consideration of the ‘‘synchronize to the pilot signal’’ recited InterDigital filed a response, opposing statutory public interest factors, in the asserted claim of the ’847 patent. Respondents’ motion. InterDigital’s InterDigital has in effect asserted that The ALJ further found that the currently Response to Respondents MMO and the patents in question are FRAND- imported Nokia handsets, which Nokia, Inc.’s Motion for Leave to File a encumbered, standard-essential patents. contain chips that were not previously Reply in Support of Petition for Review 5. Please state and explain your adjudicated, infringe the asserted claims (June 19, 2015). The motion is denied. position on whether InterDigital has of the ’966 and ’847 patents. The ALJ Having examined the record of this offered Respondents licensing terms also found that there is no evidence of investigation, including the RID, the that reflect the value of its own patents. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37658 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 6. What portion of the accused orders would have on (1) the public Persons filing written submissions devices is allegedly covered by the health and welfare, (2) competitive must file the original document asserted claims? Do the patents in conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. electronically on or before the deadlines question relate to relatively minor production of articles that are like or stated above and submit 8 true paper features of the accused devices? directly competitive with those that are copies to the Office of the Secretary by 7. Please state and explain your subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. noon the next day pursuant to section position on the legal significance of consumers. The Commission is 210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of InterDigital’s alleged willingness to therefore interested in receiving written Practice and Procedure (19 CFR accept an arbitral determination of submissions that address the 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to FRAND terms with respect to the aforementioned public interest factors the investigation number (‘‘Inv. No. patents in question. in the context of this investigation. 337–TA–613 REMAND’’) in a prominent 8. Please state and explain your If the Commission orders some form place on the cover page and/or the first position on the legal significance of of remedy, the U.S. Trade page. (See Handbook for Electronic InterDigital’s alleged unwillingness to Representative, as delegated by the Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ obtain a judicial determination of President, has 60 days to approve or secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/ FRAND terms with respect to the disapprove the Commission’s action. handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). patents in question. See Presidential Memorandum of July Persons with questions regarding filing 9. Please state and explain your 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). should contact the Secretary (202–205– position on whether Respondents have During this period, the subject articles 2000). shown themselves willing to take would be entitled to enter the United Any person desiring to submit a licenses to the patents in question on States under bond, in an amount document to the Commission in FRAND terms. determined by the Commission and confidence must request confidential 10. Do Respondents’ alleged delaying prescribed by the Secretary of the treatment. All such requests should be tactics in negotiating with InterDigital Treasury. The Commission is therefore directed to the Secretary to the provide sufficient evidence of reverse interested in receiving submissions Commission and must include a full hold-up, regardless of Respondents’ concerning the amount of the bond that statement of the reasons why the offers to license only InterDigital’s U.S. should be imposed if a remedy is Commission should grant such patent portfolio? ordered. treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents 11. Do Respondents’ licensing Written Submissions: The parties to for which confidential treatment by the counteroffers satisfy the requirements of the investigation are requested to file Commission is properly sought will be the ETSI IPR Policy? written submissions on the issues 12. Please state and explain your treated accordingly. A redacted non- identified in this notice. Parties to the confidential version of the document position on whether the RID equates investigation, interested government patent infringement and reverse hold- must also be filed simultaneously with agencies, and any other interested any confidential filing. All non- up. parties are encouraged to file written In connection with the final confidential written submissions will be submissions on the issues of remedy, available for public inspection at the disposition of this investigation, the the public interest, and bonding. Such Commission may (1) issue an order that Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. submissions should address the The authority for the Commission’s could result in the exclusion of the recommended determination by the ALJ subject articles from entry into the determination is contained in section on remedy and bonding issued in the 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as United States, and/or (2) issue one or original investigation on August 14, amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part more cease and desist orders that could 2009. Complainant and OUII are 210 of the Commission’s Rules of result in the respondent(s) being requested to submit proposed remedial Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part required to cease and desist from orders for the Commission’s 210). engaging in unfair acts in the consideration and to provide importation and sale of such articles. identification information for all By order of the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission is importers of the subject articles. Issued: June 25, 2015. interested in receiving written Complainant and OUII are also Lisa R. Barton, submissions that address the form of requested to state the dates that the Secretary to the Commission. remedy, if any, that should be ordered. patents expire and the HTSUS numbers [FR Doc. 2015–16116 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] If a party seeks exclusion of an article under which the accused products are BILLING CODE 7020–02–P from entry into the United States for imported. The written submissions and purposes other than entry for proposed remedial orders must be filed consumption, the party should so no later than close of business on July INTERNATIONAL TRADE indicate and provide information 10, 2015. Initial submissions are limited COMMISSION establishing that activities involving to 125 pages, not including any other types of entry either are adversely attachments or exhibits related to [Investigation No. 731–TA–1163 (Review)] affecting it or are likely to do so. For discussion of the public interest. Reply Woven Electric Blankets From China; background, see Certain Devices for submissions must be filed no later than Institution of a Five-Year Review Connecting Computers via Telephone the close of business on July 20, 2015. Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC Reply submissions are limited to 75 AGENCY: United States International Pub. No. 2843 (Dec. 1994) (Commission pages, not including any attachments or Trade Commission. Opinion). exhibits related to discussion of the ACTION: Notice. If the Commission contemplates some public interest. The parties may not form of remedy, it must consider the incorporate by reference their prior SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives effects of that remedy upon the public filings before the ALJ or the notice that it has instituted a review interest. The factors the Commission Commission. No further submissions on pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the will consider include the effect that an these issues will be permitted unless Act’’), as amended, to determine exclusion order and/or cease and desist otherwise ordered by the Commission. whether revocation of the antidumping VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37659 duty order on woven electric blankets facts available, which may include may appear in a review even if they from China would be likely to lead to information provided in response to this participated personally and continuation or recurrence of material notice. substantially in the corresponding injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested Definitions. The following definitions underlying original investigation or an parties are requested to respond to this apply to this review: earlier review of the same underlying notice by submitting the information (1) Subject Merchandise is the class or investigation. The Commission’s specified below to the Commission; 1 to kind of merchandise that is within the designated agency ethics official has be assured of consideration, the scope of the five-year review, as defined advised that a five-year review is not the deadline for responses is July 31, 2015. by the Department of Commerce. same particular matter as the underlying Comments on the adequacy of responses (2) The Subject Country in this review original investigation, and a five-year may be filed with the Commission by is China. review is not the same particular matter September 15, 2015. (3) The Domestic Like Product is the as an earlier review of the same domestically produced product or DATES: Effective Date: July 1, 2015. underlying investigation for purposes of products which are like, or in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 18 U.S.C. 207, the post employment absence of like, most similar in statute for Federal employees, and Michael Szustakowski (202–2205– characteristics and uses with, the 3169), Office of Investigations, U.S. Commission rule § 201.15(b) (19 CFR Subject Merchandise. In its original 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), International Trade Commission, 500 E determination, the Commission defined Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). a single Domestic Like Product Consequently, former employees are not Hearing-impaired persons can obtain comprising finished, semi-finished, and information on this matter by contacting required to seek Commission approval unassembled woven electric blankets to appear in a review under Commission the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– including woven electric blankets 205–1810. Persons with mobility rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the commonly referred to as throws, of all corresponding underlying original impairments who will need special sizes and fabric types, whether made of assistance in gaining access to the investigation or an earlier review of the man-made fiber, natural fiber or a blend same underlying investigation was Commission should contact the Office of both, as is coextensive with pending when they were Commission of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. Commerce’s scope. employees. For further ethics advice on General information concerning the (4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. this matter, contact Carol McCue Commission may also be obtained by producers as a whole of the Domestic Verratti, Deputy Agency Ethics Official, accessing its internet server (http:// Like Product, or those producers whose at 202–205–3088. www.usitc.gov). The public record for collective output of the Domestic Like Limited disclosure of business this proceeding may be viewed on the Product constitutes a major proportion proprietary information (BPI) under an Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) of the total domestic production of the administrative protective order (APO) at http://edis.usitc.gov. product. In its original determination, and APO service list. Pursuant to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the Commission defined a single § 207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the Background. On August 18, 2010, the Domestic Industry to include the known Secretary will make BPI submitted in Department of Commerce issued an domestic producer of the Domestic Like this proceeding available to authorized antidumping duty order on imports of Product. applicants under the APO issued in the woven electric blankets from China (75 (5) The Order Date is the date that the proceeding, provided that the FR 50991). The Commission is antidumping duty order under review application is made no later than 21 conducting a review pursuant to section became effective. In this review, the days after publication of this notice in 751(c) of the Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. Order Date is August 18, 2010. the Federal Register. Authorized 1675(c)), to determine whether (6) An Importer is any person or firm applicants must represent interested revocation of the order would be likely engaged, either directly or through a parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), to lead to continuation or recurrence of parent company or subsidiary, in who are parties to the proceeding. A material injury to the domestic industry importing the Subject Merchandise into separate service list will be maintained within a reasonably foreseeable time. the United States from a foreign by the Secretary for those parties Provisions concerning the conduct of manufacturer or through its selling authorized to receive BPI under the this proceeding may be found in the agent. APO. Commission’s Rules of Practice and Participation in the proceeding and Certification. Pursuant to § 207.3 of Procedure at 19 CFR parts 201, subparts public service list. Persons, including the Commission’s rules, any person A and B and 19 CFR part 207, subparts industrial users of the Subject submitting information to the A and F. The Commission will assess Merchandise and, if the merchandise is Commission in connection with this the adequacy of interested party sold at the retail level, representative proceeding must certify that the responses to this notice of institution to consumer organizations, wishing to information is accurate and complete to determine whether to conduct a full participate in the proceeding as parties the best of the submitter’s knowledge. In review or an expedited review. The must file an entry of appearance with making the certification, the submitter Commission’s determination in any the Secretary to the Commission, as will be deemed to consent, unless expedited review will be based on the provided in § 201.11(b)(4) of the otherwise specified, for the Commission’s rules, no later than 21 Commission, its employees, and 1 No response to this request for information is days after publication of this notice in contract personnel to use the required if a currently valid Office of Management the Federal Register. The Secretary will information provided in any other and Budget (OMB) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117–0016/USITC No. 15–5–338, maintain a public service list containing reviews or investigations of the same or expiration date June 30, 2017. Public reporting the names and addresses of all persons, comparable products which the burden for the request is estimated to average 15 or their representatives, who are parties Commission conducts under Title VII of hours per response. Please send comments to the proceeding. the Act, or in internal audits and regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to investigations relating to the programs the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Former Commission employees who Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC are seeking to appear in Commission and operations of the Commission 20436. five-year reviews are advised that they pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37660 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Written submissions. Pursuant to fax number, and Email address of the the firms in which your workers are § 207.61 of the Commission’s rules, each certifying official. employed/which are members of your interested party response to this notice (2) A statement indicating whether association. must provide the information specified your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of (a) Production (quantity) and, if below. The deadline for filing such the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union known, an estimate of the percentage of responses is July 31, 2015. Pursuant to or worker group, a U.S. importer of the total U.S. production of the Domestic § 207.62(b) of the Commission’s rules, Subject Merchandise, a foreign producer Like Product accounted for by your eligible parties (as specified in or exporter of the Subject Merchandise, firm’s(s’) production; Commission rule § 207.62(b)(1)) may a U.S. or foreign trade or business (b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to also file comments concerning the association, or another interested party produce the Domestic Like Product (i.e., adequacy of responses to the notice of (including an explanation). If you are a the level of production that your institution and whether the Commission union/worker group or trade/business establishment(s) could reasonably have should conduct an expedited or full association, identify the firms in which expected to attain during the year, review. The deadline for filing such your workers are employed or which are assuming normal operating conditions comments is September 15, 2015. All members of your association. (using equipment and machinery in written submissions must conform with (3) A statement indicating whether place and ready to operate), normal the provisions of §§ 201.8 and 207.3 of your firm/entity is willing to participate operating levels (hours per week/weeks the Commission’s rules and any in this proceeding by providing per year), time for downtime, submissions that contain BPI must also information requested by the maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a conform with the requirements of Commission. typical or representative product mix); §§ 201.6 and 207.7 of the Commission’s (4) A statement of the likely effects of (c) the quantity and value of U.S. rules. Please be aware that the the revocation of the antidumping duty commercial shipments of the Domestic Commission’s rules with respect to order on the Domestic Industry in Like Product produced in your U.S. filing have changed. The most recent general and/or your firm/entity plant(s); amendments took effect on July 25, specifically. In your response, please (d) the quantity and value of U.S. 2014. See 79 FR 35920 (June 25, 2014), discuss the various factors specified in internal consumption/company and the revised Commission Handbook section 752(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. transfers of the Domestic Like Product on E-filing, available from the 1675a(a)) including the likely volume of produced in your U.S. plant(s); and Commission’s Web site at http:// subject imports, likely price effects of (e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost edis.usitc.gov. Also, in accordance with subject imports, and likely impact of of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the imports of Subject Merchandise on the (iv) selling, general and administrative Commission’s rules, each document Domestic Industry. (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating filed by a party to the proceeding must (5) A list of all known and currently income of the Domestic Like Product be served on all other parties to the operating U.S. producers of the produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include proceeding (as identified by either the Domestic Like Product. Identify any both U.S. and export commercial sales, public or APO service list as known related parties and the nature of internal consumption, and company appropriate), and a certificate of service the relationship as defined in section transfers) for your most recently must accompany the document (if you 771(4)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. completed fiscal year (identify the date are not a party to the proceeding you do 1677(4)(B)). on which your fiscal year ends). not need to serve your response). (6) A list of all known and currently (10) If you are a U.S. importer or a Inability to provide requested operating U.S. importers of the Subject trade/business association of U.S. information. Pursuant to § 207.61(c) of Merchandise and producers of the importers of the Subject Merchandise the Commission’s rules, any interested Subject Merchandise in the Subject from the Subject Country, provide the party that cannot furnish the Country that currently export or have following information on your firm’s(s’) information requested by this notice in exported Subject Merchandise to the operations on that product during the requested form and manner shall United States or other countries since calendar year 2014 (report quantity data notify the Commission at the earliest the Order Date. in units and value data in U.S. dollars). possible time, provide a full explanation (7) A list of 3–5 leading purchasers in If you are a trade/business association, of why it cannot provide the requested the U.S. market for the Domestic Like provide the information, on an aggregate information, and indicate alternative Product and the Subject Merchandise basis, for the firms which are members forms in which it can provide (including street address, World Wide of your association. equivalent information. If an interested Web address, and the name, telephone (a) The quantity and value (landed, party does not provide this notification number, fax number, and Email address duty-paid but not including (or the Commission finds the of a responsible official at each firm). antidumping or countervailing duties) explanation provided in the notification (8) A list of known sources of of U.S. imports and, if known, an inadequate) and fails to provide a information on national or regional estimate of the percentage of total U.S. complete response to this notice, the prices for the Domestic Like Product or imports of Subject Merchandise from Commission may take an adverse the Subject Merchandise in the U.S. or the Subject Country accounted for by inference against the party pursuant to other markets. your firm’s(s’) imports; section 776(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. (9) If you are a U.S. producer of the (b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. 1677e(b)) in making its determination in Domestic Like Product, provide the port, including antidumping and/or the review. following information on your firm’s countervailing duties) of U.S. Information To Be Provided In operations on that product during commercial shipments of Subject Response To This Notice of Institution: calendar year 2014, except as noted Merchandise imported from the Subject As used below, the term ‘‘firm’’ includes (report quantity data in units and value Country; and any related firms. data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you (c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. (1) The name and address of your firm are a union/worker group or trade/ port, including antidumping and/or or entity (including World Wide Web business association, provide the countervailing duties) of U.S. internal address) and name, telephone number, information, on an aggregate basis, for consumption/company transfers of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37661 Subject Merchandise imported from the United States, Subject Merchandise domestic interested party group Subject Country. produced in the Subject Country, and response to its notice of institution (80 (11) If you are a producer, an exporter, such merchandise from other countries. FR 11226, March 2, 2015) of the subject or a trade/business association of (13) (Optional) A statement of five-year review was adequate and that producers or exporters of the Subject whether you agree with the above the respondent interested party group Merchandise in the Subject Country, definitions of the Domestic Like Product response was inadequate. The provide the following information on and Domestic Industry; if you disagree Commission did not find any other your firm’s(s’) operations on that with either or both of these definitions, circumstances that would warrant product during calendar year 2014 please explain why and provide conducting a full review.1 Accordingly, (report quantity data in units and value alternative definitions. the Commission determined that it data in U.S. dollars, landed and duty- Authority: This proceeding is being would conduct an expedited review paid at the U.S. port but not including conducted under authority of Title VII of the pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the antidumping or countervailing duties). Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)). If you are a trade/business association, pursuant to § 207.61 of the Commission’s For further information concerning provide the information, on an aggregate rules. the conduct of this review and rules of basis, for the firms which are members By order of the Commission. general application, consult the of your association. Issued: June 25, 2015. Commission’s Rules of Practice and (a) Production (quantity) and, if Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B known, an estimate of the percentage of Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, total production of Subject Merchandise subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part in the Subject Country accounted for by [FR Doc. 2015–16006 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 207). your firm’s(s’) production; BILLING CODE 7020–02–P Staff report. A staff report containing (b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) information concerning the subject to produce the Subject Merchandise in INTERNATIONAL TRADE matter of the review was placed in the the Subject Country (i.e., the level of nonpublic record on June 19, 2015, and production that your establishment(s) COMMISSION made available to persons on the could reasonably have expected to [Investigation No. 731–TA–1059 (Second Administrative Protective Order service attain during the year, assuming normal Review)] list for this review. A public version operating conditions (using equipment will be issued thereafter, pursuant to and machinery in place and ready to Hand Trucks From China; Scheduling section 207.62(d)(4) of the operate), normal operating levels (hours of an Expedited Five-Year Review Commission’s rules. per week/weeks per year), time for Written submissions. As provided in downtime, maintenance, repair, and AGENCY: United States International section 207.62(d) of the Commission’s cleanup, and a typical or representative Trade Commission. rules, interested parties that are parties product mix); and ACTION: Notice. (c) the quantity and value of your to the review and that have provided SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives firm’s(s’) exports to the United States of individually adequate responses to the notice of the scheduling of an expedited 2 Subject Merchandise and, if known, an notice of institution, and any party review pursuant to the Tariff Act of estimate of the percentage of total other than an interested party to the exports to the United States of Subject 1930 (‘‘the Act’’) to determine whether review may file written comments with Merchandise from the Subject Country revocation of the antidumping duty the Secretary on what determination the accounted for by your firm’s(s’) exports. order on hand trucks from China would Commission should reach in the review. (12) Identify significant changes, if be likely to lead to continuation or Comments are due on or before July 6, any, in the supply and demand recurrence of material injury within a 2015, and may not contain new factual conditions or business cycle for the reasonably foreseeable time. information. Any person that is neither Domestic Like Product that have DATES: Effective Date: June 5, 2015. a party to the five-year review nor an occurred in the United States or in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: interested party may submit a brief market for the Subject Merchandise in Keysha Martinez (202–205–2136), Office written statement (which shall not the Subject Country since the Order of Investigations, U.S. International contain any new factual information) Date, and significant changes, if any, Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., pertinent to the review by July 6, 2015. that are likely to occur within a Washington, DC 20436. Hearing- However, should the Department of reasonably foreseeable time. Supply impaired persons can obtain Commerce extend the time limit for its conditions to consider include information on this matter by contacting completion of the final results of its technology; production methods; the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– review, the deadline for comments development efforts; ability to increase 205–1810. Persons with mobility (which may not contain new factual production (including the shift of impairments who will need special information) on Commerce’s final production facilities used for other assistance in gaining access to the results is three business days after the products and the use, cost, or Commission should contact the Office issuance of Commerce’s results. If availability of major inputs into of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. comments contain business proprietary production); and factors related to the General information concerning the information (BPI), they must conform ability to shift supply among different Commission may also be obtained by national markets (including barriers to accessing its internet server (http:// 1 A record of the Commissioners’ votes, the Commission’s statement on adequacy, and any importation in foreign markets or www.usitc.gov). The public record for individual Commissioner’s statements will be changes in market demand abroad). this review may be viewed on the available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Demand conditions to consider include Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) Commission’s Web site. end uses and applications; the existence at http://edis.usitc.gov. 2 The Commission has found the responses submitted by Gleason Industrial Products, Inc. and and availability of substitute products; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Precision Products, Inc. to be individually and the level of competition among the Background. On June 5, 2015, the adequate. Comments from other interested parties Domestic Like Product produced in the Commission determined that the will not be accepted (see 19 CFR 207.62(d)(2)). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37662 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices with the requirements of sections 201.6, ‘‘Site’’). Intalco is incorporated under To submit Send them to: 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s the laws of Delaware and is a successor comments: rules. Please be aware that the to Howe Sound Company, a former Commission’s rules with respect to operator of the Holden Mine. By email ...... pubcomment-ees.enrd@ filing have changed. The most recent usdoj.gov. The Site is located in north-central By mail ...... Assistant Attorney General, amendments took effect on July 25, Washington state, within the Okanogan- U.S. DOJ–ENRD, P.O. Box 2014. See 79 FR 35920 (June 25, 2014), Wenatchee National Forest, and consists 7611, Washington, DC and the revised Commission Handbook 20044–7611. on E-filing, available from the of National Forest System land and adjoining private land. The Site is in a Commission’s Web site at http:// During the public comment period, remote area approximately twelve miles edis.usitc.gov. the Proposed Consent Decree may be northwest of Lake Chelan, and is In accordance with sections 201.16(c) examined and downloaded at this accessible only by Lake Chelan ferry. and 207.3 of the rules, each document Justice Department Web site: http:// filed by a party to the review must be The Howe Sound Company (‘‘Howe www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. served on all other parties to the review Sound’’) operated the Holden Mine at We will provide a paper copy of the (as identified by either the public or BPI the Site from 1938–1957, extracting proposed consent decree upon written service list), and a certificate of service copper, zinc, silver, and gold from request and payment of reproduction must be timely filed. The Secretary will approximately sixty miles of costs. Please mail your request and not accept a document for filing without underground workings. The Holden payment to: Consent Decree Library, a certificate of service. Mine ceased operations in 1957. U.S. DOJ–ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Authority: This review is being conducted Subsequently, Howe Sound’s interest in Washington, DC 20044–7611. under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act the Site was transferred to Holden Please enclose a check or money order of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to Village, Inc., which has operated an for $6.75 (25 cents per page section 207.62 of the Commission’s rules. interdenominational retreat at the Site reproduction cost) payable to the United By order of the Commission. since 1961 under a Special Use Permit States Treasury. issued by the USFS. The Holden Village Issued: June 25, 2015. Maureen Katz, has 5,000 to 6,000 visitors each year, Lisa R. Barton, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Secretary to the Commission. and is home to approximately 50 year- Enforcement Section, Environment and [FR Doc. 2015–16115 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] round residents. Defendant is the legal Natural Resources Division. BILLING CODE 7020–02–P successor to Howe Sound. [FR Doc. 2015–16119 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] During the period of mining BILLING CODE 4410–15–P operations, metals were recovered from DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE the ore taken from Holden Mine in an on-Site mill. Approximately 10 million NUCLEAR REGULATORY Notice of Lodging of Proposed tons of mill tailings were left on-Site COMMISSION Consent Decree Under the after mining operations ceased, placed Comprehensive Environmental in three piles spread over approximately [Docket No. 72–0010; NRC–2013–0251] Response, Compensation, and Liability 120 acres. Additionally, approximately Act Proposed License Renewal of License 250,000–300,000 cubic yards of rock No. SNM–2506 for the Prairie Island On June 24, 2015, the Department of that did not contain mineral Independent Spent Fuel Storage Justice lodged a proposed Consent concentrations sufficient to mill were Installation Decree with the United States District placed in two large waste rock piles on Court for the Eastern District of the Site. There have been, and continue AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Washington in the lawsuit entitled to be, releases and threatened releases of Commission. United States v. Intalco Aluminum hazardous substances to the ACTION: Environmental assessment and Corporation, Civil Action No. 2:15-cv- environment from the tailings and waste finding of no significant impact. 00161 SAB, Dkt # 2. rock piles that have caused the United The United States of America, by its States to incur response costs under SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory undersigned counsel, brought this CERCLA. The subject Consent Decree Commission (NRC) is considering the renewal of License No. SNM–2506, complaint and proposed consent decree resolves the United States’ claims for issued in 1993 and held by Northern on behalf of the United States reimbursement of a portion of those States Power Company, a Minnesota Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) costs. and the United States Department of Corporation (NSPM) (doing business as Agriculture Forest Service (‘‘USFS’’) The publication of this notice opens Xcel Energy) for the operation of the (collectively, ‘‘United States’’), against a period for public comment on the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Intalco Aluminum Corporation Proposed Consent Decree. Comments (PINGP) site-specific Independent Spent (‘‘Intalco’’ or ‘‘Defendant’’). should be addressed to the Assistant Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI), for an The United States brings this civil Attorney General, Environment and additional 20 years. action under Section 107 of the Natural Resources Division, and should ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID Comprehensive Environmental refer to United States v. Intalco NRC–2013–0251 when contacting the Response, Compensation, and Liability Aluminum Corporation, Civil Action NRC about the availability of Act, 42 U.S.C. 9607, to recover past No. 2:15-cv-00161 SAB, D.J. Ref. No. information regarding this document. response costs incurred by the United 90–11–2–1135/3. All comments must be You may obtain publicly-available States in connection with releases and submitted no later than thirty (30) days information related to this document threatened releases of hazardous after the publication date of this notice. using any of the following methods: substances from the Holden Mine Site Comments may be submitted either by • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to in Chelan County, Washington (the email or by mail: http://www.regulations.gov and search VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37663 for Docket ID NRC–2013–0251. Address store, and transfer spent nuclear fuel The PI ISFSI is needed to provide questions about NRC dockets to Ms. generated at the PINGP, Units 1 and 2, additional spent fuel storage capacity so Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–415– in the Prairie Island (PI) ISFSI. License that the PINGP Units 1 and 2 can 3463; email: [email protected]. SNM–2506 currently allows NSPM to continue to operate. The PINGP Units 1 For technical questions, contact the store up to 48 transnuclear-40 (TN–40) and 2 operate under separate NRC individual listed in the FOR FURTHER casks and TN–40 high thermal (TN– licenses (DPR–42 and DPR–60, INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 40HT) casks at the PI ISFSI. The PI respectively) that will expire in 2033 document. ISFSI is located within the facility and 2034, respectively. Spent fuel • NRC’s Agencywide Documents boundary of the PINGP, which is assemblies from PINGP Units 1 and 2 Access and Management System located within the city limits of Red not already stored at the PI ISFSI are (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- Wing in Goodhue County, Minnesota, currently stored onsite in a spent fuel available documents online in the approximately 45 kilometers (km) [28 pool. The PINGP spent fuel pool does ADAMS Public Documents collection at miles (mi)] southeast of the not have the needed capacity to store all http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ Minneapolis–St. Paul metropolitan area. the spent nuclear fuel that the PINPG adams.html. To begin the search, select On October 20, 2011, the licensee Units 1 and 2 would generate through ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then submitted their application for a 40-year the end of their license term. The PI select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS license renewal for the PI ISFSI ISFSI provides additional spent fuel Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, (ADAMS Accession No. ML113140518). storage capacity necessary for NSPM to please contact the NRC’s Public This application was supplemented by continue to operate the PINGP Units 1 Document Room (PDR) reference staff at letter(s), dated February 29, 2012 and 2 until a permanent facility (or 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by (ADAMS Accession No. ML12065A073) facilities) is available for offsite email to [email protected]. The and dated April 26, 2012 (ADAMS disposition of the spent fuel. ADAMS accession number for each Accession No. ML121170406). In the EA, the NRC staff describes the document referenced (if that document In October 2012, the NRC and the affected environment and evaluates the is available in ADAMS) is provided the Prairie Island Indian Community (PIIC) potential environmental impacts from first time that a document is referenced. entered into a Memorandum of the proposed 40-year renewal of license • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and Understanding (MOU) (ADAMS SNM–2506 on land use; transportation; purchase copies of public documents at Accession No. ML12284A456). The socioeconomics; climatology, the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One MOU acknowledges the PIIC’s special meteorology and air quality; geology White Flint North, 11555 Rockville expertise in the areas of historic and and soils; water resources; ecology and Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. cultural resources, socioeconomics, land threatened and endangered species; use, and environmental justice as they visual and scenic resources; noise; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean relate to license renewal for the PI historic and cultural resources; public Trefethen, Office of Nuclear Material ISFSI, and establishes a cooperating and occupational health and safety; Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear agency relationship between the NRC waste management; and environmental Regulatory Commission, Washington, and the PIIC. The MOU also defines the justice. The EA also discusses the DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– roles and responsibilities of both alternatives to the proposed action, 0867, email: [email protected]. entities and the process used to prepare including the no-action alternative. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: an EA that incorporates and reflects the NRC staff also evaluated the potential I. Introduction PIIC’s views in the areas of special environmental impacts from expertise. decommissioning of the PI ISFSI, taking The NRC is considering issuance of a In November 2013 (78 FR 69460), to into consideration an additional 40 renewal of License No. SNM–2506 to further the environmental review years of operation. Additionally, the Northern States Power Company process, the NRC published the draft EA NRC staff analyzed the cumulative (NSPM) for the operation of the Prairie and the draft FONSI for the proposed PI impacts from past, present, and Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP) ISFSI license renewal in the Federal reasonably foreseeable future actions site-specific Independent Spent Fuel Register for public review and when combined with the potential Storage Installation (ISFSI) located comment). Comments were received environmental impacts of the proposed within the city limits of Red Wing in from the applicant (NSPM), the action. Goodhue County, Minnesota for an Minnesota Department of Natural The NRC staff evaluated potential additional 40 years. Therefore, as Resources, the City of Red Wing, and environmental impacts and categorized required by part 51 of Title 10 of the the PIIC. Appendix B of the final EA the impacts as follows: Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), contains the NRC’s responses to those • SMALL-environmental effects are ‘‘Environmental Protection Regulations comments. not detectable or are so minor that they for Domestic Licensing and Related II. Environmental Assessment will neither destabilize nor noticeably Regulatory Functions,’’ which alter any important attribute of the implement the National Environmental The proposed action is whether to resource. Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA) renew the site-specific ISFSI license for • MODERATE-environmental effects (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq), the NRC an additional 40 years provided that are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not prepared an environmental assessment NRC requirements are met. If approved, to destabilize important attributes of the (EA) (ADAMS Accession No. NSPM would continue to possess and resource. ML15098A026). Based on the results of store the PINGP, Units 1 and 2, spent • LARGE-environmental effects are the EA, the NRC has determined that an fuel at the PI ISFSI for an additional 40 clearly noticeable and are sufficient to environmental impact statement is not years under the requirements in 10 CFR destabilize important attributes of the required for the proposed license part 72, ‘‘Licensing Requirements for the resource. renewal, and is issuing a finding of no Independent Storage of Nuclear Fuel, The NRC staff finds that the impacts significant impact (FONSI). High-Level Radioactive Waste, and from the proposed action would be In 1993, the NRC issued a 20-year Reactor-Related Greater than Class C small for all environmental resource license to NSPM to receive, possess, Waste.’’ areas. In addition, the NRC staff VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37664 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices concludes that there would be no proposed action, amendment of NRC ADDRESSES: You may submit comments disproportionately high and adverse Special Nuclear Materials License No. by any of the following methods (unless impacts to minority and low-income SNM–2506 for the PI ISFSI located in this document describes a different populations and that federally listed Goodhue County, Minnesota, will not method for submitting comments on a threatened and endangered species significantly affect the quality of the specific subject): would not be affected by the continued human environment. Therefore, the • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to operation of the PI ISFSI during the NRC staff has determined, pursuant to http://www.regulations.gov and search proposed license renewal period. 10 CFR 51.31, that preparation of an for Docket ID NRC–2009–0552. Address The NRC staff is also performing a environmental impact statement is not questions about NRC dockets to Carol detailed safety analysis of the NSPM’s required for the proposed action and a Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; license renewal application to assess FONSI is appropriate. email: [email protected]. For compliance with 10 CFR part 20, Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day technical questions, contact the ‘‘Standards for Protection Against of June, 2015. individual listed in the FOR FURTHER Radiation,’’ and 10 CFR part 72, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. INFORMATION CONTACT section of this ‘‘Licensing Requirements for the Marissa G. Bailey, document. Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Environmental Review, Office of Nuclear Office of Administration, Mail Stop: Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Material Safety and Safeguards. OWFN–12 H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Waste.’’ The NRC staff’s analysis will be [FR Doc. 2015–16238 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Commission, Washington, DC 20555– documented in a separate safety 0001. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P evaluation report (SER). The NRC staff’s For additional direction on obtaining decision whether to renew the NSPM’s information and submitting comments, PI ISFSI license as proposed will be NUCLEAR REGULATORY see ‘‘Obtaining Information and based on the results of the NRC staff’s COMMISSION Submitting Comments’’ in the review as documented in the final EA, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the final FONSI, and in the SER. [Docket Nos. 50–275 and 50–323; NRC– this document. 2009–0552] Based on its review of the proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: action in the EA relative to the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 Michael Wentzel, Office of Nuclear requirements set forth in 10 CFR part and 2 Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear 51, the NRC staff has determined that Regulatory Commission, Washington, renewal of NRC license SNM–2506, AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– which would authorize continued Commission. 6459, email: [email protected]. operation of the PI ISFSI in Goodhue ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: County, Minnesota, for a an additional environmental impact statement and 40 years, will not significantly affect the conduct the scoping process; reopening I. Obtaining Information and quality of the human environment. No of scoping process, public meetings, and Submitting Comments significant changes in NSPM’s request for comment. A. Obtaining Information authorized operations for the PI ISFSI were requested as part of the license SUMMARY: On January 27, 2010, the U.S. Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2009– renewal application. Approval of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 0552 when contacting the NRC about proposed action would not result in any notified the public of its opportunity to the availability of information regarding new construction or expansion of the participate in the scoping process this document. You may obtain existing ISFSI footprint beyond that associated with the preparation of an publicly-available information related to previously approved. The ISFSI is a environmental impact statement (EIS) this document by the following passive facility that produces no liquid related to the review of the license methods: or gaseous effluents. No significant renewal application submitted by • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to radiological or nonradiological impacts Pacific Gas and Electric Company http://www.regulations.gov and search are expected from continued normal (PG&E) for the renewal of Facility for Docket ID NRC–2009–0552. operations. Occupational dose estimates Operating Licenses DPR–80 and DPR–82 • NRC’s Agencywide Documents from routine monitoring activities and for an additional 20 years of operation Access and Management System transfer of spent fuel for disposal are at Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP), (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- expected to be at as low as reasonably Units 1 and 2. The current operating available documents online in the achievable levels and are expected to be licenses for DCPP, Units 1 and 2 expire ADAMS Public Documents collection at within the limits of 10 CFR 20.1201. on November 2, 2024, and August 26, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ The estimated annual dose to the 2025, respectively. The scoping period adams.html. To begin the search, select nearest potential member of the public closed on April 12, 2010. The NRC has ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then from ISFSI activities is 0.02 decided to reopen the scoping process select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS millisieverts/year (mSv/yr) [2.20 and allow members of the public an Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, millirem/year (mrem/yr)], which is additional opportunity to participate. please contact the NRC’s Public below the 0.25 mSv/yr [25 mrem/yr] DATES: The comment period for the Document Room (PDR) reference staff at limit specified in 10 CFR 72.104(a) and environmental scoping process 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by the 1 mSv/yr (100 mrem/yr) limit in 10 published on January 27, 2010 (75 FR email to [email protected]. The CFR 20.1301(a)(1). 4427) has been reopened. Comments ADAMS accession number for each should be filed no later than August 31, document referenced (if it available in III. Finding of No Significant Impact 2015. Comments received after this date ADAMS) is provided the first time that Based on its review of the proposed will be considered if it is practical to do a document is referenced. The action, in accordance with the so, but the Commission is able to ensure application for renewal of the DCPP requirements in 10 CFR part 51, the consideration only for comments licenses can be found in ADAMS under NRC staff has concluded that the received before this date. Package Accession No. ML093340125. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37665 • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and license renewal application to allow 995 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, purchase copies of public documents at time for the completion of certain California 93403 and at the Paso Robles the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One seismic studies to address concerns City Library, 1000 Spring Street, Paso White Flint North, 11555 Rockville raised during the State of California’s Robles, California 93446. Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Coastal Zone Management Act This document advises the public that consistency review. On May 31, 2011 the NRC intends to gather the B. Submitting Comments (ADAMS Accession No. ML11138A315), information necessary to prepare a plant Please include Docket ID NRC–2009– the NRC delayed all further milestones specific supplement to the NRC’s 0552 in the subject line of your associated with the safety and ‘‘Generic Environmental Impact comment submission, in order to ensure environmental reviews of the DCPP Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of that the NRC is able to make your license renewal application. Nuclear Plants’’ (NUREG–1437, comment submission available to the On December 22, 2014 (ADAMS Revision 1), related to the review of the public in this docket. Package No. ML14364A259), and application for renewal of the DCPP The NRC cautions you not to include February 25, 2015 (ADAMS Package No. operating licenses for an additional 20 identifying or contact information that ML15057A102), PG&E amended its ER years. you do not want to be publicly to provide additional information Possible alternatives to the proposed disclosed in your comment submission. identified by NRC staff as necessary to action (license renewal) include no The NRC will post all comment complete the review of the DCPP license action and reasonable alternative energy submissions at http:// renewal application. By letter dated sources. The NRC is required by 10 CFR www.regulations.gov as well as enter the April 28, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. 51.95 to prepare a supplement to the comment submissions into ADAMS. ML15104A509), the NRC staff issued a GEIS in connection with the renewal of The NRC does not routinely edit schedule for the remainder of the DCPP an operating license. This notice is comment submissions to remove license renewal review. The purpose of being published in accordance with identifying or contact information. this notice is to (1) inform the public NEPA and the NRC’s regulations found If you are requesting or aggregating that the NRC has decided to reopen the at 10 CFR part 51. comments from other persons for scoping process, as defined in 10 CFR The NRC will first conduct a scoping submission to the NRC, then you should 51.29, ‘‘Scoping-environmental impact process for the supplement to the GEIS inform those persons not to include statement and supplement to and, as soon as practicable thereafter, identifying or contact information that environmental impact statement,’’ and will prepare a draft supplement to the they do not want to be publicly (2) allow members of the public an GEIS for public comment. Participation disclosed in their comment submission. additional opportunity to participate. in the scoping process by members of Your request should state that the NRC The comments already received by the the public and local, State, Tribal, and does not routinely edit comment NRC will be considered; reopening of Federal government agencies is submissions to remove such information the scoping process provides additional encouraged. The scoping process for the before making the comment opportunity for the public to comment supplement to the GEIS will be used to submissions available to the public or on issues that may have emerged since accomplish the following: entering the comment submissions into completion of the last scoping period. a. Define the proposed action, which ADAMS. As outlined in § 800.8 of Title 36 of is to be the subject of the supplement to II. Discussion the Code of Federal Regulations (36 the GEIS; CFR), ‘‘Coordination With the National b. Determine the scope of the On January 27, 2010 (75 FR 4427), the Environmental Policy Act,’’ the NRC supplement to the GEIS and identify the NRC notified the public of its plans to coordinate compliance with significant issues to be analyzed in opportunity to participate in the scoping Section 106 of the National Historic depth; process associated with the preparation Preservation Act (NHPA) in meeting the c. Identify and eliminate from of an EIS related to the review of the requirements of the National detailed study those issues that are license renewal application submitted Environmental Policy Act of 1969 peripheral or that are not significant; by PG&E for the renewal of the (NEPA). Under § 800.8(c) the NRC d. Identify any environmental operating licenses for an additional 20 intends to use its process and assessments and other ElSs that are years of operation at DCPP. The documentation for the preparation of being or will be prepared that are application for license renewal, which the EIS on the proposed action to related to, but are not part of, the scope included an environmental report (ER), comply with Section 106 of the NHPA of the supplement to the GEIS being dated November 23, 2009 (ADAMS in lieu of the procedures set forth in considered; Package No. ML093340125), was § 800.3 through 800.6. e. Identify other environmental submitted pursuant to part 54 of Title 10 In accordance with 10 CFR 51.53(c) review and consultation requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 and 10 CFR 54.23, PG&E submitted the related to the proposed action; CFR). A separate notice of receipt and ER as part of the application. The ER f. Indicate the relationship between availability of the application was was prepared pursuant to 10 CFR part the timing of the preparation of the published in the Federal Register on 51 and is publicly available in ADAMS environmental analyses and the December 11, 2009 (74 FR 65811). A under Accession No. ML093340123 Commission’s tentative planning and notice of acceptance for docketing of the (original) and Package Nos. decision-making schedule; application and opportunity for hearing ML14364A259 (amendment 1) and g. Identify any cooperating agencies regarding renewal of the facility ML15057A102 (amendment 2). The ER and, as appropriate, allocate operating license was published in the may also be viewed on the NRC Web assignments for preparation and Federal Register on January 21, 2010 site at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/ schedules for completing the (75 FR 3493). The scoping period closed operating/licensing/renewal/ supplement to the GEIS to the NRC and on April 12, 2010. By letter dated April applications/diablo-canyon.html. In any cooperating agencies; and 10, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. addition, paper copies of the ER are h. Describe how the supplement to ML111010592), PG&E requested the available for public review near the site the GEIS will be prepared and include NRC to delay final processing of the at the San Luis Obispo County Library, any contractor assistance to be used. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37666 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices The NRC invites the following entities contacting the NRC Project Manager, NUCLEAR REGULATORY to participate in scoping: Michael Wentzel, by telephone at 1– COMMISSION a. The applicant, PG&E; 800–368–5642, extension 6459, or by [NRC–2015–0153] b. Any Federal agency which has email at [email protected], no jurisdiction by law or special expertise later than July 31, 2015. Members of the Acceptance of Commercial-Grade with respect to any environmental public may also register to speak at the Design and Analysis Computer impact involved or which is authorized meeting within 15 minutes of the start Programs for Nuclear Power Plants to develop and enforce relevant of each session. Individual oral environmental standards; comments may be limited by the time AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory c. Affected State and local agencies, Commission. including those authorized to develop available, depending on the number of persons who register. Members of the ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request and enforce relevant environmental for comment. standards; public who have not registered may also d. Any affected Indian tribe; have an opportunity to speak if time SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory e. Any person who has requested an permits. Public comments will be Commission (NRC) is issuing for public opportunity to participate in the scoping considered in the scoping process for comment draft regulatory guide (DG), process; and the supplement to the GEIS. Michael DG–1305, ‘‘Acceptance of Commercial- f. Any person who has petitioned for Wentzel will need to be contacted no Grade Design and Analysis Computer leave to intervene in the proceeding or later than July 22, 2015, if special Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.’’ who has been admitted as a party to the equipment or accommodations are This DG provides new (i.e., not proceeding. needed to attend or present information preceded by earlier guidance on the III. Public Scoping Meeting at the public meeting so that the NRC same subject) guidance that describes acceptance methods that the staff of the In accordance with 10 CFR 51.26, the staff can determine whether the request NRC considers acceptable in meeting scoping process for an EIS may include can be accommodated. regulatory requirements for acceptance a public scoping meeting to help Participation in the scoping process and dedication of commercial-grade identify significant issues related to a for the supplement to the GEIS does not design and analysis computer programs proposed activity and to determine the entitle participants to become parties to for nuclear power plants. scope of issues to be addressed in an the proceeding to which the supplement DATES: EIS. The NRC has decided to hold to the GEIS relates. Matters related to Submit comments by August 31, 2015. Comments received after this date public meetings for the DCPP license participation in any hearing are outside will be considered if it is practical to do renewal supplement to the GEIS. The the scope of matters to be discussed at so, but the NRC is able to ensure scoping meetings will be held on this public meeting. August 5, 2015, and there will be two consideration only for comments At the conclusion of the scoping sessions to accommodate interested received on or before this date. persons. The first session will convene process, the NRC will prepare a concise Although a time limit is given, at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 4:30 summary of the determination and comments and suggestions in p.m., as necessary. The second session conclusions reached; including the connection with items for inclusion in will convene at 7:00 p.m. with a repeat significant issues identified, and will guides currently being developed or of the overview portions of the meeting send a copy of the summary to each improvements in all published guides and will continue until 10:00 p.m., as participant in the scoping process. The are encouraged at any time. necessary. Both sessions will be held at summary will also be available for ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the Courtyard by Marriott San Luis inspection in ADAMS and the Federal by any of the following methods (unless Obispo, 1605 Calle Joaquin Road, San Rulemaking Web site. The NRC staff this document describes a different Luis Obispo, CA 93405. Both meetings will then prepare and issue for comment method for submitting comments on a will be transcribed and will include: (1) the draft supplement to the GEIS, which specified subject): An overview by the NRC staff of the will be the subject of a separate notice • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to NEPA environmental review process, and separate public meetings. Copies http://www.regulations.gov and search the proposed scope of the supplement to will be available for public inspection at for Docket ID NRC–2015–0153. Address the GEIS, and the proposed review the addresses listed in the ADDRESSES questions about NRC dockets to Carol schedule; and (2) the opportunity for section of this Federal Register notice. Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; interested government agencies, After receipt and consideration of the email: [email protected]. For organizations, and individuals to submit comments, the NRC will prepare a final technical questions, contact the individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER comments or suggestions on the supplement to the GEIS, which will also INFORMATION CONTACT section of this environmental issues or the proposed be available for public inspection. scope of the supplement to the GEIS. document. Additionally, the NRC staff will host Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, informal discussions one hour prior to day of June, 2015. Office of Administration, Mail Stop: the start of each session at the same For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear location. Written comments on the Brian Wittick, Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001. proposed scope of the supplement to the Chief, Projects Branch 2, Division of License GEIS will be accepted during the Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor For additional direction on accessing informal discussions. To be considered, Regulation. information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Obtaining Information and comments must be provided either at [FR Doc. 2015–15921 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Submitting Comments’’ in the the transcribed public meetings or in BILLING CODE 7590–01–P writing, as discussed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Persons may register to attend or this document. present oral comments at the meetings FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: on the scope of the NEPA review by George Lipscomb, Office of New VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37667 Reactors, 301–415–6838, email: submission to the NRC, then you should applicant seeks a voluntary change to its [email protected], or Steve inform those persons not to include licensing basis with respect to safety- Burton, Office of Nuclear Regulatory identifying or contact information that related power operated valve actuators, Research, 301–415–7000, email: they do not want to be publicly and where the NRC determines that the [email protected]. U.S. Nuclear disclosed in their comment submission. safety review must include Regulatory Commission, Washington, Your request should state that the NRC consideration of the qualification of the DC 20555–0001. does not routinely edit comment valve actuators. Further information on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submissions to remove such information the staff’s use of the draft regulatory before making the comment guide, if finalized, is contained in the I. Obtaining Information and submissions available to the public or draft regulatory guide under Section D. Submitting Comments entering the comment submissions into Implementation. A. Obtaining Information ADAMS. Applicants and potential applicants are not, with certain exceptions, II. Additional Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015– afforded protection by either the Backfit 0153 when contacting the NRC about The NRC is issuing for public Rule or any issue finality provisions the availability of information regarding comment a DG in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory under part 52. Neither the Backfit Rule this document. You may obtain Guide’’ series. This series was nor the issue finality provisions under publically-available information related developed to describe and make part 52—with certain exclusions to this document, by any of the available to the public information discussed below—were intended to following methods: regarding methods that are acceptable to • apply to every NRC action which Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to the NRC staff for implementing specific substantially changes the expectations http://www.regulations.gov and search parts of the NRC’s regulations, of current and future applicants. for Docket ID NRC–2015–0153. techniques that the staff uses in Therefore, the positions in any final • NRC’s Agencywide Documents evaluating specific issues or postulated draft regulatory guide, if imposed on Access and Management System events, and data that the staff needs in applicants, would not represent (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly its review of applications for permits backfitting (except as discussed below). available documents online in the and licenses. The exceptions to the general principle ADAMS Public Documents collection at The DG, entitled, ‘‘Acceptance of are applicable whenever a combined http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis license applicant references a part 52 adams.html. To begin the search, select Computer Programs for Nuclear Power license (i.e., an early site permit or a ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then Plants,’’ is temporarily identified by its manufacturing license) and/or part 52 select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS task number, DG–1305. This DG regulatory approval (i.e., a design Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, provides new guidance that describes certification rule or design approval. please contact the NRC’s Public acceptance methods that the staff of the The staff does not, at this time, intend Document Room (PDR) reference staff at NRC considers acceptable in meeting to impose the positions represented in 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by regulatory requirements for acceptance the draft regulatory guide in a manner email to [email protected]. The and dedication of commercial-grade that is inconsistent with any issue ADAMS accession number for each design and analysis computer programs finality provisions in these part 52 document referenced (if available in for nuclear power plants. licenses and regulatory approvals. If, in ADAMS), is provided the first time that II. Backfitting and Issue Finality the future, the staff seeks to impose a a document is referenced. The DG is position in this regulatory guide in a electronically available in ADAMS Draft Guide-1305 describes acceptable manner which does not provide issue under Accession No. ML14119A286. methods for meeting the dedication finality as described in the applicable • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and requirements in part 21 of title 10 of the issue finality provision, then the staff purchase copies of public documents at Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) must address the criteria for avoiding the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One and 10 CFR 50.55(e) with respect to issue finality as described applicable White Flint North, 11555 Rockville design and analysis computer programs issue finality provision. Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. for nuclear power plants. The draft regulatory guide, if finalized, would not Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day B. Submitting Comments constitute backfitting as defined in 10 of June, 2015. Please include Docket ID NRC–2015– CFR 50.109 (the Backfit Rule) and is not For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 0153 in the subject line of your otherwise inconsistent with the issue Thomas H. Boyce, comment submission, in order to ensure finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52, Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic that the NRC is able to make your ‘‘Licenses, Certifications and Approvals Issues Branch, Division of Engineering, Office comment submission available to the for Nuclear Power Plants.’’ This of Nuclear Regulatory Research. public in this docket. regulatory guide, if finalized, represents [FR Doc. 2015–16131 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] The NRC cautions you not to include the first NRC guidance on this subject. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P identifying or contact information that Issuance of new guidance, by itself, does you do not want to be publicly not represent backfitting unless the NRC disclosed in your comment submission. intends to impose the guidance on NUCLEAR REGULATORY The NRC will post all comment existing licensees and currently- COMMISSION submissions at http:// approved design certification rules www.regulations.gov as well as enters issued under part 52. The NRC does not Advisory Committee On Reactor the comment submissions into ADAMS. have such an intention. Existing Safeguards The NRC does not routinely edit licensees and applicants of final design Notice of Meeting comment submissions to remove certification rules will not be required to identifying or contact information. comply with the positions set forth in In accordance with the purposes of If you are requesting or aggregating this draft regulatory guide, unless the Sections 29 and 182b of the Atomic comments from other persons for licensee or design certification rule Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37668 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Advisory Committee on Reactor meeting may be closed pursuant to 5 provided 30 minutes before the meeting. Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a meeting U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss In addition, one electronic copy of each on July 8–10, 2015, 11545 Rockville organizational and personnel matters presentation should be emailed to the Pike, Rockville, Maryland. that relate solely to internal personnel Cognizant ACRS Staff one day before rules and practices of ACRS, and Wednesday, July 8, 2015, Conference meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be information the release of which would Room T2–B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, provided within this timeframe, constitute a clearly unwarranted Rockville, Maryland presenters should provide the Cognizant invasion of personal privacy.] ACRS Staff with a CD containing each 8:30 a.m.–8:35 a.m.: Opening 10:00 a.m.–10:15 a.m.: Reconciliation presentation at least 30 minutes before Remarks by the ACRS Chairman of ACRS Comments and the meeting. (Open)—The ACRS Chairman will make Recommendations (Open)—The opening remarks regarding the conduct Committee will discuss the responses In accordance with Subsection 10(d) of the meeting. from the NRC Executive Director for of Public Law 92–463 and 5 U.S.C. 8:35 a.m.–11:00 a.m.: Digital Operations to comments and 552b(c), certain portions of the June 8th Instrumentation & Control (DI&C) recommendations included in recent through 10th meeting dates may be Probabilistic Risk Analyses (PRA) ACRS reports and letters. closed, as specifically noted above. Use (Open)—The Committee will hear 12:00 p.m.–6:00 p.m.: Preparation of of still, motion picture, and television presentations by and hold discussions ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The cameras during the meeting may be with representatives of the staff and Committee will continue its discussion limited to selected portions of the EPRI regarding the overview of all the of proposed ACRS reports on matters meeting as determined by the Chairman. topics discussed during the November discussed during this meeting. [Note: A Electronic recordings will be permitted 2014 joint DI&C and PRA Subcommittee portion of this meeting may be closed in only during the open portions of the meeting, including a high-level status of order to discuss and protect information meeting. significant future activities planned designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 under the next revision to the 5-year U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).] ACRS meeting agendas, meeting research plan related to PRA. transcripts, and letter reports are 11:15 a.m.–11:45 p.m.: Assessment of Friday, July 10, 2015, Conference Room available through the NRC Public the Quality of Selected Research T2–B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Document Room at pdr.resource@ Maryland Projects (Open)—The Committee will nrc.gov, or by calling the PDR at 1–800– hold a discussion of the quality of 8:30 a.m.–11:30 a.m.: Preparation of 397–4209, or from the Publicly selected NRC research projects. ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The Available Records System (PARS) 1:00 p.m.–3:00 p.m.: Nine Mile Point Committee will continue its discussion component of NRC’s document system Unit 2 MELLLA+ Application (Open/ of proposed ACRS reports. [Note: A (ADAMS) which is accessible from the Closed)—The Committee will hear portion of this meeting may be closed in NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ presentations by and hold discussions order to discuss and protect information reading-rm/adams.html or http:// with representatives of the NRC staff designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc- U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).] and Constellation Energy Nuclear Group collections/ACRS/. regarding the safety evaluation 11:30 a.m.–12:00 p.m.: Miscellaneous associated with the Nine Mile Point (Open)—The Committee will continue Video teleconferencing service is Unit 2 MELLLA+ Application. [Note: A its discussion related to the conduct of available for observing open sessions of portion of this meeting may be closed in Committee activities and specific issues ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use order to discuss and protect information that were not completed during this service should contact Mr. Theron designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 previous meetings. Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).] Procedures for the conduct of and (301–415–8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:15 p.m.–6:00 p.m.: Preparation of participation in ACRS meetings were 3:45 p.m. (ET), at least 10 days before ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The published in the Federal Register on the meeting to ensure the availability of Committee will discuss proposed ACRS October 1, 2014 (79 FR 59307). In this service. Individuals or reports on matters discussed during this accordance with those procedures, oral organizations requesting this service meeting. [Note: A portion of this or written views may be presented by will be responsible for telephone line meeting may be closed in order to members of the public, including charges and for providing the representatives of the nuclear industry. discuss and protect information equipment and facilities that they use to Persons desiring to make oral statements designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 establish the video teleconferencing should notify Quynh Nguyen, Cognizant U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).] link. The availability of video ACRS Staff (Telephone: 301–415–5844, Thursday, July 9, 2015, Conference Email: [email protected]), 5 days teleconferencing services is not Room T2–B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, before the meeting, if possible, so that guaranteed. Rockville, Maryland appropriate arrangements can be made Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day 8:30 a.m.–9:45 a.m.: Future ACRS to allow necessary time during the of June 2015. Activities/Report of the Planning and meeting for such statements. In view of For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Procedures Subcommittee (Open/ the possibility that the schedule for Andrew L. Bates, Closed)—The Committee will discuss ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Advisory Committee Management Officer. the recommendations of the Planning Chairman as necessary to facilitate the and Procedures Subcommittee regarding conduct of the meeting, persons [FR Doc. 2015–16235 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] items proposed for consideration by the planning to attend should check with BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Full Committee during future ACRS the Cognizant ACRS Staff if such Meetings, and matters related to the rescheduling would result in major conduct of ACRS business, including inconvenience. anticipated workload and member Thirty-five hard copies of each assignments. [Note: A portion of this presentation or handout should be VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37669 NUCLEAR REGULATORY • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to submissions available to the public or COMMISSION http://www.regulations.gov and search entering the comment into ADAMS. for Docket ID NRC–2015–0146. II. Background [NRC–2015–0146] • NRC’s Agencywide Documents In accordance with the Paperwork Information Collection: Export and Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Import of Nuclear Equipment and Chapter 35), the NRC is requesting Material available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at public comment on its intention to AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ request the OMB’s approval for the Commission. adams.html. To begin the search, select information collection summarized below. ACTION: Renewal of existing information ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then 1. The title of the information collection; request for comment. select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, collection: 10 CFR part 110, ‘‘Export and SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory please contact the NRC’s Public Import of Nuclear Equipment and Commission (NRC) invites public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at Material.’’ comment on the renewal of Office of 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by 2. OMB approval number: 3150–0036. Management and Budget (OMB) 3. Type of submission: Extension. email to [email protected]. The 4. The form number, if applicable: approval for an existing collection of supporting statement and NRC Forms NRC Forms 830, 830A, 831, and 831A. information. The information collection 830, 830A, 831 and 831A are available 5. How often the collection is required is entitled, ‘‘Export and Import of in ADAMS under Accession Nos.: or requested: On occasion and annually. Nuclear Equipment and Material.’’ ML15126A252, ML15163A007, 6. Who will be required or asked to DATES: Submit comments by August 31, ML15163A010, ML15163A011 and respond: Any person in the U.S. who 2015. Comments received after this date ML15163A013. wishes to export or import nuclear • will be considered if it is practical to do NRC’s PDR: You may examine and material or equipment subject to the so, but the Commission is able to ensure purchase copies of public documents at requirements of a general or specific consideration only for comments the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One license. received on or before this date. White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 7. The estimated number of annual ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. responses: 2,973. • by any of the following methods: NRC’s Clearance Officer: A copy of 8. The estimated number of annual • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to the collection of information and related respondents: 150. http://www.regulations.gov and search instructions may be obtained without 9. The estimated number of hours for Docket ID: NRC–2015–0146. Address charge by contacting NRC’s Clearance needed annually to comply with the questions about NRC dockets to Carol Officer, Tremaine Donnell, Office of information collection requirement or Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; Information Services, U.S. Nuclear request: 957. email: [email protected]. For Regulatory Commission, Washington, 10. Abstract: Persons in the U.S. technical questions, contact the DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– whom export or import nuclear material individual listed in the FOR FURTHER 6258; email: INFOCOLLECTS.Resource@ or equipment under a general or specific INFORMATION CONTACT section of this NRC.GOV. authorization must comply with certain reporting and recordkeeping document. B. Submitting Comments • Mail comments to: Tremaine requirements under part 110 of Title 10 Donnell, Office of Information Services, Please include Docket ID NRC–2015– of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 Mail Stop: T–5 F53, U.S. Nuclear 0146 in your comment submission, in CFR). Regulatory Commission, Washington, order to ensure that the NRC is able to III. Specific Requests for Comments DC 20555–0001. make your comment submission The NRC is seeking comments that For additional direction on obtaining available to the public in this docket. address the following questions: information and submitting comments, The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in 1. Is the proposed collection of see ‘‘Obtaining Information and information necessary for the NRC to Submitting Comments’’ in the comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your properly perform its functions? Does the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of information have practical utility? this document. comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at 2. Is the estimate of the burden of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: http://www.regulations.gov as well as information collection accurate? Tremaine Donnell, Office of Information 3. Is there a way to enhance the enter the comment submissions into Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory quality, utility, and clarity of the ADAMS, and the NRC does not Commission, Washington, DC 20555– information to be collected? routinely edit comment submissions to 0001; telephone: 301–415–6258; email: 4. How can the burden of the remove identifying or contact [email protected]. information collection on respondents information. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: be minimized, including the use of If you are requesting or aggregating automated collection techniques or I. Obtaining Information and comments from other persons for other forms of information technology? Submitting Comments submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day A. Obtaining Information identifying or contact information that of June 2015. Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015– they do not want to be publicly For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 0146 when contacting the NRC about disclosed in their comment submission. Tremaine Donnell, the availability of information for this Your request should state that the NRC NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information action. You may obtain publicly- does not routinely edit comment Services. available information related to this submissions to remove such information [FR Doc. 2015–16133 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] action by any of the following methods: before making the comment BILLING CODE 7590–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37670 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices NUCLEAR REGULATORY Chairman as necessary to facilitate the before the meeting. If an electronic copy COMMISSION conduct of the meeting, persons cannot be provided within this planning to attend should check with timeframe, presenters should provide Advisory Committee on Reactor the DFO if such rescheduling would the DFO with a CD containing each Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the result in a major inconvenience. presentation at least thirty minutes ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and If attending this meeting, please enter before the meeting. Electronic Procedures; Notice of Meeting through the One White Flint North recordings will be permitted only building, 11555 Rockville Pike, during those portions of the meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning Rockville, MD. After registering with that are open to the public. Detailed and Procedures will hold a meeting on security, please contact Mr. Theron procedures for the conduct of and July 7, 2015, Room T–2B3, 11545 Brown (240–888–9835) to be escorted to participation in ACRS meetings were Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. the meeting room. The meeting will be open to public published in the Federal Register on attendance with the exception of a Dated: June 24, 2015. October 1, 2014 (79 FR 59307). portion that may be closed pursuant to Mark L. Banks, Detailed meeting agendas and meeting 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory transcripts are available on the NRC organizational and personnel matters Committee on Reactor Safeguards. Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- rm/doc-collections/acrs. Information that relate solely to the internal [FR Doc. 2015–16236 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] regarding topics to be discussed, personnel rules and practices of the BILLING CODE 7590–01–P ACRS, and information the release of changes to the agenda, whether the which would constitute a clearly meeting has been canceled or unwarranted invasion of personal NUCLEAR REGULATORY rescheduled, and the time allotted to privacy. COMMISSION present oral statements can be obtained The agenda for the subject meeting from the Web site cited above or by shall be as follows: Advisory Committee on Reactor contacting the identified DFO. Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the Moreover, in view of the possibility that Tuesday, July 7, 2015—12:00 p.m. Until ACRS Subcommittee on Fukushima; the schedule for ACRS meetings may be 1:00 p.m. Notice of Meeting adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, The Subcommittee will discuss The ACRS Subcommittee on proposed ACRS activities and related persons planning to attend should check Fukushima will hold a meeting on July with these references if such matters. The Subcommittee will gather 7, 2015, Room T–2B1, 11545 Rockville information, analyze relevant issues and rescheduling would result in a major Pike, Rockville, Maryland. inconvenience. facts, and formulate proposed positions The meeting will be open to public If attending this meeting, please enter and actions, as appropriate, for attendance with the exception of through the One White Flint North deliberation by the Full Committee. portions that may be closed to protect building, 11555 Rockville Pike, Members of the public desiring to information that is proprietary pursuant Rockville, MD. After registering with provide oral statements and/or written to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4). The agenda for security, please contact Mr. Theron comments should notify the Designated the subject meeting shall be as follows: Federal Official (DFO), Quynh Nguyen Brown (Telephone 240–888–9835) to be (Telephone 301–415–5844 or Email: Tuesday, July 7, 2015—8:30 a.m. Until escorted to the meeting room. [email protected]) five days prior 12:00 p.m. Dated: June 24, 2015. to the meeting, if possible, so that The Subcommittee will review the Mark L. Banks, arrangements can be made. Thirty-five draft regulatory basis for the Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory hard copies of each presentation or Containment Protection and Release Committee on Reactor Safeguards. handout should be provided to the DFO Reduction rulemaking for Mark I and [FR Doc. 2015–16237 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] thirty minutes before the meeting. In Mark II boiling water reactors. The BILLING CODE 7590–01–P addition, one electronic copy of each Subcommittee will hear presentations presentation should be emailed to the by and hold discussions with the NRC DFO one day before the meeting. If an staff and other interested persons NUCLEAR REGULATORY electronic copy cannot be provided regarding this matter. The COMMISSION within this timeframe, presenters Subcommittee will gather information, should provide the DFO with a CD analyze relevant issues and facts, and [NRC–2015–0120] containing each presentation at least formulate proposed positions and Selection of Material Balance Areas thirty minutes before the meeting. actions, as appropriate, for deliberation and Item Control Areas Electronic recordings will be permitted by the Full Committee. only during those portions of the Members of the public desiring to AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory meeting that are open to the public. provide oral statements and/or written Commission. Detailed procedures for the conduct of comments should notify the Designated ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; and participation in ACRS meetings Federal Official (DFO), Weidong Wang reopening of comment period. were published in the Federal Register (Telephone 301–415–6279 or Email: on October 1, 2014 (79 FR 59307). [email protected]) five days prior SUMMARY: On May 14, 2015, the U.S. Information regarding changes to the to the meeting, if possible, so that Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) agenda, whether the meeting has been appropriate arrangements can be made. solicited comments on DG 5057, canceled or rescheduled, and the time Thirty-five hard copies of each ‘‘Special Nuclear Material Control and allotted to present oral statements can presentation or handout should be Accounting Systems for Non-Fuel Cycle be obtained by contacting the identified provided to the DFO thirty minutes Facilities. The public comment period DFO. Moreover, in view of the before the meeting. In addition, one closed on June 15, 2015. The NRC has possibility that the schedule for ACRS electronic copy of each presentation decided to reopen the public comment meetings may be adjusted by the should be emailed to the DFO one day period to allow more time for members VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37671 of the public to develop and submit http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ more time for members of the public to their comments. adams.html. To begin the search, select submit their comments. DATES: The comment period for the ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day document published on May 14, 2015 select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS of June 2015. (80 FR 27709) has been reopened. Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Comments should be filed no later than please contact the NRC’s Public Thomas H. Boyce, July 31, 2015. Comments received after Document Room (PDR) reference staff at Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic this date will be considered, if it is 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by Issues Branch, Division of Engineering, Office practical to do so, but the Commission email to [email protected]. The of Nuclear Regulatory Research. is able to ensure consideration only for ADAMS accession number for each [FR Doc. 2015–16130 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] comments received on or before this document referenced (if it is available in BILLING CODE 7590–01–P date. ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is mentioned. The draft ADDRESSES: You may submit comments regulatory guide is available POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION by any of the following methods (unless electronically under ADAMS accession this document describes a different number ML15015A271. The regulatory [Docket No. CP2015–86; Order No. 2552] method for submitting comments on a analysis may be found in ADAMS under specified subject): Accession No. ML15015A294. New Postal Product • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to Regulatory guides are not copyrighted AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. http://www.regulations.gov and search and NRC approval is not required to ACTION: Notice. for Docket ID NRC–2015–0120. Address reproduce them. questions about NRC dockets to Carol • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; purchase copies of public documents at recent Postal Service filing concerning email: [email protected]. For the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One an additional Global Expedited Package technical questions, contact the White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Services 3 (GEPS 3) negotiated service FOR FURTHER individuals listed in the Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. agreement. This notice informs the INFORMATION CONTACT section of this B. Submitting Comments public of the filing, invites public document. comment, and takes other • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Please include Docket ID NRC–2015– administrative steps. Office of Administration, Mail Stop: 0120 in your comment submission. DATES: Comments are due: July 2, 2015. OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear The NRC cautions you not to include Regulatory Commission, Washington, identifying or contact information that ADDRESSES: Submit comments DC 20555–0001. you do not want to be publicly electronically via the Commission’s For additional direction on accessing disclosed in your comment submission. Filing Online system at http:// information and submitting comments, The NRC will post all comment www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit see ‘‘Obtaining Information and submissions at http:// comments electronically should contact Submitting Comments’’ in the www.regulations.gov as well as enter the the person identified in the FOR FURTHER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of comment submissions into ADAMS. INFORMATION CONTACT section by this document. The NRC does not routinely edit telephone for advice on filing alternatives. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom comment submissions to remove Pham, Office of Nuclear Material Safety identifying or contact information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Safeguards, telephone: 301–415– If you are requesting or aggregating David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 7254, email address: Tom.Pham@ comments from other persons for 202–789–6820. nrc.gov, and Mekonen Bayssie, Office of submission to the NRC, then you should SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Nuclear Regulatory Research, telephone: inform those persons not to include Table of Contents 301–415–1699, email address: identifying or contact information that [email protected]; U.S. Nuclear they do not want to be publicly I. Introduction Regulatory Commission, Washington, disclosed in their comment submission. II. Notice of Commission Action DC 20555–0001. Your request should state that the NRC III. Ordering Paragraphs SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: does not routinely edit comment I. Introduction submissions to remove such information I. Obtaining Information and before making the comment On June 23, 2015, the Postal Service Submitting Comments submissions available to the public or filed notice that it has entered into an additional Global Expedited Package A. Obtaining Information entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. Services 3 (GEPS 3) negotiated service Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015– agreement (Agreement).1 0120 when contacting the NRC about II. Discussion To support its Notice, the Postal the availability of information for this On May 14, 2015, the NRC solicited Service filed a copy of the Agreement, action. You may obtain publically- comments on Selection of Material a copy of the Governors’ Decision available information related to this Balance Areas and Item Control Areas. authorizing the product, a certification action by any of the following methods: The purpose of This DG provides of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to guidance to licensees and applicants on and an application for non-public http://www.regulations.gov and search the NRC’s regulations concerning the treatment of certain materials. It also for Docket ID NRC–2015–0120. material control and accounting of filed supporting financial workpapers. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents special nuclear material. The public Access and Management System comment period closed on June 15, 1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing a Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- 2015. The NRC has decided to reopen Package Services 3 Negotiated Service Agreement available documents online in the the public comment period on this and Application for Non-Public Treatment of ADAMS Public Documents collection at document until July 31, 2015, to allow Materials Filed Under Seal, June 23, 2015 (Notice). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37672 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices II. Notice of Commission Action GEPS—NPR 7 Model Contract and to consider this proposed rule change. The Commission establishes Docket Application for Non-public Treatment The proposed rule change, if approved, No. CP2015–86 for consideration of of Materials Filed Under Seal. would adopt rules in connection with matters raised by the Notice. Documents are available at EDGX Options, which would be a The Commission invites comments on www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2015–55 facility of the Exchange. EDGX Options whether the Postal Service’s filing is and CP2015–83. would operate an electronic trading system developed to trade options. consistent with 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or Stanley F. Mires, 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR Accordingly, the Commission, Attorney, Federal Compliance. 5 part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, [FR Doc. 2015–16142 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] no later than July 2, 2015. The public designates August 17, 2015, as the date portions of the filing can be accessed via BILLING CODE 7710–12–P by which the Commission should either the Commission’s Web site (http:// approve or disapprove, or institute www.prc.gov). proceedings to determine whether to The Commission appoints Cassie SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE disapprove, the proposed rule change D’Souza to serve as Public COMMISSION (File No. SR–EDGX–2015–18). Representative in this docket. [Release No. 34–75297; File No. SR–EDGX– For the Commission, by the Division of 2015–18] Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated III. Ordering Paragraphs authority.6 It is ordered: Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Robert W. Errett, 1. The Commission establishes Docket Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Designation Deputy Secretary. No. CP2015–86 for consideration of the of a Longer Period for Commission [FR Doc. 2015–16086 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] matters raised by the Postal Service’s Action on a Proposed Rule Change To BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Notice. Establish Rules Governing the Trading 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Cassie of Options on the EDGX Options D’Souza is appointed to serve as an Exchange SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE officer of the Commission to represent COMMISSION the interests of the general public in this June 25, 2015. proceeding (Public Representative). On April 30, 2015, EDGX Exchange, [Release No. 34–75300; File No. SR–Phlx– 3. Comments are due no later than Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with 2014–66] July 2, 2015. the Securities and Exchange 4. The Secretary shall arrange for Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’), Self-Regulatory Organizations; publication of this order in the Federal pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Order Register. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Disapproving a Proposed Rule 1 2 Change, as Modified by Amendment By the Commission. (‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, a proposed rule change to adopt rules to No. 2, To Adopt New Exchange Rule Shoshana M. Grove, govern the trading of options on the 1081, Solicitation Mechanism, To Secretary. EDGX Options Exchange. The proposed Introduce a New Electronic Solicitation [FR Doc. 2015–16050 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] rule change was published for comment Mechanism BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P in the Federal Register on May 19, June 25, 2015. 2015.3 The Commission received no comment letters on the proposed rule I. Introduction POSTAL SERVICE change. On October 14, 2014, NASDAQ OMX Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 4 provides PHLX LLC (‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘Phlx’’) filed International Product Change—Global that within 45 days of the publication of with the Securities and Exchange Expedited Package Services—Non- notice of the filing of a proposed rule Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant Published Rates change, or within such longer period up to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. to 90 days as the Commission may Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 2 ACTION: Notice. designate if it finds such longer period 19b–4 thereunder, a proposed rule to be appropriate and publishes its change to adopt new Exchange Rule SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives reasons for so finding or as to which the 1081, Solicitation Mechanism, to notice of filing a request with the Postal self-regulatory organization consents, introduce a new electronic solicitation Regulatory Commission to add Global the Commission shall either approve the mechanism pursuant to which a Expedited Package Services—Non- proposed rule change, disapprove the member can electronically submit all-or- Published Rates 7 (GEPS—NPR 7) to the proposed rule change, or institute none orders of 500 contracts or more (or, Competitive Products List. proceedings to determine whether the in the case of mini options, 5000 DATES: Effective date: July 1, 2015. proposed rule change should be contracts or more) that the member FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: disapproved. The 45th day for this filing represents as agent against contra orders Sylvia Baylis, 202–268–6464. is July 3, 2015. The Commission is that the member solicited. The proposed extending this 45-day time period. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The rule change was published for comment ® The Commission finds it appropriate United States Postal Service hereby in the Federal Register on October 31, to designate a longer period within 3 gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 2014. On December 8, 2014, the which to take action on the proposed 3642, on June 19, 2015, it filed with the Commission extended the time period rule change so that it has sufficient time Postal Regulatory Commission a Request 5 of the United States Postal Service to Id. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(31). add Global Expedited Package 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Services—Non-Published Rates 7 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74949 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. (GEPS—NPR 7) to the Competitive (May 13, 2015), 80 FR 28745. 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73441 Products List, and Notice of Filing 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). (October 27, 2014), 79 FR 64862 (‘‘Notice’’). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37673 in which to either approve the proposed contra orders that the member had trading at an improved price against rule change, disapprove the proposed solicited. Currently, under Phlx Rule non-solicited contra-side interest or at rule change, or institute proceedings to 1080(c)(ii)(C)(2), Order Entry Firms 11 the stop price, defined below, against determine whether to approve or must expose orders they represent as the Solicited Order. The solicitation disapprove the proposed rule change to agent for at least one second before such mechanism would accommodate both January 29, 2015.4 On January 28, 2015, orders may be automatically executed, simple orders and Complex Orders.17 the Commission instituted proceedings in whole or in part, against orders Prior to the first time a member enters under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act 5 to solicited from members and non- an Agency Order into the solicitation determine whether to approve or member broker-dealers to transact with mechanism on behalf of a customer, the disapprove the proposed rule change.6 such orders.12 The proposed rule change member would be required to deliver to The Commission received two comment would provide an alternative method, to the customer a written notification letters from the same commenter enable a member to electronically informing the customer that its Agency regarding the proposal,7 as well as a execute orders it represents on behalf of Orders may be executed using Phlx’s response from the Exchange to the a public customer, broker-dealer, or any solicitation mechanism. Such written commenter’s first letter.8 On April 9, other entity (an ‘‘Agency Order’’) 13 notification would be required to 2015, the Exchange filed Amendment against solicited limit orders of a public disclose the terms and conditions No. 2 to the proposed rule change.9 The customer, broker-dealer, or any other contained in proposed Rule 1081 and to proposed rule change, as modified by entity (a ‘‘Solicited Order’’) through a be in a form approved by the Amendment No. 2, was published for solicitation mechanism designed for this Exchange.18 comment in the Federal Register on purpose.14 The proposed mechanism would be a Solicitation Auction Eligibility April 22, 2015, on which date the Requirements Commission also designated a longer process by which a member (the period for Commission action on the ‘‘Initiating Member’’) would be able to All options traded on the Exchange, proposed rule change.10 electronically submit an all-or-none including mini options, would be This Order disapproves the proposed Agency Order of 500 contracts or more eligible for the Solicitation Auction. rule change, as modified by Amendment (or, in the case of mini options,15 5000 Proposed Rule 1081(i) describes the No. 2. contracts or more) against a Solicited circumstances under which an Initiating Order, and to initiate an auction (the Member would be permitted to initiate II. Description of the Proposal ‘‘Solicitation Auction’’).16 As noted a Solicitation Auction. The Exchange proposes to adopt new below, at the end of the Solicitation Proposed Rule 1081(i)(A) provides Rule 1081, Solicitation Mechanism, to Auction, allocation would occur with that the Agency Order and the Solicited introduce a new electronic solicitation all contracts of the Agency Order Order must each be limit orders for at mechanism pursuant to which a least 500 contracts (or, in the case of member would be able to electronically 11 Rule 1080(c)(ii)(A)(1) defines ‘‘Order Entry mini options, at least 5000 contracts) submit all-or-none orders of 500 Firm’’ as a member organization of the Exchange and must be designated as all-or-none. that is able to route orders to AUTOM. (AUTOM is The orders must match in size, and their contracts or more (or, in the case of mini the Exchange’s electronic quoting and trading options, 5000 contracts or more) that the system, which has been denoted in Exchange rules limit prices must match or cross in member represents as agent against as XL II, XL and AUTOM.) price.19 If the orders cross in price, the 12 According to the Exchange, Section (c), price at which the Agency Order and Solicited Orders, of Exchange Rule 1064, Crossing 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73791 the Solicited Order would be considered Facilitation and Solicited Orders, governs execution (December 8, 2014), 79 FR 73924 (December 12, for submission pursuant to proposed of solicited orders by open outcry, on the 2014). Exchange’s trading floor, and would not be affected Rules 1081(i)(B) and (C) would be the 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). by proposed Rule 1081. The Exchange states that limit price of the Solicited Order.20 The 6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74167 many aspects of the functionality of the proposed orders would not be able to be stop or (January 28, 2015), 80 FR 5865 (February 3, 2015) solicitation mechanism are similar to those stop limit orders; would need to be (‘‘Order Instituting Proceedings’’). provided for in Rule 1080(n), PIXL, and certain of 7 See Letters from Michael J. Simon, Secretary the proposed rules correspond to the existing PIXL marked with a time in force of day, good and General Counsel, International Securities rules. For information about specific provisions of Exchange LLC (‘‘ISE’’), dated February 25, 2015 proposed Rule 1081 that correspond to the PIXL 17 A Complex Order is any order involving the (‘‘ISE Letter’’) and dated June 15, 2015 (‘‘Second ISE rule and that have been omitted in the description simultaneous purchase and/or sale of two or more Letter’’). The Second ISE Letter notes that ISE of the proposal herein, see Notice of Amendment different options series in the same underlying reiterates its original comments. No. 2, supra note 10. security, priced at a net debit or credit based on the 8 See Letter from Carla Behnfeldt, Associate 13 The Exchange notes that the capitalized and relative prices of the individual components, for the General Counsel, Nasdaq, dated March 11, 2015 defined term ‘‘Agency Order’’ as used in proposed same account, for the purpose of executing a (‘‘Phlx Response Letter’’). Rule 1081 differs from the term ‘‘agency order’’ as particular investment strategy. A Complex Order 9 The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 on April used in Phlx Rule 1080(b)(i)(A). See Notice of may also be a stock-option order, which is an order 1, 2015. Amendment No. 1 was withdrawn on April Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 80 FR at 22570 to buy or sell a stated number of units of an 8, 2015. Amendment No. 2 amends and replaces the n. 17. underlying stock or exchange-traded fund (‘‘ETF’’) original filing in its entirety. In Amendment No. 2, 14 The Exchange states that participants would be coupled with the purchase or sale of options the Exchange: (1) Makes certain changes to required to ensure that their records adequately contract(s). Complex Orders on Phlx are discussed Exchange Rule 1080(n) regarding the PIXL auction demonstrate the solicitation of an order that is in Commentary .07 to Rule 1080. process; (2) clarifies that the trading system does entered into the mechanism for execution against 18 See proposed Rule 1081(i)(H). The rule would not currently accept all-or-none Complex Orders; an Agency Order as a Solicited Order prior to entry require delivery of this disclosure only prior to the (3) provides that the side of the Agency Order will of such order into this mechanism. first submission of an Agency Order on behalf of a be disseminated at the commencement of an 15 A given Solicitation Auction could be for customer rather than prior to the submission of auction; (4) clarifies the treatment of responsive all- options contracts exclusively or for mini options each and every Agency Order on behalf of such or-none interest in the auction; (5) adds examples contracts exclusively, but could not be used for a customer. regarding the operation of the solicitation combination of both options contracts and mini 19 In the case of Complex Orders, the underlying mechanism; and (6) makes certain other technical options contracts. components of both Complex Orders would also and clarifying changes. 16 The Exchange notes that similar electronic need to match. Additionally, all the option legs of 10 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74746 functionality is offered today by other option each Complex Order would need to consist entirely (April 16, 2015), 80 FR 22569 (April 22, 2015) exchanges. See Chicago Board Options Exchange of options or entirely of mini options. (‘‘Notice of Amendment No. 2’’). The comment (‘‘CBOE’’) Rule 6.74B, Solicitation Auction 20 As noted below, under Rule 1081(i)(B), the period for the Notice of Amendment No. 2 closed Mechanism, and ISE Rule 716(e), Solicited Order limit price of the Solicited Order must also be equal on May 7, 2015. Mechanism. to or better than the National Best Bid/Offer. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37674 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices ‘til cancelled or immediate or cancel; initiate a Solicitation Auction.23 In (‘‘RSQT’’) or non-streaming registered and would not be routed regardless of addition, Agency Orders submitted at or options trader (‘‘ROT’’) assigned in the routing strategy indicated on the before the opening of trading would not affected series.27 The Exchange believes order.21 be eligible to initiate a Solicitation that in order to maintain fair and Pursuant to proposed Rule 1081(i)(B), Auction and would be rejected.24 orderly markets, a market maker the Initiating Member would need to Agency Orders that are not Complex assigned in an option should not be stop the entire Agency Order at a price Orders received while another solicited for participation in a (the ‘‘stop price’’) that is equal to or electronic auction (including any Solicitation Auction by an Initiating better than the National Best Bid/Offer Solicitation Auction, PIXL auction, or Member. The Exchange believes that a (‘‘NBBO’’) on both sides of the market, any other kind of auction) involving the market maker interested in participating provided that such price would need to same option series is in progress would in transactions on the Exchange should be at least $0.01 better than any public not be eligible to initiate a Solicitation do so by way of his or her quotations, customer non-contingent limit order on Auction and would be rejected.25 and should respond to Solicitation the Phlx order book and would need to Similarly, a Complex Agency Order Auction notifications rather than create be equal to the Agency Order’s limit received while another auction in the them by having an Initiating Member price or provide the Agency Order with same Complex Order strategy is in submitting Solicited Orders on the a better price than its limit price. Stop progress would not be eligible to initiate market maker’s behalf. a Solicitation Auction and would be prices could be submitted in $0.01 Solicitation Auction Process increments, regardless of the applicable rejected.26 Minimum Price Variation (the ‘‘MPV’’). Finally, a solicited order may not be Pursuant to proposed Rule Contingent orders (including all-or- for the account of any Exchange 1081(ii)(A)(1), to begin the Solicitation none, stop or stop-limit orders) on the specialist, streaming quote trader Auction process, the Initiating Member order book would not be considered (‘‘SQT’’), remote streaming quote trader would need to mark the Agency Order when checking the acceptability of the and the Solicited Order for Solicitation stop price. The Exchange states that 23 See proposed Rule 1081(i)(D). Auction processing, and specify the stop 24 See proposed Rule 1081(i)(E). Orders submitted price at which it seeks to cross the contingent orders are not represented as during a specified period of time, as determined by part of the Exchange Best Bid/Offer Agency Order with the Solicited Order. the Exchange and communicated to Exchange The system would determine the stop since they may only be executed if membership on the Exchange’s Web site, prior to specific conditions are met. Given that the end of the trading session in the affected series price based upon the submitted limit prices, if such prices for the Agency these orders are not represented as part (including, in the case of Complex Orders, in any series that is a component of the Complex Order) Order and Solicited Order do not match of the Exchange Best Bid/Offer, they are also would not be eligible to initiate a Solicitation as discussed above.28 Once the Initiating not included in the NBBO and thus Auction and would be rejected. See proposed Rule Member has submitted an Agency Order would not be considered when checking 1081(i)(F). 25 and Solicited Order for processing in the acceptability of the stop price.22 The Exchange notes that a similar restriction currently applies with respect to PIXL auctions. See the Solicitation Auction, the Agency Orders that are submitted but that do PIXL Rule 1080(n)(ii), which provides that ‘‘[o]nly Order and the Solicitation Order could not comply with the eligibility one Auction may be conducted at a time in any not be modified or cancelled.29 requirements set forth in proposed Rule given series or strategy.’’ The Exchange proposes to 1081(i)(A) through (C) would be rejected revise this provision to make clear that only one Crossing Two Public Customer Orders electronic auction may be conducted at a time in upon receipt and would be ineligible to any given series or strategy. The Exchange proposes Without a Solicitation Auction to amend the PIXL rule by adding Rule As noted above, the proposed rule 21 According to the Exchange, whether an order 1080(n)(i)(H) to provide that PIXL Orders that are change would enable a member to is marked with a time in force of day as opposed received while another electronic auction involving to, for example, good till cancelled or immediate or the same option series or the same Complex Order electronically execute an Agency Order, cancel is irrelevant to the manner in which they strategy is in progress would not be eligible to which is an order it represents on behalf would be treated once they are entered into the initiate a PIXL Auction and would be rejected. See of a public customer, broker-dealer, or solicitation mechanism. Amendment No. 2, supra note 9. any other entity, against a Solicited 22 Proposed Rule 1081(i)(B) would not apply if 26 According to the Exchange, a simple Agency the Agency Order is a Complex Order (a ‘‘Complex Order in one series that is submitted while an Order, which is a solicited limit order Agency Order’’). Rather, proposed Rule 1081(i)(C) electronic auction is already in process with respect would apply to Complex Agency Orders and would to a Complex Agency Order that includes the same 27 See proposed Rule 1081(i)(G). See also Notice require them to be of a conforming ratio, as defined series would not be rejected. Instead, a Solicitation of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 80 FR at 22571 in Commentary .07(a)(ix) to Rule 1080. A Complex Auction would be initiated for that incoming n. 35, for a description of each of these types of Agency Order which is not of a conforming ratio Agency Order offering each unique strategy or market participants. would be rejected. The Exchange represents that individual series the same opportunity to initiate an 28 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, PIXL operates in the same manner. See Amendment auction. Any Legging Orders would automatically 80 FR at 22571, n 36. No. 2, supra note 9 (citing Rule 1080(n)(i)(C)). be removed from the order book upon receipt of an 29 Rule 1081(ii)(A)(l) would not apply to Complex Proposed Rule 1081(i)(C) would require all Agency or Complex Agency Order that consists of Agency Orders. Rather, a parallel provision, component option legs of the order to be for at least a component in which there is a Legging Order proposed Rule 1081(ii)(A)(2) would provide that to 500 contracts (or, in the case of mini options, at (whether a buy order or a sell order) that initiates initiate a Solicitation Auction in the case of a least 5000 contracts). It also would provide that the a Solicitation Auction. See Amendment No. 2, Complex Agency Order and Complex Solicited Initiating Member must stop the entire Complex supra note 9, 80 FR at 22571, n. 34 (noting that this Order (a ‘‘Complex Solicitation Auction’’), the Agency Order at a price that is better by at least feature of proposed Rule 1081 comports with a Initiating Member would need to mark the orders $0.01 than the best net price (debit or credit) (i) feature of PIXL). Complex Orders submitted during for Solicitation Auction processing, and specify the available on the Complex Order book regardless of normal trading hours in a strategy that has not yet price (‘‘stop price’’) at which it seeks to cross the the Complex Order book size; and (ii) achievable opened under Commentary .07 of Rule 1080 would Complex Agency Order with the Complex Solicited from the best Phlx bids and offers for the individual cause the strategy to immediately open and permit Order. The system would determine the stop price options (an ‘‘improved net price’’) regardless of a Solicitation Auction to be initiated. See proposed based upon the submitted limit prices if such prices size, provided in either case that such price is equal Rule 1081(i)(E). In addition, neither a Solicitation do not match as discussed above. See Notice of to or better than the Complex Agency Order’s limit Auction for a simple Agency Order or for Complex Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 80 FR at 22571, price. Stop prices for Complex Agency Orders Agency Order may be initiated prior to the regular n. 36. Once the Initiating Member has submitted the would be submitted in $0.01 increments, regardless opening of the individual option in the case of a Complex Agency Order and the Complex Solicited of MPV, and contingent orders on the order book simple Agency Order, or the regular opening of all Order for processing pursuant to proposed Rule would not be considered when checking the individual components in the case of a Complex 1081(ii)(A)(1)–(2), the Complex Agency Order and acceptability of the stop price. See proposed Rule Agency Order. See Notice of Amendment No. 2, Complex Solicited Order could not be modified or 1081(i)(C). supra note 10, 80 FR at 22571 n. 34. cancelled. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37675 of a public customer, broker-dealer, or Complex Order book in the same Solicitation Auction any other entity through the solicitation strategy, the public customer-to-public The proposed Solicitation Auction 30 mechanism. customer Complex Order would not be process is described in proposed Rules However, pursuant to proposed Rule permitted to be executed at a price at 1081(ii)(A)(4) through 1081(ii)(A)(10). 1081(v), if a member were to enter an which the all-or-none Complex Order Following the issuance of the Request Agency Order for the account of a would be eligible to trade based on its for Response, the Solicitation Auction public customer paired with a Solicited limit price and size. would last for a period of 500 Order for the account of public The Exchange believes that permitting milliseconds,39 unless the auction was customer and if the paired orders public customer to public customer concluded as the result of any of the adhered to the eligibility requirements crosses for simple orders and Complex circumstances of early termination of proposed Rule 1081(i), such paired Orders through use of the solicitation described below.40 orders would be executed automatically mechanism would benefit public Any person or entity would be without a Solicitation Auction.31 The customers on both sides of the crossing permitted to submit Responses to the execution price for such paired public transaction by providing speedy and Request for Response, provided each customer orders (except if they are efficient executions to public customer such Response is properly marked Complex Orders) would need to be orders in this circumstance while specifying the price, size and side of the expressed in the minimum quoting maintaining the priority of public market at which it would be willing to increment applicable to the affected customer interest on the book. participate in the execution of the 32 series. Such an execution would not Solicitation Auction Notification Agency Order.41 The Exchange believes be permitted to trade through the NBBO that permitting any person or entity to Pursuant to proposed Rule or at the same price as any resting submit Responses to the Request for 1081(ii)(A)(3), when the Exchange public customer order. If all-or-none Response should attract Responses from receives an order for Solicitation orders are on the order book in the all sources, maximizing the potential for Auction processing, a Request for affected series, the public customer-to- liquidity in the Solicitation Auction and Response with the option details (name public customer order may not be thus affording the Agency Order the best of security, strike price, and expiration executed at a price at which the all-or- opportunity for price improvement. date), size, side,36 and stop price of the none order would be eligible to trade Responses would not be visible to 33 Agency Order and the Solicitation based on its limit price and size. Solicitation Auction participants, and Auction start time would then be sent In the case of a Complex Order, a would not be disseminated to the over the PHLX Orders data feed and public customer-to-public customer Options Price Reporting Authority Specialized Quote Feed (‘‘SQF’’).37 The cross would be permitted to occur only (‘‘OPRA’’). A Response would be Exchange believes that providing option at a price that would improve the permitted to be for any size up to the details, size, side, and stop price is calculated Phlx Best Bid/Offer or size of the Agency Order.42 The ‘‘cPBBO’’ and would improve upon the sufficient information for participants to net limit price of any Complex Orders determine whether to submit responses strategy, side, size, and stop price of the Agency 38 (excluding all-or-none) on the Complex to the Solicitation Auction. Order, as well as the Solicitation Auction start time. Order book in the same strategy.34 If all- See id. or-none Complex Orders 35 are on the To make this clear, the Exchange proposes to add 39 In April/May 2014, to determine whether the a sentence at the end of Rule 1080.07(b)(v) stating proposed Solicitation Auction timer would provide that ‘‘[n]otwithstanding the above, the trading sufficient time to respond to a Request for 30 However, the Solicited Order may not be for system does not currently accept all-or-none Response, the Exchange polled all Phlx market the account of any Exchange specialist, SQT, RSQT Complex Orders.’’ See Amendment No. 2, supra makers, 20 of which responded. Of those that or ROT assigned in the affected series. See note 27, note 9, 80 FR at 22571, n. 40. The Exchange states responded to the survey, 15 are currently supra and accompanying text. that it anticipates that it will file a proposed rule responding to auctions on Phlx or intend to do so. 31 Rule 1080(c)(ii)(C)(2), which states that Order change to provide for the handling and execution 100% of those respondents indicated that their firm Entry Firms must expose orders they represent as of all-or-none Complex Orders and thereafter permit could respond to auctions with a duration of at least agent for at least one second before such orders may the trading system to accept them. The Exchange 50 milliseconds. Thus, the Exchange states that it be automatically executed against solicited orders, therefore states that it intends to delete this new believes that the proposed Solicitation Auction would be amended to clarify that it would not sentence to be added to Rule 1080.07(b)(v) if the duration of 500 milliseconds would provide a apply to Rule 1081, Solicitation Mechanism. See Exchange submits, and the Commission approves, meaningful opportunity for participants on Phlx to also Rule 1081(ii)(A)(4). a proposed rule change that provides for all-or-none respond to a Solicitation Auction, whether initiated 32 The execution price for a Complex Order Complex Orders to be submitted through the by an Agency Order or a Complex Agency Order, would be permitted to be in $.01 increments. trading system. See id. The proposed rule change while at the same time facilitating the prompt 33 All-or-none orders can be submitted on the describes how the solicitation mechanism would execution of orders. The Exchange notes that both Exchange only for non-broker-dealer customers. As handle all-or-none Complex Orders once they are ISE and Miami International Securities Exchange stated above, the mechanism would not consider permitted under Exchange rules. According to the LLC (‘‘MIAX’’) rules provide for a 500 millisecond all-or-none orders when checking the acceptability Exchange, the Complex Agency Orders and response time. See ISE Rule 716, Supplementary of the stop price of an Agency Order. Complex Solicited Orders that would be permitted Material .04 and MIAX Rule 515A(b)(2)(i)(C). 34 The term ‘‘cPBBO’’ means the best net debit or to be entered into the Solicitation Auction, 40 Rule 1080(c)(ii)(C)(2), which states that Order credit price for a Complex Order Strategy based on however, are unique to the mechanism and their Entry Firms must expose orders they represent as the PBBO for the individual options components of acceptability is mandated by it, despite the agent for at least one second before such orders may such Complex Order Strategy, and, where the requirement that these orders must be entered with be automatically executed against solicited orders, underlying security is a component of the Complex an all-or-none contingency. Thus, the Exchange would be amended by the proposed rule change to Order, the National Best Bid and/or Offer for the states that it would not need to file a proposed rule clarify that it would not apply to proposed Rule underlying security. See Rule 1080.07(a)(iv). change in order to allow Complex Agency Orders 1081, Solicitation Mechanism. See also proposed 35 According to the Exchange, its trading system and Complex Solicited Orders to be submitted into Rule 1081(ii)(A)(4). is capable of accepting all-or-none Complex Orders, the system. 41 In the case of a Complex Agency Order, the but such orders are not affirmatively permitted to 36 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, Response would need to specify the price, size and be submitted under Exchange rules. Rule 80 FR at 22572. side of the market at which the person submitting 1080.07(b)(v) provides in part that ‘‘Complex 37 SQF is an interface that allows specialists and the Response would be willing to participate in the Orders may be submitted as: All-or-none orders— market makers to connect and send quotes into Phlx execution of the Complex Agency Order. See Notice to be executed in its [sic] entirety or not at all.’’ See XL and assists them in responding to auctions and of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72351 (June 9, providing liquidity to the market. 42 The Exchange’s proposal would not permit 2014), 79 FR 33977 (June 13, 2014) (SR–Phlx–2014– 38 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, Responses to be submitted with an all-or-none 39). The Exchange states, however, that all-or-none 80 FR at 22572. In the case of a Complex Agency contingency. The Exchange states that an all-or- Complex Orders may not be submitted at this time. Order, the Request for Response will include the Continued VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37676 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices minimum price increment for trading halt on the Exchange in the entirety and would have no means after Responses would be $0.01. A Response affected series (or, in the case of a the auction executions occur to offset would need to be equal to or better than Complex Solicitation Auction, any time the trading risk that they otherwise the NBBO on both sides of the market there is a trading halt on the Exchange would incur because the market is at the time of receipt of the Response. in any component of a Complex Agency halted, if they were permitted to execute A Response with a price that is outside Order).47 against the Agency Order in this the NBBO at the time of receipt would Pursuant to proposed Rule 1081(ii)(C), instance. By contrast, the Solicited be rejected.43 Multiple Responses at if the Solicitation Auction concluded Order ‘‘stopped’’ the Agency Order different prices from the same member before the expiration of the Solicitation when the order was submitted into the would be permitted during the Auction period because of the PBBO, Solicitation Auction and, in the Solicitation Auction.44 Responses cPBBO or Complex Order book Exchange’s view, therefore should would be permitted to be modified or (excluding all-or-none Complex Orders) execute against the Agency Order, if the cancelled during the Solicitation crossed the stop price, as described Solicitation Auction concludes before Auction. above, the entire Agency Order would the expiration of the Solicitation be executed using the allocation Auction period as the result of a trading Conclusion of the Solicitation Auction algorithm set forth in proposed Rule halt. Proposed Rules 1081(ii)(B)(1) through 1081(ii)(E). The algorithm is described Furthermore, the Exchange notes, (B)(4) describe a number of below under the heading ‘‘Order when an Agency Order and Solicited circumstances that would cause the Allocation’’. Order are submitted into the Solicitation Solicitation Auction to conclude. In addition, pursuant to proposed Auction, the stop price would need to Generally, it would conclude at the end Rule 1081(ii)(C), if the Solicitation be equal to or improve the NBBO and of the Solicitation Auction period, Auction concluded before the expiration be at least $0.01 better than any public except that it would conclude earlier: (i) of the Solicitation Auction period as the customer non-contingent limit orders on Any time the Phlx Best Bid/Offer result of a trading halt, the entire the Phlx order book. The Exchange (‘‘PBBO’’) on the same side of the Agency Order or Complex Agency Order believes that public customer interest market as the Agency Order crosses the would be executed solely against the submitted to Phlx after submission of stop price 45 (because, the Exchange Solicited Order or Complex Solicited the Agency Order and Solicited Order states, further price improvement would Order at the stop price and any but prior to the trading halt should not be unlikely and any Responses offering unexecuted Responses would be prevent the Agency Order from being improvement would likely be cancelled.48 Responses and other executed at the stop price since such cancelled); 46 or (ii) any time there is a interest present in the system would not public customer interest was not present be considered for trading against the at the time the Agency Order was none contingency included as a Response is not Agency Order in the case of a trading ‘‘stopped’’ by the Solicited Order. available for any type of auction in the Phlx market halt. The Exchange believes that this Entry of an unrelated market or because all-or-none orders may be submitted only result is appropriate since the for Customer accounts under Exchange rules, and marketable limit order on the opposite Customers typically do not respond to auctions in participants representing tradable side of the market from the Agency any event. See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra interest in the Solicitation Auction have Order received during the Solicitation note 10, 80 FR at 22572. (However, all-or-none not ‘‘stopped’’ the Agency Order in its Auction would not cause the orders entered and present on the Exchange book at the end of the Solicitation Auction would be Solicitation Auction to end early. cancelled. The Exchange also states that an all-or- considered for execution, as discussed below.) Rather, the unrelated order would 43 none Complex Order crossing the stop price should Similarly, in the case of Complex Order not end the Complex Solicitation Auction since the execute against interest outside the Responses, the Response would need to be equal to order would be contingent and might not actually Solicitation Auction (if marketable or better than the cPBBO on both sides, as defined be able to trade based on its size contingency. The in Commentary .07(a)(iv) of Rule 1080, at the time against the PBBO) or would post to the Exchange believes that continuing to run the order book and then route if eligible for of receipt of the Complex Order Response. Complex Solicitation Auction in this instance for However, the Responses would not need to improve the duration of the auction timer would benefit the routing (in the case of an order upon the limit of orders on the Complex Order book Agency Order in allowing interest that may offer marketable against the NBBO but not because, the Exchange states, the Complex Order price improvement over the stop price to continue book is not displayed on OPRA and would not against the PBBO), pursuant to proposed to be collected. This approach would be consistent Rule 1081(ii)(D). If contracts remain necessarily be known to the responding participant. with the proposed rules for Solicitation Auctions If a Complex Order Response was received that was involving simple orders. Under the proposal, from such unrelated order at the time equal to or crossed the limit of orders on the Simple Solicitation Auctions would conclude early the Solicitation Auction ends, the total Complex Order book, the Response would only be when the PBBO on the same side of the market as unexecuted volume of such unrelated executed at a price that improves the resting order’s the Agency Order crossed the stop price. All-or- limit price by at least $0.01. See proposed rule none orders are not part of the PBBO as they are interest would be considered for 1081(ii)(H). See also Notice of Amendment No. 2, contingent and not displayed on OPRA. See participation in the order allocation supra note 10, 80 FR at 22572, n. 50. A Complex Amendment No. 2, supra note 9, 80 FR at 22572, process set forth in proposed Rule Order Response submitted with a price that is n.52. 1081(ii)(E) (described below), regardless outside the cPBBO at the time of receipt would be 47 See proposed Rule 1081(ii)(B)(4). Trading on of the number of contracts in relation to rejected. See proposed Rule 1081(ii)(A)(9). the Exchange in any option contract is halted 49 44 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, whenever trading in the underlying security has the Solicitation Auction size. The 80 FR at 22572. been paused or halted by the primary listing 45 See proposed Rule 1081(ii)(B)(2). market. See Rule 1047(e). See also Securities 49 Similarly, pursuant to proposed Rule 46 In the case of a Complex Solicitation Auction, Exchange Act Release No. 62269 (June 10, 2010), 75 1081(ii)(D), in the case of a Complex Solicitation the auction would end any time the cPBBO or the FR 34491 (June 17, 2010) (SR–Phlx–2010–82). The Auction, an unrelated market or marketable limit Complex Order book, excluding all-or-none Exchange states that any executions that occur Complex Order on the opposite side of the market Complex Orders, on the same side of the market as during any latency between the pause or halt in the from the Complex Agency Order as well as orders the Complex Agency Order, crosses the stop price. underlying security and the processing of the halt for the individual components of the unrelated See proposed Rule 1081(ii)(B)(3). The Exchange on the Exchange would be nullified pursuant to Complex Order received during the Complex believes that, when either the cPBBO or Complex Exchange Rule 1092(c)(iv)(B). Solicitation Auction would not cause the Complex Order interest, excluding all-or-none interest, is 48 Pursuant to Exchange Rule 1080(n)(ii)(C), in the Solicitation Auction to end early and would present on the Exchange on the same side as the case of a trading halt on the Exchange in the execute against interest outside of the Complex Complex Agency Order and crosses the stop price, affected series, a PIXL Order will be executed solely Solicitation Auction. If contracts remain from such further price improvement would be unlikely and against the Initiating Order at the stop price and any unrelated Complex Order at the time the Complex Responses offering improvement would likely be unexecuted PAN responses will be cancelled. Solicitation Auction ends, the total unexecuted VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37677 Exchange states that unrelated opposite proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(5), when proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(1) algorithm, side interest received during the determining if there is sufficient size to if there is sufficient size (considering all Solicitation Auction is handled in this execute the Complex Agency Orders at resting orders, quotes and Responses) to manner because participants submitting a price(s) better than the stop price, no execute the entire Agency Order at a such unrelated interest may not be all-or-none interest of any size would be price or prices better than the stop price, aware that an auction is in progress and considered. Phlx states that this the Agency Order would be executed should therefore be able to access firm difference is due to a system limitation against such better priced interest, with quotes that comprise the NBBO without relating to all-or-none Complex public customers having priority in the delay. The Exchange further believes Orders.52 The Exchange believes that allocation at each price level. After that considering such unrelated interest the difference in the treatment of all-or- public customer interest at a particular that remains unexecuted upon receipt none Complex Orders would not be price level has been satisfied, including for participation in the order allocation impactful since, according to a study it all-or-none orders with a size which can process would increase the number of made of the matter, all-or-none Complex be satisfied, remaining contracts would contracts against which an Agency Orders are rare.53 Moreover, the be allocated among all Exchange quotes, Order could be executed, and should Exchange notes, if sufficient size exists orders and Responses in accordance therefore create more opportunities for in other non-solicited interest to execute with Phlx Rules 1014(g)(vii)(B)(1)(b) and the Agency Order to be executed at the entire Complex Agency Order at an (d), and the Solicited Order would be better prices. improved price, the all-or-none cancelled.56 The Exchange provided an Complex Order would be considered for example of allocation in a Solicitation Order Allocation trade and executed if possible.54 Auction with sufficient improving The allocation of orders executed In both simple Solicitation Auctions interest.57 upon the conclusion of a Solicitation and Complex Solicitation Auctions, Auction would depend upon whether once a determination is made that 56 Similarly, pursuant to proposed Rule the Solicitation Auction has yielded sufficient improving interest exists, all- 1081(ii)(E)(3), in the case of a Complex Solicitation sufficient improving interest to improve or-none interest would be executed at Auction, if there is sufficient size (considering resting Complex Orders and Responses) to execute the price of the entire Agency Order. As the auction’s conclusion pursuant to the entire Complex Agency Order at a price(s) better noted above, all contracts of the Agency normal priority rules, except in a case than the stop price, the Complex Agency Order Order would trade at an improved price where the all-or-none contingency could would be executed against better priced Complex against non-solicited contra-side interest not be satisfied. If an execution that can Orders, Responses, as well as quotes and orders which comprise the cPBBO at the end of the or, in the event of insufficient adhere to the all-or-none contingency Complex Solicitation Auction. (The Exchange states improving interest to improve the price would not be possible, the all-or-none that the cPBBO is not considered in determining of the entire Agency Order, at the stop interest would be ignored and would whether there is sufficient improving size because price against the Solicited Order. remain on the order book.55 the market and/or size of the individual components can change between the calculation of Consideration of All-or-None Interest. Solicitation Auction with Sufficient sufficient size and the actual execution.) Such The Exchange states that the treatment Improving Interest. Pursuant to the interest would be allocated at a given price in the of all-or-none interest in assessing the following order: (i) To public customer Complex presence of sufficient improving interest 52 Phlx explains that all-or-none simple orders Orders and Responses in time priority; (ii) to SQT, reside with simple orders on the book. By contrast, RSQT, and non-SQT ROT Complex Orders and would not always be the same for Responses on a size pro-rata basis; (iii) to non- Complex Solicitation Auctions as it all-or-none Complex Orders reside in a separate book, in a different part of the trading system. market maker off-floor broker-dealer Complex would be for simple Solicitation According to the Exchange, the aggregation of all- Orders and Responses on a size pro-rata basis, and Auctions. In all Solicitation Auctions, or-none Complex Orders with other Complex (iv) to quotes and orders that comprise the cPBBO whether simple or complex, the system Orders in order to determine the presence of at the end of the Complex Solicitation Auction with sufficient improving interest would be a more public customer interest being satisfied first in time would not consider an all-or-none order difficult process than aggregation of all-or-none priority, then to SQT, RSQT, and non-SQT ROT when determining if there is sufficient simple orders with other simple orders. See also interest satisfied on a size pro-rata basis, and lastly size to execute the Agency Order (or Amendment No. 2, supra note 9. to non-market maker off-floor broker-dealers on a Complex Agency Order) at a price(s) 53 The Exchange reviewed six months of data size pro-rata basis. This allocation methodology is which showed that all-or-none Complex Orders consistent with the allocation methodology utilized better than the stop price if it would not represented only 0.12% of all Complex Orders. See for a Complex Order executed in PIXL. In addition, be possible to satisfy the all-or-or none Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10. providing public customer’s with priority over SQT, contingency in the execution.50 54 The Exchange provided the following example RSQT, and non-SQT ROTs, who in turn have of assessing the sufficiency of improving interest in priority over non-market maker off-floor broker- However, in the case of simple dealers is the same priority scheme used for regular Solicitation Auctions, all-or-none a Complex Solicitation Auction. Assume a Complex Agency Order to buy 1000 contracts that was orders. See Rule 1014(g). interest of a size that could potentially stopped by a Complex Solicited Order at $2.00 is When determining if there would be sufficient be executed consistent with its all-or- entered when the cPBBO is $1.90–$2.10. Assume size to execute the entire Complex Agency Order at none contingency would be considered that during the Solicitation Auction a Response is a price(s) better than the stop price, if the short sale price test in Rule 201 of Regulation SHO would be when determining whether there is received to sell 900 contracts at $1.98 and an all- or-none Complex Order is received to sell 100 triggered for a covered security, Complex Orders sufficient size to execute the Agency contracts at $1.99. At the end of the Solicitation and Responses marked ‘‘short’’ would not be Orders at a price(s) better than the stop Auction involving a Complex Order, the system considered because of the possibility that a short price.51 would not consider all-or-none interest in sale price restriction may apply during the interval By contrast, in the case of Complex determining whether it can execute the Complex between assessing for adequate size and the Agency Order at a better price than the stop price. execution of the Complex Agency Order. However, Solicitation Auctions, pursuant to In this example, by excluding the all-or-none if there was sufficient size to execute the entire Complex Order, only 900 contracts would be Complex Agency Order at a price(s) better than the volume of such unrelated interest would be available to sell at a better price than the stop price. stop price irrespective of any covered securities for considered for participation in the order allocation Therefore, the Complex Agency Order would trade which the price test would be triggered that might process, regardless of the number of contracts in against the Solicited Order at the $2.00 stop price. be present, then all Complex Orders and Responses relation to the Complex Solicitation Auction size, See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10. marked ‘‘short’’ would be considered for allocation described in proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E). 55 As discussed above, however, if without the in accordance with proposed Rule 1081(ii)(J)(3). 50 See Amendment No. 2, supra note 9. size of the all-or-none order there would be 57 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 51 The Exchange provided an example of insufficient interest to satisfy the Agency Order at at 80 FR 22574. The Exchange also provided an assessing the sufficiency of improving interest in a an improved price, the Agency Order would be example of allocation in a Complex Solicitation simple Solicitation Auction. See Notice of executed against the Solicited Order, and the Auction with sufficient improving interest. See Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 80 FR at 22574. responding interest would be cancelled. Continued VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37678 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Solicitation Auction with Insufficient Exchange states that requiring the stop Protection, generally prohibits trade- Improving Interest. Pursuant to price to be at least $0.01 better than any throughs, the Exchange notes that an proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(2), if there public customer interest on the limit exception to the prohibition exists, was not sufficient size (considering all order book would ensure public pursuant to Rule 1084(b)(x), when the resting orders, quotes and Responses) to customer priority of existing interest transaction that constituted the trade- execute the entire Agency Order at a and in turn provide the Solicited Order through was the execution of an order price(s) better than the stop price, the participant certainty that if an execution that was stopped at a price that did not Agency Order would be executed occurs at the stop price, such execution trade-through at the time of the stop.63 against the Solicited Order at the stop would represent the Solicited Order and In addition, the Exchange believes price, provided such price is better than not interest that arrived after the that, since the proposal would permit the limit of any public customer order Solicited Order participant stopped the Responses to be cancelled at any time (excluding all-or-none) on the limit Agency Order for its entire size. prior to the conclusion of the order book, on either the same side as Proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(6) would Solicitation Auction, Responses being or the opposite side of the Agency provide that a single quote, order or executed at a price trading through the Order, and equal to or better than the Response may not be allocated a market is, at best, highly unlikely as contra-side PBBO.58 Otherwise, both the number of contracts that is greater than participants would cancel Responses Agency Order and Solicited Order its size. when better priced interest that they would be cancelled without a trade Finally, proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(7) could trade against is present in the occurring.59 The Exchange believes that provides that a Complex Agency Order marketplace. this proposed provision would ensure consisting of a stock/ETF component Proposed Rule 1081(ii)(G) would that non-contingent public customer would not execute against interest provide that if, the Solicitation Auction orders on the limit order book would comprising the cPBBO at the end of the price when trading against non-solicited maintain priority. The Exchange notes Complex Solicitation Auction.62 interest (except if it was a Complex that ‘‘at least one other solicitation Legging of a stock/ETF component Solicitation Auction), would be the mechanism offered by another exchange would introduce the risk of a participant same as or would cross the limit of an considers public customer orders on the not receiving an execution on all order (excluding an all-or-none order) limit order book at the stop price when components of the Complex Order and resting on the limit order book on the determining if there is sufficient would therefore not be considered as a same side of the market as the Agency improving interest to satisfy the Agency means of executing a Complex Order Order, the Agency Order could be Order ....’’60 In contrast, the that includes a stock/ETF component. executed only at a price that is at least Exchange points out that the proposed $0.01 better than the resting order’s The Exchange states that introducing 64 solicitation mechanism offered on Phlx the risk of inability to fully execute a limit price. However, if such 61 execution price would be equal to or would not consider such interest. The complex strategy is counterproductive would not improve the stop price, the to, and inconsistent with, the effort to Agency Order would be executed Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 80 FR allow Complex Orders in the 22575 n.62. against the non-solicited interest at a 58 solicitation mechanism. Proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(2) would not apply price that is $0.01 better for the Agency to Complex Solicitation Auctions. Rather, a parallel provision, proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(4), would Miscellaneous Provisions Order than the stop price, provided the provide that, in a Complex Solicitation Auction, if Proposed Rules 1081(ii)(F) through (I) price would not equal or cross a public there is not sufficient size (considering resting customer order and would be equal to Complex Orders and Responses) to execute the would address the handling of the Agency Order and other orders, quotes or improved upon the PBBO on the entire Complex Agency Order at a price(s) better opposite side of the Agency Order.65 If than the stop price, the Complex Agency Order and Responses when certain conditions would be executed against the Solicited Order at are present. Pursuant to proposed Rule the stop price, provided such stop price was better 63 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, than the limit of any public customer Complex 1081(ii)(F), if the market moves at 80 FR at 22575. Order (excluding all-or-none) on the Complex Order following the receipt of a Response, 64 The system would not consider the origin of book, better than the cPBBO when a public such that there are Responses that cross the resting order but would seek to ensure the customer order (excluding all-or-none) is resting on the then-existing NBBO (provided such priority of all resting orders on the order book by the book in any component of the Complex Agency requiring that any execution occur at a price which Order, and equal to or better than the cPBBO on the NBBO is not crossed) at the time of the would improve upon the limit of a resting order by opposite side of the Complex Agency Order. The conclusion of the Solicitation Auction, at least $0.01, if possible. If an execution could not Exchange states that this proposed behavior would such Responses would be executed, if occur at least $0.01 better than the limit of a resting ensure that non-contingent public customers on the possible, at their limit price(s). order on the book, the system would permit the limit order book maintain priority. Otherwise, both Solicited Order to trade against the Agency Order the Complex Agency Order and the Solicited Order Although Exchange Rule 1084, Order at the resting limit order price provided the resting would be cancelled with no trade occurring. order is not for a public customer. See Notice of 59 The Exchange provided examples of allocation 62 The Exchange states that this provision, which Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, at 80 FR at in a Solicitation Auction with insufficient parallels Phlx Rule 1080(n)(ii)(E)(2)(g) concerning 22576. improving interest. With respect to simple Complex Orders in its PIXL auction, is being 65 See also Phlx Rule 1080(n)(ii)(H). Proposed Solicitation Auctions, see Notice of Amendment proposed for the same reasons explained in its File Rule 1081(ii)(G) would not apply to Complex No. 2, supra note 10, 80 FR at 22575. With respect No. SR-Phlx- 2013–46 with respect to that rule. See Solicitation Auctions. Rather, a parallel provision, to Complex Solicitation Auctions, see Notice of Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69845 (June proposed Rule 1081(ii)(H), would provide that if the Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 80 FR at 22575 25, 2013), 78 FR 39429 (July 1, 2013) (Order Complex Solicitation Auction price when trading n.63. Granting Approval To Proposed Rule Change, as against non-solicited interest was the same as or 60 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, Modified by Amendment No. 1, Regarding Complex would cross the limit of that of a Complex Order at 80 FR 22575. Order PIXL) (for purposes of this Order, the (excluding all-or-none) on the Complex Order book 61 See ISE Rule 716(e)(2)(i) which provides in part ‘‘Complex PIXL Filing’’). The Exchange states that on the same side of the market as the Complex that in the case of insufficient improving interest this limitation is also consistent with the handling Agency Order, the Complex Agency Order would be ‘‘[i]f there are Priority Customer Orders on the of Complex Orders that include a stock/ETF permitted to be executed only at a price that Exchange on the opposite side of the Agency Order component and are entered into the Phlx XL improves the resting order’s limit price by at least at the proposed execution price and there is system, noting that Commentary .08(a)(i) to Phlx $0.01, provided such execution price would sufficient size to execute the entire size of the Rule 1080 states, for example, that stock-option improve the stop price. If such execution price Agency Order, the Agency Order will be executed orders can only be executed against other stock- would be equal to or would not improve the stop against the bid or offer, and the solicited order will option orders and cannot be executed by the System price, the Agency Order would be executed $0.01 be cancelled.’’ against orders for the individual components. better than the stop price provided the price does VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37679 such price is not possible, the Agency Trade Exemption.68 Members of FINRA could not execute the underlying Order and Solicited Order would be or the NASDAQ Stock Market covered security component of a cancelled with no trade occurring.66 The (‘‘NASDAQ’’) are required to have a Complex Agency Order, Complex Exchange states that the system would Uniform Service Bureau/Executing Solicited Order, Complex Order or permit only the Solicited Order and no Broker Agreement (‘‘AGU’’) with Response in accordance with Rule 201 other interest to trade against the Nasdaq Execution Services LLC (‘‘NES’’) of Regulation SHO, the Exchange would Agency Order at the stop price since the in order to trade orders containing a cancel back the Complex Agency Order, Solicited Order stopped the entire size stock/ETF component; firms that are not Complex Solicited Order, Complex Agency Order at a price which was members of FINRA or NASDAQ are Order or Response to the entering required upon receipt to be equal to or required to have a Qualified Special member organization. For purposes of improve the NBBO and to be at least Representative (‘‘QSR’’) arrangement proposed Rule 1081(ii)(J)(3), the term $0.01 improvement over any public with NES in order to trade orders ‘‘covered security’’ would have the same customer orders resting on the order containing a stock/ETF component. meaning as in Rule 201(a)(1) of book, thereby establishing priority at the Proposed Rule 1081(ii)(J)(2) provides Regulation SHO.73 stop price. The Exchange further states that where one component of a Complex The Exchange states that this that this system logic ensures that the Agency Order, Complex Solicited Order, approach is consistent with Rule 201 of Agency Order would receive a better Complex Order or Response is the Regulation SHO. Under this proposal, 69 priced execution than the stop price underlying stock or ETF share, the the Exchange and NES, as trading when trading against interest other than Exchange would be required to centers, would prevent the execution or the Solicited Order. electronically communicate the display of a short sale of the stock/ETF underlying security component of the component of a Complex Order priced Proposed Rule 1081(ii)(I) would Complex Agency Order (together with provide that any unexecuted Responses at or below the current national best bid the Complex Solicited Order, Complex when the short sale price test restriction or Solicited Orders would be cancelled Order or Response, as applicable) to at the end of the Solicitation Auction. is triggered. Specifically, while the NES, its designated broker-dealer, for Exchange and NES are determining, The Exchange notes that because both immediate execution. The Exchange Responses and Solicited Orders would respectively, the prices of the options states that such execution and reporting component and of the stock or ETF be specifically entered into the would occur otherwise than on the Solicitation Auction to trade against the component of the Complex Order, as Exchange and would be handled by NES described above, NES would check the Agency Order, and then cancelling the pursuant to applicable rules regarding unexecuted portion of Responses and current national best bid of the stock or equity trading. ETF component at the time of Solicited Orders would be consistent Finally, proposed Rule 1081(ii)(J)(3) with the expected behavior of such execution. The execution of one states that when the short sale price test component is contingent upon the interest by the submitting participants. 70 in Rule 201 of Regulation SHO would execution of all other components and Complex Agency Orders With Stock/ be triggered for a covered security, NES once a Complex Order is accepted and ETF Components would not execute a short sale order in validated by the Phlx trading System, the underlying covered security the entire package would be processed Proposed Rule 1081(ii)(J) deals with component of a Complex Agency Order, as a single transaction and both the Complex Agency Orders with stock or Complex Solicited Order, Complex option leg and stock/ETF components ETF components. Proposed Rule Order or Response if the price was equal would be simultaneously processed.74 1081(ii)(J)(1) provides that member to or below the current national best organizations would be permitted to bid.71 However, NES would execute a Regulatory Issues short sale order in the underlying submit Complex Agency Orders, The proposed rule change contains covered security component of a Complex Solicited Orders, Complex two paragraphs describing prohibited Complex Agency Order, Complex Orders and/or Responses with a stock/ practices when participants use the Solicited Order, Complex Order or ETF component only if such orders/ solicitation mechanism. Responses comply with the Qualified Response if such order was marked Contingent Trade Exemption from Rule ‘‘short exempt,’’ regardless of whether it Proposed Rule 1081(iii) states that the 611(a) of Regulation NMS 67 pursuant to was at a price that was equal to or below Solicitation Auction could be used only the Act. Member organizations the current national best bid.72 If NES where there is a genuine intention to submitting such orders with a stock/ETF execute a bona fide transaction. It would component represent that such orders 68 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. be considered a violation of proposed 54389 (August 31, 2006), 71 FR 52829 (September comply with the Qualified Contingent Rule 1081 and would be deemed 7, 2006) (order granting an exemption for each NMS conduct inconsistent with just and stock component of certain qualified contingent equitable principles of trade and a not equal or cross a non-all-or-none public trades from Rule 611(a) of Regulation NMS). customer Complex Order or a non-all-or-none 69 See text of proposed Rule 1081(ii)(J)(2), public customer order present in the cPBBO on the Amendment No. 2, supra note 9. Order, however, a broker-dealer should not mark same side as the Complex Agency Order in a 70 17 CFR 242.201. See Securities Exchange Act the short sale order ‘‘short exempt’’ under Rule component of the Complex Order Strategy and Release No. 61595 (February 26, 2010), 75 FR 11232 201(c). See SHO FAQs Question and Answer Nos. would be equal to or better than the cPBBO on the (March 10, 2010). See also Division of Trading and 4.2, 5.4, and 5.5. See also Securities Exchange Act opposite side of the Complex Agency Order. If such Markets: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions Release No. 63967 (February 25, 2011), 76 FR 12206 price would not be possible, the Agency Order and Concerning Rule 201 of Regulation SHO, January (March 4, 2011) (SR–Phlx–2011–27) (discussing, Solicited Order would be cancelled with no trade 20, 2011 (‘‘SHO FAQs’’) at www.sec.gov/divisions/ among other things, Complex Orders marked ‘‘short occurring. The Exchange noted that this marketreg/mrfaqregsho1204.htm. exempt’’) and the Complex PIXL Filing. The system functionality is consistent with the operation of 71 The term ‘‘national best bid’’ is defined in SEC would handle short sales of the orders and PIXL auctions. Rule 201(a)(4). 17 CFR 242.201(a)(4). Responses described herein the same way it 66 The Exchange provided an example of the 72 The Exchange notes that a broker or dealer may handles the short sales discussed in the Complex operation of proposed Rule 1081(ii)(G). See Notice mark a sell order ‘‘short exempt’’ only if the PIXL Filing. of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10 (adding provisions of SEC Rule 201(c) or (d) are met. 17 CFR 73 17 CFR 242.201(a)(4). clarifying language to the example). 242.200(g)(2). Since NES and the Exchange do not 74 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 10, 67 17 CFR 242.611(a). display the stock or ETF portion of a Complex at 80 FR 22577. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37680 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices violation of Rule 707 75 if an Initiating professionals would not receive the Amendment No. 2, is consistent with Member submitted an Agency Order same priority afforded to public the requirements of the Act and the (thereby initiating a Solicitation customers in a Solicitation Auction rules and regulations thereunder Auction) and also submitted its own under proposed Rule 1081, and instead applicable to a national securities Response in the same Solicitation would be treated as broker-dealers in exchange. In particular, the Commission Auction. The Exchange states that the this regard. Therefore, an Agency Order does not find that the proposed rule purpose of this provision is to prevent or Solicited Order submitted for a change, as modified by Amendment No. Solicited Members from submitting an professional would not be considered a 2, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of inaccurate or misleading stop price or public customer order eligible to be the Act, which, among other things, trying to improve their allocation paired with a public customer order or requires that the rules of a national entitlement by participating with another professional order and these securities exchange be designed ‘‘to multiple expressions of interest. would not be automatically executed promote just and equitable principles of Proposed Rule 1081(iv) states that a without a Solicitation Auction pursuant trade, to remove impediments to and pattern or practice of submitting to Rule 1081(v), discussed above. In perfect the mechanism of a free and unrelated orders or quotes that cross the addition, unrelated professional orders, open market and a national market stop price causing a Solicitation excluding all-or-none orders, or system and, in general, to protect Auction to conclude before the end of Responses for the account of a investors and the public interest the Solicitation Auction period would professional would be treated under the ....’’81 Because this determination be deemed conduct inconsistent with proposed rule as broker-dealer orders under the Act necessitates disapproving just and equitable principles of trade for purposes of execution priority. the proposed rule change, as modified and a violation of Rule 707. Unrelated professional all-or-none by Amendment No. 2, the Commission 82 Definition of Professional in Rule orders would continue to receive does so. 1000(b)(14) customer priority as stipulated in Rule The Commission recognizes that it 1000(b)(14).77 has previously approved rules of other In addition to proposing Rule 1081, national securities exchanges that III. Discussion and Commission the Exchange also proposes an provide for solicited order Findings amendment to Rule 1000(b)(14). In mechanisms.83 Phlx’s proposed 2010, the Exchange amended its priority Under Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act, solicitation mechanism rules, however, rules to give certain non-broker-dealer the Commission shall approve a would deviate from the solicited order orders the same priority as broker-dealer proposed rule change of a self- mechanism rules of other exchanges orders. In so doing, the Exchange regulatory organization if it finds that that previously were approved by the adopted a new defined term, the such proposed rule change is consistent Commission. ‘‘professional,’’ for certain persons or with the requirements of the Act, and In the Order Instituting Proceedings, entities.76 Rule 1000(b)(14) defines the rules and regulations thereunder the Commission invited the views of professional as a person or entity that (i) that are applicable to such interested persons concerning whether is not a broker or dealer in securities, organization.78 The Commission shall the Exchange’s proposal is consistent and (ii) places more than 390 orders in disapprove a proposed rule change if it with Section 6 or any other provision of listed options per day on average during does not make such a finding.79 The the Act, or the rules and regulations a calendar month for its own beneficial Commission’s Rules of Practice, under thereunder. The Commission also account(s). A professional account is Rule 700(b)(3), state that the ‘‘burden to highlighted specific features of the treated in the same manner as an off- demonstrate that a proposed rule change Exchange’s proposal and requested the floor broker-dealer for purposes of Phlx is consistent with the Exchange Act and views of interested persons on those Rule 1014(g), to which the trade the rules and regulations issued features.84 In particular, the allocation algorithm described in thereunder . . . is on the self-regulatory Commission noted that, under the proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(1) refers. organization that proposed the rule Exchange’s proposal, if at the However, Rule 1000(b)(14) also change’’ and that a ‘‘mere assertion that conclusion of the Solicitation Auction currently states that all-or-none the proposed rule change is consistent period there is a public customer order professional orders are to be treated like with those requirements . . . is not on the order book at the stop price, the customer orders. The Exchange sufficient.’’ 80 auction would be cancelled.85 The proposes to amend Rule 1000(b)(14) by After careful consideration, the Commission stated that this result is (i) specifying that orders submitted Commission does not find that the consistent with the rule of another pursuant to Rule 1081 for the accounts proposed rule change, as modified by exchange’s solicited order mechanism.86 of professionals be treated in the same The Commission remarked that the manner as off-floor broker-dealer orders 77 See Amendment No. 2, supra note 9. Exchange’s proposed rule differs from for purposes of Rule 1014(g), and (ii) 78 See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(i). 79 See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(ii); and see also 17 adding proposed Rule 1081 to the list of 81 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). CFR 201.700(b)(3). rules for the purpose of which a 82 The Commission notes that, other than as 80 See 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3). ‘‘The description of discussed below, this order makes no findings with professional would be treated in the a proposed rule change, its purpose and operation, respect to whether other aspects of the proposed same manner as an off-floor broker- its effect, and a legal analysis of its consistency with rule change are consistent with the Act. applicable requirements must all be sufficiently dealer. The effect of these proposed 83 See, e.g., ISE Rule 716(e), Solicited Order changes to Rule 1014 would be that detailed and specific to support an affirmative Commission finding. Any failure of a self-regulatory Mechanism; CBOE Rule 6.74B, Solicitation Auction organization to provide the information elicited by Mechanism; BOX Rule 7270(b), Solicitation 75 Phlx Rule 707 states, ‘‘[a] member, member Form 19b-4 may result in the Commission not Auction; and MIAX Rule 515A(b), PRIME organization, or person associated with or having a sufficient basis to make an affirmative Solicitation Mechanism. employed by a member or member organization finding that a proposed rule change is consistent 84 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, shall not engage in conduct inconsistent with just with the Exchange Act and the rules and 80 FR at 5874–5875. and equitable principles of trade.’’ regulations issued thereunder that are applicable to 85 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, 76 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61802 the self-regulatory organization.’’ Id. See also 80 FR at 5874. (March 30, 2010), 75 FR 17193 (April 5, 2010) General Instructions to Form 19b-4, Item 3(b), 17 86 See id., citing to ISE Rule 716(e), Solicited (approving SR–Phlx–2010–05). CFR 249.819. Order Mechanism. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37681 the other exchange’s rule in a case Complex Orders reside in a separate ISE also states that Phlx’s ‘‘weakened where, in addition to the public book, in a different part of the trading protections’’ would enable regulatory customer order at the stop price, there system. Thus aggregation of all-or-none arbitrage by broker-dealers seeking to is sufficient price-improving interest Complex Orders with other Complex reduce the likelihood that their crosses along with the public customer order at Orders in order to determine the will be broken up.104 ISE suggests that the stop price to fill the Agency Order.87 presence of sufficient improving interest ISE and other competing exchanges The Commission pointed out that, on is a more difficult process than ‘‘would be forced to match these the other exchange, the public customer aggregation of all-or-none simple orders changes in order to maintain order at the stop price and the price- with other simple orders.’’ 96 competitive standing.’’ 105 ISE urges that improving interest would trade against As noted above, the Commission the Commission hold Phlx to ‘‘the same the Agency Order.88 The Commission received two comment letters, each standards guaranteed by other options noted that, under Phlx’s proposal, the letter from ISE, on the proposed rule exchanges,’’ maintaining that the Agency Order and the Solicited Order change and a response from the Commission would thereby uphold would be cancelled.89 Exchange to ISE’s first comment letter.97 ‘‘principles of customer protection that The Commission also sought The Commission below discusses the were central to the approval of comment on a similar feature of the issues raised in ISE’s comment letters solicitation mechanisms operated by ISE Exchange’s proposal.90 The Commission and the Exchange’s response to ISE’s and other markets.’’ 106 noted that, under Phlx’s proposal, first comment letter and sets forth the In response, Phlx states that ISE’s generally, if, upon the conclusion of an Commission’s consideration of the argument is ‘‘without merit.’’ 107 Phlx auction, a public customer order is arguments made by both the ISE and the notes that it ‘‘will not allow a resting on the book opposite the Agency Exchange. solicitation auction to be initiated at a Order at the Solicited Order’s stop price, price where there is non-contingent A. Cancellation of the Solicitation both the Solicited Order and the Agency customer interest on the PHLX book and Auction when the Agency Order Could Order are canceled. However, if the will continue to prevent customers from Be Satisfied by a Public Customer Order public customer order was an all-or- being traded through.’’ 108 In addition, at the Stop Price and Improving Interest none order, the proposal provides that Phlx notes, customer interest that the execution of the Solicited Order In its first letter, ISE notes that it arrives after an order is submitted into against the Agency Order can take operates a solicitation mechanism. ISE the solicitation mechanism would still place.91 The Commission understands expresses concern that the Phlx be protected, ‘‘but in a different manner this result to apply even if the size of proposal would not contain appropriate than on ISE.’’ 109 the all-or-none public customer order safeguards to ensure that customer Phlx states that its protection of was such that it otherwise would be orders on the book would be protected customer interest at the stop price eligible to trade against the Agency and that agency orders would be would not result in regulatory arbitrage. Order.92 adequately exposed to all potential price Rather, Phlx argues, its proposal would The Commission further sought improvement.98 ISE states that Phlx’s represent ‘‘merely a different process for comment on another feature of the proposed solicitation mechanism would customer protection.’’ Phlx points out Exchange’s proposal.93 The Commission not serve the public interest and the that its proposal ‘‘would not permit noted that, under Phlx’s proposal, in the protection of investors, maintaining that trading through the customer, nor case of a Solicitation Auction for simple it ‘‘fails to provide important would it allow trading ahead of the orders, all interest on the opposite side protections guaranteed by competing customer.’’ 110 Phlx describes its of the Agency Order would be markets.’’ 99 In its response, Phlx states proposal as ‘‘simply not providing considered in determining whether the that it strongly disagrees with ‘‘ISE’s customer interest (or any other price can be improved for the full size negative characterization’’ of its interest)’’ that arrives after the solicited 100 of the Agency Order.94 The Commission proposed rule change, and concludes order is stopped with the unfair noted that, in the case of a Complex that ISE’s concerns are ‘‘misguided and advantage of trading against the agency 101 Order Solicitation Auction, all-or-none raised no valid concerns.’’ order ahead of the solicited contra order interest would not be considered.95 The ISE notes that Phlx would cancel a at a price that does not offer price Commission pointed to the Exchange’s solicitation auction if there was improvement,111 adding that ‘‘there is explanation that this difference was due customer interest on the order book at no justification for permitting any to a system limitation relative to all-or- the stop price that, combined with other market participant to step ahead of the available price improving interest, none Complex Orders: ‘‘All-or-none solicited contra order at a price which would be of sufficient size to trade with 112 simple orders reside with simple orders does not offer price improvement.’’ the Agency Order.102 ISE states that on the book. By contrast, all-or-none Phlx notes that ISE cancels a Phlx does not provide any policy solicitation auction with no trade justification for this ‘‘change from 87 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, resulting when there is a customer order 103 80 FR at 5874. established customer protections.’’ at the stop price that, together with any 88 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, improving interest, cannot satisfy the 80 FR at 5875, citing to proposed Rule 96 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, agency order. ‘‘Whether ISE ‘protects’ a 1081(ii)(E)(1). 80 FR at 5870 n.48 and accompanying text. customer order at the stop price,’’ Phlx 89 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, 97 See supra notes 7 and 8. 80 FR at 5875. 98 See ISE Letter at 1. 104 Id. 90 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, 99 See ISE Letter at 2. 105 Id. 80 FR at 5874. 100 See Phlx Response Letter at 1. 91 106 See ISE Letter at 1–2. See id. 101 See Phlx Response Letter at 4. 92 107 See Phlx Response Letter at 2. See id. 102 See ISE Letter at 1. ISE noted that other 108 93 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, options exchanges, including ISE, would execute Id. (emphasis in original). 80 FR at 5874. the agency order against the customer order and the 109 Id. 94 See Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, other price improving interest, thereby providing an 110 Id. 80 FR at 5874, citing to proposed Rule execution for the customer on the book as well as 111 Id. 1081(ii)(E)(1). an improved price for the agency order. Id. 112 See Phlx Response Letter at 2 (emphasis in 95 Id., citing to proposed Rule 1081(ii)(E)(5). 103 See ISE Letter at 1. original). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37682 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices asserts, ‘‘evidently depends upon the the NBBO or better.119 The agency order In explaining its approach, Phlx notes size of that customer order (or the must be exposed to the broader market that, under its proposal, at the initiation absence of other orders sufficient to in a solicitation auction so that it has of the auction, the stop price must be at aggregate into a size sufficient for the the possibility of obtaining a better least $0.01 better than any public agency order to execute against),’’ price, before the solicited order is customer interest on the limit order arguing that ISE’s approach ‘‘cannot permitted to be crossed with the agency book at that time. According to Phlx, really be considered customer order.120 In a solicited order this ‘‘ensures public customer priority ‘protection.’ ’’ 113 mechanism, the trading crowd to which of existing interest and in turn provides Further, Phlx observes that, in its the agency order is exposed does not the Solicited Order participant certainty PIXL auction mechanism, customers have the right to trade against the that if an execution occurs at the stop rarely submit interest priced at the stop agency order at the price proposed by price, it will be against the Solicited price after the auction has been the solicited party.121 Unless the trading Order rather than against interest initiated, with that interest being crowd provides (i) a better price and (ii) (including public customer orders) that executed in the auction.114 Phlx states enough interest at that better price for arrived after the solicited party had that there is ‘‘no reason to expect that the entire size of the order, the solicited already stopped the Agency Order for its customer orders would be received at order is permitted to trade against the entire size at that price.’’ 124 Phlx also the stop price more frequently in agency order for its full size, with all states that it is ‘‘simply not providing solicitation auctions than in PIXL other participants excluded.122 customer interest (or any other interest) Auctions.’’ Specifically, Phlx represents The exchanges that currently feature a which arrives after the solicited order is that in February 2015, customer solicited order mechanism include stopped with the unfair advantage of executions at the stop price occurred provisions that address, among other trading against the solicited agency only 70 times out of 474,388 PIXL scenarios, the circumstance where there order ahead of the solicited contra order auctions, or approximately .015% of the is a public customer order on the order at a price which does not offer price time. The Exchange observes that book at the stop price that, when improvement.’’ 125 cancellations caused by customer orders combined with price-improving interest The Commission does not view a arriving at the stop price after a that otherwise could not fill the agency public customer order at the stop price Solicitation Auction was initiated might order on its own, would be able to fill that arrives after the auction has occur only roughly 0.015% more often the agency order.123 In that commenced as trading ‘‘ahead of’’ the in its solicitation mechanism than in circumstance, those exchanges’ rules Solicited Order and thereby as receiving 115 ISE’s solicitation mechanism. Phlx provide that the public customer order an ‘‘unfair advantage’’ when the states that, ‘‘[g]iven how rarely a and the available price-improving Solicited Order would be required to be customer order can be expected to be interest would be executed against the cancelled in any event under the Phlx’s received during a solicitation auction at agency order. By contrast, under its proposal. On the contrary, the the stop price, the PHLX’s proposal to proposal, Phlx would cancel the Agency Commission believes that the Agency cancel a solicitation order with no trade Order rather than permit it to be Order should be given the opportunity occurring when a customer order is executed against a public customer at to execute against the later-arriving received at the stop price during the the stop price that, when combined with public customer interest at the stop auction does not pose a significant risk available price-improving interest, price, together with sufficient price- to the protection of customer interest would be of sufficient size to fill the improving interest to satisfy the size of nor to the opportunity for price Agency Order. the Agency Order, and thus benefit from improvement.’’ 116 a measure of price improvement, rather The Second ISE Letter reiterates the In view of the fact that the purpose of than being cancelled as under the comments that ISE made in its initial the Phlx’s proposed solicitation Exchange’s proposal. letter.117 ISE states that ‘‘Phlx should mechanism is to enable the Agency In making the argument that its instead be held to the same high Order to be executed, the Commission proposal ‘‘does not pose a significant standard required of other markets that believes that the Agency Order should risk to the protection of customer guarantee an execution for the customer be given the opportunity to receive an interest nor to the opportunity for price order by allowing the solicitation execution in the above-described improvement,’’ Phlx cites to data from auction to be broken up. This remains circumstance. Moreover, to the extent its PIXL auction showing that public the case even when dealing with that the Agency Order could execute customer orders arrive on the order customer orders that are received after against the customer order at the stop book at the stop price very an auction has been initiated, and price, along with available price- infrequently.126 The Commission notes regardless of how rare Phlx anticipates improving interest that otherwise could that this data also could be cited to such orders may be.’’ 118 not fill the Agency Order on its own, the argue, on the other side of the issue, that The Commission notes that solicited composite price that the Agency Order the incentive for solicited parties to order mechanisms generally are would receive would be at a better price provide liquidity through the proposed designed to enable a member firm to than the Solicited Order’s stop price. In solicitation mechanism would be little assist a customer that wishes to buy or addition, the public customer order and affected by later-arriving public sell 500 or more contracts (i.e., an any available price-improving interest customer orders. In any event, the agency order) by finding a counterparty that arrived on the order book after the Commission believes that data showing (i.e., a solicited order) to execute against auction’s commencement also would the potential infrequency of a situation the full size of the customer’s interest at receive an execution, rather than simply should not be dispositive of the remaining on the book. Commission’s consideration regarding 113 See Phlx Response Letter at 2. 114 Id. 119 See supra note 83. 124 See Notice of Amendment No. 2, supra note 115 Id. 120 Id. 10, 80 FR at 22575. 116 See Phlx Response Letter at 2. 121 Id. 125 See Phlx Response Letter at 2 (emphasis in 117 See Second ISE Letter at 1. 122 Id. original). 118 See Second ISE Letter at 2. 123 Id. 126 See Phlx Response Letter at 2. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37683 the Exchange’s proposed treatment of Phlx should be permitted to ‘‘eliminate price.135 ISE states that Phlx does not public customer orders at the stop price this protection’’ without providing a cite any relevant policy considerations that arrive during the auction and that policy rationale.130 to justify this provision, but ‘‘simply otherwise could satisfy the size of the In response, Phlx notes that all-or- reasons that it should be exempted from Agency Order when combined with none orders ‘‘continue to be protected providing this functionality due to price-improving interest. from being traded through when their ‘systems limitations’ that make it more For the reasons stated above, the all-or-none contingency can be difficult to aggregate complex orders Commission believes that Phlx’s satisfied.’’ However, Phlx explains, due with all-or-none orders.’’ 136 ISE proposed approach not to execute the to the contingency, such orders are contends that other options exchanges Agency Order against a public customer offered a ‘‘less robust protection’’ than ‘‘have spent the necessary time and order at the stop price, that when non-contingent orders.131 Phlx states resources to overcome such obstacles in combined with price-improving interest that a customer seeking the same the interest of maintaining a fair and could fulfill the Agency Order, would protection could submit the order orderly market where agency orders are result in an outcome that does not without this contingency, since the adequately exposed to potential price appear to be consistent with the Act. contingency is within the discretion and improvement.’’ 137 ISE remarks that Specifically, cancelling the Agency control of the customer.132 Further, Phlx ‘‘Phlx should not be singled out for Order and leaving the public customer notes that ISE does not provide priority favorable treatment simply because it order on the order book unexecuted to all-or-none orders on ISE’s book 133 was unwilling to invest in appropriate would disadvantage both of these and cited to ISE Rule 713. safeguards offered by its orders. It would also disadvantage any The Commission believes that Phlx’s competitors.’’ 138 price-improving interest that arrived on proposed approach to permit the In response, Phlx reiterates its the book during the auction (but was Agency Order and Solicited Order to position that aggregation of all-or-none insufficient in size to trade against the cross when an all-or-none customer complex orders with other complex Agency Order without taking into order at the stop price exists on Phlx’s orders was a more difficult process than account the public customer order), order book would result in an outcome aggregation of all-or-none simple orders which, under the other exchanges’ rules, that is not consistent with the Act. with other simple orders, because all-or- also would receive an execution. While Specifically, rather than protecting the none complex orders reside in a such a result may be expedient for the all-or-none public customer order at the separate book that is in a different part firm that entered the Agency Order and stop price, Phlx’s proposal to allow the of the trading system.139 Citing data that Solicited Order into the Solicitation Solicited Order to execute against the it had reviewed to demonstrate that all- Auction and for the solicited party, it Agency Order and leave the all-or-none or-none complex orders are rare,140 Phlx would raise concerns under Section public customer order on the order book responds that it must carefully weigh 6(b)(5) of the Act, which, among other would disadvantage the public customer the costs and benefits of changes to its things, requires that the rules of a order. While such a result may be trading system and deploy resources in national securities exchange be expedient for the firm that entered the the manner it determines most designed ‘‘to promote just and equitable Agency Order and Solicited Order into beneficial to its market participants.141 principles of trade, to remove the Solicitation Auction and for the In this case, Phlx states that it has impediments to and perfect the solicited party, it would raise concerns elected to ‘‘enhance the efficiency and mechanism of a free and open market under Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which, effectiveness of its markets’’ rather than and a national market system and, in among other things, requires that the to ‘‘overhaul the trading system to general, to protect investors and the rules of a national securities exchange include a mere 0.12% of all Complex public interest . . .’’ 127 In light of these be designed ‘‘to promote just and Orders in the calculation of sufficiency observations, the Commission cannot equitable principles of trade, to remove of improving interest.’’ 142 Phlx does not find that the proposed rule change is impediments to and perfect the believe that such an overhaul would consistent with the Act. mechanism of a free and open market advance the interests of market and a national market system and, in participants.143 B. Execution of the Solicitation Auction general, to protect investors and the The Second ISE Letter states that at the Stop Price When There Is a public interest . . .’’ 134 In light of these ‘‘[b]y ignoring all-or-none complex Contingent Public Customer Order at observations, the Commission cannot orders, Phlx would allow the execution the Stop Price find that the proposed rule change is of an agency order against the solicited In addition, ISE expresses a concern consistent with the Act. order at a worse price than available regarding Phlx’s handling of all-or-none from other market participants.’’ 144 ISE customer orders on the book. ISE notes C. No Consideration of All-or-None notes that ‘‘Phlx attempts to equate their that the Exchange’s proposal would Complex Orders When Determining proposal with ISE’s rules regarding the allow a Solicited Order to cross with the Whether the Price Has Been Improved priority of all-or-none orders. To clarify Agency Order when there is a resting for the Full Size of the Agency Order this here, all-or-none orders on ISE have customer all-or-none order at the stop The ISE Letter expresses a concern price of the Solicited Order, even if the regarding the provision of the Phlx 135 See ISE Letter at 2. customer order is eligible to trade based proposal that would allow all-or-none 136 Id. on its size contingency.128 ISE orders in the Complex Order Book to be 137 Id. maintains that customer protection was ignored when determining whether 138 Id. ‘‘a central principle in the approval of there would be sufficient interest to 139 See Phlx Response Letter at 3. 140 Id. The Exchange noted that it had reviewed solicitation mechanisms of other execute the Agency Order at a better six months of data which showed that all-or-none markets.’’ 129 ISE does not believe that complex orders represented only 0.12% of all 130 Id. Complex Orders. Id. 127 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 131 See Phlx Response Letter at 3. 141 Id. 128 See ISE Letter at 2; The Second ISE Letter 132 Id. 142 See Phlx Response Letter at 3–4. reiterates comments ISE included in its first letter. 133 Id. 143 See Phlx Response Letter at 4. 129 Id. 134 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 144 See Second ISE Letter at 2. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37684 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices no priority over other orders at the same none interest to satisfy a Complex perfect the mechanism of a free and price (emphasis in original). Our rules Agency Order at a better price than the open market and a national market make clear, however, that all-or-none stop price, any resting all-or-none system and, in general, to protect orders are available for execution after Complex Orders would participate in investors and the public interest. other trading interest at the same price the execution pursuant to normal Specifically, rather than including all- has been exhausted. All-or-none orders priority rules, so long as the all-or-none or-none Complex Order interest in its on ISE decidedly may not be ignored contingency can be satisfied. However, consideration of whether there is when such orders would result in a Phlx’s proposal differs when there is sufficient improving Complex Order better price for the other side of the sufficient improving interest to satisfy interest, Phlx’s proposal, by ignoring all- trade.’’ 145 ISE further remarks that ‘‘[i]t the Complex Agency Order at a better or-none Complex Orders on one of its is fundamental to the solicitation price than the stop price only when all- systems, would disadvantage both the process that the agency order be fully or-none Complex Order interest is exposed to all other price improving included. In those circumstances, Phlx’s resting all-or-none Complex Orders and interest, including all-or-none proposal would deny the all-or-none the Complex Agency Order. As orders.’’ 146 Complex Order resting elsewhere on the discussed above, the Commission does As described above, under Phlx’s Exchange a potential execution and it not believe the Exchange has proposal, at the conclusion of a would not provide the Complex Agency sufficiently demonstrated why its Solicitation Auction involving Complex Order with an execution at a better price proposal, which fails to take into Orders, the Exchange’s system would than the stop price, even though there account interest available in its market, not consider all-or-none complex was, in fact, sufficient improving would satisfy the requirements of interest in determining whether such interest available. Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.152 interest could execute against the Phlx has provided data indicating that Accordingly, the Commission cannot Complex Agency Order at a better price participants infrequently submit all-or- find that the proposed rule change is than the stop price. Therefore, when the none Complex Orders. However, Phlx consistent with the Act. determination of whether there is has not provided sufficient information sufficient improving interest to execute in its proposal to overcome the D. Efficiency, Competition and Capital against the Complex Agency Order Commission’s fundamental concerns Formation otherwise would require the inclusion about the impact that the proposal could of such all-or-none complex interest, the have on exchanges’ incentives to In analyzing the proposed rule Complex Agency Order simply would maintain a fair and orderly market change, as modified by Amendment No. trade against the Solicited Order at the where agency orders are adequately 2, and in making its determination to stop price, rather than against the exposed to potential price improvement. disapprove the rule change, the sufficient improving interest that could The Commission believes that data Commission has considered whether the be available on the Exchange at a better showing the infrequency of a situation action will promote efficiency, price. should not be dispositive of the competition, and capital formation,153 The Commission notes that the Commission’s consideration regarding but, as discussed above, the solicited order mechanisms of other whether the Exchange has met its Commission does not find that the exchanges that accommodate complex burden to demonstrate that its proposal proposed rule change, as modified by orders provide for the consideration of is consistent with the Act. Amendment No. 2, is consistent with all-or-none complex order interest in Further, Phlx has stated that it must Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. determining whether there is sufficient weigh the costs and benefits of changes improving interest.147 ISE Rule 722 to its trading system, and has IV. Conclusion determined not to overhaul the trading Supplementary Material .08 permits For the foregoing reasons, the complex orders in ISE’s solicited order system to include infrequently Commission does not believe that Phlx mechanism and provides no carve-out submitted all-or-none Complex Orders has met its burden to demonstrate that for the consideration of all-or-none in the calculation of assessing the extent complex orders.148 CBOE Rule 6.74B of price-improving interest that could the proposed rule change, as modified Interpretation .01 permits complex interact with the Complex Agency by Amendment No. 2, is consistent with orders in CBOE’s solicited order Order. The Commission notes that other the Act and the rules and regulations mechanism and provides no carve-out exchanges have overcome such thereunder applicable to a national for the consideration of all-or-none obstacles in the interest of maintaining securities exchange, and, in particular, complex orders.149 a fair and orderly market where agency with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. Similar to these other exchanges’ orders are adequately exposed to It is therefore ordered, pursuant to solicitation mechanisms, under Phlx’s potential price improvement.150 Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposal, when there is sufficient The Commission believes that Phlx’s proposed rule change (SR–Phlx–2014– improving interest that is not all-or- failure to provide a potential execution 66), as modified by Amendment No. 2, to all-or-none Complex Orders and to be, and hereby is, disapproved. 145 Id. provide meaningful opportunity for 146 See Second ISE Letter at 3. price improvement to Complex Agency 147 See ISE Rule 716(e) and Supplementary Orders would result in an execution Material .08 and CBOE Rule 6.74B, Solicitation allocation that is inconsistent with 152 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Auction Mechanism. Neither BOX Rule 7270(b), 151 153 Whenever pursuant to the Act the Commission Solicitation Auction, or MIAX Rule 515A(b), PRIME Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which is engaged in rulemaking or the review of a rule of Solicitation Mechanism, permit solicitation requires that the rules of an exchange auctions for complex orders. must be designed, among other things, a self-regulatory organization, and is required to consider or determine whether an action is 148 See ISE Rule 716(e) and Supplementary to promote just and equitable principles Material .08; see also ISE Rule 722(b)(4) (permitting necessary or appropriate in the public interest, the complex orders to be entered as all-or-none). of trade, to remove impediments to and Commission shall also consider, in addition to the 149 See CBOE Rule 6.74B and Interpretation .01; protection of investors, whether the action will see also CBOE Rule 6.53C(b) (permitting complex 150 See supra notes 151–153. promote efficiency, competition, and capital orders to be entered as all-or-none). 151 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37685 For the Commission, by the Division of included on the subject line if email is in Items I, II, and III below, which Items Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated used. To help us process and review have been prepared by the Exchange. authority.154 your statement more efficiently, please The Exchange filed the proposal as a Robert W. Errett, use only one method. The Commission ‘‘non-controversial’’ proposed rule Deputy Secretary. will post all statements on the Advisory change pursuant to section [FR Doc. 2015–16088 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Committee’s Web site at http:// 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 3 and Rule 4 BILLING CODE 8011–01–P www.sec.gov./info/smallbus/ 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder. The acsec.shtml. Commission is publishing this notice to Statements also will be available for solicit comments on the proposed rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Web site viewing and printing in the change from interested persons. COMMISSION Commission’s Public Reference Room, I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 100 F Street NE., Room 1580, [Release Nos. 33–9854; 34–75303; File No. Statement of the Terms of the Substance Washington, DC 20549, on official 265–27] of the Proposed Rule Change business days between the hours of Advisory Committee on Small and 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. All statements The purpose of this filing is to Emerging Companies received will be posted without change; describe the functionality and adopt we do not edit personal identifying fees for the use of two new front-end AGENCY: Securities and Exchange information from submissions. You order entry and management Commission. should submit only information that applications. The text of the proposed ACTION: Notice of meeting. you wish to make available publicly. rule change is available on the Exchange’s Web site (http:// SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Z. Davis, Senior Special Counsel, at www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/ Commission Advisory Committee on CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at Small and Emerging Companies is (202) 551–3460, Office of Small Business Policy, Division of Corporation the Exchange’s Office of the Secretary, providing notice that it will hold an and at the Commission. open, public telephone meeting on Finance, Securities and Exchange Wednesday, July 15, 2015, beginning at Commission, 100 F Street NE., II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 1:00 p.m. EDT. Members of the public Washington, DC 20549–3628. Statement of the Purpose of, and may attend the meeting by listening to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule the webcast accessible on the accordance with Section 10(a) of the Change Commission’s Web site at www.sec.gov. Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 In its filing with the Commission, the Persons needing special U.S.C.–App. 1, and the regulations Exchange included statements accommodations to access the meeting thereunder, Keith F. Higgins, Designated concerning the purpose of and basis for because of a disability should notify the Federal Officer of the Committee, has the proposed rule change and discussed contact person listed below. The agenda ordered publication of this notice. any comments it received on the for the meeting includes a continuation Dated: June 25, 2015. proposed rule change. The text of these of discussions started at the Brent J. Fields, statements may be examined at the Committee’s meeting on June 3, 2015, Committee Management Officer. places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set including regarding public company [FR Doc. 2015–16108 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] disclosure effectiveness and the forth in sections A, B, and C below, of BILLING CODE 8011–01–P treatment of ‘‘finders.’’ The public is the most significant aspects of such invited to submit written statements to statements. the Committee. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s DATES: The public meeting will be held COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and on Wednesday, July 15, 2015. Written Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule statements should be received on or [Release No. 34–75302; File No. SR–CBOE– 2015–062] Change before Monday, July 13, 2015. 1. Purpose ADDRESSES: Written statements may be Self-Regulatory Organizations; submitted by any of the following Chicago Board Options Exchange, The purpose of this filing is to methods: Incorporated; Notice of Filing and describe the functionality and adopt fees for the use of two new front-end Electronic Statements Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Front-End order entry and management • Use the Commission’s Internet Order Entry and Management Tools in applications. On June 1, 2015, CBOE IV, submission form (http://www.sec.gov/ Connection With Purchase of Livevol LLC (‘‘Newco’’) (a wholly owned info/smallbus/acsec.shtml); or Assets subsidiary of CBOE’s parent company, • Send an email message to rule- CBOE Holdings, Inc.) entered into a [email protected]. Please include File June 25, 2015. definitive asset purchase agreement Number 265–27 on the subject line; or Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the with Livevol 5 pursuant to which Newco Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Paper Statements agreed to purchase certain software and ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 technology, including Livevol X • Send paper statements to Brent J. notice is hereby given that on June 23, (‘‘LVX’’) and Livevol Core X (‘‘LVCX’’ Fields, Federal Advisory Committee 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Management Officer, Securities and Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., ‘‘CBOE’’) filed with the Securities and 4 17 CFR 240.19b 4(f)(6). Washington, DC 20549–1090. Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) 5 Livevol, Inc. has an additional subsidiary, All submissions should refer to File No. the proposed rule change as described Livevol Securities, Inc. (‘‘LVS’’), which is a registered U.S. broker-dealer (but not a Trading 265–27. This file number should be Permit Holder of the Exchange). CBOE will not 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). acquire any assets related to this broker-dealer 154 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. business. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37686 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices and, together with LVX, the detailed trade reporting.10 Use of the thus which type of routing permissions ‘‘applications’’).6 applications is completely optional. are available to a user) is entirely within The applications are designed so that 13 The applications are front-end order a user’s discretion. orders entered into an application may The Exchange represents that the entry and management tools for listed be sent to CBOE or other U.S. exchanges applications are merely new front-end stocks and options that support both 7 (and trading centers) through an ‘‘LV order entry and management systems simple and complex orders. LVX is a Routing Intermediary.’’ An ‘‘LV Routing that interface to the systems of LV software application that is installed Intermediary’’ is a CBOE Trading Permit Routing Intermediaries. The locally on a user’s desktop terminal, and Holder that has connectivity to, and is applications are not integrated into and LVCX is a web-based application a member of, other options and/or stock have no connectivity to CBOE’s trading integrated into the application exchanges (or trading centers). If a user system (or the trading systems of any programming interface of the user’s sends an order through an application to other U.S. exchange or trading center). proprietary system. The applications an LV Routing Intermediary, the LV Thus, orders submitted through the provide users with the capability to Routing Intermediary will route that applications will ultimately come to send option orders to U.S. options order to a market for execution on CBOE or other exchanges for execution exchanges and stock orders to U.S. stock behalf of the entering user.11 Users through third-party routing technology. exchanges (and other trading centers 8). cannot directly route orders through the There will be no change to, or impact Additionally, the applications allow applications to an exchange or trading on, the Exchange’s market structure as users to input parameters to control the center. For users’ convenience, CBOE a result of offering the applications. As size, timing and other variables of their will make available upon request a list a result, the Exchange represents that trades.9 Both applications include of LV Routing Intermediaries that the applications do not require any access to real-time options and stock provide third-party routing services for changes to the Exchange’s surveillance market data; LVX also includes access to orders entered through LVX or LVCX. or communications rules. The Exchange notes that a firm’s Use of the applications is completely historical data. The applications provide decision to function as an LV Routing voluntary. CBOE will make the their users with the ability to maintain Intermediary is within that firm’s sole applications available to users (and in an electronic audit trail and provide discretion.12 certain cases, their customers, as further Certain LV Routing Intermediaries described below) as a convenience for 6 Pursuant to the asset purchase agreement, may permit application users to entering and managing orders, but Newco will also purchase from Livevol market data analytical products. See infra note 10. designate a market to which an LV neither application is an exclusive 7 Newco may add functionality to permit users to Routing Intermediary is to route an means for any user to send orders to submit orders for commodity futures, commodity order received from an application. CBOE or intermarket. Orders entered options and other non-security products to be sent Other LV Routing Intermediaries may into the applications that are ultimately to designated contract markets, futures commission employ ‘‘smart router’’ functionality, routed to CBOE for execution will merchants, introducing brokers or other applicable destinations of the users’ choice. which, generally, determines where to receive no preferential treatment as 8 A ‘‘trading center,’’ as provided under Rule route an order based on pre-set compared to orders electronically sent 600(b)(78) of Regulation NMS, 17 CFR algorithmic logic. LV Routing to CBOE in any other manner. Orders 242.600(b)(78), means a national securities Intermediaries may also provide users entered into an application that get exchange or national securities association that with the ability to either designate a routed to CBOE will be subject to operates a self-regulatory organization trading facility, an alternative trading system, an exchange destination market (an order-by-order current trading rules in the same market-maker, an over-the-counter market-maker, or basis or by default) or use the smart manner as all other orders sent to the any other broker or dealer that executes orders router functionality. Which LV Routing Exchange, which is the same as orders internally by trading as principal or crossing orders Intermediary a user chooses to use (and that are sent through an application to as agent. 9 LVX also provides position and risk the Exchange today. 10 The functionality of the applications that CBOE will begin making the management capabilities. The LVX risk formats users’ stock and option orders entered into management functionality allows users to, among those applications for broker-dealers, which then applications available to users following other things, set pre-trade customizable risk submit those orders to exchanges for execution, is the closing of the acquisition of the controls. Users of these risk controls set the the basis for this rule filing. The applications applications and other technology parameters for the controls (to the extent a firm include other functionality. LVCX provides users products from Livevol.14 Newco will sublicenses LVX applications to its customers (see with certain basic data analysis tools for real-time below), the firm will set risk controls on behalf of data, including market scanners, watchlists and grant users licenses to use LVX and its customers). Users have the option to instead use alerts. LVX provides users with these tools for both LVCX. The Exchange notes that a firm other third-party risk control software, including real-time and historical data as well as other or individual does not need to be a risk control software or technology (LVCX users are advanced analytical tools, including time and sales Trading Permit Holder to license LVX or responsible for obtaining their own risk control analytics, charting capabilities, live and historical software or technology). The Exchange notes that skews, volatility comparisons, data queries and LVCX, because, as discussed above, entering broker-dealers (including Trading Permit filtering, and ‘‘Greek’’ calculations. The Exchange neither application is directly connected Holders) must ensure that any orders that come notes that Newco will also acquire technology to CBOE (or any other U.S. exchange), from the applications to their systems will be products separate from the applications that offer and orders submitted into either subject to all applicable pre-trade risk control these and other market data and analytical tools to requirements in accordance with Rule 15c3–5 of the customers, as well as an add-on tool that extracts Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’). See 17 data from the data analysis products (including the 13 Currently, there are seven broker-dealers that CFR 240.15c3–5. Please note that, in the adopting applications) and enters it into a Microsoft Excel are expected to function as LV Routing release for Rule 15c3–5 under the Act, the spreadsheet. These data analysis tools are not Intermediaries as of the closing date of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the subject to a rule filing requirement. acquisition (LVS will not be one of the LV Routing ‘‘Commission’’) indicated that a broker-dealer 11 A user may also be an LV Routing Intermediary Intermediaries). relying on risk management technology developed if the user is CBOE Trading Permit Holder that has 14 CBOE expects the closing date to be July 31, by third parties should perform appropriate due connectivity to, and is a member of, other options 2015 and will announce the closing date via press diligence to help assure the controls are reasonably and/or stock exchanges (or trading centers). release or its Web site (including via circular). The designed, effective, and otherwise consistent with 12 To the extent a firm sublicenses LVX proposed rule change will be operative on the later Rule 15c3–5. Mere reliance on representations of applications to its customers (see below), the firm of August 1, 2015 (assuming a July 31, 2015 closing the third-party technology developer, even if an will determine which LV Routing Intermediary to date) or the first business day immediately exchange or other regulated entity, is insufficient to use for applications used by the firm and its following the closing date (if the closing date occurs meet this due diligence standard. customers. later than July 31, 2015). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37687 application for execution must be agreement with Newco on August 1, developing, maintaining, supporting routed through the connectivity of an 2015, pursuant to which the firm can and enhancing the applications and the LV Routing Intermediary.15 Newco will sublicense these log-ins to its customers. related Routing Intermediary also provide technical support, The firm must pay $50,000 each month functionality as well as for income from maintenance and user training for the through July 31, 2017 as long as it has the value-added services being provided applications. LVX users that pay the no more than 499 log-in IDs. However, through use of the applications. The standard monthly fee per log-in ID set suppose, as of January 1, 2016, the firm Exchange believes the fee structure forth in the standard pricing table below wants to increase its log-in ID total to represents an equitable allocation of may not sublicense to [sic] LVX to their 500. At that time, because the firm reasonable fees because the same customers (‘‘LVX Standard Users’’). LVX would be entering into the next tier, the monthly log-in ID fees apply to all LVX users that pay the monthly enterprise firm would need to enter into a new Standard Users and all LVCX users, and fee set forth in the enterprise pricing two-year commitment (through the same LV Routing Intermediary fee table below and commit to licensing December 31, 2018) and begin paying applies the same to all broker-dealers LVX for a period of two years (which $80,000/month. If the firm needed fewer that elect to become LV Routing period will begin on the date on which than 500 log-ins during that two-year Intermediaries for LVX Standard Users. the user enters into an agreement for an period, it would continue to pay The Exchange believes these fees are applicable enterprise tier with Newco $80,000 each month for that two-year reasonable and appropriate as they are that permits sublicensing) may period. At the end of the two-year competitive with similar applications sublicense LVX to their customers commitment, if an LVX Enterprise User available throughout the market and are (‘‘LVX Enterprise Users’’).16 wants to continue to license LVX, the based on Livevol’s costs and fee firm could either enter into a new two- structure currently in place for the LVX Standard User Pricing Table year commitment to remain an LVX applications. The Exchange believes the Enterprise User (with the monthly fee to LV Routing Intermediary fee is also Monthly Fee/ be based on how many log-ins the firm Number of Log-In IDs Log-In ID reasonable in light of the fact that it is has at that time) or instead go to small in relation to the total costs 1–15 ...... $500 standard log-in ID pricing without typically incurred in routing and 16 + ...... $400 sublicensing rights for its outstanding executing orders. The Exchange also log-ins. notes that use of the applications, and For LVCX, the Exchange proposes a LVX Enterprise User Pricing Table the decision to function as an LV monthly fee of $100 per log-in ID. CBOE Routing Intermediary, are discretionary will pass through to the LVCX user its Number of Log-Ins IDs Monthly and not compulsory. Users can choose Enterprise Fee actual costs of any LVCX installation to route orders without the use of either fees, which costs will be determined on of the applications. The Exchange is 1–499 ...... $50,000 a time and materials (per hour) basis. 500 + ...... $80,000 offering the applications as a LVCX users may sublicense LVCX to convenience; they are not an exclusive • their customers. means available to send orders to CBOE LVX Standard User Pricing Additionally, the Exchange proposes or intermarket. Example: If a customer wants to license an LV Routing Intermediary fee of $0.02 20 log-ins, it would pay $500 × 15 + The Exchange believes the × per executed contract or share $400 5, or $9,500 per month for those equivalent for the first million contracts requirement to enter into a two-year log-ins. That monthly fee would or share equivalent executed in a month commitment to become an LVX increase or decrease for each additional and $0.03 per executed contract or share Enterprise User (and thus to be able to or cancelled, respectively, log-in ID by equivalent for each additional contract sublicense LVX to customers) is the applicable amount set forth in the or share equivalent executed in the appropriate, because providing ongoing above table. support for a firm’s customer base • same month. This fee is based on the LVX Enterprise User Pricing aggregate number of executions on all (which may be large) would likely Example: A firm enters into an markets (including CBOE) from all LVX require the Exchange to expend Standard Users for which an LV Routing significant additional resources, 15 Rule 6.23A provides that only Trading Permit Intermediary serves in that capacity. including potentially adding personnel Holders and associated persons with authorized to provide training and support for these access may directly enter orders into CBOE’s The Exchange notes that this fee will be trading system. charged to an LV Routing Intermediary customers as well as increasing 16 The Exchange notes that it expects Newco to whether it is routing application orders equipment and infrastructure assume agreements between Livevol and their on behalf of itself or on behalf of commitments. Without the two-year current LVX and LVCX customers at the closing of another application user.17 There will commitment, Newco would be at the acquisition, provided that the fees those customers pay under those agreements as of the be no LV Routing Intermediary fee significant risk of making these closing date are consistent with the fees for LVX set charged for executions from LVX expenditures, only to have the firm no forth in this rule filing. Additionally, Newco applications of LVX Enterprise Users or longer need them and not have the intends to prepare a form license agreement for from LVCX applications. opportunity to recoup the costs related each application and, no later than three months following the closing of the acquisition, ensure each The monthly log-in ID fees for to those resources. While the initial cost customer has executed such agreement so that all standard LVX tier log-in IDs and for to add a log-in ID for a customer is LVX customers and LVCX customers use the LVCX log-in IDs, as well as LV Routing smaller as the number of log-ins product pursuant to the same terms and conditions. Intermediary fees, will allow for licensed by a single firm increases due CBOE expects LVS will enter into a license agreement with Newco at the closing of the Newco’s recoupment of the costs of to the scalability of costs, sublicensing acquisition and be an LVX Enterprise User. LVS to a larger number of customers will would be responsible for entering into any user 17 The Exchange notes the LV Routing generally require Newco to bear these agreements with any new customers to whom it Intermediary fee is the same amount as the routing longer-term costs. The Exchange sublicenses LVX after the closing in accordance intermediary fee for PULSe; however, the LV with the terms and conditions in its license Routing Intermediary fee applies to routing to any believes other providers in the industry agreement, as would be required with respect to any market, including CBOE, while the PULSe fee offer certain rights in exchange for customer that is permitted to sublicense LVX. applies to away-market routing only. longer term commitments for similar VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37688 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices sublicensing rights. Additionally, given • There will be procedures and order entry and management the high monthly cost and long-term internal controls in place that are applications in addition to the commitment to become an LVX reasonably designed so that Newco will technology products it currently offers Enterprise User and given that the not unfairly take advantage of (such as the PULSe workstation), which Exchange charges integration [sic] costs confidential information it receives as a applications include access to data as to LVCX users but not LVX Standard result of its relationship with CBOE in well as analytical tools. LVX and LVCX Users, because the Exchange connection with the applications or any are currently offered and used in the understands that LV Routing other business activities. marketplace and compete with similar Intermediaries will generally pass- • The books, records, premises, products offered by other technology through the LV Routing Intermediary fee officers, directors, agents and employees providers as well as other exchanges.23 to their customers, the Exchange of Newco, with respect to the products Additionally, firms can create their own believes it is reasonable and appropriate that may be deemed facilities of CBOE, proprietary front-end order entry to not apply the LV Routing will be deemed to be those of CBOE for software and routing technology. Intermediary fee to orders that come purposes of and subject to oversight The Exchange believes the proposed through an LVX Enterprise User’s pursuant to the Act. rule change does not discriminate applications or LVCX applications. It is among market participants because use 2. Statutory Basis also reasonable for the Exchange to of the applications, as well as being an protect its intellectual property related The Exchange believes the proposed LV Routing Intermediary, is completely to LVX by requiring payment for the rule change is consistent with the Act voluntary. The Exchange is making the right to sublicense, which could create and the rules and regulations applications available as a convenience additional risk as Newco will not thereunder applicable to the Exchange to market participants, who will control to which users a firm may and, in particular, the requirements of continue to have the option to use any sublicense LVX. The Exchange believes Section 6(b) of the Act.19 Specifically, order entry and management system this commitment requirement the Exchange believes the proposed rule available in the marketplace to send represents an equitable allocation of change is consistent with the Section orders to the Exchange and other reasonable fees because any user that 6(b)(5) 20 requirements that the rules of exchanges; the applications are merely wants sublicensing rights is subject to an exchange be designed to prevent alternatives that will be offered by the the same fees and time commitment. fraudulent and manipulative acts and Exchange rather than its current owner. The Exchange believes the installation practices, to promote just and equitable Neither application is an exclusive fee for LVCX is reasonable because the principles of trade, to foster cooperation means available to market participants Exchange believes the related and coordination with persons engaged to send orders to CBOE or other installation work will vary per customer in regulating, clearing, settling, markets. Any orders sent through an due to the necessity of integration of the processing information with respect to, application to CBOE for execution will software into a customer’s own system. and facilitating transactions in receive no preferential treatment. The Exchange believes this fee to be securities, to remove impediments to Additionally, the applications will be equitable because it directly passes and perfect the mechanism of a free and available to all market participants, and through those costs to the user based on open market and a national market the Exchange expects to license the a time and materials basis that will system, and, in general, to protect applications to market participants apply to all users in the same manner. investors and the public interest. pursuant to the same terms and The Exchange notes that Newco will Additionally, the Exchange believes the conditions. provide additional technology products proposed rule change is consistent with The Exchange believes the applications remove impediments to and services and may in the future the Section 6(b)(5) 21 requirement that and perfect the mechanism of a free and engage in other business activities, the rules of an exchange not be designed open market and a national market which may include the provision of to permit unfair discrimination between system because users have discretion to other technology products and services customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. determine which LV Routing to broker-dealers and non-broker-dealers Additionally, the Exchange also believes Intermediary they will use, and thus in addition to the applications.18 In this the proposed rule change is consistent what type of routing parameters will be regard: with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,22 which available to them (whether it is the requires that Exchange rules provide for ability to designate a destination market 18 See supra note 10. Newco is not and, at least the equitable allocation of reasonable or use smart router functionality). Each initially, will not be registered as a broker-dealer dues, fees, and other charges among its under Section 15(a) of the Act. In this regard, the user must enter into an agreement with Exchange notes the following: (a) CBOE and Newco Trading Permit Holders and other an LV Routing Intermediary, which can will be responsible for the marketing of the persons using its facilities. provide for routing to U.S. options and applications. Newco will be the party to any In particular, the Exchange believes stock exchanges (and trading centers). agreements with customers for these products. (b) that offering the applications to market CBOE and Newco will be responsible for providing, Only Trading Permit Holders will supporting and maintaining the technology for the participants protects investors and is in continue to be permitted to directly applications. CBOE will be responsible for ensuring the public interest, because it will allow route orders received from an that Newco’s provision of the applications, to the the Exchange to directly offer users extent they are deemed facilities of CBOE, meets application to CBOE, and only members CBOE’s self-regulatory organization obligations. (c) of other U.S. exchanges will be able to accounts. Should Newco seek to register as a Unless it registers as a broker-dealer under Section broker-dealer in the future, the Exchange represents enter orders for execution at those 15(a) of the Act, Newco will not hold itself out as that the broker-dealer would not perform any exchanges that they receive from an a broker-dealer, provide advice related to securities operations without first discussing with the transactions, match orders, make decisions about application. The Exchange also notes Commission staff whether any of the broker-dealer’s routing orders, facilitate the clearance and that broker-dealers must continue to operations should be subject to an Exchange rule settlement of executed trades, prepare or send filing required under the Act. transaction confirmations, screen counterparties for 23 For example, International Securities 19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). creditworthiness, hold funds or securities, open, Exchange, LLC (‘‘ISE’’) offers a front-end order entry 20 maintain, administer or close brokerage accounts, or 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). workstation called PrecISE to its customers, which provide assistance in resolving problems, 21 Id. the Exchange believes has similar functionality as discrepancies or disputes related to brokerage 22 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). the applications. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37689 ensure that orders they receive from Enterprise User (and thus to be able to participants will continue to have the applications will be subject to sublicense LVX to customers) is flexibility to use any order entry and applicable pre-trade risk control appropriate, because providing ongoing management technology they choose. requirements of the broker-dealer that support for a firm’s customer base The Exchange will merely be directly directly submits the orders to an (which may be large) would likely offering the applications as alternatives exchange in accordance with Rule require the Exchange to expend to a product that the Exchange currently 15c3–5 under the Act.24 significant additional resources, makes available in the market (PULSe). The standard monthly log-in ID fees including potentially adding personnel If market participants believe that other for LVX log-in ID and monthly fees for to provide training and support for these products available in the marketplace LVCX log-in IDs, as well as LV Routing customers as well as increasing are more beneficial than either Intermediary fees, will allow for equipment and infrastructure application, they will simply use those Newco’s recoupment of the costs of commitments. Without the two-year products instead. Orders sent to the developing, maintaining, supporting commitment, Newco would be at Exchange through an application for and enhancing the applications and the significant risk of making these execution will receive no preferential related Routing Intermediary expenditures, only to have the firm no treatment. The Exchange notes that the functionality as well as for income from longer need them and not have the applications are already available and the value-added services being provided opportunity to recoup the costs related used in the marketplace today. This through use of the applications. The to those resources. While the initial cost acquisition merely changes the party Exchange believes the fee structure to add a log-in ID for a customer is that will own and license to users the represents an equitable allocation of smaller as the number of log-ins applications going forward. reasonable fees because the same licensed by a single firm increases due CBOE believes that the proposed rule monthly log-in ID fees apply to all LVX to the scalability of costs, sublicensing change will relieve any burden on, or Standard Users and all LVCX users, and to a larger number of customers will otherwise promote, competition. CBOE the same LV Routing Intermediary fee generally require Newco to bear these will be offering a type of product that applies the same to all broker-dealers longer-term costs. The Exchange is widely available throughout the that elect to become LV Routing believes other providers in the industry industry, including from some Intermediaries for LVX Standard Users. offer certain rights in exchange for exchanges. Market participants can also The Exchange believes these fees are longer term commitments for similar develop their own proprietary products reasonable and appropriate as they are sublicensing rights. It is also reasonable with the same functionality. ISE competitive with similar applications for the Exchange to protect its currently offers a similar front-end order available throughout the market and are intellectual property related to LVX by entry application. CBOE believes that based on Livevol’s costs and fee requiring payment for the right to the applications will be additions to its structure currently in place for the sublicense, which could create current suite of technology products it applications. The Exchange believes the additional risk as Newco will not offers to market participants to enter LV Routing Intermediary fee is also control to which users a firm may and manage orders for routing to U.S. reasonable in light of the fact that it is sublicense LVX. The Exchange believes exchanges. Any market participant will small in relation to the total costs this commitment requirement be able to use the applications. typically incurred in routing and represents an equitable allocation of The Exchange notes that when executing orders. The Exchange also reasonable fees because any user that Congress charged the Commission with notes that use of the applications, and wants sublicensing rights is subject to supervising the development of a the decision to function as an LV the same fees and time commitment. ‘‘national market system’’ for securities, Routing Intermediary, are discretionary The Exchange believes the installation a premise of its action was that prices, and not compulsory. Users can choose fee for LVCX is reasonable because the products and services ordinarily would to route orders without the use of either Exchange believes the related be determined by market forces.25 of the applications. The Exchange is installation work will vary per customer Consistent with this purpose, Congress offering the applications as a due to the necessity of integration of the and the Commission have repeatedly convenience; they are not an exclusive software into a customer’s own system. stated their preference for competition, means available to send orders to CBOE The Exchange believes this fee to be rather than regulatory intervention, to or intermarket. Additionally, given the equitable because it directly passes determine prices, products and services high monthly cost and long-term through those costs to the user based on in the securities markets.26 Many commitment to become an LVX a time and materials basis that will Enterprise User and given that the apply to all users in the same manner. 25 See, e.g., H.R. Rep. No. 94–229, at 92 (1975) Exchange charges integration [sic] costs (Conf. Rep.) (stating Congress’s intent that the B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s ‘‘national market system evolve through the to LVCX users but not LVX Standard Statement on Burden on Competition interplay of competitive forces as unnecessary Users, because the Exchange regulatory restrictions are removed’’). understands that LV Routing CBOE does not believe that the 26 See S. Rep. No. 94–75, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. 8 Intermediaries will generally pass- proposed rule change will impose any (1975) (‘‘The objective [in enacting the 1975 through the LV Routing Intermediary fee burden on competition that is not amendments to the Exchange Act] would be to enhance competition and to allow economic forces, to their customers, the Exchange necessary or appropriate in furtherance interacting within a fair regulatory field, to arrive believes it is reasonable and appropriate of the purposes of the Act. The at appropriate variations in practices and to not apply the LV Routing Exchange will make the applications services.’’); Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Intermediary fee to orders that come available to market participants on the Relating to NYSE Arca Data, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2, 2008), 73 FR through an LVX Enterprise User’s same terms and conditions, and use of 74770 (Dec. 9, 2008) at 74781 (‘‘The Exchange Act applications or LVCX applications. either application will be completely and its legislative history strongly support the The Exchange believes the voluntary. Additionally, the decision to Commission’s reliance on competition, whenever requirement to enter into a two-year act as an LV Routing Intermediary is possible, in meeting its regulatory responsibilities for overseeing the SROs and the national market commitment to become an LVX completely voluntary, and users have system. Indeed, competition among multiple discretion to determine which LV markets and market participants trading the same 24 See 17 CFR 240.15c3–5. Routing Intermediary to use. Market Continued VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37690 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices exchanges and other market participants to determine whether the proposed rule For the Commission, by the Division of make technology products, including change should be approved or Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 29 products similar to the applications, disapproved. authority. available to the industry. Other market Robert W. Errett, participants that offer these products IV. Solicitation of Comments Deputy Secretary. can adjust pricing or add functionality Interested persons are invited to [FR Doc. 2015–16090 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] to attract users to their products to submit written data, views, and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P compete with the Exchange-offered arguments concerning the foregoing, products based on all competitive forces including whether the proposed rule in the marketplace, as the Exchange SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE change is consistent with the Act. expects these other market participants COMMISSION Comments may be submitted by any of currently do. The Exchange believes the following methods: [Release No. 34–75295; File No. SR–BOX– that other market participants that offer 2015–23] these products will continue to remain Electronic Comments competitive in the market for order- Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX entry, management and routing • Use the Commission’s Internet Options Exchange LLC; Notice of products, as they currently are in this comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of market in which at least two exchanges rules/sro.shtml); or a Proposed Rule Change To Amend (including CBOE) offer similar • Send an email to rule-comments@ Rule 7260 To Extend, Through June 30, technology products. For example, sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– 2016, the Pilot Program That Permits CBOE currently offers PULSe, and ISE CBOE–2015–062 on the subject line. Certain Classes To Be Quoted in currently offers PrecISE. The Exchange Penny Increments believes that many investors will Paper Comments June 25, 2015. continue to elect to use competing • products available from non-exchange Send paper comments in triplicate Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the technology providers. to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Commission, 100 F Street NE., (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Washington, DC 20549–1090. notice is hereby given that on June 17, Statement on Comments on the 2015, BOX Options Exchange LLC (the All submissions should refer to File Proposed Rule Change Received From ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities Number SR–CBOE–2015–062. This file Members, Participants, or Others and Exchange Commission number should be included on the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule The Exchange neither solicited nor subject line if email is used. To help the received comments on the proposed change as described in Items I, and II Commission process and review your rule change. below, which Items have been prepared comments more efficiently, please use by the self-regulatory organization. The III. Date of Effectiveness of the only one method. The Commission will Commission is publishing this notice to Proposed Rule Change and Timing for post all comments on the Commission’s solicit comments on the proposed rule Commission Action Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ from interested persons. Because the foregoing proposed rule rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s change does not: (i) Significantly affect submission, all subsequent Statement of the Terms of Substance of the protection of investors or the public amendments, all written statements the Proposed Rule Change interest; (ii) impose any significant with respect to the proposed rule burden on competition; and (iii) become change that are filed with the The Exchange proposes to amend operative for 30 days from the date on Commission, and all written Rule 7260 to extend, through June 30, which it was filed, or such shorter time communications relating to the 2016, the pilot program that permits as the Commission may designate, it has proposed rule change between the certain classes to be quoted in penny become effective pursuant to Section Commission and any person, other than increments (‘‘Penny Pilot Program’’). 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 27 and Rule 19b– those that may be withheld from the The text of the proposed rule change is 4(f)(6) 28 thereunder. public in accordance with the available from the principal office of the At any time within 60 days of the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Exchange, at the Commission’s Public filing of the proposed rule change, the available for Web site viewing and Reference Room and also on the Commission summarily may printing in the Commission’s Public Exchange’s Internet Web site at http:// temporarily suspend such rule change if Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., boxexchange.com. it appears to the Commission that such Washington, DC 20549 on official II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s action is necessary or appropriate in the business days between the hours of Statement of the Purpose of, and public interest, for the protection of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule investors, or otherwise in furtherance of filing also will be available for Change the purposes of the Act. If the inspection and copying at the principal Commission takes such action, the office of the Exchange. All comments In its filing with the Commission, the Commission shall institute proceedings received will be posted without change; self-regulatory organization included the Commission does not edit personal statements concerning the purpose of, products is the hallmark of the national market identifying information from and basis for, the proposed rule change system.’’) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–21); Regulation submissions. You should submit only and discussed any comments it received NMS, 70 FR at 37499 (observing that NMS on the proposed rule change. The text information that you wish to make regulation ‘‘has been remarkably successful in of these statements may be examined at promoting market competition in [the] forms that available publicly. All submissions are most important to investors and listed should refer to File Number SR–CBOE– companies’’). 29 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 27 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 2015–062, and should be submitted on 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 28 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). or before July 22, 2015. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37691 the places specified in Item IV below. securities. The Exchange will distribute on other exchanges, while at the same The self-regulatory organization has Regulatory Circulars notifying time allowing the Exchange to continue prepared summaries, set forth in Participants which replacement classes to compete for order flow with other Sections A, B, and C below, of the most shall be included in the Penny Pilot exchanges in option issues trading as significant aspects of such statements. Program. part of the Pilot. BOX is specifically authorized to act A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s jointly with the other options exchanges C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and participating in the Pilot Program in Statement on Comments on the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule identifying any replacement class. Proposed Rule Change Received From Change Members, Participants, or Others 2. Statutory Basis 1. Purpose The Exchange has neither solicited The Exchange believes that the nor received comments on the proposed The Exchange proposes to extend the proposal is consistent with the rule change. effective time period of the Penny Pilot requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,4 Program that is currently scheduled to in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for expire on June 30, 2015, for an Act,5 in particular, in that it is designed 3 Commission Action additional year, through June 30, 2016. to prevent fraudulent and manipulative The Penny Pilot Program permits acts and practices, to promote just and The Exchange has filed the proposed certain classes to be quoted in penny equitable principles of trade, to foster rule change pursuant to Section increments. The minimum price cooperation and coordination with 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 6 and Rule variation for all classes included in the persons engaged in facilitating 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.7 Because the Penny Pilot Program, except for proposed rule change does not: (i) ® transactions in securities, and to remove PowerShares QQQ Trust (‘‘QQQQ’’) , impediments to and perfect the Significantly affect the protection of SPDR S&P 500 Exchange Traded Funds mechanism of a free and open market investors or the public interest; (ii) (‘‘SPY’’), and iShares Russell 2000 Index and a national market system, and, in impose any significant burden on Funds (‘‘IWM’’), will continue to be general protect investors and the public competition; and (iii) become operative $0.01 for all quotations in options series interest. prior to 30 days from the date on which that are quoted at less than $3 per In particular, the proposed rule it was filed, or such shorter time as the contract and $0.05 for all quotations in change, which extends the Penny Pilot Commission may designate, if options series that are quoted at $3 per for an additional year through June 30, consistent with the protection of contract or greater. QQQQ, SPY, and 2016 and changes the dates for replacing investors and the public interest, the IWM will continue to be quoted in $0.01 Penny Pilot issues that were delisted to proposed rule change has become increments for all options series. the second trading day following July 1, effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) The Exchange may replace, on a semi- 2015 and January 1, 2016, will enable of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) annual basis, any Pilot Program classes public customers and other market thereunder. that have been delisted on the second participants to express their true prices A proposed rule change filed under 8 trading day following July 1, 2015 and to buy and sell options for the benefit Rule 19b–4(f)(6) normally does not January 1, 2016. The Exchange notes of all market participants. This is become operative prior to 30 days after 9 that the replacement classes will be consistent with the Act. the date of the filing. However, selected based on trading activity for the pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the six month period beginning December 1, B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission may designate a shorter 2014 and ending May 31, 2015 for the Statement on Burden on Competition time if such action is consistent with the July 2015 replacements, and the six The Exchange does not believe that protection of investors and the public month period beginning June 1, 2015 the proposed rule change will impose interest. The Exchange has asked the and ending November 30, 2015 for the any burden on competition not Commission to waive the 30-day January 2016 replacements. The necessary or appropriate in furtherance operative delay so that the proposal may Exchange will employ the same of the purposes of the Act. To the become operative immediately upon parameters to prospective replacement contrary, this proposal is pro- filing. The Commission believes that classes as approved and applicable competitive because it allows Penny waiving the 30-day operative delay is under the Pilot Program, including Pilot issues to continue trading on the consistent with the protection of excluding high-priced underlying Exchange. Moreover, the Exchange investors and the public interest believes that the proposed rule change because doing so will allow the Pilot 3 The Penny Pilot Program has been in effect on will allow for further analysis of the Program to continue without the Exchange since its inception in May 2012. See Pilot and a determination of how the interruption in a manner that is Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 66871 (April consistent with the Commission’s prior 27, 2012), 77 FR 26323 (May 3, 2012) (File No.10– Pilot should be structured in the future; 206, In the Matter of the Application of BOX and will serve to promote regulatory approval of the extension and expansion Options Exchange LLC for Registration as a clarity and consistency, thereby of the Pilot Program and will allow the National Securities Exchange Findings, Opinion, reducing burdens on the marketplace Exchange and the Commission and Order of the Commission), 67328 (June 29, 2012), 77 FR 40123 (July 6, 2012) (SR–BOX–2012– and facilitating investor protection. The 6 007), 68425 (December 13, 2012), 77 FR 75234 Pilot is an industry wide initiative 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). (December 19, 2013) (SR–BOX–2012–021), 69789 supported by all other option 7 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 8 (June 18, 2013), 78 FR 37854 (June 24, 2013) (SR– exchanges. The Exchange believes that 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). BOX–2013–31), 71056 (December 12, 2013), 78 FR 9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– 76691 (December 18, 2013) (SR–BOX–2013–56), extending the Pilot will allow for 4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to give the 72348 (June 9, 2014), 79 FR 33976 (June 13, 2014) continued competition between market Commission written notice of the Exchange’s intent (SR–BOX–2014–17), 73822 (December 11, 2014), 79 participants on the Exchange trading to file the proposed rule change along with a brief FR 75606 (December 18, 2014) (SR–BOX–2014–29). similar products as their counterparts description and the text of the proposed rule The extension of the effective date and the revision change, at least five business days prior to the date of the dates to replace issues that have been delisted of filing of the proposed rule change, or such are the only changes to the Penny Pilot Program 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). shorter time as designated by the Commission. The being proposed at this time. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Exchange has satisfied this pre-filing requirement. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37692 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices additional time to analyze the impact of available for Web site viewing and I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Pilot Program. Accordingly, the printing in the Commission’s Public Statement of the Terms of the Substance Commission designates the proposed Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., of the Proposed Rule Change rule change as operative upon filing Washington, DC 20549–1090 on official CBOE proposes to amend Rule 5.3.06 10 with the Commission. business days between the hours of to allow the listing of options overlying At any time within 60 days of the 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the Exchange-Traded Fund Shares (‘‘ETFs’’) filing of such proposed rule change, the filing will also be available for that are listed pursuant to generic listing Commission summarily may inspection and copying at the principal standards on equities exchanges for temporarily suspend such rule change if office of the Exchange. All comments series of portfolio depositary receipts it appears to the Commission that such received will be posted without change; and index fund shares based on action is necessary or appropriate in the international or global indexes under public interest, for the protection of the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from which a comprehensive surveillance investors, or otherwise in furtherance of agreement is not required. The text of the purposes of the Act. If the submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make the proposed rule change is available on Commission takes such action, the the Exchange’s Web site (http:// Commission shall institute proceedings available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR–BOX– www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/ under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act to CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at 2015–23 and should be submitted on or determine whether the proposed rule the Exchange’s Office of the Secretary, before July 22, 2015. change should be approved or and at the Commission. disapproved. For the Commission, by the Division of II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s IV. Solicitation of Comments Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.11 Statement of the Purpose of, and Interested persons are invited to Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule submit written data, views, and Robert W. Errett, Change Deputy Secretary. arguments concerning the foregoing, In its filing with the Commission, the including whether the proposed rule [FR Doc. 2015–16084 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Exchange included statements change is consistent with the Act. BILLING CODE 8011–01–P concerning the purpose of and basis for Comments may be submitted by any of the proposed rule change and discussed the following methods: any comments it received on the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Electronic Comments proposed rule change. The text of these COMMISSION • statements may be examined at the Use the Commission’s Internet places specified in Item IV below. The comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ [Release No. 34–75296; File No. SR–CBOE– Exchange has prepared summaries, set rules/sro.shtml); or 2015–052] forth in sections A, B, and C below, of • Send an email to rule-comments@ the most significant aspects of such sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Self-Regulatory Organizations; statements. BOX–2015–23 on the subject line. Chicago Board Options Exchange, A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Paper Comments Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Statement of the Purpose of, and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed • Send paper comments in triplicate Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Rule Change To Amend Rule 5.3.06 Change Commission, 100 F Street NE., June 25, 2015. Washington, DC 20549–1090. 1. Purpose All submissions should refer to File Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the The Exchange proposes to amend Number SR–BOX–2015–23. This file Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Rule 5.3.06 to allow the listing of number should be included on the ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 options overlying ETFs (referred to as subject line if email is used. To help the notice is hereby given that on June 15, ‘‘Units’’ in Rule 5.3.06) that are listed Commission process and review your 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, pursuant to generic listing standards on comments more efficiently, please use Incorporated (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or equities exchanges for series of portfolio only one method. The Commission will ‘‘CBOE’’) filed with the Securities and depositary receipts and index fund post all comments on the Commission’s Exchange Commission (the shares based on international or global Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule indexes under which a comprehensive rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the change as described in Items I and II surveillance sharing agreement submission, all subsequent below, which Items have been prepared (‘‘comprehensive surveillance agreement’’ or ‘‘CSSA’’) is not required.5 amendments, all written statements by the Exchange. The Exchange filed the This proposal will enable the Exchange with respect to the proposed rule proposal as a ‘‘non-controversial’’ to list and trade options on ETFs change that are filed with the proposed rule change pursuant to Commission, and all written without a CSSA provided that the ETF Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule communications relating to the is listed on an equities exchange 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.4 The proposed rule change between the pursuant to the generic listings Commission and any person, other than Commission is publishing this notice to standards that do not require a CSSA those that may be withheld from the solicit comments on the proposed rule pursuant to Rule 19b–4(e) 6 of the public in accordance with the change from interested persons. Exchange Act. Rule 19b–4(e) provides provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be that the listing and trading of a new 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 10 5 See e.g., NYSE MKT Rule 1000 Commentary For purposes only of waiving the operative 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). delay for this proposal, the Commission has .03(a)(B); NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. considered the proposed rule’s impact on Commentary .01(a)(B); NASDAQ Rule efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 5705(a)(3)(A)(ii); and BATS Rule 14.11(b)(3)(A)(ii). 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 6 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37693 derivative securities product by a self- generic listing standards pursuant to and global indexes would be traded, in regulatory organization (‘‘SRO’’) shall Rule 19b–4(e) 9 of the Exchange Act for all other respects, under the Exchange’s not be deemed a proposed rule change, ETFs based on indexes that consist of existing trading rules and procedures pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of Rule stocks listed on U.S. exchanges.10 In that apply to options on ETFs and 19b–4, if the Commission has approved, general, the criteria for the underlying would be covered under the Exchange’s pursuant to Section 19(b) of the component securities in the surveillance program for options on Exchange Act, the SRO’s trading rules, international and global indexes are ETFs. Pursuant to the proposed rule, the procedures and listing standards for the similar to those for the domestic Exchange may list and trade options on product class that would include the indexes, but with modifications as an ETF without a CSSA provided that new derivatives securities product, and appropriate for the issues and risks the ETF is listed pursuant to generic the SRO has a surveillance program for associated with non-U.S. securities. listing standards for series of portfolio the product class.7 In other words, the In addition, the Commission has depositary receipts and index fund proposal will amend the listing previously approved the listing and shares based on international or global standards to allow the Exchange to list trading of ETFs based on international indexes under which a comprehensive and trade options on ETFs based on indexes—those based on non-U.S. surveillance agreement is not required. international or global indexes to a component stocks—as well as global The Exchange believes that these similar degree that they are allowed to indexes—those based on non-U.S. and generic listing standards are intended to be listed on several equities exchanges.8 U.S. component stocks.11 ensure that stocks with substantial In approving ETFs for equities market capitalization and trading Exchange Traded Funds exchange trading, the Commission volume account for a substantial portion The Exchange allows for the listing thoroughly considered the structure of of the weight of an index or portfolio. and trading of options on ETFs (referred the ETFs, their usefulness to investors The Exchange believes that this to as ‘‘Units’’ in Rule 5.3.06). Rule and to the markets, and SRO rules that proposed listing standard for options on 5.3.06(v)(A)–(C) provide the listings govern their trading. The Exchange ETFs is reasonable for international and standards for options on ETFs with non- believes that allowing the listing of global indexes, and, when applied in U.S. component securities, such as ETFs options overlying ETFs that are listed conjunction with the other listing based on international or global indexes. pursuant to the generic listing standards requirements,15 will result in options Rule 5.3.06(v)(A) requires that any non- on equities exchanges for ETFs based on overlying ETFs that are sufficiently U.S. component securities of an index international and global indexes and broad-based in scope and not readily or portfolio of securities on which the applying Rule 19b–4(e) 12 should fulfill susceptible to manipulation. The Units are based that are not subject to the intended objective of that Rule by Exchange also believes that allowing the comprehensive surveillance agreements allowing options on those ETFs that Exchange to list options overlying ETFs do not in the aggregate represent more have satisfied the generic listing that are listed on equities exchanges than 50% of the weight of the index or standards to commence trading, without pursuant to generic standards for series portfolio. Rule 5.3.06(v)(B) requires that the need for the public comment period of portfolio depositary receipts and component securities of an index or and Commission approval. The index fund shares based on portfolio of securities on which the proposed rule has the potential to international or global indexes under Units are based for which the primary reduce the time frame for bringing which a CSSA is not required, will market is in any one country that is not options on ETFs to market, thereby result in options overlying ETFs that are subject to a comprehensive surveillance reducing the burdens on issuers and adequately diversified in weighting for agreement do not represent 20% or other market participants. The failure of any single security or small group of more of the weight of the index. Rule a particular ETF to comply with the securities to significantly reduce 5.3.06(v)(C) requires that component generic listing standards under Rule concerns that trading in options securities of an index or portfolio of 19b–4(e) 13 would not, however, overlying ETFs based on international securities on which the Units are based preclude the Exchange from submitting or global indexes could become a for which the primary market is in any a separate filing pursuant to Section surrogate for trading in unregistered two countries that are not subject to 19(b)(2),14 requesting Commission securities. comprehensive surveillance agreements approval to list and trade options on a The Exchange believes that ETFs do not represent 33% or more of the particular ETF. based on international and global weight of the index. indexes that have been listed pursuant Requirements for Listing and Trading to the generic standards are sufficiently Generic Listing Standards for Exchange- Options Overlying ETFs Based on Traded Funds broad-based enough as to make options International and Global Indexes overlying such ETFs not susceptible The Exchange notes that the Options on ETFs listed pursuant to instruments for manipulation. The Commission has previously approved these generic standards for international Exchange believes that the threat of manipulation is sufficiently mitigated 7 When relying on Rule 19b–4(e), the SRO must 9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e). submit Form 19b–4(e) to the Commission within for underlying ETFs that have been 10 five business days after the SRO begins trading the See Commentary .03 to Amex Rule 1000 and listed on equities exchanges pursuant to new derivative securities products. See Securities Commentary .02 to Amex Rule 1000A. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42787 (May generic listing standards for series of Exchange Act Release No. 40761 (December 8, portfolio depositary receipts and index 1998), 63 FR 70952 (December 22, 1998). 15, 2000), 65 FR 33598 (May24, 2000). 11 8 See NYSE MKT Rule 1000 Commentary See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. fund shares based on international or .03(a)(B); NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) 50189 (August 12, 2004), 69 FR 51723 (August 20, global indexes under which a Commentary .01(a)(B); NASDAQ Rule 2004) (approving the listing and trading of certain comprehensive surveillance agreement Vanguard International Equity Index Funds); 44700 5705(a)(3)(A)(ii); and BATS Rule 14.11(b)(3)(A)(ii). is not required and for the overlying See also Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. (August 14, 2001), 66 FR 43927 (August 21, 2001) 54739 (November 9, 2006), 71 FR 66993 (SR– (approving the listing and trading of series of the options, that the Exchange does not see Amex–2006–78); 55269 (February 9, 2007), 72 FR iShares Trust based on certain S&P global indexes). 7490 (February 15, 2007) (SR–NASDAQ–2006–050); 12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e). 15 All of the other listing criteria under the 55621 (April 12, 2007), 72 FR 19571 (April 18, 13 17 CFR 240.19b–4(e). Exchange’s rules will continue to apply to any 2007) (SR–NYSEArca–2006–86). 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). options listed pursuant to the proposed rule change. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37694 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices the need for CSSA to be in place before Section 6(b) of the Act,16 in general, and B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s listing and trading options on such furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) Statement on Burden on Competition 17 ETFs. The Exchange notes that its of the Act, in particular, in that it is The Exchange does not believe that proposal does not replace the need for designed to prevent fraudulent and the proposed rule change will impose a CSSA as provided in the current rule. manipulative acts and practices, to any burden on competition that is not The provisions of the current rule, promote just and equitable principles of necessary or appropriate in furtherance including the need for a CSSA, remain trade, to foster cooperation and of the purposes of the Act. To the materially unchanged in the proposed coordination with persons engaged in contrary, the proposed rule change is a rule and will continue to apply to facilitating transactions in securities, to competitive change that is substantially options on ETFs that are not listed on remove impediments to and perfect the similar to recent rule changes filed by an equities exchange pursuant to mechanisms of a free and open market the MIAX Options Exchange (‘‘MIAX’’), generic listing standards for series of and a national market system and, in NASDAQ OMX PHLX, LLC (‘‘Phlx’’) portfolio depositary receipts and index general, to protect investors and the and International Securities Exchange, fund shares based on international or public interest. LLC (‘‘ISE’’).18 Furthermore, the global indexes under which a In particular, the proposed rules have Exchange believes this proposed rule comprehensive surveillance agreement the potential to reduce the time frame change will benefit investors by is not required. Instead, the proposed for bringing options on ETFs to market, providing additional methods to trade rule adds an additional listing thereby reducing the burdens on issuers options on ETFs, and by providing them mechanism for certain qualifying and other market participants. The with valuable risk management tools. options on ETFs to be listed on the Exchange also believes enabling the Specifically, the Exchange believes that Exchange. listing and trading of options on ETFs market participants on the Exchange Proposed Non-Substantive pursuant to this new listing standard would benefit from the introduction and Reorganizational Changes will benefit investors by providing them availability of options on ETFs in a with valuable risk management tools. manner that is similar to equities The Exchange proposes to take this The Exchange notes that its proposal exchanges and will provide investors opportunity to reorganize the provisions does not replace the need for a CSSA as with a venue on which to trade options set forth in Rule 5.3.06. As background, provided in the current rule. The on these products. For all the reasons the Exchange states that there are three provisions of the current rule, including stated above, the Exchange does not general areas addressed in Rule 5.3.06. believe that the proposed rule change First, current subparagraphs (i) to (v) the need for a comprehensive will impose any burden on competition identify general and specific types of surveillance sharing agreement, remain not necessary or appropriate in ETFs eligible for options listing. The materially unchanged in the proposed furtherance of the purposes of the Act, Exchange is proposing to maintain this rule and will continue to apply to and believes the proposed change will organization. Second, subparagraph options on ETFs that are not listed on enhance competition. (v)(E) sets forth the two ways in which an equities exchange pursuant to an ETF may meet the Exchange’s initial generic listing standards for series of C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s listing criteria. Third, subparagraphs portfolio depositary receipts and index Statement on Comments on the (A)–(D) and (F) set forth additional fund shares based on international or Proposed Rule Change Received From initial listing criteria for ETFs based on global indexes under which a Members, Participants, or Others comprehensive surveillance agreement the particular type of ETF. The The Exchange neither solicited nor Exchange believes that reorganizing the is not required. Instead, the proposed rule adds an additional listing received comments on the proposed presentation of these paragraphs would rule change. make Rule 5.3.06 clearer and more user- mechanism for certain qualifying friendly. As a result, CBOE proposes to options on ETFs to be listed on the III. Date of Effectiveness of the move the contents of current Exchange in a manner that is designed Proposed Rule Change and Timing for subparagraph (v)(E) to be set forth as to prevent fraudulent and manipulative Commission Action new paragraphs (B)(i) and (ii), after the acts and practices, to promote just and Because the proposed rule change general and specific types of ETFs equitable principles of trade, to foster does not (i) significantly affect the eligible for options listing are identified. cooperation and coordination with protection of investors or the public The Exchange believes that this persons engaged in facilitating interest; (ii) impose any significant placement would make it clearer that transactions in securities, to remove burden on competition; and (iii) become this provision applies to all ETFs. impediments to and perfect the operative for 30 days from the date on Finally, the Exchange proposes to add mechanisms of a free and open market which it was filed, or such shorter time new subparagraph lettering to existing and a national market system and, in as the Commission may designate, it has rule text and to re-letter existing rule general, to protect investors and the become effective pursuant to Section text. These these [sic] are technical public interest. 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 19 and Rule 19b– organizational changes and are not The Exchange believes that the 4(f)(6) thereunder.20 substantive changes. proposed non-substantive CBOE also proposes to amend Rule reorganizational changes to Rule 5.3.06 18 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 5.4.08 by updating internal cross- would be beneficial to market 74509 (March 13, 2015), 80 FR 14425 (March 19, participants and users of CBOE’s 2015) (SR–MIAX–2015–04); 74553 (March 20, references to Rule 5.3.06 to reflect 2015), 80 FR 16072 (March 26, 2015) (SR–Phlx– renumbering changing being proposed Rulebook because these proposed 2015–27) and 74832 (April 29, 2015), 80 FR 25738 in this current filing to Rule 5.3.06. changes would generally result in a (May 5, 2015) (SR–ISE–2015–16). These proposed changes to Rule 5.4.08 clearer and more user-friendly 19 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). are technical and non-substantive. presentment of the provisions set forth 20 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). As required under Rule in CBOE’s Rulebook. 19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the 2. Statutory Basis Commission with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief The Exchange believes that the 16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). description and the text of the proposed rule proposed rule change is consistent with 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). change, at least five business days prior to the date VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37695 A proposed rule change filed Paper Comments SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the • COMMISSION Act 21 normally does not become Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities [Release No. 34–75301; File No. SR– operative for 30 days after the date of its NYSEMKT–2015–44] filing. However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 22 and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street permits the Commission to designate a NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE shorter time if such action is consistent All submissions should refer to File MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and with the protection of investors and the Number SR–CBOE–2015–052. This file Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed public interest. The Exchange has asked number should be included on the Rule Change Amending the Members’ the Commission to waive the 30-day subject line if email is used. To help the Schedule as Defined in the Amended operative delay so that the proposal may Commission process and review your and Restated Limited Liability become operative immediately upon Company Agreement of NYSE Amex comments more efficiently, please use filing. The Exchange stated that waiver Options LLC Dated as of May 14, 2014 only one method. The Commission will of the operative delay will permit the in Order to Reflect Changes to the Exchange to list and trade certain ETF post all comments on the Commission’s Capital Structure of the Company options on the same basis as other Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ options markets.23 Moreover, the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the June 25, 2015. 1 Exchange has represented that the submission, all subsequent Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the reorganizational changes are non- amendments, all written statements Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 2 3 substantive and would assist market with respect to the proposed rule ‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, participants by providing a clearer rule. change that are filed with the notice is hereby given that on June 17, The Commission believes the waiver of Commission, and all written 2015, NYSE MKT LLC (the ‘‘Exchange’’ the operative delay is consistent with communications relating to the or ‘‘NYSE MKT’’) filed with the the protection of investors and the proposed rule change between the Securities and Exchange Commission public interest. Therefore, the Commission and any person, other than (the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule Commission hereby waives the those that may be withheld from the change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared operative delay and designates the public in accordance with the by the self-regulatory organization. The proposal operative upon filing.24 provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Commission is publishing this notice to At any time within 60 days of the available for Web site viewing and filing of the proposed rule change, the solicit comments on the proposed rule printing in the Commission’s Public change from interested persons. Commission summarily may Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., temporarily suspend such rule change if Washington, DC 20549 on official I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s it appears to the Commission that such business days between the hours of Statement of the Terms of Substance of action is necessary or appropriate in the 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such the Proposed Rule Change public interest, for the protection of filing also will be available for The Exchange proposes to amend the investors, or otherwise in furtherance of inspection and copying at the principal Members’ Schedule (as defined in the the purposes of the Act. If the Amended and Restated Limited Commission takes such action, the office of the Exchange. All comments Liability Company Agreement of NYSE Commission shall institute proceedings received will be posted without change; Amex Options LLC (the ‘‘Company’’) to determine whether the proposed rule the Commission does not edit personal dated as of May 14, 2014 (the ‘‘LLC change should be approved or identifying information from Agreement’’)) in order to reflect changes disapproved. submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make to the capital structure of the Company IV. Solicitation of Comments available publicly. All submissions based on two transactions (such Interested persons are invited to should refer to File Number SR–CBOE– amendment, the ‘‘Proposed Rule submit written data, views, and 2015–052, and should be submitted on Change’’). The first transaction involved arguments concerning the foregoing, or before July 22, 2015. the issuance of Annual Incentive Shares including whether the proposed rule (as defined in the Members Agreement For the Commission, by the Division of change is consistent with the Act. (as defined below)) to the Founding Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Firms (as defined below) consistent Comments may be submitted by any of authority.25 the following methods: with the formula set forth in Section 2.1 Robert W. Errett, of that certain Amended and Restated Electronic Comments Deputy Secretary. Members Agreement, dated as of May • Use the Commission’s Internet [FR Doc. 2015–16085 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 14, 2014, by and among the Company, NYSE MKT, NYSE Holdings LLC comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ BILLING CODE 8011–01–P rules/sro.shtml); or (formerly known as NYSE Euronext) • Send an email to rule-comments@ (‘‘NYSE Holdings’’), NYSE Market (DE), sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Inc. (formerly known as NYSE Market, CBOE–2015–052 on the subject line. Inc.) (‘‘NYSE Market (DE)’’), Banc of America Strategic Investments of filing of the proposed rule change, or such Corporation (‘‘BAML’’), Barclays shorter time as designated by the Commission. Electronic Commerce Holdings Inc. 21 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). (‘‘Barclays’’), Citadel Securities LLC 22 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). (‘‘Citadel’’), Citigroup Financial 23 See supra note 18. Strategies, Inc. (‘‘Citigroup’’), Goldman, 24 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has also considered the proposed rule’s impact on 1 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1). efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 25 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37696 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Sachs & Co. (‘‘Goldman Sachs’’), Datek are allocated among the Members (as Market (DE) of the Class B Common Online Management Corp. (‘‘TD defined in the LLC Agreement) holding Interests transferred by the Founding Ameritrade’’) and UBS Americas Inc. Class B Common Interests (such Firms, such Class B Common Interests (‘‘UBS’’) (collectively, excluding the Members, the ‘‘Class B Members’’) based will automatically convert into an Company, NYSE MKT, NYSE Holdings on each Class B Member’s contribution appropriate number of Class A Common and NYSE Market (DE), the ‘‘Founding to the volume of the Exchange relative Interests. Firms’’) (the ‘‘Members Agreement’’). to such Class B Member’s Individual Immediately following the Founding The second transaction will involve the Target (as defined in the Members Firm Transfer, NYSE MKT will own an transfer of Interests (as defined in the Agreement). The Annual Incentive equity interest of 47.2000% in the LLC Agreement) by the Founding Firms Shares may change the relative Company, NYSE Market (DE) will own to NYSE Market (DE), an affiliate of the economic and voting rights among the an equity interest of 52.8000%, and the Exchange, as soon as reasonably Class B Members but have no effect on Founding Firms, collectively, will no practicable following June 15, 2015 the relative economic and voting rights longer have an equity interest in the pursuant to Article XI of the LLC as between Members holding Class A Company. The Exchange proposes, Agreement and Section 3.1 of the Common Interests (as defined in the upon consummation of the Founding Members Agreement. The text of the LLC Agreement) and Class B Members. Firm Transfer, to amend the Members’ Effective February 28, 2015, the proposed rule change is available on the Schedule as set forth in Exhibit 5B Company issued 10.5456 Annual Exchange’s Web site at www.nyse.com, attached hereto 5 (marked against the Incentive Shares in the aggregate to the at the principal office of the Exchange, Members’ Schedule following the Founding Firms (the ‘‘Issuance of and at the Commission’s Public Issuance of Annual Incentive Shares) to Annual Incentive Shares’’). Five of the Reference Room. reflect the Founding Firm Transfer. Founding Firms did not achieve their II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Individual Targets, which reduced the 2. Statutory Basis Statement of the Purpose of, and five Founding Firms’ economic and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule voting interests in the Company relative The Proposed Rule Change is 6 Change to the other Founding Firms. In consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,7 in general, and furthers the In its filing with the Commission, the addition, because only two Founding objectives of Section 6(b)(1) 8 of the Act, self-regulatory organization included Firms exceeded their Individual Targets, which requires a national securities statements concerning the purpose of, 1.0309 unallocated Reallocation Shares exchange to be so organized and have and basis for, the proposed rule change (as defined in the Members Agreement) the capacity to carry out the purposes of and discussed any comments it received were included in an Unearned Class B the Act and to comply, and to enforce on the proposed rule change. The text Shares Pool (as defined in the Members compliance by its members and persons of those statements may be examined at Agreement). In accordance with Section associated with its members, with the the places specified in Item IV below. 2.2 of the Members Agreement, the provisions of the Act, the rules and The Exchange has prepared summaries, board of directors of the Company regulations promulgated thereunder and set forth in sections A, B, and C below, allocated such Class B Shares between the rules of the Exchange. The Proposed of the most significant parts of such those two Founding Firms that Rule Change does not modify the statements. exceeded their Individual Targets, effective February 28, 2015. The Company’s trading or compliance rules A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Exchange proposes to amend the and preserves the existing mechanisms Statement of the Purpose of, and Members’ Schedule as set forth in for ensuring the Exchange’s and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Exhibit 5A attached hereto 4 (marked Company’s compliance with the Act, Change against the Members’ Schedule in effect the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder and the rules of the 1. Purpose prior to such issuance) to reflect the issuance of Annual Incentive Shares, Exchange. The Proposed Rule Change The Exchange proposes to amend the including the allocation of the also retains NYSE MKT’s regulatory Members’ Schedule as set forth herein. Reallocation Shares included in the control over the Company and the The amendment reflects changes to the Unearned Class B Shares Pool. provisions specifically designed to capital structure of the Company due to ensure the independence of its self- (i) the issuance of Annual Incentive Founding Firm Transfer regulatory function and to ensure that Shares to the Founding Firms pursuant Pursuant to Article XI of the LLC any regulatory determinations by NYSE to Section 2.1 of the Members Agreement and Section 3.1 of the MKT, as the Company’s SRO, are Agreement and (ii) the transfer of Members Agreement, a Member may controlling with respect to the actions Interests by the Founding Firms to transfer Interests to a third party or to and decisions of the Company. NYSE Market (DE) pursuant to Article another Member in accordance with the Additionally, the Proposed Rule XI of the LLC Agreement and Section conditions and limitations set forth Change continues to require the 3.1 of the Members Agreement. therein. The Exchange is filing this Company, its Members and its directors Issuance of Annual Incentive Shares Proposed Rule Change, in part, to to comply with the federal securities provide notice that the Founding Firms laws and the rules and regulations Pursuant to Section 2.1 of the collectively intend to transfer an promulgated thereunder and to engage Members Agreement, each year until aggregate equity interest [sic] 16.0000% in conduct that fosters and does not this year (unless extended by the board in the Company to NYSE Market (DE), interfere with the Exchange’s or the of directors of the Company), the an affiliate of the Exchange (the Company’s ability to carry out its Company must issue a number of Class ‘‘Founding Firm Transfer’’). Upon B Common Interests (as defined in the consummation of the Founding Firm 5 The Commission notes that Exhibit 5B is LLC Agreement) equal to thirty percent Transfer and the acquisition by NYSE attached to the filing, not to this Notice. (30%) of the then-outstanding Class B 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). Common Interests as Annual Incentive 4 The Commission notes that Exhibit 5A is 7 15 U.S.C. 78. Shares. These Annual Incentive Shares attached to the filing, not to this Notice. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37697 respective responsibilities under the proposed rule change does not: (i) determine whether the proposed rule Act. significantly affect the protection of change should be approved or The Proposed Rule Change is also investors or the public interest; (ii) disapproved. consistent with, and furthers the impose any significant burden on IV. Solicitation of Comments objectives of, Section 6(b)(5) 9 of the Act, competition; and (iii) become operative in that it preserves all of NYSE MKT’s prior to 30 days from the date on which Interested persons are invited to existing rules and mechanisms to it was filed, or such shorter time as the submit written data, views, and prevent fraudulent and manipulative Commission may designate, if arguments concerning the foregoing, acts and practices, to promote just and consistent with the protection of including whether the proposed rule equitable principles of trade, to foster investors and the public interest, the change is consistent with the Act. cooperation and coordination with proposed rule change has become Comments may be submitted by any of persons engaged in facilitating effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) the following methods: transactions in securities, to remove of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) impediments to and perfect the thereunder. Electronic Comments mechanisms of a free and open market A proposed rule change filed under • Use the Commission’s Internet and a national market system and, in Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 12 normally does not comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ general, to protect investors and the become operative prior to 30 days after rules/sro.shtml); or public interest. the date of the filing. However, pursuant • to Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii),13 the Send an email to rule-comments@ B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission may designate a shorter sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Statement on Burden on Competition time if such action is consistent with the NYSEMKT–2015–44 on the subject line. The Exchange does not believe that protection of investors and the public Paper Comments the Proposed Rule Change will have any interest. The Exchange has asked the impact on competition. The Proposed Commission to waive the 30-day • Send paper comments in triplicate Rule Change solely relates to changes in operative delay so that the proposal may to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities the equity interests among the Members become operative immediately upon and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street of the Company pursuant to provisions filing. The Exchange stated that an NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. of the LLC Agreement and Members immediate operative date is necessary to Agreement that have been previously All submissions should refer to File permit the efficient consummation of Number SR–NYSEMKT–2015–44. This filed and approved by the Commission. both the Issuance of Annual Incentive file number should be included on the In addition, neither the Issuance of Shares and the Founding Firm Transfer. subject line if email is used. To help the Annual Incentive Shares nor the According to the Exchange, Commission process and review your Founding Firm Transfer implicates the accomplishing the Founding Firm comments more efficiently, please use Commission’s policies with respect to Transfer requires that the Members have only one method. The Commission will permissible ownership. Furthermore, certainty as to the amount of Common post all comments on the Commission’s because the Proposed Rule Change does Interests owned by each, which in turn Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ not affect the availability or pricing of requires timely consummation of the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the any goods or services, the Proposed Issuance of Annual Incentive Shares. submission, all subsequent Rule Change will not affect competition The Commission believes that waiving either between the Exchange and others the 30-day operative delay is consistent amendments, all written statements that provide the same goods and with the protection of investors and the with respect to the proposed rule services as the Exchange or among public interest because such waiver change that are filed with the market participants. would allow the Company to Commission, and all written communications relating to the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s consummate the Issuance of Annual Incentive Shares and the Founding Firm proposed rule change between the Statement on Comments on the Commission and any person, other than Proposed Rule Change Received From Transfer in an efficient and predictable manner. Accordingly, the Commission those that may be withheld from the Members, Participants, or Others hereby grants the Exchange’s request public in accordance with the No written comments were solicited and designates the proposal operative provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be or received with respect to the Proposed upon filing.14 available for Web site viewing and Rule Change. At any time within 60 days of the printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., III. Date of Effectiveness of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may Washington, DC 20549, on official Proposed Rule Change and Timing for business days between the hours of Commission Action temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such The Exchange has filed the proposed action is necessary or appropriate in the filing also will be available for rule change pursuant to Section public interest, for the protection of inspection and copying at the principal 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 10 and Rule investors, or otherwise in furtherance of office of the Exchange. All comments 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.11 Because the the purposes of the Act. If the received will be posted without change; Commission takes such action, the the Commission does not edit personal 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Commission shall institute proceedings identifying information from 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 15 of the Act to submissions. You should submit only 11 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– information that you wish to make 4(f)(6) requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the Exchange’s intent 12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). publicly available. All submissions to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief 13 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). should refer to File Number SR– description and text of the proposed rule change, 14 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day NYSEMKT–2015–44 and should be at least five business days prior to the date of filing operative delay, the Commission has considered the submitted on or before July 22, 2015. of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, as designated by the Commission. The Exchange and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). has satisfied this requirement. 15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37698 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices For the Commission, by the Division of II. Description of the Amended therein is superseded by proposed Rules Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Proposal 4702 and 4703.15 Lastly, BX proposes 16 authority. The Exchange proposes to amend and certain conforming and technical Robert W. Errett, restate certain rules governing the changes to Rules 4756, 4757, and 16 Deputy Secretary. NASDAQ OMX BX Equities Market in 4780. BX represents that, except where [FR Doc. 2015–16089 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] order to provide additional detail and specifically stated otherwise, all BILLING CODE 8011–01–P clarity regarding its order type functionality.6 This proposed rule proposed rules are restatements of change is a response to Chair White’s existing rules and are not intended to reflect substantive changes to rule text SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE request that each equities exchange or the operation of the NASDAQ OMX COMMISSION conduct a comprehensive review of the 17 operation of each of the order types that BX Equities Market. Proposed Rule it offers to members.7 4702 related to Order Types contains [Release No. 34–75291; File No. SR–BX– While the Exchange believes that its definitions and descriptions of Price to 2015–015] current rules and other public Comply Orders, Price to Display Orders disclosures provide a comprehensive (referred to as ‘‘Price to Comply Post Self-Regulatory Organizations; Orders’’ in current Rule 4751),18 Non- NASDAQ OMX BX Inc.; Notice of Filing description of the operation of the NASDAQ OMX BX Equities Market and Displayed Orders, Post-Only Orders, of Amendment No. 1 and Order are sufficient for members and the Retail Price Improving Orders, and Granting Accelerated Approval of investing public to have an accurate Retail Orders. Proposed Rule 4703 Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by understanding of its market structure, it related to Order Attributes contains Amendment No. 1, To Amend and also acknowledges that a restatement of definitions and descriptions of time-in- Restate Certain Rules That Govern the certain rules will further clarify the force (‘‘TIF’’) modifiers, order size, order NASDAQ OMX BX Equities Market operation of its system.8 For instance, price, pegging, minimum quantity, routing, discretion, reserve size, June 24, 2015. BX believes that adding examples of order type operation to its rules will attribution, intermarket sweep order designation, and display.19 I. Introduction promote greater understanding of the In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange Exchange’s market structure.9 In proposes to add language further On March 20, 2015, NASDAQ OMX addition, BX asserts that certain BX, Inc. (‘‘BX’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed explaining the operation of the functionality previously described as an following order types: Post-Only Orders, with the Securities and Exchange ‘‘order type’’ is more precisely Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant orders with a TIF of IOC, including characterized as an attribute that may be Routable Orders and Post-Only Orders; to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities 10 added to a particular order. orders with Midpoint Pegging, Primary Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule Accordingly, this proposed rule change Pegging or Market Pegging; and orders 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule distinguishes between ‘‘Order Types’’ designated with both Pegging and change to amend and restate certain BX and ‘‘Order Attributes,’’ and provides Routing attributes.20 For example, the rules that govern the NASDAQ OMX BX descriptions of the Order Attributes that Exchange states that for Order Types Equities Market in order to provide a may be attached to particular Order that list both Pegging and Routing as 11 clearer and more detailed description of Types. possible Order Attributes, the two Order certain aspects of its functionality. The Currently, BX Rule 4751 sets forth Attributes may be combined since proposed rule change was published for most of the rules governing NASDAQ Pegging serves to establish the price of comment in the Federal Register on OMX BX Equities Market Order Types the order, while Routing establishes the April 6, 2015.3 The Commission and Order Attributes, as well as other market center(s) to which the system’s received no comment letters regarding defined terms that pertain to trading routing functionality may direct a the proposed rule change. On May 12, securities on the NASDAQ OMX BX routed order if liquidity is available at 12 2015, the Commission extended to July Equities Market. BX proposes to that price.21 The Exchange also 5, 2015, the time period in which to restate and amend Rule 4751 as new proposes to add further specification 13 approve the proposed rule change, Rule 4701. BX also proposes to amend regarding the availability of certain disapprove the proposed rule change, or the definitions pertaining to Order order types only through certain institute proceedings to determine Types and Order Attributes and to communication protocols by stating that relocate them from Rule 4751 to new whether the proposed rule change a Post-Only Order with a TIF of IOC Rules 4702 (Order Types) and 4703 should be disapproved.4 On June 22, may not be entered through the RASH (Order Attributes), respectively.14 In 22 2015, the Exchange filed Amendment or FIX protocols. In addition, the 5 addition, BX proposes to delete Rule Exchange proposes to add language No. 1 to the proposed rule change. This 4755 as the information contained order approves the proposed rule stating that one or more Order change, as amended, on an accelerated 6 See Notice 80 FR at 18473. 15 See Rule 4755. basis. 7 See id.; see also Mary Jo White, Chair, 16 BX states that, in subsequent proposed rule Commission, Speech at the Sandler O’Neill & changes, it plans to restate the remainder of its 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Partners, L.P. Global Exchange and Brokerage Rules numbered 4752 through 4780 so that they Conference (June 5, 2014), available at http:// 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. appear sequentially following Rule 4703. See. www.sec.gov/News/Speech/Detail/Speech/ 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74617 Notice, 80 FR at 18474. 1370542004312. 17 See. Notice, 80 FR at 18474. (March 31, 2015), 80 FR 18473 (‘‘Notice’’). 8 See Notice, 80 FR at 18474. 18 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74934, See Notice, 80 FR at 18477 n.29. 9 Id. 80 FR 28325 (May 18, 2015). 19 The Notice contains additional details related 10 Id. 5 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange proposed to to proposed Rules 4702 and 4703. See Notice, 80 11 correct typographical errors in the original filing, Id. FR at 18473–90. further improve the clarity of certain rule language, 12 See Rule 4751. 20 See Amendment No. 1. and include additional explanation with regard to 13 See proposed Rule 4701. 21 Id. the purpose of the proposed rule change. 14 See proposed Rules 4702 and 4703. 22 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37699 Attributes may be assigned to a single re-organizes the Exchange’s order type change, as amended, is consistent with order, but if the use of multiple Order rules and provides additional detail the Act. Comments may be submitted by Attributes would result in contradictory regarding the order type functionality any of the following methods: instructions, the system will reject the currently offered by the Exchange. order or remove non-conforming Order Based on the Exchange’s representation, Electronic Comments 23 Attributes. the Commission believes that the • Use the Commission’s Internet proposed rule change does not raise any III. Discussion and Commission comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ novel regulatory considerations and Findings rules/sro.shtml); or should provide greater specificity, • After careful review, the Commission clarity and transparency with respect to Send an email to rule-comments@ finds that the proposed rule change is the order type functionality available on sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– consistent with the requirements of the the Exchange. In addition, the BX–2015–015 on the subject line. Act and the rules and regulations Commission notes that the Exchange’s Paper Comments thereunder applicable to a national proposed rule changes provide securities exchange.24 In particular, the additional detail related to functionality • Send paper comments in triplicate Commission finds that the proposed for certain order types and the handling to Secretary, Securities and Exchange rule change is consistent with Section of orders during initial entry and after Commission, 100 F Street NE., 25 6(b)(5) of the Act, which requires, posting to the NASDAQ OMX BX Washington, DC 20549–1090. among other things, that the rules of a Equities Market Book. Accordingly, the national securities exchange be Commission believes that this proposed All submissions should refer to File designed to prevent fraudulent and rule change should provide greater Number SR–BX–2015–015. This file manipulative acts and practices, to transparency with respect to the number should be included on the promote just and equitable principles of Exchange’s order type functionality. For subject line if email is used. To help the trade, to foster cooperation and these reasons, the Commission believes Commission process and review your coordination with persons engaged in that the proposal should help to prevent comments more efficiently, please use facilitating transactions in securities, to fraudulent and manipulative acts and only one method. The Commission will remove impediments to and perfect the practices, promote just and equitable post all comments on the Commission’s mechanism of a free and open market principles of trade, remove Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ and a national market system, and, in impediments to and perfect the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the general, to protect investors and the mechanism of a free and open market submission, all subsequent public interest; and are not designed to and a national market system, and, in amendments, all written statements permit unfair discrimination between general, protect investors and the public with respect to the proposed rule customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. interest. change that are filed with the The Commission notes that the The Commission finds good cause to Commission, and all written Exchange believes that the proposal is approve the filing, as amended by communications relating to the consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule proposed rule change between the Act because the reorganized and change, prior to the thirtieth day after Commission and any person, other than enhanced descriptions of its Order the date of publication of notice of filing those that may be withheld from the Types, Order Attributes, and related thereof in the Federal Register. The public in accordance with the System functionality should promote proposed amendments should further provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be just and equitable principles of trade increase the Exchange’s transparency available for Web site viewing and and perfect the mechanisms of a free with respect to the operation of various printing in the Commission’s Public and open market and the national order types and modifiers, and serve to Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., market system by providing greater enhance investors’ understanding of the Washington, DC 20549, on official clarity concerning certain aspects of the tools available with respect to the business days between the hours of 26 System’s operations. In addition, the handling of their orders. Accelerated 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the Commission notes that BX believes that approval would allow the Exchange to filing also will be available for the proposed rule change should update its rule text immediately, thus inspection and copying at the principal contribute to the protection of investors providing users with greater clarity with office of the Exchange. All comments and the public interest by making BX’s respect to the use and potential use of received will be posted without change; 27 rules easier to understand. Further, BX functionality offered by the Exchange. the Commission does not edit personal believes that additional specificity in its In addition, the initial proposal was identifying information from rules will promote a better open for comment for twenty-one days submissions. You should submit only understanding of the Exchange’s after publication and generated no information that you wish to make operation, thereby facilitating fair comment. Accordingly, the Commission available publicly. All submissions competition among brokers and dealers believes that good cause exists, should refer to File Number SR–BX– and among markets.28 consistent with Sections 6(b)(5) and 2015–015 and should be submitted on The Commission notes that, according 29 19(b) of the Act, to approve the filing, or before July 22, 2015. to the Exchange, the proposal does not as amended by Amendment No. 1 to the add any new functionality but instead proposed rule change, on an accelerated V. Conclusion basis. 23 Id. It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 24 In approving this proposed rule change, the IV. Solicitation of Comments Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,30 that the Commission has considered the proposed rule’s Interested persons are invited to proposed rule change (SR–BX–2015– impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). submit written data, views, and 015) be, and it hereby is, approved on 25 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). arguments concerning the foregoing, an accelerated basis, as amended. 26 See Notice, 80 FR at 18488. including whether the proposed rule 27 Id. 30 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 28 Id. 29 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5); 15 U.S.C. 78s(b). 31 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37700 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices For the Commission, by the Division of bears any qualifying notation giving submit orders to Floor Brokers likely are Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated discretion as to the price or time at seeking to rely on a Floor Broker’s authority.31 which such order is to be executed.’’ expertise and discretion.6 The Exchange Robert W. Errett, CBOE Rule 6.75 (Discretionary believes that customers place orders Deputy Secretary. Transactions) further provides that with Floor Brokers because Floor [FR Doc. 2015–16083 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] ‘‘[u]nder normal market conditions, and Brokers can exercise discretion in BILLING CODE 8011–01–P in the absence of a ‘not held’ executing a client’s order and can instruction, a Floor Broker may not potentially provide higher execution exercise time discretion on market or quality.7 The Exchange states that a SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE marketable limit orders and shall customer would otherwise COMMISSION immediately execute such orders at the electronically submit an order to the [Release No. 34–75299; File No. SR–CBOE– best price or prices available.’’ Exchange for automatic handling and an 2015–047] CBOE now proposes to amend electronic execution.8 Exchange Rule 6.75, as well as Rules Self-Regulatory Organizations; 6.53 and 6.73, to establish a different Chicago Board Options Exchange, default status for orders sent to Floor III. Discussion and Commission Incorporated; Order Approving Brokers. Specifically, CBOE proposes to Findings Proposed Rule Change Relating to add a new Interpretation and Policy .06 After careful review, the Commission Floor Broker Due Diligence to CBOE Rule 6.73 (Responsibilities of finds that the proposed rule change is Floor Brokers) to specify that an order consistent with the Act and the rules June 25, 2015. entrusted to a Floor Broker will be and regulations thereunder applicable to 9 I. Introduction considered a Not Held Order unless (i) a national securities exchange. In a Floor Broker’s customer otherwise particular, the Commission finds that On May 5, 2015, Chicago Board specifies or (ii) the order was the proposed rule change is consistent Options Exchange, Incorporated (the 10 electronically received by the Exchange with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, which ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘CBOE’’) filed with the and subsequently routed to a Floor requires that the rules of the exchange Securities and Exchange Commission Broker or PAR Official pursuant to the be designed, among other things, to (the ‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to order entry firm’s routing instructions. prevent fraudulent and manipulative Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities The Exchange also proposes to add acts and practices, to promote just and Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’),2 and additional language to the Not Held equitable principles of trade, to remove Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 a proposed rule Order definition in CBOE Rule 6.53(g) impediments to and perfect the change to amend Exchange rules related that mirrors the language it proposes to mechanism of a free and open market to Floor Broker due diligence. The add to Rule 6.73. Finally, the Exchange and a national market system, and, in proposed rule change was published for proposes to amend CBOE Rule 6.75, general, to protect investors and the comment in the Federal Register on which addresses a Floor Broker’s public interest. May 22, 2015.4 The Commission discretion in executing orders, to delete The Commission believes that the received no comment letters on the the sentence that specifies that a Floor Exchange has articulated a reasonable proposed rule change. This order Broker may not exercise time discretion basis for changing the current default approves the proposed rule change. on an order under normal market presumption of whether a customer II. Description of the Proposal conditions unless the order was marked intends to provide a Floor Broker with ‘‘not held.’’ the ability to exercise time and price CBOE proposes to amend several discretion on its behalf as long as the rules to address certain order handling The consequence of these proposes changes, taken together, will result in a order is not otherwise marked, or obligations on the part of its Floor received electronically, in a manner to Brokers. Specifically, whether orders change to the default order handling obligations for orders sent to Floor suggest that the customer did not intend sent to Floor Brokers are presumed to be for its order to be treated as Not Held. ‘‘Held’’ or ‘‘Not Held.’’ A ‘‘Not Held’’ Brokers. Whereas Floor Brokers are currently obligated by CBOE Rule 6.75 Other than changing the default order generally is one where the presumption to ‘‘Not Held’’ for most customer gives the Floor Broker to immediately execute orders at the best available prices under normal orders sent to Floor Brokers, CBOE is discretion in executing the order, both market conditions unless the customer not proposing to change any other order with respect to the time of execution provides a Not Held instruction on the handling obligations applicable to Floor and the price (though the customer may order, CBOE’s proposal will consider all Brokers. CBOE’s proposal responds to specify a limit price), and the Floor orders sent to Floor Brokers to be ‘‘Not its understanding of the changing role of Broker works the order over a period of Held’’ by default unless the customer Floor Brokers on its trading floor since time to avoid market impact while specifies or if the order is delivered to it adopted Rule 6.75, and its seeking best execution of the order. A CBOE electronically in such a manner understanding of how customers today ‘‘Held’’ order generally is one where the as to suggest that the customer is use, and intend to continue to use, the customer seeks a prompt execution at seeking a prompt execution of a services of Floor Brokers on the CBOE the best currently available price or marketable order at the best available exchange. Accordingly, the Commission prices. finds that the proposed rule change is Currently, CBOE Rule 6.53 (Certain prices. In its filing, the Exchange states that consistent with the Act and is designed Order Types Defined) defines a ‘‘Not CBOE Rules 6.73 and 6.75 were adopted Held Order’’ as an order that is marked prior to electronic trading and thus did 6 See id. as ‘‘not held’’ or ‘‘take time,’’ or ‘‘which not contemplate the interaction between 7 See id. an electronic trading environment and a 8 See id. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 9 manual trading floor.5 The Exchange In approving this proposed rule change, the 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. Commission notes that it has considered the 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. believes that, at present, customers who proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74990 and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). (May 18, 2015), 80 FR 29767 (‘‘Notice’’). 5 See Notice, supra note 4, 80 FR at 29768. 10 15 U.S.C. 78(b)(5). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37701 to promote just and equitable principles Series, Federated International Series, applicants with a copy of the request, of trade and remove impediments to and Inc., Federated Investment Series personally or by mail. Hearing requests perfect the mechanism of a free and Funds, Inc., Federated MDT Series, should be received by the Commission open market. Federated MDT Stock Trust, Federated by 5:30 p.m. on July 17, 2015, and Managed Pool Series, Federated should be accompanied by proof of IV. Conclusion Municipal Securities Fund, Inc., service on applicants, in the form of an IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, Federated Municipal Securities Income affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, Trust, Federated Premier Intermediate service. Pursuant to rule 0–5 under the that the proposed rule change (SR– Municipal Income Fund, Federated Act, hearing requests should state the CBOE–2015–047) be, and hereby is, Premier Municipal Income Fund, nature of the writer’s interest, any facts approved. Federated Short-Intermediate Duration bearing upon the desirability of a For the Commission, by the Division of Municipal Trust, Federated Total Return hearing on the matter, the reason for the Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Government Bond Fund, Federated request, and the issues contested. authority.11 Total Return Series, Inc., Federated U.S. Persons who wish to be notified of a Robert W. Errett, Government Securities Fund: 1–3 Years, hearing may request notification by Deputy Secretary. Federated U.S. Government Securities writing to the Commission’s Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–16087 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Fund: 2–5 Years, Federated World ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Investment Series, Inc., Intermediate and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street Municipal Trust, Edward Jones Money NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. Market Fund, Money Market Applicants, c/o Peter Germain, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Obligations Trust (each such registered Federated Investors, Inc., Federated COMMISSION management investment company or Investors Tower, 1001 Liberty Avenue, [Investment Company Act Release No. series thereof, a ‘‘Federated Fund’’); Pittsburgh, PA 15222–3779. 31697; File No. 812–13875–47] Federated Advisory Services Company, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federated Equity Management Company Bruce R. MacNeil, Senior Counsel, at Cash Trust Series, Inc., et al.; Notice of of Pennsylvania, Federated Global (202) 551–6817 or Daniele Marchesani, Application Investment Management Corp., Branch Chief, at (202) 551–6821 Federated Investment Counseling, June 24, 2015. (Division of Investment Management, Federated Investment Management Chief Counsel’s Office). AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Company, Federated MDTA LLC, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission (‘‘Commission’’). Passport Research, Ltd., Federated ACTION: Notice of an application for an following is a summary of the Securities Corp. (each, an Adviser, and application. The complete application order pursuant to sections 6(c) and 17(b) collectively, the ‘‘Advisers’’) and any of the Investment Company Act of 1940 may be obtained via the Commission’s other registered management investment Web site by searching for the file (the ‘‘Act’’) for an exemption from company or series thereof for which a section 17(a) of the Act. number, or for an applicant using the person controlling, controlled by, or Company name box, at http:// SUMMARY: Summary of the Application: under common control with Federated www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by Applicants request an order (‘‘Order’’) Investors, Inc., a Pennsylvania calling (202) 551–8090. that would permit certain registered corporation (‘‘Federated’’), serves as management investment companies to investment adviser (included in the Applicants’ Representations engage in certain primary and secondary term ‘‘Adviser,’’ and any such company 1. Each Fund is an open-end or market transactions in fixed-income or series thereof, together with the closed-end management investment securities (the ‘‘Securities Federated Funds, the ‘‘Funds,’’ and company registered under the Act and 1 Transactions’’) on a principal basis with individually, a ‘‘Fund’’). is organized as a statutory trust, certain broker-dealers and banks that are DATES: Filing Dates: The application was business trust, or corporation under the affiliated persons of the registered filed on March 1, 2011 and amended on laws of Delaware, Maryland, or management investment companies August 29, 2011, July 3, 2012, December Massachusetts. The Funds have a solely by virtue of non-controlling 7, 2012, August 29, 2013, June 15, 2015 variety of investment objectives, but ownership interests in such investment and June 22, 2015. each may invest a portion of its assets companies. Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An in fixed-income securities. The fixed- Applicants: Cash Trust Series, Inc., order granting the application will be income securities in which the Funds Federated Adjustable Rate Securities issued unless the Commission orders a may invest include, but are not limited Fund, Federated Core Trust, Federated hearing. Interested persons may request to, government securities, municipal Core Trust II, L.P., Federated Core Trust a hearing by writing to the securities, tender option bonds, taxable III, Federated Enhanced Treasury Commission’s Secretary and serving and tax-exempt money market Income Fund, Federated Equity Funds, securities, repurchase agreements, asset- Federated Equity Income Fund, Inc., 1 All entities that currently intend to rely on the and mortgage-backed securities, requested Order are named as applicants. Any other Federated Fixed Income Securities, Inc., entity that relies on the Order in the future will corporate issues and syndicated loans, Federated Global Allocation Fund, comply with the terms and conditions of the as the Funds’ respective investment Federated Government Income application. No Fund may rely on the requested objectives, policies and restrictions Securities, Inc., Federated Government Order unless the Adviser serves as the primary allow. investment adviser to such Fund. On October 27, Income Trust, Federated High Income 1993, the Commission issued an exemptive order 2. The Advisers are direct or indirect Bond Fund, Inc., Federated High Yield under section 17(b) of the Act permitting the Funds wholly-owned subsidiaries of Trust, Federated Income Securities to engage in transactions with certain affiliated Federated. Each Adviser is registered as Trust, Federated Index Trust, Federated banks (A.T. Ohio Tax-Free Money Fund, et al., an investment adviser under the Investment Company Act Release Nos. 19737 (Sept. Institutional Trust, Federated Insurance 28, 1993) (notice) and 19816 (Oct. 27, 1993) (order)) Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The (‘‘1993 Order’’). The Order sought herein would not Advisers act as investment advisers to 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). supersede the 1993 Order. the Funds and may supervise one or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37702 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices more sub-advisers with respect to securities, to the detriment of their same nature that are being carried out certain Funds. shareholders. during the same period with respect to 3. Applicants state that, because of 5. Therefore, applicants request the unaffiliated institutional clients of the consolidation in the financial services Order pursuant to sections 6(c) and Affiliated Dealer. industry, combined with an increase in 17(b) of the Act exempting from section 7. Applicants represent that there is fund industry assets, a few major 17(a) of the Act 2 Securities Transactions not, and will not be, any express or broker-dealers account for a large entered into in the ordinary course of implied understanding between the percentage of the market share in business by a Fund with an Affiliated Advisers and any Affiliated Dealer that trading in fixed-income securities. Dealer under the circumstances, terms will cause a Fund to enter into Applicants state that the decline in the and conditions set forth in the Securities Transactions or give number of broker-dealers and banks application. ‘‘Securities Transactions’’ preference to the Affiliated Dealer in trading in the fixed-income securities in for purposes of the Order are primary effecting such transactions between the which the Funds seek to invest and the and secondary market transactions in Funds and the Affiliated Dealer. 3 increasing importance of the few fixed-income securities executed on a Applicants’ Legal Analysis remaining institutions have increased principal basis between the Funds and 1. Section 17(a) of the Act, in relevant the importance to the Funds of their Affiliated Dealers. An ‘‘Affiliated part, prohibits an affiliated person of a relationships with such entities. For Dealer’’ includes any person, or any registered investment company, or an example, applicants state that, for the affiliated person of a person (‘‘second- affiliated person of such person, acting period January 1, 2014 through tier affiliate’’), who is an affiliated as principal, from selling to or December 31, 2014, there were eighty- person of a Fund solely because such person, directly or indirectly, owns, purchasing from such company any six underwriters in the U.S. high yield security or other property and from bond market and that the applicants controls or holds with power to vote five percent (5%) or more of the borrowing money or other property from currently trade with each of the top ten such company. Section 17(b) of the Act underwriters in this market: JP Morgan, outstanding voting securities of a Fund and such person or affiliated person authorizes the Commission to exempt a Bank of America Merrill Lynch, transaction from section 17(a) of the Act Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan thereof is a (a) broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of if evidence establishes that the terms of Stanley, Barclays, Wells Fargo, Credit the proposed transaction, including the Suisse, RBC and Deutsche Bank. These 1934 (the ‘‘1934 Act’’) or (b) bank excepted from the definition of broker consideration to be paid or received, are entities accounted for 80.2% of the reasonable and fair and do not involve and dealer pursuant to Sections market share for this period. The Funds overreaching on the part of any person 3(a)(4)(B) and 3(a)(5)(C) of the 1934 Act also invest in money market concerned and the proposed transaction and therefore not required to register as instruments issued by these dealers. For is consistent with the policy of each a broker or dealer under the 1934 Act.4 example, during 2014, Federated registered investment company The requested relief would not extend estimates that Barclays, Deutsche Bank, concerned and with the general to primary market Securities JP Morgan, HSBC and RBC issued over purposes of the Act. 9% of the financial commercial paper. Transactions in fixed-income securities, 2. Section 6(c) of the Act, in relevant In addition, as of January 30, 2015, other than repurchase agreements and part, authorizes the Commission to applicants stated that eleven banks or other fixed-income securities that are exempt any person or transaction, or broker-dealers that were part of ‘‘Eligible Securities’’ as defined in rule any class or classes of persons or Federated’s top fifteen dealers in 2014 2a–7 under the Act, of which the transactions, from any provision or maintained customer accounts in one or Affiliated Dealer, or any entity provisions of the Act, if and to the more of the Funds and that the controlling, controlled by or under extent that such exemption is necessary percentage of outstanding voting common control with the Affiliated or appropriate in the public interest and securities held by each of these entities Dealer (such entity, a ‘‘Control consistent with the protection of could rise above 5% of a Fund’s Affiliate’’), is the primary obligor. investors and the purposes fairly 6. Applicants state that all Securities outstanding shares at any time. intended by the policy and provisions of Transactions will originate with the Therefore, applicants state that the the Act. Funds are constantly at risk of being purchasing Fund or its Adviser on 3. Section 2(a)(3) of the Act, in prevented from trading with the most behalf of the Fund. No Affiliated Dealer relevant part, defines ‘‘affiliated person’’ significant dealers in the fixed-income will seek to influence the choice of a of another person to include: (a) Any markets due to circumstances that they broker or dealer for any Securities person directly or indirectly owning, cannot effectively control. Transaction by a Fund. An Affiliated controlling, or holding with power to 4. Applicants assert that the inability Dealer’s participation in any Securities vote, 5% or more of the outstanding of the Funds to execute Securities Transaction will be limited to the voting securities of such other person; Transactions (as defined below) with normal course of sales activities of the (b) any person 5% or more of whose Affiliated Dealers (defined below) outstanding voting securities are 2 Applicants are not seeking any relief from would significantly limit the number of section 10(f), 17(d) or 17(e) of the Act or rules 17d– directly or indirectly owned by, broker-dealers and banks available to 1 and 17e–1 thereunder. controlled, or held with power to vote, the Funds, the universe of 3 Fixed-income securities for purposes of the by such person; and (c) any person underwritings in which the Funds may Order include interests in syndicated loans, as well directly or indirectly controlling, participate, and the Securities as convertible bonds and convertible preferred controlled by, or under common control stock. Transactions in which the Funds may 4 No director, officer or employee of the Funds or with, such other person. engage. Applicants state that the the Advisers is or will be a director, officer or 4. Section 2(a)(9) of the Act, in inability to effect Securities employee of an Affiliated Dealer. Additionally, the relevant part, defines ‘‘control’’ as ‘‘the Transactions with Affiliated Dealers Chairman of the Funds’ board of directors or power to exercise a controlling trustees (‘‘Board’’) is not an interested person of the would impair an Advisers’ flexibility in Funds, as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act, and influence over the management or portfolio management and the ability of seven of the nine members of the Funds’ Board are policies of a company, unless such the Funds to purchase and sell portfolio independent trustees or directors. power is solely the result of an official VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37703 position with such company.’’ Section affiliated person of such Affiliated Affiliated Dealers in each such category, 2(a)(9) also provides that any person Dealer. among other things. who owns beneficially, either directly or 2. An Affiliated Dealer’s participation B. Transactional through one or more controlled in any Securities Transaction will be companies, more than 25% of the voting limited to the normal course of sales With respect to each Securities securities of a company shall be activities of the same nature that are Transaction entered into or effected presumed to control such company, and being carried out during the same pursuant to the Order: that any person who does not so own period with respect to unaffiliated 5. Each Fund’s Board, including a more than 25% of the voting securities institutional customers of the Affiliated majority of the disinterested Board of any company shall be presumed not Dealer. In particular, no Adviser will members (‘‘Necessary Majority’’), will to control such company. directly or indirectly consult with any approve, and the Fund will implement, 5. Applicants state that if a bank or Affiliated Dealer concerning Securities procedures governing all Securities broker-dealer acquires five percent or Transactions, or the selection of a broker Transactions pursuant to the Order and more of the outstanding voting or dealer for any Securities Transaction the Fund’s Board will no less frequently securities of a Fund, the bank or broker- placed or to be placed on behalf of a than quarterly review all such Securities dealer would become an affiliated Fund. No Affiliated Dealer will seek to Transactions and receive and review a person of the Fund and a second-tier influence the choice of broker or dealer report (the ‘‘Report’’) of those Securities affiliate of the other Funds within the for any Securities Transaction by a Transactions. The Report will be meaning of section 2(a)(3) of the Act (by Fund. prepared by the Fund’s Adviser, and virtue of the Funds’ being under the 3. The Compliance Department of the reviewed and approved by the Fund’s common control of the Advisers or Advisers will prepare guidelines for Chief Compliance Officer, will indicate common directors or officers). their respective personnel to make for each Securities Transaction that the 6. Applicants submit that the primary certain that Securities Transactions terms and conditions of the Order have purpose of section 17(a) is to prevent a effected pursuant to the Order comply been satisfied, and will include a person with the power to control or with its terms and conditions, and that discussion of any significant changes in influence a registered investment the Advisers maintain an arm’s-length the volume, type or terms of Securities company from engaging in self-dealing relationship with the Affiliated Dealers. Transactions between the relevant Fund or overreaching, to the detriment of the The Compliance Department of the and the Affiliated Dealer, the reasons for investment company’s shareholders. Advisers will monitor periodically the these changes, and a determination that Applicants submit that the policies activities of the Advisers to make such changes are legitimate. which section 17(a) of the Act was certain that the terms and conditions of 6. For each Securities Transaction, the meant to further are not implicated in the Order are met. Advisers will adhere to a ‘‘best the context of the requested Order 4. Each Fund’s Board will annually execution’’ standard, will consider only because the Affiliated Dealers are not in determine whether the level of the interests of the Fund, and will not a position to cause a Fund to enter into Securities Transactions executed with take into account the impact of the a Securities Transaction or otherwise Affiliated Dealers is appropriate based Fund’s investment decision on the influence portfolio decisions by the upon its review, without limitation, of Affiliated Dealer. Before entering into Advisers on behalf of the Funds. the following materials to be prepared any Securities Transaction, the Adviser Applicants state that, as a result, no by the Advisers: will determine that the transaction is Affiliated Dealer is in a position to (a) a report on the Affiliated Dealers’ consistent with the investment cause a Fund to enter into Securities market share in fixed-income securities objectives and policies of the Fund and Transactions that are not in the best for the previous twelve (12) months; and is in the best interests of the Fund and interests of the Fund and its (b) a memorandum explaining why its shareholders. shareholders. Applicants also state that continued reliance on the Order is in 7. A primary market Securities there will be no conflict of interest the best interests of the Funds. Such Transaction will not involve the associated with an Adviser’s decision to memorandum will discuss the findings purchase of a fixed-income security of engage in a Securities Transaction with of the Fixed Income Brokerage Practices which the Affiliated Dealer to the an Affiliated Dealer on behalf of a Fund. Committee which reviews broker transaction, or one of its Control Applicants further submit that the performance and execution on a Affiliates, is the primary obligor, unless conditions to the requested Order quarterly basis. Such memorandum will the transaction is for repurchase provide further protections against any also include an analysis of the current agreements or Eligible Securities, and possibility of self-dealing or fixed-income securities markets and such Affiliated Dealer, and any of its overreaching by the Affiliated Dealers. such other materials as the Board may Control Affiliates, does not hold 5% or Therefore, applicants submit that the request in order to aid it in its review, more of the outstanding voting requested Order satisfies the statutory including, but not limited to, data securities of a Fund defined as a standards for relief. showing that the exclusion of the ‘‘Money Market Fund’’ in the General Affiliated Dealers would deny the Instructions to Form N–1A, which holds Applicants’ Conditions Funds opportunities for investment and itself out as a money market fund and Applicants agree that the Order improved execution. meets the maturity, quality, and granting the requested relief will be Based on such report and diversification requirements of rule 2a– subject to the following conditions: memorandum, without limitation, the 7 under the Act. Board will further, in a separate 8. The Advisers to the Funds will A. Structural determination, consider annually maintain a credit committee for Eligible 1. No Fund will engage in Securities whether continued reliance by the Securities and an execution assessment Transactions in reliance on the Funds on the Order is appropriate for committee for trading in fixed-income requested Order with any Affiliated each category of fixed-income securities securities. A Fund may purchase from Dealer which controls any Fund, within (such categories to be reasonably an Affiliated Dealer an Eligible Security the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act, defined by the Advisers), as evidenced for which the Affiliated Dealer or a or with any Affiliated Dealer that is an by the aggregate market share of the Control Affiliate is the primary obligor VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37704 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices only if (a) the credit committee has prices, except that if, after reasonable are required by law to be granted to determined that the Affiliated Dealer’s efforts, quotations are unavailable from existing securities holders of the issuer). or the Control Affiliate’s primary two such dealers, only one other 12. With respect to a primary market obligations, or if the Eligible Security is competitive quotation is required. For transaction in which an Affiliated guaranteed by another entity, the other each such transaction, the Adviser will Dealer offers as principal fixed-income entity’s obligations, present minimal determine, based upon the quotations securities on a continuing, rather than a credit risks, as currently required by and such other relevant information fixed, basis a Fund will enter into such rule 2a–7(c) under the Act and (b) the (such as available transaction prices and execution assessment committee any other information regarding the transactions only where the Adviser has reviews the terms of the purchase at its value of the securities) as is reasonably determined, based upon relevant next regular meeting and addresses any available to the Adviser, that the price information reasonably available to the concerns regarding the terms of available from the Affiliated Dealer is at Adviser, that the yield on such fixed- purchase, including whether the Funds least as favorable as that available from income securities is at least equal to the may engage in future Eligible Securities other sources. yield of Comparable Securities at that transactions with such Affiliated Dealer. (a) With respect to each such time. Before any such fixed-income The Advisers’ Compliance Department transaction involving repurchase securities are purchased pursuant to the will monitor the meetings of the credit agreements, a Fund will enter into such Order, the Fund or the Adviser will and execution assessment committees agreements only where the Adviser has obtain competitive quotations with and will include the committees’ determined, based upon relevant respect to yields on fixed-income determinations in the Report provided information reasonably available to the securities comparable to the type of to the Board. Adviser, that the income to be earned fixed-income securities involved from at 9. Each Fund will (a) for so long as the from the repurchase agreement is at least two dealers that are not affiliated Order is relied upon, maintain and least equal to that available from other persons of the Affiliated Dealer or the preserve in an easily accessible place a sources. Before any repurchase Adviser, and that are in a position to written copy of the procedures and agreements are entered into pursuant to quote favorable market yields, except conditions (and any modifications the exemption, the Fund or the Adviser thereto) that are described herein, and that if, after reasonable efforts, will obtain competitive quotations with quotations are unavailable from two (b) maintain and preserve for a period respect to repurchase agreements of not less than six years from the end such dealers, only one other competitive comparable to the type of repurchase quotation is required. of the fiscal year in which any agreement involved from at least two Securities Transaction in which the dealers that are not affiliated persons of 13. Prior to entering into a Securities Fund’s Adviser knows that both an the Affiliated Dealer or the Adviser, Transaction with an Affiliated Dealer, Affiliated Dealer and the Fund directly except that if, after reasonable efforts, the Fund’s Adviser will determine that or indirectly have an interest occurs, the quotations are unavailable from two the Fund needs the ability to transact first two years in an easily accessible such dealers, only one other competitive with the Affiliated Dealer based upon a place, a written record of each such quotation is required. reasonable determination: transaction setting forth a description of the security purchased or sold by the (b) With respect to each such (a) that the Fund could not obtain as Fund, a description of the Affiliated transaction involving variable rate favorable an execution for the Security Dealer’s, or the Affiliated Dealer’s demand notes for which dealer quotes Transaction by trading with an affiliated person’s, interest or role in the are not ordinarily available, a Fund will unaffiliated dealer; and only undertake purchases and sales transaction, the terms of the transaction, (b) that there is no similar investment where the Adviser has determined, and the information or materials upon opportunity suitable for and more which the determination was made that based on relevant information reasonably available to the Adviser, that advantageous to the Fund that could be such transaction was made in obtained from an unaffiliated dealer. accordance with the procedures set the income earned from the variable rate 14. The commission, fee, spread, or forth above and conditions in the demand note is at least equal to that of application. variable rate demand notes of other remuneration to be received by an 10. Except as otherwise provided comparable quality that are available Affiliated Dealer will be reasonable and below, before any secondary market from other sources. fair compared to the commission, fee, principal transaction is entered into 11. Except as otherwise provided spread, or other remuneration received between a Fund and an Affiliated below, with respect to securities offered by other persons in connection with Dealer, the Fund’s Adviser will obtain a in a primary market underwritten comparable transactions involving competitive quotation for the same transaction a Fund will undertake such similar securities being purchased and securities (or in the case of securities for purchase from the Affiliated Dealer only sold during a comparable period of which quotations for the same securities where the Adviser has determined, time. based upon relevant information are not available, a competitive For the Commission, by the Division of quotation for Comparable Securities 5) reasonably available to the Adviser, that the securities were purchased at a price Investment Management, under delegated from at least two dealers that are not authority. affiliated persons of the Affiliated that is no more than the price paid by Robert W. Errett, Dealer or the Adviser and that are in a each other purchaser of securities from position to quote favorable market the Affiliated Dealer or other members Deputy Secretary. of the underwriting syndicate in that [FR Doc. 2015–16091 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 5 The term ‘‘Comparable Securities’’ refers to offering or in any concurrent offering of BILLING CODE 8011–01–P securities with substantially identical maturities, the securities, and on the same terms as credit risk and repayment terms (including floating such other purchasers (except in the or fixed-rate coupons, attached options, or any other provisions that affect the expected size or case of an offering conducted under the timing of the payments from the securities) as the laws of a country other than the United securities to be purchased or sold. States, for any rights to purchase that VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37705 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Foods, LLC are owned by LaSalle ACTION: Notice of Action Subject to Capital Group, L.P., an Associate of Intergovernmental Review Under [License No. 05/05–0298] LaSalle Capital Group II–A. L.P., Executive Order 12372. LaSalle Capital Group II–A, L.P.; Notice therefore this transaction is considered Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 to be financing a Small Business for the SUMMARY: The Small Business of the Small Business Investment Act, purpose of purchasing property from an Administration (SBA) is notifying the Conflicts of Interest Associate and it requires SBA prior public that it intends to fund grant written exemption. applications for 22 existing Small Notice is hereby given that LaSalle Notice is hereby given that any Business Development Centers (SBDCs) Capital Group II–A, L.P., 70 West interested person may submit written beginning October 1, 2015 subject to the Madison Street, Suite 5710, Chicago, comments on the transaction within availability of funds. A description of Illinois, 60602, a Federal Licensee under fifteen days of the date of this the SBDC program is contained in the the Small Business Investment Act of publication to the Associate supplementary information below. 1958, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’), in Administrator for the Office of The SBA is publishing this notice at connection with the financing of a small Investment and Innovation, U.S. Small least 90 days before the expected concern, has sought an exemption under Business Administration, 409 Third funding date. The SBDCs mailing Section 312 of the Act and Section Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. addresses listed below are participating 107.730, Financings which Constitute Dated: June 24, 2015. in the intergovernmental review Conflicts of Interest of the Small John R Williams, process. A copy of this notice also is Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’) Rules being furnished to the respective State and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Office of Investment and Innovation. single points of contact designated LaSalle Capital Group II–A, L.P. is under the Executive Order. providing debt and equity financing to [FR Doc. 2015–16144 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] DATES: Westminster Foods II, LLC, 70 West BILLING CODE 8025–01–P A State single point of contact Madison Street, Suite 5710, Chicago, and other interested State or local Illinois, 60602. Some of the proceeds entities may submit written comments SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION will be used to purchase Westminster regarding funding of an SBDC within 30 Foods, LLC. days from the date of publication of this Action Subject to Intergovernmental notice. Please address any comments to The financing is brought within the Review Under Executive Order 12372 purview of § 107.730(a)(5) of the the relevant SBDC State Director listed Regulations because a majority of the AGENCY: U.S. Small Business below. membership units of Westminster Administration. ADDRESSES: ADDRESSES OF RELEVANT SBDC STATE DIRECTORS Mr. Rande Kessler, SBDC State Director, University of Louisiana, Mon- Ms. Kristina Oliver, SBDC State Director, West Virginia Development roe, 700 University Avenue, Admin 2–101, Monroe, LA 71209–6435, Office, 1900 Kanawha Blvd., Capitol Complex, Building 6, Room (318) 342–5506. 652, Charleston, WV 25305, (304) 558–2960. Mr. Mike Bowman, SBDC State Director, University of Delaware, One Ms. Carmen Marti, SBDC Director, Inter American University of Puerto Innovation Way, Suite 301, Newark, DE 19711, (302) 831–4283. Rico, 416 Ponce de Leon Avenue, Union Plaza, Seventh Floor, San Juan, PR 00918, (787) 763–6811. Ms. Becky Naugle, SBDC State Director, University of Kentucky, One Ms. Rene Sprow, SBDC State Director, Univ. of Maryland@College Quality Street, Lexington, KY 40507, (859) 257–7668. Park, 7100 Baltimore Avenue, Suite 402, Baltimore, MD 20740, (301) 403–8300. Mr. Chris Bouchard, SBDC State Director, University of Missouri, 410 Ms. Lisa Shimkat, SBDC State Director, Iowa State University, 2321 South Sixth Street, 200 Engineering North, Columbia, MO 65211, North Loop Drive, Suite 202, Ames, IA 50010–8218, (515) 294– (573) 884–1555. 2037. Ms. Leonor Dottin-Carrillo, SBDC Director, University of the Virgin Is- lands, 8000 Niskey Center, Suite 720, St. Thomas, USVI 00802– 5804, (340) 776–3206. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: regional economic development through assistance for veterans, both active duty Vicky Mundt, Director of Financial job creation and retention as a result of and personnel returning from Oversight, Office of Small Business the extensive one-on-one long-term deployment; disaster recovery Development Centers, U.S. Small counseling, training and specialized assistance; IRS, EPA, and OSHA Business Administration, 409 Third services they receive from the SBDCs. regulatory compliance; as well as Street SW., Sixth Floor, Washington, DC The SBDCs are made up of a unique research and development. Based on 20416. collaboration of SBA, state and local client needs, business trends and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: governments, and private sector funding individual business requirements, resources. SBDCs modify their services to meet the Description of the SBDC Program SBDCs provide clients with evolving needs through more than 900 Small Business Development Centers professional business assistance local service delivery points across the (SBDCs) provide a wide array of regarding business plans, market nation and all U.S. Territories. technical assistance to small businesses research, financial preparation SBDCs deliver these services to small and aspiring entrepreneurs supporting packages, cash flow, and procurement business concerns using an effective business performance and sustainability contracts. Special emphasis areas education network of 63 Lead Centers and enhancing the creation of new include: Manufacturing; international reaching out to both rural and urban businesses entities. These small trade and export assistance; e- areas, serving entrepreneurs of all types businesses in turn foster local and commerce; technology transfer; throughout a state or region. SBDCs can VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37706 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices be found in every U.S. state, the District compliance with its negotiated (c) develop working relationships of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, Cooperative Agreement with the SBA. with financial institutions, the American Samoa and the U.S. Virgin OSBDC has six Program Managers who investment communities, professional Islands. SBDCs provide professional each have a portfolio of 10–12 SBDCs associations, private consultants and business counseling free of charge along for which they are responsible for SBDC local small business groups; with low cost training. performance management. OSBDC also (d) establish a lead center which To reach the millions of small has three Grants Managers along with a operates and oversees a statewide or businesses across the U.S., SBDC finance staff who oversee the issuance regional network of SBDC service assistance is available virtually and budget aspects of the Cooperative centers; anywhere: from rural circuit riders in Agreement. SBDCs operate on the basis (e) have a full-time Director; and Alaska to marine services in the Outer of an annual proposed plan to provide Banks of North Carolina. Many centers assistance within a state or geographic (f) expend at least 80 percent of the are located within or are co-located area. The initial plan must have the Federal funds to provide direct client with: Local economic development written approval of the Governor. Non- services to small businesses. entities; chambers of commerce; Federal funds must match Federal funds Scott Henry, Department of Defense’s Procurement by 1:1. Acting Associate Administrator, Office of Technical Assistance Centers; The SBDC Services Small Business Development Centers. Department of Commerce’s An SBDC must have a full range of [FR Doc. 2015–16145 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Manufacturing Extension Partnership BILLING CODE 8025–01–P sites; and community colleges. Some business development and technical SBDCs also have International Trade assistance services in its area of Centers and some are classified by a operations, supporting local small SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION special emphasis on Technology. business needs, SBA priorities and Lead Center SBDCs hosts include: established SBDC program objectives. Actions Subject to Intergovernmental • 48 University-sponsored Lead Services include training and Review SBDCs professional business advising to 2 SBDC locations are located at existing and prospective small business AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Historically Black Colleges and owners in all areas of small firm Administration. establishment and growth, including: Universities (Howard University in ACTION: Notice of action subject to Washington, DC and the University of management; online and social media and marketing; finance and access to intergovernmental review under the Virgin Islands, U.S.V.I.). Executive Order 12372. • 8 Community college-sponsored capital; exporting and international trade; manufacturing; and business Lead SBDCs SUMMARY: The Small Business operations, including disaster Dallas-TX, UT, OR, NM, AZ, San Administration (SBA) is notifying the Diego-CA, Los Angeles, CA, and mitigation. The SBA district office and the SBDC public that it intends to fund grant American Samoa applications for 41 existing Small • 7 State-sponsored Lead SBDCs (CO, negotiate annually through this funding Business Development Centers (SBDCs) IL, IN, MN, MT, OH, & WV). announcement the specific mix of services and best use of program funds beginning January 1, 2016 subject to the Program Objectives to meet mutually agreed upon annual availability of funds. A description of The SBDC program uses Federal milestones, giving particular attention to the SBDC program is contained in the funds to leverage the resources of states, SBA’s annual priorities and special supplementary information. academic institutions and the private emphasis groups, including veterans, The SBA is publishing this notice at sector to: women, the disabled, and other least 90 days before the expected (a) Strengthen the nation’s small minorities. funding date. The SBDCs mailing business communities; addresses listed below are participating (b) increase local economic growth; SBDC Program Requirements in the intergovernmental review (c) ensure inclusiveness by An SBDC must meet required process. A copy of this notice also is broadening the impact of SBDC programmatic and financial being furnished to the respective State technical assistance to underserved requirements established by statute, single points of contact designated markets. regulations, other program directive and under the Executive Order. its Cooperative Agreement. Following SBDC Program Organization DATES: A State single point of contact these guidelines an SBDC must: and other interested State or local Through a partnership between SBA (a) Provide services that are accessible entities may submit written comments and institutions of higher education and to all persons, especially those who regarding funding of an SBDC within 30 state government, a network of 63 lead identify as disabled; SBDCs are managed by the Office of (b) open all service centers during days from the date of publication of this Small Business Development Centers normal business hours of the notice. Please address any comments to (OSBDC). The local District Offices have community or during the normal the relevant SBDC State Director listed a Project Officer to ensure each SBDC business hours of its state or academic below. provides quality services and is in Host Organization, throughout the year; ADDRESSES: ADDRESSES OF RELEVANT SBDC STATE DIRECTORS Mr. Sherman Wilkinson, SBDC State Director, Salt Lake Community Mr. Herbert Thweatt, SBDC Director, American Samoa Community College, 9750 South 300 West, Sandy, UT 84070, (801) 957–5384. College, P.O. Box 2609, Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799, (684) 699–4830 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37707 ADDRESSES OF RELEVANT SBDC STATE DIRECTORS—Continued Ms. Michele Abraham, SBDC State Director, University of South Caro- Mr. Michael Myhre, SBDC State Director, University of West Florida, lina, 1705 College Street, Columbia, SC 29208, (803) 777–4555. 11000 University Parkway, Bldg. 38, Pensacola, FL 32514, (850) 473–7802 Ms. Diane R. Howerton, SBDC Regional Director, University of Cali- Mr. Sam Males, SBDC State Director, University of Nevada Reno, Col- fornia, Merced, 550 East Shaw, Suite 100, Fresno, CA 93710, (559) lege of Business Admin., Room 441, Reno, NV 89557–0100, (775) 241–6590. 784–1717. Mr. Marquise Jackson, Acting SBDC Regional Director, Southwestern Community College, 880 National City Blvd., National City, CA 91950, (619) 216–6718. Mr. Casey Jeszenka, SBDC Network Director, University of Guam, Mr. Timothy Mittan, Acting SBDC Regional Director, Long Beach Com- P.O. Box 5014—U.O.G. Station, Mangilao, GU 96923, (671) 735– munity College, 4901 E Carson Street, MC 05, Long Beach, CA 2590. 90808, (562) 938–5020. Mr. Dan Ripke, SBDC Regional Director, California State University, Ms. Kristin Johnson, SBDC Regional Director, Humboldt State Univer- Chico, Building 35, CSU Chico, Chico, CA 95929, (530) 898–4598. sity, Office of Economic & Community Dev., 1 Harpst Street, House 71, Room 110, Arcata, CA 95521, (707) 826–3920. Ms. Katrina Smith, Acting SBDC Regional Director, Orange County/In- Ms. Janice Washington, SBDC State Director, Maricopa County land Empire Network, 800 North State College Blvd., SGMH 5313, Comm. College, 2411 West 14th Street, Suite 132, Tempe, AZ Fullerton, CA 92831, (657) 278–3195. 85281–6942, (480) 731–8722. Ms. Janet Rodrick, SBDC State Director, University of Arkansas, 2801 Mr. Darrell Brown, SBDC Executive Director, Howard University, 2600 South University Avenue, Little Rock, AR 72204, (501) 683–7700. 6th Street NW., Washington, DC 20059, (202) 806–1550. Mr. Allan Adams, SBDC State Director, University of Georgia, Chic- Mr. David Martin, SBDC State Director, University of North Dakota, opee Complex, 1180 East Broad Street, Athens, GA 30602, (706) Bank of North Dakota Building, 1200 Memorial Highway, Bismarck, 542–6762. ND 58504, (701) 715–2475. Mr. Rich Grogan, SBDC State Director, University of New Hampshire, Dr. Gerald Sonnenfeld, Interim SBDC State Director, University of 10 Garrison Ave., Durham, NH 03824, (603) 862–1446. Rhode Island, 75 Lower College Road, Kingston, RI 02881, (401) 874–4576. Mr. Keith Brophy, State Director, 1034 L. William Seidman Center, 50 Front Avenue SW., Grand Rapids, MI 49504, (616) 331–7371. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: assistance; IRS, EPA, and OSHA • 48 University-sponsored Lead Vicky Mundt, Director of Financial regulatory compliance; as well as SBDCs, 2 SBDC locations are located at Oversight, Office of Small Business research and development. Based on Historically Black Colleges and Development Centers, U.S. Small client needs, business trends and Universities (Howard University in Business Administration, 409 Third individual business requirements, Washington, DC and the University of Street SW., Sixth Floor, Washington, DC SBDCs modify their services to meet the the Virgin Islands, U.S.V.I.). 20416. evolving needs through more than 900 • 8 Community college-sponsored SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: local service delivery points across the Lead SBDCs, Dallas-TX, UT, OR, NM, nation and all U.S. Territories. AZ, San Diego-CA, Los Angeles, CA, Description of the SBDC Program SBDCs deliver these services to small and American Samoa. Small Business Development Centers business concerns using an effective • 7 State-sponsored Lead SBDCs (CO, (SBDCs) provide a wide array of education network of 63 Lead Centers IL, IN, MN, MT, OH, & WV). technical assistance to small businesses reaching out to both rural and urban and aspiring entrepreneurs supporting areas, serving entrepreneurs of all types Program Objectives business performance and sustainability throughout a state or region. SBDCs can The SBDC program uses Federal and enhancing the creation of new be found in every U.S. state, the District funds to leverage the resources of states, businesses entities. These small of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, academic institutions and the private businesses in turn foster local and American Samoa and the U.S. Virgin sector to: regional economic development through Islands. SBDCs provide professional (a) Strengthen the nation’s small job creation and retention as a result of business counseling free of charge along business communities; the extensive one-on-one long-term with low cost training. (b) increase local economic growth; counseling, training and specialized To reach the millions of small (c) ensure inclusiveness by services they receive from the SBDCs. businesses across the U.S., SBDC broadening the impact of SBDC The SBDCs are made up of a unique assistance is available virtually technical assistance to underserved collaboration of SBA, state and local anywhere: From rural circuit riders in markets. governments, and private sector funding Alaska to marine services in the Outer SBDC Program Organization resources. Banks of North Carolina. Many centers SBDCs provide clients with are located within or are co-located Through a partnership between SBA professional business assistance with: Local economic development and institutions of higher education and regarding business plans, market entities; chambers of commerce; state government, a network of 63 lead research, financial preparation Department of Defense’s Procurement SBDCs are managed by the Office of packages, cash flow, and procurement Technical Assistance Centers; The Small Business Development Centers contracts. Special emphasis areas Department of Commerce’s (OSBDC). The local District Offices have include: Manufacturing; international Manufacturing Extension Partnership a Project Officer to ensure each SBDC trade and export assistance; e- sites; and community colleges. Some provides quality services and is in commerce; technology transfer; SBDCs also have International Trade compliance with its negotiated assistance for veterans, both active duty Centers and some are classified by a Cooperative Agreement with the SBA. and personnel returning from special emphasis on Technology. OSBDC has six Program Managers who deployment; disaster recovery Lead Center SBDCs hosts include: each have a portfolio of 10–12 SBDCs VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37708 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices for which they are responsible for SBDC (b) open all service centers during collection techniques or other forms of performance management. OSBDC also normal business hours of the information technology. Mail, email, or has three Grants Managers along with a community or during the normal fax your comments and finance staff who oversee the issuance business hours of its state or academic recommendations on the information and budget aspects of the Cooperative Host Organization, throughout the year; collection(s) to the OMB Desk Officer Agreement. SBDCs operate on the basis (c) develop working relationships and SSA Reports Clearance Officer at of an annual proposed plan to provide with financial institutions, the the following addresses or fax numbers. assistance within a state or geographic investment communities, professional (OMB), Office of Management and area. The initial plan must have the associations, private consultants and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for SSA, written approval of the Governor. Non- local small business groups; Fax: 202–395–6974, Email address: Federal funds must match Federal funds (d) establish a lead center which [email protected], by 1:1. operates and oversees a statewide or (SSA), Social Security Administration, regional network of SBDC service SBDC Services OLCA, Attn: Reports Clearance centers; Director, 3100 West High Rise, 6401 An SBDC must have a full range of (e) have a full-time Director; and Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21235, business development and technical (f) expend at least 80 percent of the Fax: 410–966–2830, Email address: assistance services in its area of Federal funds to provide direct client [email protected]. operations, supporting local small services to small businesses. business needs, SBA priorities and Or you may submit your comments established SBDC program objectives. Scott Henry, online through www.regulations.gov, Services include training and Acting Associate Administrator, Office of referencing Docket ID Number [SSA– professional business advising to Small Business Development Centers. 2015–0041]. existing and prospective small business [FR Doc. 2015–16149 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] I. The information collections below owners in all areas of small firm BILLING CODE 8025–01–P are pending at SSA. SSA will submit establishment and growth, including: them to OMB within 60 days from the Management; online and social media date of this notice. To be sure we and marketing; finance and access to SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION consider your comments, we must receive them no later than August 31, capital; exporting and international [Docket No: SSA–2015–0041] trade; manufacturing; and business 2015. Individuals can obtain copies of the collection instruments by writing to operations, including disaster Agency Information Collection the above email address. mitigation. Activities: Proposed Request and The SBA district office and the SBDC Comment Request 1. Representative Payee Report of negotiate annually through this funding Benefits and Dedicated Account—20 announcement the specific mix of The Social Security Administration CFR 416.546, 416.635, 416.640, and services and best use of program funds (SSA) publishes a list of information 416.665—0960–0576. SSA requires to meet mutually agreed upon annual collection packages requiring clearance representative payees (RPs) to submit a milestones, giving particular attention to by the Office of Management and written report accounting for the use of SBA’s annual priorities and special Budget (OMB) in compliance with money paid to Social Security or emphasis groups, including veterans, Public Law 104–13, the Paperwork Supplemental Security Income (SSI) women, the disabled, and other Reduction Act of 1995, effective October recipients, and to establish and minorities. 1, 1995. This notice includes revisions maintain a dedicated account for these and one extension of OMB-approved payments. SSA uses Form SSA–6233 to: SBDC Program Requirements information collections, as well as one (1) Ensure the RPs use the payments for An SBDC must meet required collection in use without an OMB the recipient’s current maintenance and programmatic and financial number. personal needs; and (2) confirm the requirements established by statute, SSA is soliciting comments on the expenditures of funds from the regulations, other program directive and accuracy of the agency’s burden dedicated account remain in its Cooperative Agreement. Following estimate; the need for the information; compliance with the law. Respondents these guidelines an SBDC must: its practical utility; ways to enhance its are RPs for SSI and Social Security (a) Provide services that are as quality, utility, and clarity; and ways to recipients. accessible to all persons, especially minimize burden on respondents, Type of Request: Revision of an OMB- those who identify as disabled; including the use of automated approved information collection. Average bur- Number of re- Frequency of den per re- Estimated total Modality of completion spondents response sponse annual burden (minutes) (hours) SSA–6233 ...... 30,000 1 20 10,000 2. Certification of Prisoner Identity can issue a replacement Social Security to verify the identity of certain Information—20 CFR 422.107—0960– card, applicants must show SSA proof incarcerated U.S. citizens who need 0688. Inmates of Federal, State, or local of their identity. People who are in replacement Social Security cards. prisons may need a Social Security card prison for an extended period typically Information prison officials provide as verification of their Social Security do not have current identity documents. comes from the official prison files, sent number for school or work programs, or Therefore, under formal written on correctional facility letterhead. SSA as proof of employment eligibility upon agreement with the correctional uses this information to establish the release from incarceration. Before SSA institution, SSA allows prison officials applicant’s identity in the replacement VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37709 Social Security card process. The certify the identity of prisoners applying Type of Request: Extension of an respondents are prison officials who for replacement Social Security cards. OMB-approved Information Collection. Average bur- Number of re- Frequency of (Number of re- den per re- Estimated total Modality of completion spondents response sponses) sponse annual burden (minutes) (hours) Verification of Prisoner Identity Statements ...... 1,000 200 (200,000) 3 10,000 II. SSA submitted the information for medical care or services for liability information using Form SSA– collection below to OMB for clearance. Medicaid beneficiaries. Regulations at 8019–U2, and provides that information Your comments regarding the 42 CFR 433.136 through 433.139 require to the Medicaid state agencies. The information collection would be most Medicaid state agencies to obtain this Medicaid state agencies use the useful if OMB and SSA receive them 30 information on Medicaid applications information to bill third parties liable days from the date of this publication. and redeterminations as a condition of for medical care, support, or services for To be sure we consider your comments, Medicaid eligibility. States may enter a beneficiary to guarantee that Medicaid we must receive them no later than July into agreements with the Commissioner remains the payer of last resort. The 31, 2015. Individuals can obtain copies of Social Security to make Medicaid respondents are SSI claimants and of the OMB clearance package by eligibility determinations for aged, recipients. writing to OR.Reports.Clearance@ blind, and disabled beneficiaries in Type of Request: Revision of an OMB- ssa.gov. those states. Applications for and approved information collection. Third Party Liability Information redeterminations of SSI eligibility in This is a correction notice: SSA Statement—42 CFR 433.136 through jurisdictions with such agreements are published the incorrect form number in 433.139 —0960–0323. To reduce applications and redeterminations of the burden chart for this collection at 80 Medicaid costs, Medicaid state agencies Medicaid eligibility. Under these FR 24307, on April 30, 2015. We are must identify third party insurers liable agreements, SSA obtains third party correcting this error here. Average bur- Number of re- Frequency of den per re- Estimated total Modality of completion spondents response sponse annual burden (minutes) (hours) SSA–8019–U2 Paper Form ...... 200 1 5 17 MSSICS Version ...... 51,381 1 5 4,282 Totals ...... 51,581 ...... 4,299 Dated: June 26, 2015. DATES: Comments should be received no (B) The organizational component of Faye I. Lipsky, later than August 31, 2015. the executive agency administering the Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security contract, and the organizational FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Administration. component of the agency whose Kammann, Director of Finance, at 1730 requirements are being met through [FR Doc. 2015–16132 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] M St. NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC BILLING CODE 4191–02–P contractor performance of the service; 20036, or by facsimile at (202) 254– (C) The total dollar amount obligated 3711. for services under the contract and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On funding source for the contract; OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL December 16, 2009, the Consolidated (D) The total dollar amount invoiced Appropriations Act, 2010 (Consolidated for services under the contract; Agency Information on Public Appropriations Act), Public Law 111– (E) The contract type and date of Availability of FY 2014 Service award; 117, became law. Section 743(a) of the Contract Inventory (F) The name of the contractor and Consolidated Appropriations Act, titled, place of performance; ‘‘Service Contract Inventory AGENCY: Office of Special Counsel (G) The number and work location of Requirement,’’ requires agencies to (OSC). contractor and subcontractor employees, submit to the Office of Management and ACTION: First notice. expressed as full-time equivalents for Budget (OMB), an annual inventory of direct labor, compensated under the service contracts awarded or extended SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Special contract; Counsel, in accordance with section through the exercise of an option on or (H) Whether the contract is a personal 743(c) of Division C of the Consolidated after April 1, 2010, and describes the services contract; and Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111– contents of the inventory. The contents (I) Whether the contract was awarded 117, 123 Stat. 3034, 3216), is of the inventory must include: on a noncompetitive basis, regardless of announcing the availability of OSC’s (A) A description of the services date of award. service contract inventory for fiscal year purchased by the executive agency and Section 743(a)(3)(A) through (I) of the (FY) 2014. This inventory provides the role the services played in achieving Consolidated Appropriations Act. information on service contract actions agency objectives, regardless of whether Section 743(c) of the Consolidated that exceeded $25,000 that OSC made in such a purchase was made through a Appropriations Act requires agencies to FY 2014. contract or task order; ‘‘publish in the Federal Register a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37710 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices notice that the inventory is available to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Federal employment, state and local the public.’’ Kammann, Director of Finance, at the government employees, and their Consequently, through this notice, we address shown above; by facsimile at representatives, and the general public. are announcing that OSC’s service (202) 254–3711. Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary contract inventory for FY 2014 is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OSC is an Estimated Annual Number of Survey available to the public. The inventory independent agency responsible for, Form Respondents: 320. provides information on service contract among other things, (1) investigation of Frequency of Survey form use: actions over $25,000 that OSC made in allegations of prohibited personnel Annual. FY 2014. OSC’s finance section has practices defined by law at 5 U.S.C. Estimated Average Amount of Time posted its inventory, and a summary of 2302(b), protection of whistleblowers, for a Person To Respond to survey: 12 the inventory can be found at our and certain other illegal employment minutes. homepage at the following link: practices under titles 5 and 38 of the Estimated Annual Survey Burden: 109 https://osc.gov/Pages/Resources- U.S. Code, affecting current or former hours. ReportsAndInfo.aspx. Federal employees or applicants for This survey form is used to survey Dated: June 15, 2015. employment, and covered state and current and former Federal employees and applicants for Federal employment Mark P. Cohen, local government employees; and (2) the who have submitted allegations of Principal Deputy Special Counsel. interpretation and enforcement of Hatch Act provisions on political activity in possible prohibited personnel practices [FR Doc. 2015–16121 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] chapters 15 and 73 of title 5 of the U.S. or other prohibited activity for BILLING CODE 7405–01–P Code. investigation and possible prosecution Title of Collection: Office of Special by OSC, and whose matter has been closed or otherwise resolved during the OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL Counsel (OSC) Annual Survey; OMB Control Number 3255–0003, Expiration prior fiscal year, on their experience at Survey Renewal for FY 2015—Request 10/31/2015. OSC. Specifically, the survey asks for Comment OSC is required to conduct an annual questions relating to whether the survey of individuals who seek its respondent was: (1) Apprised of his or AGENCY: Office of Special Counsel. assistance. Section 13 of Public Law her rights; (2) successful at the OSC or ACTION: First Notice for public comment. 103–424 (1994), codified at 5 U.S.C. at the Merit Systems Protection Board; 1212 note, states, in part: ‘‘[T]he survey and (3) satisfied with the treatment SUMMARY: In accordance with the shall—(1) Determine if the individual received at the OSC. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 seeking assistance was fully apprised of Dated: June 15. 2015. U.S.C. Chapter 35), and implementing their rights; (2) determine whether the Carolyn N. Lerner, regulations at 5 CFR part 1320, the U.S. individual was successful either at the Special Counsel. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), plans Office of Special Counsel or the Merit [FR Doc. 2015–16110 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] to request approval from the Office of Systems Protection Board; and (3) Management and Budget (OMB) for use determine if the individual, whether BILLING CODE 7405–01–P of a previously approved information successful or not, was satisfied with the collection consisting of an electronic treatment received from the Office of survey form. The current OMB approval Special Counsel.’’ The same section also DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION for the OSC Survey expires 10/31/15. provides that survey results are to be Federal Aviation Administration We are submitting the electronic survey published in OSC’s annual reports to for renewal, based on its pending t Congress. Copies of prior years’ annual [Docket No. FAA–2015–1497; Airspace expiration. There are several changes reports are available on OSC’s Web site, Docket No. 15–AWA–4] being submitted with this request for at https://osc.gov/Pages/Resources- RIN 2120–AA66 renewal of the use of the OSC survey. ReportsAndInfo.aspx or by calling OSC Current and former Federal employees, at (202) 254–3600. The survey form for Designation of Oceanic Airspace employee representatives, other Federal the collection of information is available agencies, state and local government by calling OSC at (202) 254–3600. AGENCY: Federal Aviation employees, and the general public are Type of Information Collection Administration (FAA), DOT. invited to comment on this for the first Request: Approval of previously ACTION: Notice of provision of air traffic time. Comments are invited on: (a) approved collection of information that services in oceanic airspace. Whether the proposed collection expires on 10/31/2015, with some consisting of our survey is necessary for revisions. The Disclosure Unit was SUMMARY: By this action the FAA the proper performance of OSC added for the first time to the electronic informs airspace users of the type of air functions, including whether the survey of individuals with cases traffic control (ATC) service provided in information will have practical utility; resolved in FY 2014. The second major the oceanic airspace controlled by the (b) the accuracy of OSC’s estimate of the change is that the survey is hosted by United States of America (U.S.). This burden of the proposed collection of Survey Monkey, (https:// notice is consistent with U.S. information; (c) ways to enhance the www.surveymonkey.com) rather than obligations under the Convention on quality, utility, and clarity of the being an in-house supported IT tool. A International Civil Aviation (Chicago information to be collected; and (d) future enhancement will add an Convention), including, that all ways to minimize the burden of the additional question to the survey about Contracting States disseminate collection of information on the user’s experience with our new OSC information regarding the types of ATC respondents, including through the use Form 14 Wizard and electronic services provided in oceanic airspace of automated collection techniques or complaint form, which is currently in under their control. other forms of information technology. development. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DATES: Comments should be received by Affected public: Current and former Jason Stahl, Airspace Policy and August 31, 2015. Federal employees, applicants for Regulations Group, Office of Airspace VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37711 Services, Federal Aviation met. Specifically, these airspace areas requested). All flights in these airspace Administration, 800 Independence must be within signal coverage of areas would receive traffic information Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; domestic radio navigational aid or ATC as far as is practical. telephone: (202) 267–8783. radar coverage from the 12–NM limit Anchorage Oceanic CTA/FIR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: outward to the inner oceanic CTA/FIR boundaries. The Chicago Convention Aircraft operating in the Anchorage Background permits the application of domestic Oceanic CTA/FIR can expect to receive International Civil Aviation ATC procedures even though this is ATC services associated with the Organization (ICAO) international airspace. However, within following types of airspace areas and the oceanic CTA/FIR area itself, ICAO associated altitudes: The Chicago Convention was adopted oceanic ATC procedures are used Class G—below FL 55; to promote the safe and orderly instead of domestic procedures. Class A—FL 55 to FL 600, inclusive development of international civil Article of Exemption except less than 100 NM seaward is aviation. The Chicago Convention also Class E below FL 180; created the International Civil Aviation Article 3 of the Chicago Convention Class E—above FL 600. Organization (ICAO), which provides that the Chicago Convention, promulgates uniform international and its annexes, are not applicable to Anchorage Arctic CTA/FIR Standards and Recommended Practices state-aircraft (which includes military Aircraft operating in the Anchorage (SARPs) aimed at standardizing aircraft). However, article 3 requires Arctic CTA/FIR can expect to receive international civil aviation operational states, when issuing regulations for their ATC services associated with the practices and services. Currently, these state aircraft, to have due regard for the following types of airspace areas and SARPs are detailed in 18 annexes to the safety of navigation of civil aircraft. The associated altitudes: Chicago Convention. Annex 11, Air U.S., as a Contracting State, complies Class G—below FL12; Traffic Services, and Annex 15, with this provision. Class E—FL12 to but not including Aeronautical Information Services, are Further, article 12 obligates each FL180; of particular relevance to this notice as Contracting State to adopt measures to Class A—FL180 to FL600 inclusive; they address civil aircraft operations, ensure that persons operating an aircraft Class E—above FL 600. the establishment of airspace, ATC within its territory will comply with services in international airspace, and that state’s air traffic rules, and with Houston Oceanic CTA/FIR the dissemination of aeronautical Annex 2, Rules of the Air, when Aircraft operating in the Houston information. operating over the high seas. The U.S. Oceanic CTA/FIR can expect to receive Most recently ICAO recommended, has satisfied this responsibility through ATC services associated with the and the FAA concurred, that all Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations following types of airspace areas and Contracting States take action to define (14 CFR) part 91, General Operating and associated altitudes: their oceanic airspace, and inform those Flight Rules, which requires that Class G—below FL 15; interested as to the type of ATC services operators of aircraft comply with U.S. Class E—FL 15 to, but not including FL that would be provided. operating rules when in the U.S. and 180; By this action the FAA gives notice to that U.S.-registered aircraft comply with Class A—FL 180 to FL 600, inclusive; those interested parties operating in the Annex 2 when over the high seas (see Class E—above FL 600. oceanic airspace controlled by the U.S. 14 CFR 91.703). of the type of ATC services provided Section 91.703 applies only to civil Miami Oceanic CTA/FIR within the airspace. aircraft. State aircraft operating outside Aircraft operating in the Miami the U.S. are only subject to the ‘‘due Oceanic CTA/FIR can expect to receive ATC Services/Procedures Provided regard’’ provisions of article 3 of the ATC services associated with the Pursuant to the Chicago Convention, Chicago Convention. The SARPs in following types of airspace areas and the U.S. accepted responsibility for Annex 11, apply to airspace under the associated altitudes: providing ATC services over the jurisdiction of a Contracting State that Class G—below FL 25; domestic U.S. and within certain areas has accepted the responsibility of Class E—FL 25 to, but not including FL of the western half of the North Atlantic, providing air traffic services over the 180; the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean, and high seas (oceanic airspace), or in Class A—FL 180 to FL 600, inclusive; the North Pacific. In the airspace over airspace of undetermined sovereignty. Class E—above FL 600. the contiguous U.S. and out to 12 nautical miles (NM) from the U.S. U.S. Controlled Oceanic Airspace New York Oceanic CTA/FIR, excluding shores, domestic ATC separation is The ICAO classes of airspace and that portion of the airspace delegated to applied (with certain limitations) along associated services provided, as NAVCANADA with additional services (e.g., traffic described in Annex 11, to be used by Aircraft operating in the New York advisories, bird activity information, the U.S. within their delegated Oceanic/ Oceanic CTA/FIR, excluding that weather and chaff information, etc.). Arctic CTA/FIR areas are: (1) Class A portion of the airspace delegated to The U.S. also manages airspace areas airspace area (instrument flight rules NAVCANADA can expect to receive outside of the domestic U.S. These areas (IFR) flights only are permitted, all ATC services associated with the are called Control Areas (CTA) and flights are provided with ATC service following types of airspace areas and Flight Information Regions (FIR). Within and are separated from each other); (2) associated altitudes: these CTA/FIR the U.S. applies oceanic Class E airspace area (IFR and visual Class G—below FL 55; separation procedures consistent with flight rules (VFR) flights are permitted, Class A—FL 55 to FL 600, inclusive; ICAO regional procedures. IFR flights are provided with ATC Class E—above FL 600. The FAA may also apply, per Annex service and are separated from other IFR 11, domestic ATC procedures within flights); and (3) Class G airspace area Oakland Oceanic OCA/FIR designated Offshore/Control airspace (IFR and VFR flights are permitted and Aircraft operating in the Oakland areas provided certain conditions are receive flight information service if Oceanic OCA/FIR can expect to receive VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37712 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices ATC services associated with the approximately 5,037 square feet of Line Adjustments. Appraisals following types of airspace areas and airport property at the Elko Municipal concluded the two parcels have equal associated altitudes: Airport (Airport), City of Elko, Nevada. values. As a result, the City and land Class G—below FL 55; The City of Elko proposes to release the owner concluded that a land swap Class A—FL 55 to FL 600, inclusive airport land in order to acquire an equal would represent an equitable and less except less than 100 NM seaward 5,037 square feet parcel of privately- expensive way to resolve the from the shoreline within controlled owned land. The land exchange was encroachment problem. The release airspace, sunrise to sunset, is Class E proposed after a 2011 deed survey land is not needed for airport purposes below FL 200; disclosed that the airport perimeter and land exchange will result in no net Class E—above FL 600. fence encroached into private property loss in value or negative impact for the abutting the airport. Relocation of the airport. The reuse of the released parcel Oakland CTA airspace area delegated to fence is not practical due to the cost for commercial purposes represents a Oakland Center by Fukuoka ATMC at associated with moving the fence and compatible land use that will not and above FL 55 underground utilities. The parties interfere with the airport or its Aircraft operating in the Oakland CTA concluded that the encroachment operation. The acquisition of the delegated airspace to Oakland Center at problem could be resolved with an privately owned parcel will obviate the and above FL 55 can expect to receive equitable land exchange. Since the need to relocate the perimeter fence. ATC services associated with the release land is not needed for airport Therefore, the exchange provides a following types of airspace and purposes, the exchange will not benefit to the airport and civil aviation. associated altitudes: negatively impact the airport or civil Issued in Phoenix, Arizona: June 26, 2015. aviation. Class A—FL 55 to FL 600, inclusive Mike N. Williams, except less than 100 NM seaward DATES: Comments must be received on Manager, Phoenix Airports District Office, from the shoreline within controlled or before July 31, 2015. Western-Pacific Region. airspace, sunrise to sunset, is Class E FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: below FL 200; [FR Doc. 2015–16207 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Comments on the request may be mailed BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Class E—above FL 600. or delivered to the FAA at the following San Juan Oceanic CTA/FIR address Mike N. Williams, Manager, Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft operating-in the San Juan DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Phoenix Airports District Office, CTA/FIR can expect to receive ATC Federal Register Comment, 3800 N. Federal Aviation Administration services associated with the following Central Avenue, Suite 1025, 10th Floor, types of airspace and associated Phoenix, Arizona 85012. In addition, Sixth Meeting: Special Committee 231 altitudes: one copy of the comment submitted to (SC 231) Class G—below FL 25; the FAA must be mailed or delivered to AGENCY: Federal Aviation Class E—FL 25 to, but not including FL Mr. Mark Gibbs, Airport Director, Elko 180; Administration (FAA), U.S. Department Regional Airport, 975 Terminal Way, of Transportation (DOT). Class A—FL 180 to FL 600, inclusive; Elko, Nevada 89801. Class E—above FL 600. ACTION: Sixth Meeting Notice of Special SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Accordingly, the U.S. designation of Committee 231. accordance with the Wendell H. Ford ICAO classes of Oceanic Airspace and Aviation Investment and Reform Act for associated altitudes, as described in this SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice the 21st Century (AIR 21), Public Law notice will be reflected on the to advise the public of the sixth meeting 106–181 (Apr. 5, 2000; 114 Stat. 61), appropriate aeronautical charts. of the Special Committee 231. this notice must be published in the DATES: The meeting will be held Issued in Washington, DC, on June 23, Federal Register 30 days before the 2015. September 16th–September 24th from Secretary may waive any condition 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. Gary A. Norek, imposed on a federally obligated airport ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations by surplus property conveyance deeds Group. or grant agreements. RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th Street [FR Doc. 2015–16246 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 a.m.] The following is a brief overview of NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, Tel: (202) 330–0663. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P the request: The City of Elko, Nevada requested a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The release from sponsor grant assurance RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION obligations for approximately 5,037 Suite 910, Washington, DC, 20036, or by square feet of airport land to facilitate a telephone at (202) 833–9339, fax at (202) Federal Aviation Administration land exchange so the airport can acquire 833–9434, or Web site at an equal 5,037 square feet of privately- http://www.rtca.org or Sophie Bousquet, Notice of Release From Federal Grant owned land. A land survey conducted Program Director, RTCA, Inc., Assurance Obligations for Elko in 2011 disclosed that the airport [email protected], (202) 330–0663. Regional Airport (EKO), Elko, Nevada perimeter fence encroached into private SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant AGENCY: Federal Aviation property abutting the airport. Relocating to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Administration, DOT. the fence line and underground utilities Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– ACTION: Notice of request to release would be costly for the Airport. The 463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby airport land. City offered to trade a parcel of unused given for a meeting of the Special airport land that is not needed for Committee 231. The agenda will include SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation airport purposes for the portion of land the following: Administration (FAA) proposes to rule into which the airport fence encroaches. and invites public comment on the The land exchange would conform to Tuesday, September 22, 2015 application for a release of Nevada Revised Statutes for Boundary 1. Welcome/Introduction VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37713 2. Administrative Remarks given for a meeting of the Special ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 3. Agenda Review Committee 229. The agenda will include 4. Summary of Working Group activities the following: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and 5. Other Business invite public comment for a temporary 6. Date and Place of Next Meeting Tuesday, September 1, 2015 (09:30 change in use not to exceed 5 years to a.m.–5:00 p.m.) accommodate vehicular parking on a Wednesday, September 23, 2015 1. Welcome/Introductions/ section of the aircraft parking apron to 1. Continuation of Plenary or Working Administrative Remarks the immediate west of the terminal Group Session 2. Agenda overview and approval building, at Albany International 3. Minutes Hamburg meeting review Thursday, September 24, 2015 Airport, Albany, NY. and approval DATES: Comments must be received on 1. Continuation of Plenary or Working 4. Review Action Items from Hamburg or before July 31, 2015. Group Session Meeting ADDRESSES: Comments on this 5. ‘‘Phasing in’’ RTCA/DO–204B, Attendance is open to the interested application may be mailed or delivered public but limited to space availability. EUROCAE/ED–62B requirements— discussion to the following address: With the approval of the chairman, John O’Donnell, Chief Executive members of the public may present oral 6. Briefing of ICAO and COSPAS– SARSAT activities Officer, Albany International Airport, statements at the meeting. Persons Albany County Airport Authority, wishing to present statements or obtain 7. WG 1 to 5 status and week’s plan 8. Other Industry coordination and Administration Building, Suite 200, information should contact the person Albany, NY 12211–1057, (518) 242– listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION presentations 9. WG meetings (rest of the day) 2222; and at the FAA New York CONTACT section. Members of the public Airports District Office: Evelyn may present a written statement to the Wednesday, September 2, 2015 (09:00 Martinez, Manager, New York Airports committee at any time. a.m.–5:00 p.m.) District Office, 1 Aviation Plaza, Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 1. WG 1 to 5 meetings Jamaica, NY 11434, (718) 995–5771. 2015. Thursday, September 3, 2015 (09:00 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Latasha Robinson, a.m.–4:00 p.m.) Ryan Allen, Community Planner, New Management & Program Analyst, NextGen, York Airports District Office, location Program Oversight and Administration, 1. WG 1–5 meetings (if needed) listed above. (718) 995–5677. Federal Aviation Administration. 2. WGs’ reports The request for a temporary change in [FR Doc. 2015–16244 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 3. Action item review 4. Future meeting plans and dates use not to exceed 5 years to BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 5. Industry coordination and accommodate vehicular parking on a presentations (if any) section of the apron may be reviewed in 6. Other business person at the New York Airports District DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 7. Adjourn Office located at 159–30 Rockaway Blvd., Suite 111, Jamaica, NY 11434. Federal Aviation Administration Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Fifth Meeting: Special Committee 229 With the approval of the chairman, invites public comment on the request (SC 229) members of the public may present oral for a temporary change in use not to statements at the meeting. Persons exceed 5 years, to accommodate AGENCY: Federal Aviation wishing to present statements or obtain vehicular parking on a section of the Administration (FAA), U.S. Department information should contact the person aircraft parking apron to the immediate of Transportation (DOT). listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION west of the terminal at Albany ACTION: Fifth meeting notice of Special CONTACT section. Members of the public International Airport under the Committee 229. may present a written statement to the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47125(a). Based committee at any time. on a full review, the FAA determined SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice that the request for a temporary change to advise the public of the fifth meeting Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2015. in use not to exceed 5 years to of the Special Committee 229. Latasha Robinson, accommodate vehicular parking on a DATES: The meeting will be held section of the active apron at Albany September 1st–3rd from 9:00 a.m.–5:00 Management & Program Analyst, NextGen, Program Oversight and Administration, International Airport (ALB), NY, p.m. Federal Aviation Administration. submitted by the Albany County Airport ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at [FR Doc. 2015–16243 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Authority, met the procedural RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th Street BILLING CODE 4910–13–P requirements. NW., Suite 450, Washington, DC 20036, The following is a brief overview of Tel: (202) 330–0663. the request: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The Authority requests the temporary RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., conversion of approximately 2.88 acres of Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by Federal Aviation Administration existing aircraft parking apron space to telephone at (202) 833–9339, fax at (202) accommodate vehicular parking during main 833–9434, or Web site at http:// Notice of Intent To Rule on Request for terminal overflow events for a time period www.rtca.org or Sophie Bousquet, a Temporary Change in Use To not to exceed 5 years from the date of Program Director, RTCA, Inc., Accommodate Vehicular Parking on a approval. The conversion would provide for [email protected], 202–330–0663. Section of the Active Aircraft Parking approximately 200 additional parking spaces, Apron, at Albany International Airport, and includes temporary perimeter fencing, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant Albany, NY ingress/egress gates, pavement markings, to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal ticketing and payment stations, paving Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– AGENCY: Federal Aviation modifications, and temporary lighting and 463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby Administration (FAA), DOT. signage. As indicated in the sponsor request, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37714 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices the aircraft parking apron space in question October 27–29, 2015 37066; and the FAA Memphis Airports is not currently utilized to capacity for its 1. Chairmen’s Opening Remarks, District Office, 2600 Thousand Oaks primary aviation function, which is transient Boulevard, Suite 2250, Memphis, TN overnight aircraft parking. There are Introductions. currently other portions of the airport that 2. Approval of Summary from the 38118–2482. Written comments on the can accommodate transient overnight parking Sixty-Fifth Meeting—(RTCA Paper No. Sponsor’s request must be delivered or if needed. The area will provide needed 127–15/SC135–702). mailed to: Mr. Phillip J. Braden, vehicular parking during overflow events, 3. Review New Change Proposals. Manager, Memphis Airports District and the revenue generated will be used for 4. Review Working Group Activities. Office, 2600 Thousand Oaks Boulevard, airport purposes. All proceeds generated 5. New/Unfinished Business. Suite 2250, Memphis, TN 38118–2482. from the parking area must be used 6. Establish date/locations for Next exclusively by the airport in accordance with In addition, a copy of any comments 49 U.S.C. 47107(b) and the FAA’s policy on SC–135 Meetings. submitted to the FAA must be mailed or revenue use. 7. Closing and Adjourn. delivered to Mr. Harold M. Van Attendance is open to the interested Leeuwen, Jr., Airport Manager, Sumner Any person may inspect the request public but limited to space availability. County Regional Airport Authority, by appointment at the FAA office With the approval of the chairman, address listed above. Interested persons members of the public may present oral 1475 Airport Road, Gallatin, TN 37066. are invited to comment on the proposed statements at the meeting. Persons FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 5 year temporary change of use from wishing to present statements or obtain Stephen Wilson, Community Planner, aeronautical to non-aeronautical. All information should contact the person Federal Aviation Administration, comments will be considered by the listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Memphis Airports District Office, 2600 FAA to the extent practicable. CONTACT section. Members of the public Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Suite 2250, Issued in Jamaica, New York, June 25, may present a written statement to the Memphis, TN 38118–2482. The 2015. committee at any time. application may be reviewed in person Evelyn Martinez, Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, at this same location, by appointment. Manager, New York Airports District Office. 2015. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA [FR Doc. 2015–16201 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Latasha Robinson, proposes to rule and invites public BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Management & Program Analyst, NextGen, Program Oversight and Administration, comment on the request to release Federal Aviation Administration. property for non-aeronautical purposes DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [FR Doc. 2015–16245 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] at Sumner County Regional Airport, BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Gallatin, TN 37066 under the provisions Federal Aviation Administration of AIR 21 (49 U.S.C. 47107(h)(2)). On June 25, 2015, the FAA Sixty-Sixth Meeting: Special DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Committee 135 (SC 135) determined that the request to release property for non-aeronautical purposes Federal Aviation Administration AGENCY: Federal Aviation at Sumner County Regional Airport Administration (FAA), U.S. Department Notice of Intent To Rule on Change in meets the procedural requirements of of Transportation (DOT). Use of Aeronautical Property at the agency. The FAA may approve the ACTION: Sixty-Sixth Meeting Notice of Sumner County Regional Airport, request, in whole or in part, no later Special Committee 135. Gallatin, Tennessee than July 31, 2015. AGENCY: Federal Aviation The following is a brief overview of SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice the request: to advise the public of the sixty-sixth Administration (FAA), DOT. meeting of the Special Committee 135. ACTION: Request for public comment. The Sumner County Regional Airport Authority is proposing the release of DATES: The meeting will be held SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation approximately 14.29 acres to the City of October 27th–October 29th from 9:00 Administration (FAA) is requesting Gallatin, Tennessee for construction of a.m.–5:00 p.m. public comment on a request by the Airport Road. This property is located ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Sumner County Regional Airport along the existing airport western RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th Street Authority of Gallatin, Tennessee, owner property line extending approximately NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, of the Sumner County Regional Airport, 5,800 feet along Airport Road. Tel: (202) 330–0663. to change a portion of airport property Any person may inspect, by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: from aeronautical to non-aeronautical The appointment, the request in person at RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., use at the Sumner County Regional the FAA office listed above under FOR Suite 910, Washington, DC, 20036, or by Airport. The request consists of FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. telephone at (202) 833–9339, fax at (202) approximately 14.29 acres to the City of 833–9434, or Web site at http:// Gallatin, Tennessee for construction of Issued in Memphis, TN, on June 25, 2015. www.rtca.org or Sophie Bousquet, Airport Road. This action is taken under Phillip J. Braden, the provisions of Section 125 of the Program Director, RTCA, Inc., Manager, Memphis Airports District Office, Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment [email protected], (202) 330–0663. Southern Region. Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 2015–16219 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Pursuant 21). to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– DATES: Comments must be received on 463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby or before July 31, 2015. given for a meeting of the Special ADDRESSES: Documents are available for Committee 135. The agenda will include review at the Sumner County Regional the following: Airport, 1475 Airport Road, Gallatin, TN VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37715 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Related Agencies Appropriation Act, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1993 (Pub. L. 102–388, October 6, 1992) Federal Highway Administration require annual certifications by the Federal Highway Administration [Docket No. FHWA–2015–0015] Governors. In this regard, the State must [Docket No. FHWA 2015–0016] submit by January 1 of each year either Agency Information Collection a written certification, signed by the Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a Governor, stating that the State is in Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information Collection compliance with 23 U.S.C. 159; or a New Information Collection AGENCY: Federal Highway written certification stating that the AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT. Governor is opposed to the enactment or Administration (FHWA), DOT. enforcement, and that the State ACTION: Notice and request for ACTION: Notice and request for legislature has adopted a resolution comments. comments. expressing its opposition to 23 U.S.C. SUMMARY: The FHWA invites public Section 159. SUMMARY: The FHWA invites public comments about our intention to request Beginning in Fiscal Year 1996, States’ comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget’s failure to comply by October 1 of each the Office of (OMB) approval for a new information fiscal year resulted in a withholding Management and Budget’s (OMB) collection, which is summarized below penalty of 10 percent from major approval for a new information under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. We categories of Federal-aid funds (i.e., collection, which is summarized below under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. We are required to publish this notice in the National Highway System, Surface Federal Register by the Paperwork are required to publish this notice in the Transportation Program and the Reduction Act of 1995. Federal Register by the Paperwork Interstate Maintenance Program) from Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Please submit comments by States’ apportionments for the fiscal DATES: August 31, 2015. year. Any funds withheld in Fiscal Year Please submit comments by August 31, 2015. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 1996 and thereafter cannot be restored identified by DOT Docket ID 2015–0015 and will be redistributed. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: identified by DOT Docket ID 2015–0016 Web site: For access to the docket to Respondents: Each of the 50 SDOTs, by any of the following methods: read background documents or the District of Columbia, and the Web site: For access to the docket to comments received go to the Federal Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. read background documents or eRulemaking Portal: Go to http:// Frequency: Annually. comments received go to the Federal www.regulations.gov. Follow the online Estimated Average Burden per eRulemaking Portal: Go to http:// instructions for submitting comments. Response: Annual average of 5 hours for www.regulations.gov. Follow the online Fax: 1–202–493–2251. instructions for submitting comments. each respondent. Mail: Docket Management Facility, Fax: 1–202–493–2251. U.S. Department of Transportation, Estimated Total Annual Burden Mail: Docket Management Facility, West Building Ground Floor, Room Hours: 260 total annual burden hours. U.S. Department of Transportation, W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Public Comments Invited: You are West Building Ground Floor, Room Washington, DC 20590–0001. asked to comment on any aspect of this W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. information collection, including: (1) Washington, DC 20590–0001. Department of Transportation, West Whether the proposed collection is Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, necessary for the FHWA’s performance; Department of Transportation, West 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., (2) the accuracy of the estimated Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. burdens; (3) ways for the FHWA to and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. enhance the quality, usefulness, and except Federal holidays. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, clarity of the collected information; and except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (4) ways that the burden could be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Warren, 202–366–2157, minimized, including the use of [email protected]; Office of Damaris Santiago, 202–366–2034, electronic technology, without reducing Safety, Federal Highway Department of Transportation, FHWA, the quality of the collected information. Administration, Department of Office of Project Development and The agency will summarize and/or Transportation, New Jersey Avenue SE., Environmental Review, E76–201, 1200 Washington, DC 20590–0001. Office include your comments in the request New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, hours are from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday for OMB’s clearance of this information DC 20590. Office hours are from 8 a.m. through Friday, except Federal holidays. collection. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act except Federal holidays. Title: Drug Offender’s Drivers License of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Suspension Certification and 49 CFR 1.48. Title: FHWA Environmental OMB Control #: 2125–0579. Issued on: June 25, 2015. Excellence Awards Background: States are legally Michael Howell, Background: In 1995 FHWA required to enact and enforce laws that established the biennial Environmental revoke or suspend the drivers licenses Information Collection Officer. Excellence Awards to recognize of any individual convicted of a drug [FR Doc. 2015–16175 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] partners, projects, and processes that offense and to make annual BILLING CODE 4910–22–P use FHWA funding sources to go certifications to the FHWA on their beyond environmental compliance and actions. The implementing regulations achieve environmental excellence. The of the Department of Transportation and Environmental Excellence Awards also VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37716 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices recognize partners, projects, and Issued on: June 25, 2015. II. Background processes that exemplify innovation and Michael Howell, On April 7, 2015, FMCSA published commitment to the human environment, Information Collection Officer. a notice of receipt of Federal diabetes and organization and process [FR Doc. 2015–16166 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] exemption applications from 73 innovation. Awardees must make an BILLING CODE 4910–22–P individuals and requested comments outstanding contribution that goes from the public (80 FR 18681). The beyond traditional transportation public comment period closed on May projects and that encourages DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 7, 2015, and two comments were environmental stewardship and received. Federal Motor Carrier Safety partnerships to achieve a truly multi- FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility faceted, environmentally sensitive Administration of the 73 applicants and determined that transportation solution. granting the exemptions to these Award: Anyone can nominate a [FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2014–0315] project, process, person or group that individuals would achieve a level of has used FHWA funding sources to safety equivalent to or greater than the Qualification of Drivers; Exemption level that would be achieved by make an outstanding contribution to Applications; Diabetes Mellitus transportation and the environment. complying with the current regulation The nominator is responsible for AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). submitting an application via the FHWA Administration (FMCSA), DOT. III. Diabetes Mellitus and Driving Environmental Excellence Awards Web ACTION: Notice of final disposition. Experience of the Applicants site that gives a summary of the The Agency established the current outstanding accomplishments of the SUMMARY: FMCSA confirms its decision requirement for diabetes in 1970 entry. The collected information will be to exempt 73 individuals from its rule because several risk studies indicated used by FHWA to evaluate the project, prohibiting persons with insulin-treated that drivers with diabetes had a higher showcase environmental excellence, diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating and enhance the public’s knowledge of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in rate of crash involvement than the environmental stewardship in the interstate commerce. The exemptions general population. The diabetes rule planning and project development enable these individuals to operate provides that ‘‘A person is physically process. Nominations will be reviewed CMVs in interstate commerce. qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle if that person has no established by a panel of judges from varying DATES: The exemptions were effective backgrounds. It is anticipated that medical history or clinical diagnosis of on May 8, 2015. The exemptions expire diabetes mellitus currently requiring awards will be given every 2 years. The on May 8, 2017. winners are presented plaques at an insulin for control’’ (49 CFR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 391.41(b)(3)). awards ceremony. Charles A. Horan, III, Director, Carrier, Respondents: Anyone who has used FMCSA established its diabetes Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards, FHWA funding sources in the 50 States, exemption program, based on the (202) 366–4001, [email protected], U.S. territories, and the District of Agency’s July 2000 study entitled ‘‘A FMCSA, Room W64–224, Department of Columbia. Report to Congress on the Feasibility of Frequency: The information will be Transportation, 1200 New Jersey a Program to Qualify Individuals with collected biennially. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus to Estimated Average Burden per 0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Response: 8 hours per respondent per 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Directed by the Transportation Act for application. Federal holidays. the 21st Century.’’ The report concluded Estimated Total Annual Burden SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that a safe and practicable protocol to Hours: It is expected that the allow some drivers with ITDM to I. Electronic Access respondents will complete operate CMVs is feasible. The approximately 150 applications for an You may see all the comments online September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441), estimated total of 1200 annual burden through the Federal Document Federal Register notice in conjunction hours. Management System (FDMS) at: http:// with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR Public Comments Invited: You are www.regulations.gov. 67777), Federal Register notice provides asked to comment on any aspect of this Docket: For access to the docket to the current protocol for allowing such information collection, including: (1) read background documents or drivers to operate CMVs in interstate Whether the proposed collection is comments, go to http:// commerce. necessary for the FHWA’s performance; www.regulations.gov and/or Room These 73 applicants have had ITDM (2) the accuracy of the estimated W12–140 on the ground level of the over a range of one to 36 years. These burdens; (3) ways for the FHWA to West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue applicants report no severe enhance the quality, usefulness, and SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss clarity of the collected information; and and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, of consciousness or seizure, requiring (4) ways that the burden could be except Federal holidays. the assistance of another person, or minimized, including the use of Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 resulting in impaired cognitive function electronic technology, without reducing U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments that occurred without warning the quality of the collected information. from the public to better inform its symptoms, in the past 12 months and no The agency will summarize and/or rulemaking process. DOT posts these recurrent (2 or more) severe include your comments in the request comments, without edit, including any hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 for OMB’s clearance of this information personal information the commenter years. In each case, an endocrinologist collection. provides, to www.regulations.gov, as verified that the driver has Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act described in the system of records demonstrated a willingness to properly of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can monitor and manage his/her diabetes and 49 CFR 1.48. be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. mellitus, received education related to VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37717 diabetes management, and is on a stable diabetes; also, any involvement in an William W. McPhee (MI) insulin regimen. These drivers report no accident or any other adverse event in Michael S. Murray (IA) other disqualifying conditions, a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or including diabetes-related not it is related to an episode of Benjamin M. Naastad (ND) complications. Each meets the vision hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual Richard G. Niemi (WI) requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s Kenthia E. Norfleet (AL) The qualifications and medical or optometrist’s report to the medical condition of each applicant were stated examiner at the time of the annual Donald M. Oakes (NH) and discussed in detail in the April 7, medical examination; and (4) that each Philip L. Orsi (NY) 2015, Federal Register notice and they individual provide a copy of the annual Robert E. Piernik (FL) will not be repeated in this notice. medical certification to the employer for Harold E. Pratt (MO) III. Discussion of Comments retention in the driver’s qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s Jack C. Reed (NE) FMCSA received two comments in qualification file if he/she is self- Fernando Rivera (IL) this proceeding. The comments are employed. The driver must also have a Timothy F. Rodehaver (OH) addressed below. copy of the certification when driving, An anonymous commenter stated that for presentation to a duly authorized Robin R. Roth (MN) allowing insulin-dependent drivers to Federal, State, or local enforcement Lewis S. Russell (OR) operate CMVs in interstate commerce official. would increase safety as more William J. Schmidt (MN) experienced drivers would be allowed VI. Conclusion Todd J. Schoeller (WI) to drive. This is the purpose of the Based upon its evaluation of the 73 Gary H. Schrot (WI) Diabetes Exemption Program. exemption applications, FMCSA Charla Sloan, Transit Director of the exempts the following drivers from the Ryan A. Snow (PA) KI BOIS Area Transit System in diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Kevin L. Sundh (UT) Oklahoma, stated that she believes 391.41(b)(10), subject to the William H. Terry (IN) insulin-dependent drivers should be requirements cited above (49 CFR Gary E. Tilson (VA) allowed to operate CMVs in interstate 391.64(b)): commerce without an exemption. Tony W. Alonzo (TX) Duane K. Torlish, Jr. (NY) IV. Basis for Exemption Determination Rafael M. Alvarado (TX) Ronald W. Truitt (PA) Mark J. Avedisian (NY) Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Timothy E. Vanderwiele (NY) Timothy J. Burke (MA) FMCSA may grant an exemption from Eric E. Burton (TN) Leo D. Vermeire (WA) the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Roger D. Cassada (VA) Brian W. Walls (PA) 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to Timothy W. Clark (OH) Gary L. Webster (VT) achieve an equivalent or greater level of Leonard W. Cleaves (MA) safety than would be achieved without Bruce Combs (OH) Lance A. Wendinger (MN) the exemption. The exemption allows Larry A. Cramer (SD) Allan W. Widener (GA) the applicants to operate CMVs in Bradford A. Davies (ME) Shane D. Wildoner (PA) interstate commerce. Larry A. DeSanno (OR) To evaluate the effect of these Robert S. Doering (IL) Roy L. Woodbury (OK) exemptions on safety, FMCSA Michael L. Domarus (MN) Kyle A. Wright (WA) considered medical reports about the Matthew G. Drabant (CO) applicants’ ITDM and vision, and Adan A. Espinoza (CA) In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) reviewed the treating endocrinologists’ Howard E. Fruehling (IA) and 31315 each exemption is valid for medical opinion related to the ability of Michael F. Gabbianelli (NJ) two years unless revoked earlier by the driver to safely operate a CMV while Christopher W. Geib (OH) FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked using insulin. Ernest W. Gibbs (VA) if the following occurs: (1) The person Consequently, FMCSA finds that in James E. Goins (NJ) fails to comply with the terms and each case exempting these applicants Gregory J. Goodenbour (IA) conditions of the exemption; (2) the from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Paul M. Gugerty, Jr. (IL) exemption has resulted in a lower level 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level William F. Guttormsen (NJ) of safety than was maintained before it of safety equal to that existing without Michael D. Howell (NC) was granted; or (3) continuation of the the exemption. Curtis L. Hudson (SC) exemption would not be consistent with V. Conditions and Requirements Mayer Indorsky (NY) the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. Raymond J. Jacobs (NY) 31136(e) and 31315. If the exemption is The terms and conditions of the Lyle J. Kaehler (WI) exemption will be provided to the Charles F. Kennedy (PA) still effective at the end of the 2-year applicants in the exemption document Stephen P. Koons (PA) period, the person may apply to FMCSA and they include the following: (1) That Curtis G. Kirchbaum (PA) for a renewal under procedures in effect each individual submit a quarterly Joseph A. Lahaderne (NY) at that time. monitoring checklist completed by the Walter P. Leck (PA) Issued on: June 23, 2015. treating endocrinologist as well as an Eric F. Leigh (IL) Larry W. Minor, annual checklist with a comprehensive Alvin G. Madwatkins (NJ) medical evaluation; (2) that each Clayton B. Mathis (GA) Associate Administrator for Policy. individual reports within 2 business John R. Mauney (NC) [FR Doc. 2015–16140 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] days of occurrence, all episodes of Derrell R. McCaskill (MD) BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P severe hypoglycemia, significant Darrel F. McCoy, Jr. (MO) complications, or inability to manage Eric O. McLamb (NC) VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37718 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. exemptions in accordance with FMCSA Instructions: Each submission must procedures. FMCSA has evaluated these Federal Motor Carrier Safety include the Agency name and the 23 applications for renewal on their Administration docket number for this notice. Note that merits and decided to extend each [Docket No. FMCSA–2000–7918; FMCSA– DOT posts all comments received exemption for a renewable two-year 2001–9561; FMCSA–2002–13411; FMCSA– without change to http:// period. They are: 2003–14504; FMCSA–2006–24015; FMCSA– www.regulations.gov, including any Juan D. Adame, Jr. (TX) 2007–2663; FMCSA–2007–25246; FMCSA– personal information included in a James C. Barr (OH) 2007–27897; FMCSA–2008–0174; FMCSA– comment. Please see the Privacy Act Jean-Pierre G. Brefort (CT) 2008–0266; FMCSA–2011–0024; FMCSA– heading below. Ryan L. Brown (IL) 2011–0057; FMCSA–2011–0092; FMCSA– Docket: For access to the docket to David S. Carman (NJ) 2013–0027; FMCSA–2013–0028] read background documents or Todd A. Chapman (NC) Qualification of Drivers; Exemption comments, go to http:// Timothy J. Curran (CA) Applications; Vision www.regulations.gov at any time or Erik R. Davis (GA) Room W12–140 on the ground level of Paul W. Dawson (CO) AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Everett A. Doty (AZ) Administration (FMCSA), DOT. Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 Waylon E. Hall (LA) ACTION: Notice of renewal of a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Gary D. Hallman (AL) exemptions; request for comments. Friday, except Federal holidays. The Dean R. Hawley (NC) Federal Docket Management System Edward J. Kasper (DE) SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its (FDMS) is available 24 hours each day, David J. Kibble (PA) decision to renew the exemptions from 365 days each year. If you want Darrell W. Knorr (IL) the vision requirement in the Federal acknowledgment that we received your Jorge G. Lopez (OH) Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for 23 comments, please include a self- William F. Nickel, V (OR) individuals. FMCSA has statutory addressed, stamped envelope or Gonzalo Pena (FL) authority to exempt individuals from postcard or print the acknowledgement Robert A. Reyna (UT) the vision requirement if the page that appears after submitting Tim M. Seavy (IN) exemptions granted will not comments on-line. Charles R. Sylvester (NC) compromise safety. The Agency has Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 David R. Thomas (AL) concluded that granting these U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments The exemptions are extended subject exemption renewals will provide a level from the public to better inform its to the following conditions: (1) That of safety that is equivalent to or greater rulemaking process. DOT posts these each individual has a physical than the level of safety maintained comments, without edit, including any examination every year (a) by an without the exemptions for these personal information the commenter ophthalmologist or optometrist who commercial motor vehicle (CMV) provides, to www.regulations.gov, as attests that the vision in the better eye drivers. described in the system of records continues to meet the requirements in DATES: This decision is effective August notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and (b) by a 8, 2015. Comments must be received on be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. medical examiner who attests that the or before July 29, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: individual is otherwise physically ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Charles A. Horan, III, Director, Carrier, qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that bearing the Federal Docket Management Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards, each individual provides a copy of the System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. 202–366–4001, [email protected], ophthalmologist’s or optometrist’s [Docket No. FMCSA–2000–7918; FMCSA, Department of Transportation, report to the medical examiner at the FMCSA–2001–9561; FMCSA–2002– 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room time of the annual medical examination; 13411; FMCSA–2003–14504; FMCSA– W64–224, Washington, DC 20590–0001. and (3) that each individual provide a 2006–24015; FMCSA–2007–2663; Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. copy of the annual medical certification FMCSA–2007–25246; FMCSA–2007– Monday through Friday, except Federal to the employer for retention in the 27897; FMCSA–2008–0174; FMCSA– holidays. driver’s qualification file and retains a 2008–0266; FMCSA–2011–0024; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: copy of the certification on his/her FMCSA–2011–0057; FMCSA–2011– person while driving for presentation to 0092; FMCSA–2013–0027; FMCSA– I. Background a duly authorized Federal, State, or local 2013–0028], using any of the following Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, enforcement official. Each exemption methods: FMCSA may renew an exemption from will be valid for two years unless • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to the vision requirements in 49 CFR rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers exemption will be rescinded if: (1) the on-line instructions for submitting of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a person fails to comply with the terms comments. two-year period if it finds ‘‘such and conditions of the exemption; (2) the • Mail: Docket Management Facility; exemption would likely achieve a level exemption has resulted in a lower level U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 of safety that is equivalent to or greater of safety than was maintained before it New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building than the level that would be achieved was granted; or (3) continuation of the Ground Floor, Room W12–140, absent such exemption.’’ The exemption would not be consistent with Washington, DC 20590–0001. procedures for requesting an exemption the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. • Hand Delivery or Courier: West (including renewals) are set out in 49 31136(e) and 31315. Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, CFR part 381. 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., III. Basis for Renewing Exemptions Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 II. Exemption Decision Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an p.m., Monday through Friday, except This notice addresses 23 individuals exemption may be granted for no longer Federal Holidays. who have requested renewal of their than two years from its approval date VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37719 and may be renewed upon application this document to which each comment and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, for additional two year periods. In applies, and provide a reason for each except Federal holidays. accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and suggestion or recommendation. You Issued on: June 23, 2015. 31315, each of the 23 applicants has may submit your comments and Larry W. Minor, satisfied the entry conditions for material online or by fax, mail, or hand obtaining an exemption from the vision delivery, but please use only one of Associate Administrator for Policy. requirements (65 FR 66286; 66 FR these means. FMCSA recommends that [FR Doc. 2015–16138 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 13825; 66 FR 30502; 66 FR 33990; 66 FR you include your name and a mailing BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 41654; 67 FR 76439; 68 FR 10298; 68 FR address, an email address, or a phone 10300; 68 FR 19598; 68 FR 33570; 68 FR number in the body of your document 44837; 70 FR 7545; 70 FR 7546; 70 FR so the Agency can contact you if it has DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 25878; 70 FR 41811; 71 FR 14566; 71 FR questions regarding your submission. Federal Motor Carrier Safety To submit your comment online, got 30227; 72 FR 180; 72 FR 7111; 72 FR Administration 7812; 72 FR 8417; 72 FR 9397; 72 FR to http://www.regulations.gov and put 28093; 72 FR 36099; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR the docket number, ‘‘FMCSA–2000– [Docket No. FMCSA–2015–0062] 40362; 72 FR 52419; 73 FR 27014; 73 FR 7918; FMCSA–2001–9561; FMCSA– 38497; 73 FR 48271; 73 FR 51689; 73 FR 2002–13411; FMCSA–2003–14504; Qualification of Drivers; Exemption 63047; 74 FR 6212; 74 FR 19270; 74 FR FMCSA–2006–24015; FMCSA–2007– Applications; Diabetes Mellitus 26466; 74 FR 34395; 75 FR 50799; 75 FR 2663; FMCSA–2007–25246; FMCSA– AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 66423; 75 FR 77590; 76 FR 9861; 76 FR 2007–27897; FMCSA–2008–0174; Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 17481; 76 FR 18824; 76 FR 21796; 76 FR FMCSA–2008–0266; FMCSA–2011– ACTION: Notice of applications for 25762; 76 FR 25766; 76 FR 28125; 76 FR 0024; FMCSA–2011–0057; FMCSA– exemptions; request for comments. 29024; 76 FR 37885; 76 FR 44652; 77 FR 2011–0092; FMCSA–2013–0027; 70537; 78 FR 10250; 78 FR 14410; 78 FR FMCSA–2013–0028’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of 24300; 78 FR 24798; 78 FR 27281; 78 FR box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ When the new applications from 49 individuals for 37270; 78 FR 41188; 78 FR 46407; 78 FR screen appears, click on ‘‘Comment exemption from the prohibition against 51268; 78 FR 56993; 79 FR 24298). Each Now!’’ button and type your comment persons with insulin-treated diabetes of these 23 applicants has requested into the text box in the following screen. mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial renewal of the exemption and has Choose whether you are submitting your motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate submitted evidence showing that the comment as an individual or on behalf commerce. If granted, the exemptions vision in the better eye continues to of a third party and then submit. If you would enable these individuals with meet the requirement specified at 49 submit your comments by mail or hand ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision delivery, submit them in an unbound commerce. impairment is stable. In addition, a format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, review of each record of safety while suitable for copying and electronic DATES: Comments must be received on driving with the respective vision filing. If you submit comments by mail or before July 31, 2015. deficiencies over the past two years and would like to know that they ADDRESSES: You may submit comments indicates each applicant continues to reached the facility, please enclose a bearing the Federal Docket Management meet the vision exemption stamped, self-addressed postcard or System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA– requirements. envelope. FMCSA will consider all 2015–0062 using any of the following These factors provide an adequate comments and material received during methods: basis for predicting each driver’s ability the comment period and may change • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to to continue to drive safely in interstate this notice based on your comments. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting commerce. Therefore, FMCSA Viewing Comments and Documents concludes that extending the exemption comments. • for each renewal applicant for a period To view comments, as well as any Mail: Docket Management Facility; of two years is likely to achieve a level documents mentioned in this preamble U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 of safety equal to that existing without as being available in the docket, go to New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building the exemption. http://www.regulations.gov and in the Ground Floor, Room W12–140, search box insert the docket number, Washington, DC 20590–0001. IV. Public Participation and Request for ‘‘FMCSA–2000–7918; FMCSA–2001– • Hand Delivery: West Building Comments 9561; FMCSA–2002–13411; FMCSA– Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 FMCSA encourages you to participate 2003–14504; FMCSA–2006–24015; New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, by submitting comments and related FMCSA–2007–2663; FMCSA–2007– DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday materials. 25246; FMCSA–2007–27897; FMCSA– through Friday, except Federal 2008–0174; FMCSA–2008–0266; Holidays. Submitting Comments FMCSA–2011–0024; FMCSA–2011– • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. If you submit a comment, please 0057; FMCSA–2011–0092; FMCSA– Instructions: Each submission must include the docket number for this 2013–0027; FMCSA–2013–0028’’ in the include the Agency name and the notice (FMCSA–2000–7918; FMCSA– ‘‘Keyword’’ box and click ‘‘Search.’’ docket numbers for this notice. Note 2001–9561; FMCSA–2002–13411; Next, click ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ that all comments received will be FMCSA–2003–14504; FMCSA–2006– button choose the document listed to posted without change to http:// 24015; FMCSA–2007–2663; FMCSA– review. If you do not have access to the www.regulations.gov, including any 2007–25246; FMCSA–2007–27897; Internet, you may view the docket personal information provided. Please FMCSA–2008–0174; FMCSA–2008– online by visiting the Docket see the Privacy Act heading below for 0266; FMCSA–2011–0024; FMCSA– Management Facility in Room W12–140 further information. 2011–0057; FMCSA–2011–0092; on the ground floor of the DOT West Docket: For access to the docket to FMCSA–2013–0027; FMCSA–2013– Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., read background documents or 0028), indicate the specific section of Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. comments, go to http:// VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37720 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices www.regulations.gov at any time or cognitive function that occurred without reactions resulting in loss of Room W12–140 on the ground level of warning in the past 12 months and no consciousness, requiring the assistance the West Building, 1200 New Jersey recurrent (2 or more) severe of another person, or resulting in Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 impaired cognitive function that a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through years. Her endocrinologist certifies that occurred without warning in the past 12 Friday, except Federal holidays. The Ms. Aasen understands diabetes months and no recurrent (2 or more) Federal Docket Management System management and monitoring has stable severe hypoglycemic episodes in the (FDMS) is available 24 hours each day, control of her diabetes using insulin, last 5 years. His endocrinologist certifies 365 days each year. If you want and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. that Mr. Blackwell understands diabetes acknowledgment that we received your Aasen meets the requirements of the management and monitoring, has stable comments, please include a self- vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). control of his diabetes using insulin, addressed, stamped envelope or Her optometrist examined her in 2015 and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. postcard or print the acknowledgement and certified that she does not have Blackwell meets the requirements of the page that appears after submitting diabetic retinopathy. She holds an vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). comments on-line. operator’s license from North Dakota. His optometrist examined him in 2015 Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 Kyle E. Beine and certified that he does not have U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments diabetic retinopathy. He holds an Mr. Beine, 23, has had ITDM since from the public to better inform its operator’s license from Georgia. rulemaking process. DOT posts these 2004. His endocrinologist examined him comments, without edit, including any in 2015 and certified that he has had no Joseph G. Blastick personal information the commenter severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting provides, to www.regulations.gov, as in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Blastick, 35, has had ITDM since described in the system of records assistance of another person, or 1987. His endocrinologist examined him notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can resulting in impaired cognitive function in 2015 and certified that he has had no be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or Charles A. Horan, III, Director, Carrier, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards, the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the (202) 366–4001, [email protected], certifies that Mr. Beine understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or FMCSA, Department of Transportation, diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room has stable control of his diabetes using W64–224, Washington, DC 20590–0001. insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 safely. Mr. Beine meets the certifies that Mr. Blastick understands p.m., Monday through Friday, except requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, Federal holidays. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist has stable control of his diabetes using examined him in 2015 and certified that insulin, and is able to drive a CMV SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: he does not have diabetic retinopathy. safely. Mr. Blastick meets the I. Background He holds an operator’s license from requirements of the vision standard at Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Wisconsin. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist FMCSA may grant an exemption from Dean B. Bibens, Jr. examined him in 2015 and certified that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Mr. Bibens, 58, has had ITDM since Regulations for a 2-year period if it finds He holds a Class A CDL from South 2002. His endocrinologist examined him ‘‘such exemption would likely achieve a Dakota. in 2015 and certified that he has had no level of safety that is equivalent to or severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Gary W. Boninsegna greater than the level that would be in loss of consciousness, requiring the achieved absent such exemption.’’ The assistance of another person, or Mr. Boninsegna, 58, has had ITDM statute also allows the Agency to renew resulting in impaired cognitive function since 1991. His endocrinologist exemptions at the end of the 2-year that occurred without warning in the examined him in 2015 and certified that period. The 49 individuals listed in this past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or he has had no severe hypoglycemic notice have recently requested such an more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in reactions resulting in loss of exemption from the diabetes prohibition the last 5 years. His endocrinologist consciousness, requiring the assistance in 49 CFR 391.41(b) (3), which applies certifies that Mr. Bibens understands of another person, or resulting in to drivers of CMVs in interstate diabetes management and monitoring, impaired cognitive function that commerce. Accordingly, the Agency has stable control of his diabetes using occurred without warning in the past 12 will evaluate the qualifications of each insulin, and is able to drive a CMV months and no recurrent (2 or more) applicant to determine whether granting safely. Mr. Bibens meets the severe hypoglycemic episodes in the the exemption will achieve the required requirements of the vision standard at last 5 years. His endocrinologist certifies level of safety mandated by statute. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist that Mr. Boninsegna understands II. Qualifications of Applicants examined him in 2014 and certified that diabetes management and monitoring, he does not have diabetic retinopathy. has stable control of his diabetes using Adele M. Aasen He holds an operator’s license from insulin, and is able to drive a CMV Ms. Aasen, 53, has had ITDM since Connecticut. safely. Mr. Boninsegna meets the 1971. Her endocrinologist examined her requirements of the vision standard at in 2015 and certified that she has had Joseph M. Blackwell 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His no severe hypoglycemic reactions Mr. Blackwell, 31, has had ITDM ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 resulting in loss of consciousness, since 2010. His endocrinologist and certified that he has stable requiring the assistance of another examined him in 2015 and certified that nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. person, or resulting in impaired he has had no severe hypoglycemic He holds a Class B CDL from Ohio. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37721 Brian K. Bouma He holds a Class A CDL from North requirements of the vision standard at Mr. Bouma, 47, has had ITDM since Carolina. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that 2015. His endocrinologist examined him Steven C. Cornell he does not have diabetic retinopathy. in 2015 and certified that he has had no Mr. Cornell, 45, has had ITDM since severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting He holds an operator’s license from 2013. His endocrinologist examined him Nebraska. in loss of consciousness, requiring the in 2015 and certified that he has had no assistance of another person, or severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Thomas M. Delasko resulting in impaired cognitive function in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Delasko, 41, has had ITDM since that occurred without warning in the assistance of another person, or 2005. His endocrinologist examined him past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or resulting in impaired cognitive function in 2015 and certified that he has had no more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting the last 5 years. His endocrinologist past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or in loss of consciousness, requiring the certifies that Mr. Bouma understands more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in assistance of another person, or diabetes management and monitoring, the last 5 years. His endocrinologist resulting in impaired cognitive function has stable control of his diabetes using certifies that Mr. Cornell understands that occurred without warning in the insulin, and is able to drive a CMV diabetes management and monitoring, past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or safely. Mr. Bouma meets the has stable control of his diabetes using more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in requirements of the vision standard at insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist safely. Mr. Cornell meets the certifies that Mr. Delasko understands examined him in 2015 and certified that requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, he does not have diabetic retinopathy. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist has stable control of his diabetes using He holds a Class A CDL from Michigan. examined him in 2015 and certified that insulin, and is able to drive a CMV Billy J. Bronson he does not have diabetic retinopathy. safely. Mr. Delasko meets the He holds a Class A CDL from requirements of the vision standard at Mr. Bronson, 60, has had ITDM since Pennsylvania. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist 2007. His endocrinologist examined him examined him in 2015 and certified that Josiah L. Crestik in 2015 and certified that he has had no he does not have diabetic retinopathy. severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Crestik, 24, has had ITDM since He holds an operator’s license from in loss of consciousness, requiring the 1997. His endocrinologist examined him Florida. assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting William T. Eason that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Eason, 54, has had ITDM since past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or 2011. His endocrinologist examined him more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function in 2015 and certified that he has had no the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting certifies that Mr. Bronson understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or in loss of consciousness, requiring the diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in assistance of another person, or has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist resulting in impaired cognitive function insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Crestik understands that occurred without warning in the safely. Mr. Bronson meets the diabetes management and monitoring, past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 safely. Mr. Crestik meets the certifies that Mr. Eason understands and certified that he does not have requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist has stable control of his diabetes using CDL from Oregon. examined him in 2015 and certified that insulin, and is able to drive a CMV Michael L. Campbell he does not have diabetic retinopathy. safely. Mr. Eason meets the He holds an operator’s license from requirements of the vision standard at Mr. Campbell, 57, has had ITDM since Minnesota. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist 2011. His endocrinologist examined him examined him in 2015 and certified that Richard L. Cunningham in 2015 and certified that he has had no he does not have diabetic retinopathy. severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Cunningham, 66, has had ITDM He holds a Class A CDL from North in loss of consciousness, requiring the since 2010. His endocrinologist Carolina. assistance of another person, or examined him in 2015 and certified that resulting in impaired cognitive function he has had no severe hypoglycemic Stefan D. Gall that occurred without warning in the reactions resulting in loss of Mr. Gall, 60, has had ITDM since past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or consciousness, requiring the assistance 2008. His endocrinologist examined him more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in of another person, or resulting in in 2015 and certified that he has had no the last 5 years. His endocrinologist impaired cognitive function that severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting certifies that Mr. Campbell understands occurred without warning in the past 12 in loss of consciousness, requiring the diabetes management and monitoring, months and no recurrent (2 or more) assistance of another person, or has stable control of his diabetes using severe hypoglycemic episodes in the resulting in impaired cognitive function insulin, and is able to drive a CMV last 5 years. His endocrinologist certifies that occurred without warning in the safely. Mr. Campbell meets the that Mr. Cunningham understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist examined him in 2015 and certified that insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Gall understands he does not have diabetic retinopathy. safely. Mr. Cunningham meets the diabetes management and monitoring, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37722 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices has stable control of his diabetes using diabetes management and monitoring, the last 5 years. His endocrinologist insulin, and is able to drive a CMV has stable control of his diabetes using certifies that Mr. Grimm understands safely. Mr. Gall meets the requirements insulin, and is able to drive a CMV diabetes management and monitoring, of the vision standard at 49 CFR safely. Mr. Gray meets the requirements has stable control of his diabetes using 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined of the vision standard at 49 CFR insulin, and is able to drive a CMV him in 2015 and certified that he does 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist safely. Mr. Grimm meets the not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds examined him in 2015 and certified that requirements of the vision standard at a chauffeur’s license from Michigan. he does not have diabetic retinopathy. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His He holds a Class A CDL from Florida. ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 Douglas J. Garrison and certified that he does not have Daniel W. Gregory Mr. Garrison, 55, has had ITDM since diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A 1990. His endocrinologist examined him Mr. Gregory, 57, has had ITDM since CDL from Delaware. in 2015 and certified that he has had no 2014. His endocrinologist examined him severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in 2015 and certified that he has had no Stephen G. Helmer in loss of consciousness, requiring the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Helmer, 47, has had ITDM since assistance of another person, or in loss of consciousness, requiring the 1996. His endocrinologist examined him resulting in impaired cognitive function assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no that occurred without warning in the resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or the last 5 years. His endocrinologist more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function certifies that Mr. Garrison understands the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the diabetes management and monitoring, certifies that Mr. Gregory understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or has stable control of his diabetes using diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in insulin, and is able to drive a CMV has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist safely. Mr. Garrison meets the insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Helmer understands requirements of the vision standard at safely. Mr. Gregory meets the diabetes management and monitoring, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using examined him in 2015 and certified that 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist insulin, and is able to drive a CMV he does not have diabetic retinopathy. examined him in 2015 and certified that safely. Mr. Helmer meets the He holds an operator’s license from he does not have diabetic retinopathy. requirements of the vision standard at Iowa. He holds a Class A CDL from North 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist Carolina. examined him in 2015 and certified that Charles F. Gollahon he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Barry L. Grimes, Sr. Mr. Gollahon, 81, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from Nebraska. 2011. His endocrinologist examined him Mr. Grimes, 70, has had ITDM since in 2015 and certified that he has had no 2013. His endocrinologist examined him Kenneth P. Henry severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in 2015 and certified that he has had no Mr. Henry, 51, has had ITDM since in loss of consciousness, requiring the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting 2008. His endocrinologist examined him assistance of another person, or in loss of consciousness, requiring the in 2014 and certified that he has had no resulting in impaired cognitive function assistance of another person, or severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting that occurred without warning in the resulting in impaired cognitive function in loss of consciousness, requiring the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or that occurred without warning in the assistance of another person, or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or resulting in impaired cognitive function the last 5 years. His endocrinologist more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in that occurred without warning in the certifies that Mr. Gollahon understands the last 5 years. His endocrinologist past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or diabetes management and monitoring, certifies that Mr. Grimes understands more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in has stable control of his diabetes using diabetes management and monitoring, the last 5 years. His endocrinologist insulin, and is able to drive a CMV has stable control of his diabetes using certifies that Mr. Henry understands safely. Mr. Gollahon meets the insulin, and is able to drive a CMV diabetes management and monitoring, requirements of the vision standard at safely. Mr. Grimes meets the has stable control of his diabetes using 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist requirements of the vision standard at insulin, and is able to drive a CMV examined him in 2014 and certified that 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His safely. Mr. Henry meets the he does not have diabetic retinopathy. ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 requirements of the vision standard at He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio. and certified that he does not have 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 Donald E. Gray CDL from Maryland. and certified that he has stable Mr. Gray, 61, has had ITDM since nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. Dennis J. Grimm 2014. His endocrinologist examined him He holds a Class B CDL from in 2015 and certified that he has had no Mr. Grimm, 55, has had ITDM since Washington. severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting 2014. His endocrinologist examined him in loss of consciousness, requiring the in 2014 and certified that he has had no Marco K. Higgs assistance of another person, or severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Higgs, 41, has had ITDM since resulting in impaired cognitive function in loss of consciousness, requiring the 1995. His endocrinologist examined him that occurred without warning in the assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the the last 5 years. His endocrinologist past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or certifies that Mr. Gray understands more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37723 that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Peter E. Mizialko past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Mizialko, 53, has had ITDM since more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in assistance of another person, or 2012. His endocrinologist examined him the last 5 years. His endocrinologist resulting in impaired cognitive function in 2015 and certified that he has had no certifies that Mr. Higgs understands that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting diabetes management and monitoring, past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or in loss of consciousness, requiring the has stable control of his diabetes using more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in assistance of another person, or insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist resulting in impaired cognitive function safely. Mr. Higgs meets the requirements certifies that Mr. Klawes understands that occurred without warning in the of the vision standard at 49 CFR diabetes management and monitoring, past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or 391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist has stable control of his diabetes using more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in examined him in 2015 and certified that insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist he has stable nonproliferative diabetic safely. Mr. Klawes meets the certifies that Mr. Mizialko understands retinopathy. He holds an operator’s requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, license from Oregon. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His has stable control of his diabetes using Jeffrey T. Hunley ophthalmologist examined him in 2014 insulin, and is able to drive a CMV and certified that he does not have Mr. Hunley, 45, has had ITDM since safely. Mr. Mizialko meets the diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A 2010. His endocrinologist examined him requirements of the vision standard at CDL from Wisconsin. in 2015 and certified that he has had no 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting John E. Marshall examined him in 2015 and certified that in loss of consciousness, requiring the he does not have diabetic retinopathy. assistance of another person, or Mr. Marshall, 77, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from New resulting in impaired cognitive function 2006. His endocrinologist examined him Jersey. that occurred without warning in the in 2015 and certified that he has had no Matthew E. Modlin past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Modlin, 25, has had ITDM since the last 5 years. His endocrinologist assistance of another person, or 2006. His endocrinologist examined him certifies that Mr. Hunley understands resulting in impaired cognitive function in 2015 and certified that he has had no diabetes management and monitoring, that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting has stable control of his diabetes using past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or in loss of consciousness, requiring the insulin, and is able to drive a CMV more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in assistance of another person, or safely. Mr. Hunley meets the the last 5 years. His endocrinologist resulting in impaired cognitive function requirements of the vision standard at certifies that Mr. Marshall understands that occurred without warning in the 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His diabetes management and monitoring, past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 has stable control of his diabetes using more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in and certified that he has stable insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. safely. Mr. Marshall meets the certifies that Mr. Modlin understands He holds a Class A CDL from North requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, Carolina. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV Colin S. Jackson examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. safely. Mr. Modlin meets the Mr. Jackson, 32, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from requirements of the vision standard at 1995. His endocrinologist examined him Pennsylvania. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His in 2015 and certified that he has had no ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Andrew Milite and certified that he does not have in loss of consciousness, requiring the diabetic retinopathy. He holds an assistance of another person, or Mr. Milite, 47, has had ITDM since operator’s license from North Carolina. 2011. His endocrinologist examined him resulting in impaired cognitive function Michael I. Moore that occurred without warning in the in 2015 and certified that he has had no past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Moore, 64, has had ITDM since more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in in loss of consciousness, requiring the 2003. His endocrinologist examined him the last 5 years. His endocrinologist assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no certifies that Mr. Jackson understands resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting diabetes management and monitoring, that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the has stable control of his diabetes using past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or insulin, and is able to drive a CMV more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function safely. Mr. Jackson meets the the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the requirements of the vision standard at certifies that Mr. Milite understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in examined him in 2015 and certified that has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist he does not have diabetic retinopathy. insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Moore understands He holds an operator’s license from safely. Mr. Milite meets the diabetes management and monitoring, Washington. requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His insulin, and is able to drive a CMV Dennis J. Klawes ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 safely. Mr. Moore meets the Mr. Klawes, 69, has had ITDM since and certified that he does not have requirements of the vision standard at 2013. His endocrinologist examined him diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist in 2014 and certified that he has had no CDL from New York. examined him in 2015 and certified that VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00144 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37724 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices he does not have diabetic retinopathy. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His has stable control of his diabetes using He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana. ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 insulin, and is able to drive a CMV and certified that he does not have safely. Mr. Schoenberger meets the Clyde S. Morgan diabetic retinopathy. He holds an requirements of the vision standard at Mr. Morgan, 58, has had ITDM since operator’s license from North Carolina. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist 2015. His endocrinologist examined him examined him in 2015 and certified that Justin D. Redding in 2015 and certified that he has had no he does not have diabetic retinopathy. severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Redding, 42, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from in loss of consciousness, requiring the 2014. His endocrinologist examined him Pennsylvania. assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Jarred E. Shawles that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Shawles, 29, has had ITDM since past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or 1994. His endocrinologist examined him more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function in 2015 and certified that he has had no the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting certifies that Mr. Morgan understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or in loss of consciousness, requiring the diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in assistance of another person, or has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist resulting in impaired cognitive function insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Redding understands that occurred without warning in the safely. Mr. Morgan meets the diabetes management and monitoring, past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist examined him in 2015 and certified that safely. Mr. Redding meets the certifies that Mr. Shawles understands he does not have diabetic retinopathy. requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, He holds a Class A CDL from 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His has stable control of his diabetes using Minnesota. ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 insulin, and is able to drive a CMV and certified that he has stable safely. Mr. Shawles meets the Richard M. Ohland nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. requirements of the vision standard at Mr. Ohland, 55, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from Montana. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist 2014. His endocrinologist examined him examined him in 2015 and certified that Alex R. Rumph in 2015 and certified that he has had no he does not have diabetic retinopathy. severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Rumph, 30, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from California. in loss of consciousness, requiring the 1990. His endocrinologist examined him assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no Charles M. Smith resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Smith, 42, has had ITDM since that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the 2004. His endocrinologist examined him past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the certifies that Mr. Ohland understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Rumph understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or safely. Mr. Ohland meets the diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Smith understands examined him in 2015 and certified that safely. Mr. Rumph meets the diabetes management and monitoring, he does not have diabetic retinopathy. requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using He holds a Class A CDL from 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His insulin, and is able to drive a CMV Minnesota. ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 safely. Mr. Smith meets the and certified that he has stable requirements of the vision standard at James D. Parrish nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist Mr. Parrish, 60, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from Montana. examined him in 2015 and certified that 2014. His endocrinologist examined him he does not have diabetic retinopathy. Kenneth S. Schoenberger in 2015 and certified that he has had no He holds a Class A CDL from severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Schoenberger, 57, has had ITDM Pennsylvania. in loss of consciousness, requiring the since 2012. His endocrinologist assistance of another person, or examined him in 2015 and certified that Howard L. Smith resulting in impaired cognitive function he has had no severe hypoglycemic Mr. Smith, 71, has had ITDM since that occurred without warning in the reactions resulting in loss of 2014. His endocrinologist examined him past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or consciousness, requiring the assistance in 2015 and certified that he has had no more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in of another person, or resulting in severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting the last 5 years. His endocrinologist impaired cognitive function that in loss of consciousness, requiring the certifies that Mr. Parrish understands occurred without warning in the past 12 assistance of another person, or diabetes management and monitoring, months and no recurrent (2 or more) resulting in impaired cognitive function has stable control of his diabetes using severe hypoglycemic episodes in the that occurred without warning in the insulin, and is able to drive a CMV last 5 years. His endocrinologist certifies past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or safely. Mr. Parrish meets the that Mr. Schoenberger understands more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, the last 5 years. His endocrinologist VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37725 certifies that Mr. Smith understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or in loss of consciousness, requiring the diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in assistance of another person, or has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist resulting in impaired cognitive function insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Stover understands that occurred without warning in the safely. Mr. Smith meets the diabetes management and monitoring, past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His insulin, and is able to drive a CMV the last 5 years. His endocrinologist ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 safely. Mr. Stover meets the certifies that Mr. Walker understands and certified that he has stable requirements of the vision standard at diabetes management and monitoring, nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His has stable control of his diabetes using He holds a Class A CDL from Illinois. ophthalmologist examined him in 2014 insulin, and is able to drive a CMV and certified that he has stable Jeffrey S. Snyder safely. Mr. Walker meets the nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. requirements of the vision standard at Mr. Snyder, 51, has had ITDM since He holds a Class A CDL from 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist 2014. His endocrinologist examined him Pennsylvania. in 2015 and certified that he has had no examined him in 2015 and certified that severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Kevin G. Sundquist he does not have diabetic retinopathy. in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Sundquist, 32, has had ITDM He holds an operator’s license from assistance of another person, or since 2009. His endocrinologist Ohio. resulting in impaired cognitive function examined him in 2015 and certified that Horace V. Watson that occurred without warning in the he has had no severe hypoglycemic past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or reactions resulting in loss of Mr. Watson, 34, has had ITDM since more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in consciousness, requiring the assistance 2009. His endocrinologist examined him the last 5 years. His endocrinologist of another person, or resulting in in 2015 and certified that he has had no certifies that Mr. Snyder understands impaired cognitive function that severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting diabetes management and monitoring, occurred without warning in the past 12 in loss of consciousness, requiring the has stable control of his diabetes using months and no recurrent (2 or more) assistance of another person, or insulin, and is able to drive a CMV severe hypoglycemic episodes in the resulting in impaired cognitive function safely. Mr. Snyder meets the last 5 years. His endocrinologist certifies that occurred without warning in the requirements of the vision standard at that Mr. Sundquist understands diabetes past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His management and monitoring, has stable more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 control of his diabetes using insulin, the last 5 years. His endocrinologist and certified that he has stable and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. certifies that Mr. Watson understands nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. Sundquist meets the requirements of the He holds an operator’s license from vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). diabetes management and monitoring, Pennsylvania. His optometrist examined him in 2015 has stable control of his diabetes using and certified that he does not have insulin, and is able to drive a CMV Jerry L. Stevens diabetic retinopathy. He holds an safely. Mr. Watson meets the Mr. Stevens, 55, has had ITDM since operator’s license from Minnesota. requirements of the vision standard at 1975. His endocrinologist examined him 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His in 2015 and certified that he has had no David N. Tetlak ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Mr. Tetlak, 36, has had ITDM since and certified that he has stable in loss of consciousness, requiring the 1998. His endocrinologist examined him nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. assistance of another person, or in 2015 and certified that he has had no He holds a Class B CDL from Georgia. resulting in impaired cognitive function severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting that occurred without warning in the in loss of consciousness, requiring the Jeremy W. Wolfe past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or assistance of another person, or Mr. Wolfe, 34, has had ITDM since more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in resulting in impaired cognitive function 1982. His endocrinologist examined him the last 5 years. His endocrinologist that occurred without warning in the in 2015 and certified that he has had no certifies that Mr. Stevens understands past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting diabetes management and monitoring, more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in in loss of consciousness, requiring the has stable control of his diabetes using the last 5 years. His endocrinologist assistance of another person, or insulin, and is able to drive a CMV certifies that Mr. Tetlak understands resulting in impaired cognitive function safely. Mr. Stevens meets the diabetes management and monitoring, that occurred without warning in the requirements of the vision standard at has stable control of his diabetes using past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist insulin, and is able to drive a CMV more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in examined him in 2015 and certified that safely. Mr. Tetlak meets the he does not have diabetic retinopathy. requirements of the vision standard at the last 5 years. His endocrinologist He holds a Class A CDL from Nebraska. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist certifies that Mr. Wolfe understands examined him in 2015 and certified that diabetes management and monitoring, Todd A. Stover he does not have diabetic retinopathy. has stable control of his diabetes using Mr. Stover, 45, has had ITDM since He holds an operator’s license from insulin, and is able to drive a CMV 1990. His endocrinologist examined him Pennsylvania. safely. Mr. Wolfe meets the in 2015 and certified that he has had no requirements of the vision standard at severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Dennis P. Walker, Jr. 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist in loss of consciousness, requiring the Mr. Walker, 40, has had ITDM since examined him in 2015 and certified that assistance of another person, or 2010. His endocrinologist examined him he does not have diabetic retinopathy. resulting in impaired cognitive function in 2015 and certified that he has had no He holds an operator’s license from that occurred without warning in the severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting Missouri. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37726 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices III. Request for Comments these means. FMCSA recommends that diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) you include your name and a mailing commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in and 31315, FMCSA requests public address, an email address, or a phone interstate commerce. The exemptions comment from all interested persons on number in the body of your document enable these individuals to operate the exemption petitions described in so that FMCSA can contact you if there CMVs in interstate commerce. this notice. We will consider all are questions regarding your DATES: The exemptions were effective comments received before the close of submission. on May 9, 2015. The exemptions expire To submit your comment online, go to business on the closing date indicated on May 9, 2017. http://www.regulations.gov and in the in the date section of the notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: search box insert the docket number FMCSA notes that section 4129 of the Charles A. Horan, III, Director, Carrier, FMCSA–2015–0062 and click the search Safe, Accountable, Flexible and button. When the new screen appears, Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A click on the blue ‘‘Comment Now!’’ (202) 366–4001, [email protected], Legacy for Users requires the Secretary button on the right hand side of the FMCSA, Room W64–224, Department of to revise its diabetes exemption program page. On the new page, enter Transportation, 1200 New Jersey established on September 3, 2003 (68 FR information required including the Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– 52441).1 The revision must provide for specific section of this document to 0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to individual assessment of drivers with which each comment applies, and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except diabetes mellitus, and be consistent provide a reason for each suggestion or Federal holidays. with the criteria described in section recommendation. If you submit your SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 4018 of the Transportation Equity Act comments by mail or hand delivery, for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305). I. Electronic Access submit them in an unbound format, no Section 4129 requires: (1) Elimination 1 You may see all the comments online larger than 8 ⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for of the requirement for 3 years of copying and electronic filing. If you through the Federal Document experience operating CMVs while being submit comments by mail and would Management System (FDMS) at: http:// treated with insulin; and (2) like to know that they reached the www.regulations.gov. establishment of a specified minimum facility, please enclose a stamped, self- Docket: For access to the docket to period of insulin use to demonstrate addressed postcard or envelope. read background documents or stable control of diabetes before being We will consider all comments and comments, go to http:// allowed to operate a CMV. material received during the comment www.regulations.gov and/or Room In response to section 4129, FMCSA period and may change this proposed W12–140 on the ground level of the made immediate revisions to the rule based on your comments. FMCSA West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue diabetes exemption program established may issue a final rule at any time after SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. by the September 3, 2003 notice. the close of the comment period. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year except Federal holidays. driving experience and fulfilled the V. Viewing Comments and Documents Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 requirements of section 4129 while To view comments, as well as any U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments continuing to ensure that operation of documents mentioned in this preamble, from the public to better inform its CMVs by drivers with ITDM will To submit your comment online, go to rulemaking process. DOT posts these achieve the requisite level of safety http://www.regulations.gov and in the comments, without edit, including any required of all exemptions granted search box insert the docket number personal information the commenter under 49 U.S.C. 31136 (e). FMCSA–2015–0062 and click ‘‘Search.’’ provides, to www.regulations.gov, as Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA Next, click ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ and described in the system of records to ensure that drivers of CMVs with you will find all documents and notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can ITDM are not held to a higher standard comments related to the proposed be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. than other drivers, with the exception of rulemaking. limited operating, monitoring and II. Background Issued on June 23, 2015. medical requirements that are deemed On April 8, 2015, FMCSA published medically necessary. Larry W. Minor, a notice of receipt of Federal diabetes The FMCSA concluded that all of the Associate Administrator for Policy. exemption applications from 49 operating, monitoring and medical [FR Doc. 2015–16112 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] individuals and requested comments requirements set out in the September 3, BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P from the public (80 FR 18928). The 2003 notice, except as modified, were in public comment period closed on May compliance with section 4129(d). 8, 2015, and one comment was received. Therefore, all of the requirements set DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility out in the September 3, 2003 notice, Federal Motor Carrier Safety of the 49 applicants and determined that except as modified by the notice in the Administration granting the exemptions to these Federal Register on November 8, 2005 individuals would achieve a level of (70 FR 67777), remain in effect. [FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2015–0057] safety equivalent to or greater than the IV. Submitting Comments level that would be achieved by Qualification of Drivers; Exemption complying with the current regulation You may submit your comments and Applications; Diabetes Mellitus 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). material online or by fax, mail, or hand AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety delivery, but please use only one of II. Diabetes Mellitus and Driving Administration (FMCSA), DOT. Experience of the Applicants ACTION: Notice of final disposition. 1 Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 notice as a The Agency established the current ‘‘final rule.’’ However, the 2003 notice did not issue SUMMARY: a ‘‘final rule’’ but did establish the procedures and FMCSA confirms its decision requirement for diabetes in 1970 standards for issuing exemptions for drivers with to exempt 49 individuals from its rule because several risk studies indicated ITDM. prohibiting persons with insulin-treated that drivers with diabetes had a higher VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00147 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37727 rate of crash involvement than the III. Basis for Exemption Determination Lloyd T. Beverly (VA) general population. The diabetes rule Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, James R. Bledsoe (FL) Sammy W. Bowlin (KS) provides that ‘‘A person is physically FMCSA may grant an exemption from qualified to drive a commercial motor Durwin A. Brannon (NC) the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Larry J. Carril (IL) vehicle if that person has no established 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to medical history or clinical diagnosis of Jimmy E. Cole (TN) achieve an equivalent or greater level of Richard S. Collins (IA) diabetes mellitus currently requiring safety than would be achieved without insulin for control’’ (49 CFR Robert S. Colosimo (ND) the exemption. The exemption allows Joel F. Cook (NY) 391.41(b)(3)). the applicants to operate CMVs in FMCSA established its diabetes James N. Coombs (NJ) interstate commerce. exemption program, based on the David A. Daniels (ME) To evaluate the effect of these Mark J. Dias (MA) Agency’s July 2000 study entitled ‘‘A exemptions on safety, FMCSA William A. Emerick (MA) Report to Congress on the Feasibility of considered medical reports about the Brian A. Foss (WY) a Program to Qualify Individuals with applicants’ ITDM and vision, and William A. H. Gardner (CA) Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus to reviewed the treating endocrinologists’ Gary R. Gill (PA) Operate in Interstate Commerce as medical opinion related to the ability of Steven M. Gilmour (MA) Directed by the Transportation Act for the driver to safely operate a CMV while Ismael Gonzalez (IN) the 21st Century.’’ The report concluded Arnold P. Griffith, Jr. (IA) that a safe and practicable protocol to using insulin. Consequently, FMCSA finds that in Charles A. Gudaitis (PA) allow some drivers with ITDM to Scott D. Hanlon (NY) operate CMVs is feasible. The each case exempting these applicants Cory A. Harker (FL) September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441), from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Stanley A. Head (GA) Federal Register notice in conjunction 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level David W. Henderson (NC) with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR of safety equal to that existing without Clark D. Holdeman (TX) 67777), Federal Register notice provides the exemption. William E. Holt (TX) the current protocol for allowing such IV. Conditions and Requirements David A. Holwenger (WA) drivers to operate CMVs in interstate Alan D. Jacobs (OR) The terms and conditions of the commerce. Conrad J. Janik (NY) These 49 applicants have had ITDM exemption will be provided to the David F. Kenny (NY) over a range of one to 42 years. These applicants in the exemption document George W. Key, Jr. (AL) applicants report no severe and they include the following: (1) That Michael O. Lancial (MI) Frank A. Mowers (IL) hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss each individual submit a quarterly monitoring checklist completed by the Charles H. Nichols (MI) of consciousness or seizure, requiring Marvin R. Nunn (OR) the assistance of another person, or treating endocrinologist as well as an annual checklist with a comprehensive Terry C. Rose (NC) resulting in impaired cognitive function Robert L. Rush, Jr. (PA) that occurred without warning medical evaluation; (2) that each individual reports within 2 business Derek J. Scougal (VA) symptoms, in the past 12 months and no Roy Silva (IL) recurrent (2 or more) severe days of occurrence, all episodes of severe hypoglycemia, significant James L. Skinner (IA) hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 Robert L. Terry (TN) complications, or inability to manage years. In each case, an endocrinologist Rafael Torres, Jr. (FL) verified that the driver has diabetes; also, any involvement in an Matthew C. Vaillancourt (MA) demonstrated a willingness to properly accident or any other adverse event in Joseph E. Weitzel (PA) monitor and manage his/her diabetes a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or Ashley M. Winkels (MN) mellitus, received education related to not it is related to an episode of Steven L. Wolvers (IA) diabetes management, and is on a stable hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual David W. Wood (ID) insulin regimen. These drivers report no provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s Donald E. Zimmerman (NC) other disqualifying conditions, or optometrist’s report to the medical In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) including diabetes-related examiner at the time of the annual and 31315 each exemption is valid for complications. Each meets the vision medical examination; and (4) that each two years unless revoked earlier by requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). individual provide a copy of the annual FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked The qualifications and medical medical certification to the employer for if the following occurs: (1) The person condition of each applicant were stated retention in the driver’s qualification fails to comply with the terms and and discussed in detail in the April 8, file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s conditions of the exemption; (2) the 2015, Federal Register notice and they qualification file if he/she is self- exemption has resulted in a lower level will not be repeated in this notice. employed. The driver must also have a of safety than was maintained before it copy of the certification when driving, was granted; or (3) continuation of the II. Discussion of Comments for presentation to a duly authorized exemption would not be consistent with FMCSA received one comment in this Federal, State, or local enforcement the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. proceeding. The comment is addressed official. 31136(e) and 31315. If the exemption is below. V. Conclusion still effective at the end of the 2-year Michael Smith expressed concerns period, the person may apply to FMCSA Based upon its evaluation of the 49 regarding the monitoring of drivers for a renewal under procedures in effect exemption applications, FMCSA granted the exemptions, believing they at that time. are monitored only once a year. FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the requires that drivers who hold diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Issued on: June 23, 2015. exemption submit quarterly and annual 391.41(b)(10), subject to the Larry W. Minor, monitoring reports from their requirements cited above 949 CFR Associate Administrator for Policy. endocrinologists, and an annual vision 391.64(b)): [FR Doc. 2015–16139 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] examination. Christopher R. Alba (CO) BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37728 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION means, identifying your submissions by Two Capitol Hill docket number FRA–2012–0033. All Providence, RI 02903 Federal Railroad Administration electronic submissions must be made to Re: Request for Waiver of Buy America [Docket No. FRA–2012–0033] the U.S. Government electronic site at Requirement http://www.regulations.gov. Dear Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Lewis: Notice of Intent To Grant a Buy Commenters should follow the On January 26, 2015, the Rhode Island America Waiver to the Rhode Island instructions below for mailed and hand- Department of Transportation (RIDOT) Department of Transportation and the delivered comments. and the National Railroad Passenger National Railroad Passenger (1) Web site: http:// Corporation (Amtrak) requested a Corporation for the Purchase of Two www.regulations.gov. Follow the waiver from FRA’s Buy America Turnouts and One Crossover instructions for submitting comments requirement to purchase one (1) No. 20 on the U.S. Government electronic RH 136RE turnout, one (1) No. 20 LH AGENCY: Federal Railroad docket site; 136RE Turnout, and one (1) No. 20 LH Administration (FRA), United States (2) Fax: (202) 493–2251; Crossover 136RE (Turnouts and Department of Transportation (DOT). (3) Mail: U.S. Department of Crossover) manufactured by VAE ACTION: Notice of intent to grant Buy Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Nortrak North America, Inc. (Nortrak) America waiver. Avenue SE., Docket Operations, M–30, for use in the Kingston Track Capacity SUMMARY: FRA is issuing this notice to Room W12–140, Washington, DC and Platform Improvements Project advise the public that it intends to grant 20590–0001; or (Kingston Project). Nortrak will the Rhode Island Department of (4) Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on manufacture the Turnouts and Transportation (RIDOT) and the the first floor of the West Building, 1200 Crossover at its plant in Birmingham, National Railroad Passenger Corporation New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, Alabama, but the Turnouts and (Amtrak), a waiver from FRA’s Buy DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Crossover will contain several America requirement under 49 U.S.C. Monday through Friday, except Federal components (ZU1–60 steel left and right 24405(a)(2)(B) for the purchase of one holidays. switch point rail sections and Schwihag No. 20 RH 136RE Turnout, one No. 20 Instructions: All submissions must roller assemblies and plates) not LH 136RE Turnout, and one No. 20 LH make reference to the ‘‘Federal Railroad produced in the United States. The total Crossover 136RE (Turnouts and Administration’’ and include docket amount of foreign material is Crossover) manufactured by VAE number FRA–2012–0033. Due to approximately $126,000. For the reasons Nortrak North America, Inc. at its plant security procedures in effect since set forth below, FRA is granting a in Birmingham, Alabama, for use in the October 2001, mail received through the waiver for the purchase of the Turnouts Kingston Track Capacity and Platform U.S. Postal Service may be subject to and Crossover. Improvements Project (Kingston delays. Parties making submissions FRA believes a waiver is appropriate Project). Nortrak will manufacture the responsive to this notice should under 49 U.S.C. 24405(a)(2)(B) for the Turnouts and Crossover at its plant in consider using an express mail firm to ZUI–60 steel switch point rail sections Birmingham, Alabama. The Turnouts ensure the prompt filing of any and Schwihag roller assemblies and and Crossover will contain four submissions not filed electronically or plates because domestically-produced components (ZU1–60 steel left and right by hand. Note that all submissions components meeting the specific needs switch point rail sections and Schwihag received, including any personal of RIDOT and Amtrak for this roller assemblies and plates) not information therein, will be posted application are not currently ‘‘produced produced in the U.S. The roller without change or alteration to http:// in sufficient and reasonably available assemblies and plates are manufactured www.regulations.gov. For more amount or are not of a satisfactory in Switzerland, and the ZUl-60 steel information, you may review DOT’s quality.’’ Amtrak has conducted significant switch point rail sections are complete Privacy Act Statement in the market research to locate 100 percent manufactured in Austria. The total Federal Register published on April 11, compliant turnouts. Further, Nortrak amount of foreign material under this 2000 (65 FR 19477), or visit http:// has advised Amtrak that it is in the waiver request amounts to www.regulations.gov. process of designing 100% domestic approximately $126,000. The foreign FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. replacements for the Schwihag rollers material comprises approximately 8 John Johnson, Attorney-Advisor, FRA and plates, and expects to have them percent of the Turnouts’ $350,000 cost Office of Chief Counsel, 1200 New fully tested and approved in one to two or approximately $56,000 and 10 Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 25, years. However, Nortrak will not percent of the Crossover’s $700,000 cost Washington, DC 20590, (202) 493–0078, complete the testing and approval or approximately $70,000. FRA believes [email protected]. process in time for use in the Kingston a waiver is appropriate under 49 U.S.C. Project. In addition, Amtrak issued a 24405(a)(2)(B) for the ZUI–60 steel SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The letter competitive solicitation for the Turnouts switch point rail sections and roller granting RIDOT’s and Amtrak’s request is quoted below: and Crossover and received no Buy assemblies and plates because America compliant bids. domestically-produced components Mr. Bernard Reynolds On January 30, 2015, FRA provided meeting the specific needs of RIDOT Vice President and Chief Procurement public notice of this waiver request and and Amtrak are not currently produced Officer a 15-day opportunity for comment on its in the U.S. National Railroad Passenger Corporation Web site. FRA also sent an email notice DATES: Written comments on FRA’s (Amtrak) to over 6,000 persons who have signed determination to grant RIDOT’s and 60 Massachusetts Avenue NE up for Buy America notices through Amtrak’s Buy America waiver request Washington, D.C. ‘‘GovDelivery.’’ See http:// should be provided to the FRA on or Mr. Michael Lewis www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0782. FRA before July 6, 2015. Director received no comments. ADDRESSES: Please submit your Rhode Island Department of This waiver applies only to the ZUI– comments by one of the following Transportation 60 steel switch point rail sections and VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00149 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37729 Schwihag roller assemblies and plates FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You Privacy Act Statement used in the Turnouts and Crossover may contact Daniel Yuska, Office of All input received at the forum will installed in the Kingston Project. Environment, U.S. Department of be recorded and attributable to the Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 24405(a)(4), FRA Transportation, Maritime individual commenter and where will publish this letter granting Administration, 1200 New Jersey appropriate on behalf of an association, Amtrak’s and RIDOT’s request in the Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. business, labor union, etc. This Federal Register and provide notice of Telephone (202) 366–0714. You may information will be placed on the DOT such finding and an opportunity for send electronic mail to Daniel.Yuska@ public docket. You may review DOT’s public comment after which this waiver dot.gov. complete Privacy Act Statement in the will become effective. For access to the docket, go to http:// Federal Register published on April 11, Questions about this letter can be www.regulations.gov at any time or to 2000 (65 FR 19476, 04/11/2011) or at directed to, John Johnson, Attorney- Room W12–140 of the Department of http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html. Advisor, at [email protected] or Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Authority: 49 CFR 1.93. (202) 493–0078. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, Sincerely, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., * * * * * Sarah Feinberg Monday through Friday, except Federal Dated: June 25, 2015. Acting Administrator Holidays. To view the docket By Order of the Maritime Administrator. electronically, type the docket number T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr., Issued in Washington, DC, on June 22, 2015. ‘‘MARAD–2015–0086’’ in the Secretary, Maritime Administration. ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘Search.’’ Sarah L. Inderbitzin, [FR Doc. 2015–16180 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Click and Open Docket Folder on the BILLING CODE 4910–81–P Deputy Chief Counsel. line associated with this forum. [FR Doc. 2015–16064 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 4910–06–P The META program seeks to foster DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION collaborative efforts among Federal Maritime Administration DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION agencies, academia, industry and the public to address critical marine Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Maritime Administration transportation environmental issues. Agreement/Joint Planning Advisory Among the areas of current focus are Group Table Top Exercise [Docket Number MARAD–2015–0086] aquatic invasive species, ballast water AGENCY: Maritime Administration, Maritime Environmental and Technical and underwater hull growth, port and Department of Transportation. Assistance (META) Program Forum vessel air emissions, and alternative fuels and energy technologies. Through ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Maritime Administration, META, MARAD supports research, Department of Transportation. development and demonstration of SUMMARY: The Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) program ACTION: Notice. innovative technologies for practical applications to balance freight, requires a notice of the time, place, and SUMMARY: The Maritime Administration passenger and environmental concerns nature of each Joint Planning Advisory (MARAD), in cooperation with the with sustainable solutions. This support Group (JPAG) meeting be published in Maryland Environmental Resource includes financial support for research the Federal Register. The full text of the Center, will hold an open forum to and development activities, and VISA program, including these solicit individual input to MARAD on fostering the exchange of information requirements, is published in Federal the Agency’s Maritime Environmental and best practices. Register/Vol. 79, No. 209, 64462— and Technical Assistance (META) 64470, dated October 29, 2014. MARAD is holding this forum to On June 2–3, 2015, the Maritime Program and key environmental issues provide information on the META facing maritime transportation. Input Administration and the U.S. concept, gather public input on Transportation Command co-hosted the received will enable the Agency to identifying the key environmental assess the effectiveness and utility of the 2015 Voluntary Intermodal Sealift issues on which the META program Agreement Joint Planning Advisory Program thus far, and will inform should focus its activities, and on how MARAD and Department of Group Table-Top Exercise at Scott Air MARAD might best structure the Force Base, Illinois. Participants of the Transportation decision making program for the future. Specific topics of regarding possible future research, Table Top Exercise (TTX) were required discussion will include how MARAD to possess a secret clearance due to the development and demonstration might be able to better focus requests for projects. classified nature of the meeting and proposals, and how to address various attendance was by invitation only. The DATES: The forum will be held on levels of technology readiness. Maritime Administrator invited VISA Wednesday, July 22, 2015, from 9:00 During the forum, MARAD carriers, Maritime Labor Unions, a.m. to 1:00 p.m. EDT. representatives will explain the META Longshoreman Labor and designated ADDRESSES: The event will be held at program and discuss current areas of U.S. Strategic Seaport personnel. In the Conference Center of the Maritime focus and projects, followed by small addition, representatives from the Institute of Technology and Graduate group discussions. Minutes will be kept Department of Transportation, the Studies (MITAGS), 692 Maritime Blvd., of the discussion and posted by Maritime Administration and the Linthicum Heights, Maryland 21090 MARAD. Department of Defense (DOD) to include (Telephone 866–656–5568). The facility MARAD will release further details on the Office of the Secretary of Defense, has overnight accommodations. For this public forum, including times and U.S. Transportation Command, the those interested in reserving MITAGS agenda, on its Web page at http:// Military Sealift Command and the accommodations please feel free to call marad.dot.gov and on the DOT docket Surface Deployment and Distribution 410–859–5700. as they become available. Command attended the meeting. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00150 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37730 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You Beyel Brothers Inc. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION may contact William G. Kurfehs, Acting Central Gulf Lines, Inc. Director, Office of Sealift Support, U.S. Columbia Coastal Transport, LLC Maritime Administration Department of Transportation, Maritime CRC Marine Services, Inc. Administration, 1200 New Jersey Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Crimson Shipping Co., Inc. Agreement Open Season Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Crowley Puerto Rico Services, Inc. Telephone (202) 366–2318. You may Crowley Marine Services, Inc. AGENCY: Maritime Administration, send electronic mail to Bill.Kurfehs@ Department of Transportation. dot.gov. Curtin Maritime, Corp. Dann Marine Towing, LC ACTION: Notice of open season for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: enrollment in the VISA program. Colonel Farrell Lines Incorporated Martin Chapin, USAF, Deputy Director, Fidelio Limited Partnership Operations and Planning, U.S. SUMMARY: The Maritime Administration Transportation Command, and Mr. Foss International, Inc. (MARAD) announces that the open Kevin Tokarski, Associate Foss Maritime Company season for Fiscal Year 2016 applications Administrator for Strategic Sealift, Hapag-Lloyd USA, LLC for participation in the Voluntary Maritime Administration, welcomed the Horizon Lines, LLC Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) participants. Mr. Tokarski thanked the LA Carriers, LLC program will run for 30 days beginning industry participants for their continued Laborde Marine, L.L.C. today and ending July 31, 2015. The purpose of this notice is to invite support and stated he was pleased with Liberty Global Logistics, LLC the large number of attendees at the interested, qualified U.S.-flag vessel Liberty Shipping Group, LLC operators that are not currently enrolled JPAG meeting. He expressed a hope that Lockwood Brothers, Inc. the JPAG TTX would serve to prepare in the VISA program to apply. This is Lynden Incorporated the only planned enrollment period for all attendee for what could actually Maersk Line, Limited occur during a VISA activation. Col. carriers to join the VISA program and Marine Transport Management Chapin remarked that the classified TTX derive benefits for Department of will focus on VISA participants’ ability Matson Navigation Company, Inc. Defense (DOD) peacetime contracts to meet DOD requirements for moving McAllister Towing and Transportation initiated during the period from October contingency cargo from CONUS Sea Co., Inc. 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016. Any U.S.-flag vessel operator Ports of Embarkation to designated McCulley Marine Services, Inc. organized under the laws of a state of OCONUS Ports of Debarkation. Col. Moran Towing Corp. the United States, or the District of Chapin also stated that the TTX will National Shipping of America, LLC Columbia, who is able and willing to address mariner availability to support Northcliffe Ocean Shipping & Trading commit militarily useful sealift assets VISA activation. Further, both Company and assume the related consequential gentlemen requested participants Pasha Hawaii Transport Lines LLC risks of commercial disruption, may be complete a survey at the end of the TTX Patriot Shipping, L.L.C eligible to participate in the VISA and provide recommendations to Resolve Towing & Salvage, Inc. program. improve the JPAG. Samson Tug & Barge Company, Inc. The mission of VISA is to provide The purpose of the JPAG TTX was to: Schuyler Line Navigation Company, commercial sealift and intermodal (1) Affirm industry’s ability to meet LLC shipping services and systems, DOD requirements by exposing them to Sea Star Line, LLC including vessels, vessel space, the most demanding DOD scenario; (2) intermodal systems and equipment, exercise commercial sealift capacity in SeaTac Marine Services, LLC terminal facilities, and related relation to scenario requirements; (3) Seabridge, Inc. management services, to the Department validate scenario planning assumptions; Sealift Inc. of Defense (DOD), as necessary, to meet and (4) recommend revisions, as Smith Maritime, Inc. national defense contingency appropriate, on how we model specified Stevens Towing Co., Inc. requirements or national emergencies. scenarios and/or other related planning Stevens Transportation, LLC Carriers enrolled in the VISA program documents and associated planning Superior Maritime Services, Inc. provide DOD with assured access to assumptions. The JPAG TTX was Tactical Shipping, LLC such services during contingencies. In considered a success as industry Teras BBC Ocean Navigation Enterprises return for their VISA commitment, DOD participants were able to provide Houston, LLC gives VISA participants priority for capacity and resources to meet DOD Totem Ocean Trailer Express peacetime cargos. requirements. However, the participants Trailer Bridge, Inc. DATES: VISA Program applications must identified specific ‘‘lessons learned’’ TransAtlantic Lines, LLC that will be addressed to improve the be received on or before July 31, 2015. Western Towboat Company JPAG. The JPAG TTX participants ADDRESSES: Submit applications and agreed to work on the lessons learned to Weeks Marine, Inc. questions related to this notice to assure that they are adequately Waterman Steamship Corporation William G. Kurfehs, Acting Director, addressed for the efficient coordination Young Brothers Limited Office of Sealift Support, U.S. of VISA activation procedures. AUTHORITY: 49 CFR 1.93(l), Pub. L. 111– Department of Transportation, Maritime The following are VISA participants: 67. Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. A Way To Move, Inc. Dated: June 25, 2015. American International Shipping, LLC FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By Order of the Maritime Administrator. American Marine Corporation William G. Kurfehs, Acting Director, American President Lines, Ltd. T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr., Office of Sealift Support, U.S. American Roll-On Roll-Off Carrier, LLC Secretary, Maritime Administration. Department of Transportation, Maritime APL Marine Services, Ltd. [FR Doc. 2015–16178 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Administration, 1200 New Jersey Argent Marine Operations, Inc. BILLING CODE 4910–81–P Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37731 Telephone (202) 366–2318; Fax (202) vessel into U.S. registry. That carrier committed to Stages I and II will not 366–5904, electronic mail to may submit an application to participate have an adverse national economic [email protected] or visit http:// in the VISA program at any time upon impact. To minimize domestic www.marad.dot.gov. completion of reflagging. commercial disruption, participants operating vessels exclusively in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The VISA Advantages of Peacetime Participation domestic Jones Act trades are not program was established pursuant to In return for their VISA commitment, required to commit the capacity of those Section 708 of the Defense Production DOD awards peacetime cargo contracts U.S. domestic trading vessels to VISA Act of 1950, as amended (DPA). The to VISA participants on a priority basis. Stages I and II. Overall VISA VISA program was created to provide Award of DOD cargoes to meet DOD commitment requirements are based on for voluntary agreements for emergency peacetime and contingency annual enrollment. preparedness programs. Pursuant to the requirements is made on the basis of the In order to protect a U.S.-flag vessel DPA, voluntary agreements for following priorities: U.S.-flag vessel operator’s market share during preparedness programs, including the capacity operated by VISA participants contingency activation, VISA allows VISA program expire five (5) years after and U.S.-flag Vessel Sharing Agreement participants to join with other vessel the date they became effective. (VSA) capacity held by VISA operators in Carrier Coordination The VISA program is open to U.S.-flag participants; U.S.-flag vessel capacity Agreements (CCAs) to satisfy vessel operators of oceangoing militarily operated by non-participants; commercial or DOD requirements. VISA useful vessels, to include tugs and Combination U.S.-flag/foreign-flag provides a defense against antitrust laws barges. An operator is defined as an vessel capacity operated by VISA in accordance with the DPA. CCAs must owner or bareboat charterer of a vessel. participants, and combination U.S.-flag/ be submitted to the MARAD for Tug enrollment alone does not satisfy foreign-flag VSA capacity held by VISA coordination with the Department of VISA eligibility. Operators include participants; Combination U.S.-flag/ Justice for approval, before they can be vessel owners and bareboat charter foreign-flag vessel capacity operated by utilized. operators if satisfactory signed non-participants; U.S.-owned or agreements are in place committing the operated foreign-flag vessel capacity and Vessel Position Reporting assets of the owner to VISA. Voyage and VSA capacity held by VISA If VISA applicants have the capability space charterers are not considered participants; U.S.-owned or operated to track their vessels, they must include U.S.-flag vessel operators for purposes foreign-flag vessel capacity and VSA the tracking system used in their VISA of VISA eligibility. capacity held by non-participants; and application. Such applicants are VISA Concept Foreign-owned or operated foreign-flag required to provide MARAD access to vessel capacity of non-participants. their vessel tracking systems upon The VISA program provides for the approval of their VISA application. If Participation staged, time-phased availability of VISA applicants do not have a tracking participants’ shipping services/systems Applicants must provide satisfactory system, they must indicate this in their through pre-negotiated contracts evidence that the vessels being VISA application. The VISA program between the Government and committed to the VISA program are requires enrolled ships to comply with participants. Such arrangements are operational and are intended to be 46 CFR part 307, Establishment of jointly planned with the MARAD, U.S. operated by the applicant in the carriage Mandatory Position Reporting System Transportation Command of commercial or government preference for Vessels. (USTRANSCOM), and participants in cargoes. Operator is defined as an ocean peacetime to allow effective and best common carrier or contract carrier that Compensation valued use of commercial sealift owns, controls or manages vessels by In addition to receiving priority in the capacity, provide DOD assured which ocean transportation is provided. award of DOD peacetime cargo, a contingency access, and to minimize While vessel brokers, freight forwarders, participant will receive compensation commercial disruption. and agents play an important role as a during contingency activation for that There are three time-phased stages in conduit to locate and secure appropriate capacity activated under Stage I, II and the event of VISA activation. VISA vessels for the carriage of DOD cargo, III. The amount of compensation will Stages I and II provide for pre- they are not eligible to participate in the depend on the Stage at which capacity negotiated contracts between DOD and VISA program due to lack of requisite is activated. During enrollment, each participants to provide sealift capacity vessel ownership or operation. participant must select one of several to meet all projected DOD contingency compensation methodologies. The Commitment requirements. These contracts are compensation methodology selection executed in accordance with approved Any U.S.-flag vessel operator desiring will be completed with the appropriate DOD contracting methodologies. VISA to receive priority consideration for DOD agency, resulting in prices in Stage III provides for additional capacity DOD peacetime contracts must commit contingency contracts between DOD and to DOD when Stages I and II no less than 50 percent of its total U.S.- the participant. commitments or volunteered capacity flag militarily useful capacity in Stage are insufficient to meet contingency III of the VISA program. Participants Security Clearances requirements, and adequate shipping operating vessels in international trade All VISA applicants accepted for services from non-participants are not may receive top tier consideration in the VISA participation, not having a Facility available through established DOD award of DOD peacetime contracts by Security Clearance (FCL), will be contracting practices or U.S. committing the minimum percentages of required to pursue the clearance process Government treaty agreements. capacity to all three stages of VISA or with the Defense Security Service (DSS). bottom tier consideration by committing If the accepted applicant does not have Exceptions to This Open Season the minimum percentage of capacity to a clearance, MARAD will initiate the The only exception to this open only Stage III of VISA. USTRANSCOM clearance process with DSS. season period for VISA enrollment will and MARAD will coordinate to ensure Participants must have a FCL and be for a non-VISA carrier that reflags a that the amount of sealift assets individual security clearances, at a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37732 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices minimum of SECRET level, for key tug service is not owned or bareboat DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION personnel in order for them to chartered by the VISA applicant. Barge participate in the VISA Joint Planning operators must provide evidence to National Highway Traffic Safety Advisory Group (JPAG) meetings and to MARAD that tug service of sufficient Administration meet VISA contingency contract horsepower will be available for all [Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0062] obligations. One of the objectives of the barges enrolled in the VISA program. JPAG is to provide the USTRANSCOM, National Emergency Medical Services Once MARAD has reviewed the MARAD and VISA participants a Advisory Council; Notice of Federal application and determined VISA planning forum to analyze DOD Advisory Committee Meeting contingency sealift/intermodal service eligibility, MARAD will sign the VISA and resource requirements against application document which completes AGENCY: National Highway Traffic industry commitments. JPAG meetings the eligibility phase of the VISA Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S. are often SECRET classified sessions. enrollment process. Approved VISA Department of Transportation (DOT). Eligibility for VISA participation will be participants will be responsible for ACTION: Meeting notice—National terminated if an applicant is rejected for ensuring that information submitted Emergency Medical Services Advisory a facility clearance or if it fails to with their application remains up to Council (NEMSAC). progress in a timely manner in the date beyond the approval process. If SUMMARY: The NHTSA announces a clearance process. charter agreements are due to expire, meeting of the NEMSAC to be held in Application for VISA Participation participants must provide MARAD with the Metropolitan Washington, DC, area. charters that extend the charter duration This notice announces the date, time, New applicants may apply to for another 12 months or longer. participate by obtaining a VISA and location of the meeting, which will application package (Form MA–1020 After VISA eligibility is approved by be open to the public, as well as (OMB Approval No. 2133–0532)) from MARAD, approved applicants are opportunities for public input to the the Acting Director, Office of Sealift required to execute a VISA Contingency NEMSAC. The purpose of NEMSAC, a Support. Form MA–1020 includes Contract with USTRANSCOM. The nationally recognized council of instructions for completing and USTRANSCOM VISA Contingency emergency medical services submitting the application, blank VISA Contract will specify the following: representatives and consumers, is to Application forms and a request for Participant’s Stage III commitment, and advise and consult with DOT and the Federal Interagency Committee on EMS information regarding the operations appropriate Stage I and/or II (FICEMS) on matters relating to and U.S. citizenship of the applicant commitments for the period October 1, emergency medical services (EMS). company. A copy of the VISA document 2015 through September 30, 2016; DATES: The NEMSAC meeting will be as published in the Federal Register on Drytime Contingency terms and held on Thursday, July 30, 2015, from October 29, 2014 will also be provided conditions; and Liner Contingency 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. EDT, and on Friday, with the package. This information is terms and conditions, if applicable. If needed in order to assist MARAD in July 31, 2015, from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. any change is expected in the EDT. A public comment period will take making a determination of the Contractor’s U.S. flag fleet during the applicant’s eligibility. An applicant place on July 30, 2015, at approximately period of the applicable VISA company must provide an affidavit that 4 p.m. EDT and on July 31, 2015, at demonstrates that the company is Contingency Contract, a minimum 30- approximately 10:45 a.m. EDT. Written qualified to document a vessel under 46 day notice shall be provided to MARAD comments for the NEMSAC from the U.S.C. 12103, and that it owns, or and USTRANSCOM identifying the public must be received no later than bareboat charters and controls, change and to alter the VISA Capacity July 24, 2015. oceangoing, militarily useful vessel(s) Commitment indicated on Attachment 1 ADDRESSES: The meetings will both be for purposes of committing assets to the of the VISA Contingency Contract. held at the Ronald Reagan Building and VISA program. Execution of the USTRANSCOM International Trade Center, 1300 New VISA applicants are required to VISA Contingency Contract completes Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, submit their applications for the VISA the enrollment process and establishes DC 20004 in the Polaris Room. program as described in this Notice no the approved applicant as a VISA FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: later than 30 days after the date of Participant. The Maritime Drew Dawson, Director, U.S. publication of this Federal Register Administration reserves the right to Department of Transportation, National notice. Applicants must provide the revalidate all eligibility requirements Highway Traffic Safety Administration, following: U.S. citizenship Office of Emergency Medical Services, without notice. USTRANSCOM reserves documentation; Copy of their Articles of 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., NTI–140, the right to revalidate eligibility for Incorporation and/or By Laws; Copies of Washington, DC 20590, telephone 202– loadline documents from a recognized VISA priority for DOD business at any 366–9966; email [email protected]. time without notice. classification society to validate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of oceangoing vessel capability; U.S. Coast Authority: 49 CFR Sections 1.92 and 1.93. this meeting is given under the Federal Guard Certificates of Documentation for * * * * * Advisory Committee Act, Public Law all vessels in their fleet; Copy of 92–463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.). Bareboat Charters, if applicable, valid By Order of the Maritime Administrator. The NEMSAC is authorized under through the period of enrollment, which Dated: June 25, 2015. Section 31108 of the Moving Ahead state that the owner will not interfere T. Mitchell Hudson, Jr., with Progress in the 21st Century Act of with the charterer’s obligation to Secretary, Maritime Administration. 2012. commit chartered vessel(s) to the VISA [FR Doc. 2015–16179 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] program for the duration of the charter; Tentative Agenda of the National EMS and Copy of Time Charters, valid BILLING CODE 4910–81–P Advisory Council Meeting through the period of enrollment, for tug The tentative NEMSAC agenda services to barge operators, if sufficient includes the following: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37733 Thursday, July 30, 2015 (9 a.m. to 5 p.m. July 24, 2015. For assistance with ACTION: List of application delayed more EDT) registration, please contact Noah Smith than 180 days. (1) Opening Remarks and at [email protected] or 202–366– Introductions by NEMSAC 5030. There will not be a teleconference SUMMARY: In accordance with the Members and Staff option for this meeting. requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5117(c), (2) Disclosure of Conflicts of Interests Public Comment: Members of the PHMSA is publishing the following list by Members public are encouraged to comment of special permit applications that have (3) Remarks from the National directly to the NEMSAC during been in process for 180 days or more. Highway Traffic Safety designated public comment periods as The reason(s) for delay and the expected Administration noted above. In order to allow as many completion date for action on each (4) Remarks from FICEMS Chair Ed people as possible to speak, speakers are application is provided in association Gabriel requested to limit their remarks to 5 with each identified application. (5) Overview of the National EMS minutes. Written comments from FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Advisory Council members of the public will be Ryan Paquet, Director, Office of (6) Overview of NEMSAC distributed to NEMSAC members at the Hazardous Materials Special Permits Recommendation Procedures meeting and should reach the NHTSA and Approvals, Pipeline and Hazardous (7) Updates from Liaisons from the Office of EMS no later than July 24, Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Departments of Transportation, 2015. Written comments may be Department of Transportation, East Homeland Security, and Health & submitted by either one of the following Building, PHH–30, 1200 New Jersey Human Services methods: (1) You may submit comments Avenue Southeast, Washington, DC (8) Review of Ongoing Work of by email: [email protected] or (2) you 20590–0001, (202) 366–4535. NHTSA and FICEMS Agencies may submit comments by fax: (202) (9) Public Comment Period 366–7149. Key to ‘‘Reason for Delay’’ (Approximately 4 p.m. EDT) A final agenda as well as meeting (10) Review of Previous 1. Awaiting additional information from materials will be available to the public applicant Recommendations from NEMSAC online through www.EMS.gov on or 2. Extensive public comment under (11) Recess before July 24, 2015. Friday, July 31, 2015 (9 a.m. to 12 p.m. review EDT) Issued on: June 26, 2015. 3. Application is technically complex (1) Discussion of Naloxone Use by Jeffrey P. Michael, and is of significant impact or EMS personnel Associate Administrator for Research and precedent-setting and requires (2) Discussion of New and Emerging Program Development. extensive analysis Issues from NEMSAC Members [FR Doc. 2015–16174 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 4. Staff review delayed by other priority (3) Public Comment Period BILLING CODE 4910–59–P issues or volume of special permit (Approximately 10:45 a.m. EDT) applications (4) Discussion of NEMSAC Focus Areas for 2015–2017 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Meaning of Application Number (5) Charge to the Council, Next Steps, Suffixes Election of Chairman and Vice- Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration N—New application Chairman and Adjourn M—Modification request Registration Information: These Hazardous Materials: Delayed R—Renewal Request meetings will be open to the public; Applications however, pre-registration is requested. P—Party To Exemption Request Individuals wishing to attend must AGENCY: Office of Hazardous Materials Issued in Washington, DC, on June 23, register online at https:// Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous 2015. www.signup4.net/public/ Materials Safety Administration Ryan Paquet, ap.aspx?EID=NEMS12E no later than (PHMSA), DOT. Director, Approvals and Permits Division. Reason for Estimated date of Application No. Applicant delay completion MODIFICATION TO SPECIAL PERMITS 8451–M ...... Special Devices, Inc., Mesa, AR ...... 4 06–30–2015 15744–M ...... Praxair Distribution, Inc., Danbury, CT ...... 4 06–25–2015 7945–M ...... Pacific Scientific Company, Simi Valley, CA ...... 4 06–25–2015 15393–M ...... Savannah Acid Plant LLC, Savannah, GA ...... 3 06–30–2015 NEW SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATIONS 15767–N ...... Union Pacific Railroad Company, Omaha, NE ...... 1 06–20–2015 16001–N ...... VELTEK ASSOCIATES, INC., Malvern, PA ...... 4 06–30–2015 16190–N ...... Digital Wave Corporation, Centennial, CO ...... 4 06–29–2015 16198–N ...... Fleischmann’s Vinegar Company, Inc., CERRITOS, CA ...... 4 07–15–2015 16212–N ...... Entegris, Inc., Billerica, MA ...... 4 06–30–2015 16220–N ...... Americase, Waxahache, TX ...... 4 07–30–2015 16193–N ...... CH&I Technologies, Inc., Santa Paula, CA ...... 4 06–29–2015 16261–N ...... Dexsil Corporation, Hamden, CT ...... 4 07–13–2015 16232–N ...... Linde Gas North America LLC, Murray HIll, NJ ...... 1 07–05–2015 16249–N ...... Optimized Energy Solutions, LLC, Durango, CO ...... 4 06–30–2015 16320–N ...... Digital Wave Corporation, Centennial, CO ...... 4 06–29–2015 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00154 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37734 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Reason for Estimated date of Application No. Applicant delay completion 16346–N ...... FIBA Technologies, Inc., Littleton, MA ...... 4 07–15–2015 16337–N ...... Volkswagen Group of America (VWGoA), Herndon, VA) ...... 4 06–30–2015 16318–N ...... Technical Chemical Company, Cleburne TX ...... 4 07–17–2015 16484–N ...... Rotarex North America, Mount Pleasant, PA ...... 4 07–15–2015 PARTY TO SPECIAL PERMITS APPLICATION 16279–P ...... National Hazard Control, Tempe, AZ ...... 4 06–30–2015 RENEWAL SPECIAL PERMITS APPLICATIONS 11860–R ...... GATX Corporation, Chicago, IL ...... 1 07–15–2015 11296–R ...... Environmental Waste Services, Inc., Elburn, IL ...... 4 06–30–2015 8009–R ...... NK Co., Ltd., Busan City, KR ...... 4 06–30–2015 13976–R ...... Osmose Utilities Services, Inc., Tyrone, GA ...... 4 06–30–2015 [FR Doc. 2015–15845 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham & environment and historic resources. BILLING CODE 4910–60–M Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. OEA will issue an environmental 91 (1979). To address whether this assessment (EA) by July 6, 2015. condition adequately protects affected Interested persons may obtain a copy of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION employees, a petition for partial the EA by writing to OEA (Room 1100, revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) Surface Transportation Board Surface Transportation Board, must be filed. Washington, DC 20423–0001) or by [Docket No. AB 55 (Sub-No. 739X)] Provided no formal expression of calling OEA at (202) 245–0305. intent to file an offer of financial Assistance for the hearing impaired is CSX Transportation, Inc.— assistance (OFA) has been received, this available through the Federal Abandonment Exemption—in Atlanta, exemption will be effective on July 31, Information Relay Service at (800) 877– Fulton County, GA 2015, unless stayed pending reconsideration. Petitions to stay that do 8339. Comments on environmental and CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) has not involve environmental issues,2 historic preservation matters must be filed a verified notice of exemption formal expressions of intent to file an filed within 15 days after the EA under 49 CFR part 1152 subpart F– OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2),3 and becomes available to the public. Exempt Abandonments to abandon an interim trail use/rail banking requests Environmental, historic preservation, approximately 0.37-mile segment of rail under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be filed by line, formerly known as the L&N Belt public use, or interim trail use/rail July 13, 2015. Petitions to reopen or banking conditions will be imposed, Line, between milepost 472.27 and the 4 end of the line at milepost 472.64 in requests for public use conditions where appropriate, in a subsequent Atlanta, Fulton County, Ga. (the Line).1 under 49 CFR 1152.28 must be filed by decision. July 21, 2015, with the Surface The Line traverses United States Postal Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Service Zip Code 30310. CSXT states 1152.29(e)(2), CSXT shall file a notice of Washington, DC 20423–0001. there are no stations on the Line. consummation with the Board to signify CSXT has certified that: (1) No freight A copy of any petition filed with the Board should be sent to CSXT’s that it has exercised the authority traffic has moved over the Line for at granted and fully abandoned the Line. If least two years; (2) no formal complaint representative: Louis E. Gitomer, Law Offices of Louis E. Gitomer, LLC, 600 consummation has not been effected by filed by a user of rail service on the Line CSXT’s filing of a notice of (or by a state or local government entity Baltimore Avenue, Suite 301, Towson, consummation by July 1, 2016, and acting on behalf of such user) regarding MD 21204. there are no legal or regulatory barriers cessation of service over the Line is If the verified notice contains false or either pending with the Surface misleading information, the exemption to consummation, the authority to Transportation Board (Board) or with is void ab initio. abandon will automatically expire. CSXT has filed environmental and any U.S. District Court or has been Board decisions and notices are historic reports that address the effects, decided in favor of complainant within available on our Web site at if any, of the abandonment on the the two-year period; and (3) the WWW.STB.DOT.GOV. requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7(c) 2 The Board will grant a stay if an informed Decided: June 23, 2015. (environmental report), 49 CFR 1105.11 decision on environmental issues (whether raised By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 by a party or by the Board’s Office of Environmental (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR Analysis (OEA) in its independent investigation) Director, Office of Proceedings. 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental cannot be made before the exemption’s effective Raina S. Contee, date. See Exemption of Out-of-Serv. Rail Lines, 5 agencies) have been met. I.C.C. 2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should Clearance Clerk. As a condition to this exemption, any be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may [FR Doc. 2015–16192 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] take appropriate action before the exemption’s employee adversely affected by the BILLING CODE 4915–01–P abandonment shall be protected under effective date. Oregon Short Line Railroad— 3 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing fee, which is currently set at $1,600. See 49 CFR Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch 1002.2(f)(25). 4 CSXT states that the Line may be suitable for 1 CSXT states that, following abandonment, it other public purposes or trail use, but may be plans to sell the real estate. subject to reversionary interests. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00155 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37735 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY If we can be of any assistance, please feel free to contact the Surety Bond Fiscal Service Fiscal Service Section at (202) 874–6850. Patricia M. Greiner, Surety Companies Acceptable On [Dept. Circular 570; 2015 Revision] Federal Bonds—Terminations: Assistant Commissioner for Management (CFO). Harleysville Worcester Insurance Companies Holding Certificates of Company; OneBeacon America Authority as Acceptable Sureties on IMPORTANT INFORMATION IS Insurance Company OneBeacon Federal Bonds and as Acceptable CONTAINED IN THE NOTES AT THE Insurance Company; Pennsylvania Reinsuring Companies END OF THIS CIRCULAR. PLEASE Insurance Company READ THE NOTES CAREFULLY. Effective July 1, 2015 Certified Companies AGENCY: Bureau of the Fiscal Service, This Circular is published annually ACCREDITED SURETY AND Fiscal Service, Department of the for the information of Federal bond- Treasury. CASUALTY COMPANY, INC. (NAIC approving officers and persons required #26379) ACTION: to give bonds to the United States Notice. BUSINESS ADDRESS: PO Box consistent with 31 CFR 223.16. Copies 140855, Orlando, FL 32814–0855. SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 10 to of the Circular and interim changes may PHONE: (407) 629–2131. the Treasury Department Circular 570, be obtained directly from the internet at UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 2014 Revision, published July 1, 2014, www.gpoaccess.gov or from the $2,088,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: at 79 FR 37398. Government Printing Office (202) 512– AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, 1800. (Interim changes are published in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, the Federal Register and on the internet MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874–6850. as they occur). Other information NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is pertinent to Federal sureties may be OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, hereby given that the Certificates of obtained from the U.S. Department of VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Authority issued by the Treasury to the the Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal INCORPORATED IN: Florida. above-named companies under 31 Service, Surety Bond Section, 3700 East ACE American Insurance Company U.S.C. 9305 to qualify as acceptable West Highway, Room 6D22, Hyattsville, (NAIC #22667) sureties on Federal bonds were MD 20782, Telephone (202) 874–6850 BUSINESS ADDRESS: 436 Walnut terminated effective June 30, 2015. or Fax (202) 874–9978. Street P.O. Box 1000, Philadelphia, PA Federal bond-approving officials should The most current list of Treasury 19106. PHONE: (215) 640–1000. annotate their reference copies of the authorized companies is always UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Treasury Department Circular 570 available through the Internet at $299,291,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (‘‘Circular’’), 2014 Revision, to reflect www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/ref/ AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, this change. suretyBnd/c570.htm. In addition, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, With respect to any bonds currently applicable laws, regulations, and ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, in force with these companies, bond- application information are also NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, approving officers may let such bonds available at the same site. OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. run to expiration and need not secure Please note that the underwriting INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. new bonds. However, no new bonds limitation published herein is on a per should be accepted from these bond basis but this does not limit the ACE Property and Casualty Insurance companies, and bonds that are amount of a bond that a company can Company (NAIC #20699) continuous in nature should not be write. Companies are allowed to write BUSINESS ADDRESS: 436 WALNUT renewed. bonds with a penal sum over their STREET, P.O. Box 1000, Philadelphia, The Circular may be viewed and underwriting limitation as long as they PA 19106. PHONE: (215) 640–1000. downloaded through the Internet at protect the excess amount with UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/ref/ reinsurance, coinsurance or other $206,443,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: suretyBnd/c570.htm. methods as specified at 31 CFR 223.10– AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Questions concerning this notice may 11. Please refer to Note (b) at the end of FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, be directed to the U.S. Department of this publication. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, the Treasury, Bureau of the Fiscal The following companies have OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, Service, Financial Accounting and complied with the law and the UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Services Division, Surety Bond Section, regulations of the U.S. Department of INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. 3700 East-West Highway, Room 6D22, the Treasury. Those listed in the front Hyattsville, MD 20782. of this Circular are acceptable as ACSTAR INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC #22950) Dated: June 26, 2015. sureties and reinsurers on Federal bonds under Title 31 of the United States Alberta Holloway, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 30 SOUTH Code, Sections 9304 to 9308 [See Note ROAD, FARMINGTON, CT 06032. Acting Manager, Financial Accounting and (a)]. Those listed in the back are PHONE: (860) 415–8400. Services Branch. acceptable only as reinsurers on Federal UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: [FR Doc. 2015–16279 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] bonds under 31 CFR 223.3(b) [See Note $2,805,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BILLING CODE 4810–35–P (e)]. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37736 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, Allied World Insurance Company ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, (NAIC #22730) TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 199 Water INCORPORATED IN: Missouri. INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. Street, New York, NY 10038. PHONE: AMERICAN BANKERS INSURANCE Aegis Security Insurance Company (646) 794–0500. UNDERWRITING COMPANY OF FLORIDA (NAIC (NAIC #33898) LIMITATION b/: $69,553,000. SURETY #10111) LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 3153, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 11222 QUAIL Harrisburg, PA 17105. PHONE: (717) KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, ROOST DRIVE, MIAMI, FL 33157–6596. 657–9671. UNDERWRITING MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, PHONE: (305) 253–2244. LIMITATION b/: $5,340,000. SURETY ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. $56,394,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, INCORPORATED IN: New Hampshire. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Allied World Specialty Insurance ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, Company (NAIC #16624) NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1690 New OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. Britain Avenue, Suite 101, Farmington, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. CT 06032. PHONE: (860) 284–1300. INCORPORATED IN: Florida. ALL AMERICA INSURANCE UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: COMPANY (NAIC #20222) American Casualty Company of $39,740,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Reading, Pennsylvania (NAIC #20427) AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, DC, FL, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 351, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 333 S. VAN WERT, OH 45891–0351. PHONE: MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, WABASH AVE, CHICAGO, IL 60604. (419) 238–1010. UNDERWRITING NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PHONE: (312) 822–5000. LIMITATION b/: $13,470,000. SURETY OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LICENSES c,f/: AZ, CA, CT, GA, IL, IN, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. $14,629,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: IA, KY, MA, MI, NV, NJ, NY, NC, OH, INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, OK, TN, TX, VA. INCORPORATED IN: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Ohio. AMCO Insurance Company (NAIC ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, #19100) Allegheny Casualty Company (NAIC NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, #13285) BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE WEST OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, NATIONWIDE BLVD., 1–04–701, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Newark COLUMBUS, OH 43215–2220. PHONE: INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. Center, 20th Floor, Newark, NJ 07102. (515) 508–4211. UNDERWRITING AMERICAN CONTRACTORS PHONE: (800) 333–4167 x-269. LIMITATION b/: $20,798,000. SURETY INDEMNITY COMPANY (NAIC UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, #10216) 1 $2,303,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, KY, ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 601 South FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, NV, NM, NC, ND, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, Figueroa Street, 16th Floor, Los Angeles, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, CA 90017. PHONE: (310) 649–0990. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, $8,620,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AMERICAN ALTERNATIVE AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INSURANCE CORPORATION (NAIC INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, #19720) LA, ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, ALLEGHENY SURETY COMPANY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 555 COLLEGE NV, NJ, NM, NY, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, (NAIC #34541) ROAD EAST—P.O. BOX 5241, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, PRINCETON, NJ 08543. PHONE: (609) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 4217 WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: 243–4200. UNDERWRITING California. Steubenville Pike, Pittsburgh, PA 15205. LIMITATION b/: $16,892,000. SURETY PHONE: (412) 921–3077. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, American Fire and Casualty Company UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, (NAIC #24066) $290,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: PA. IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 62 Maple INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, Avenue, Keene, NH 03431. PHONE: ALLIED Property and Casualty NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING Insurance Company (NAIC #42579) SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, LIMITATION b/: $3,903,000. SURETY WY. INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE WEST CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, American Automobile Insurance NATIONWIDE BLVD., 1–04–701, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, Company (NAIC #21849) COLUMBUS, OH 43215–2220. PHONE: MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, (515) 508–4211. UNDERWRITING BUSINESS ADDRESS: 777 San Marin ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, LIMITATION b/: $5,904,000. SURETY Drive, Novato, CA 94998. PHONE: (415) TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, 899–2000. UNDERWRITING INCORPORATED IN: New Hampshire. CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, LIMITATION b/: $16,432,000. SURETY KY, ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, American Guarantee and Liability NV, NH, NM, ND, OH, PA, RI, SC, SD, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, Insurance Company (NAIC #26247) TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1400 INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. MS, MO, MT, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, AMERICAN LANE, TOWER I, 18TH VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37737 FLOOR, SCHAUMBURG, IL 60196– UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, 1056. PHONE: (847) 605–6000. INCORPORATED IN: Oklahoma. MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NM, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, American Southern Insurance $18,094,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, Company (NAIC #10235) AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P O Box Antilles Insurance Company (NAIC ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, 723030, Atlanta, GA 31139–0030. #10308) NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, PHONE: (404) 266–9599. OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: PO Box VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. $3,901,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: 9023507, San Juan, PR 00902–3507. INCORPORATED IN: New York. AL, AZ, AR, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, IL, IN, PHONE: (787) 474–4900. KS, KY, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, NE, NJ, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: American Home Assurance Company NY, NC, OH, PA, SC, TN, UT, VA, WA, $6,651,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: PR. (NAIC #19380) WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: INCORPORATED IN: Puerto Rico. Kansas. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 WATER Arch Insurance Company (NAIC STREET, 18TH FLOOR, NEW YORK, American Surety Company (NAIC #11150) NY 10038. PHONE: (212) 770–7000. #31380) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 300 Plaza $724,790,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 250 East 96th Three, Jersey City, NJ 07311–1107. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Street, Suite 202, Indianapolis, IN PHONE: (201) 743–4000. FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, 46240. PHONE: (317) 875–8700. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $77,837,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, $1,083,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, INCORPORATED IN: New York. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, American Insurance Company (The) OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. (NAIC #21857) VT, VA, WA, WV, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Missouri. INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 777 San Marin Arch Reinsurance Company (NAIC Drive, Novato, CA 94998. PHONE: (415) Amerisure Insurance Company (NAIC #10348) 2 899–2000. UNDERWRITING #19488) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 445 South LIMITATION b/: $28,970,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. Box 2060, Street, Suite 220, P.O. Box 1988, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, Farmington Hills, MI 48331–3586. Morristown, NJ 07962–1988. PHONE: CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, PHONE: (248) 615–9000. (973) 898–9575. UNDERWRITING IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LIMITATION b/: $35,995,000. SURETY MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, $22,451,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AS, AZ, AR, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, MI, MN, INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, AMERICAN ROAD INSURANCE NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, COMPANY (THE) (NAIC #19631) RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV. WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One American Michigan. Road, MD 7600, Dearborn, MI 48126– Argonaut Insurance Company (NAIC 2701. PHONE: (313) 337–1102. Amerisure Mutual Insurance Company #19801) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #23396) BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX $24,659,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. Box 2060, 469011, SAN ANTONIO, TX 78246. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, DC, FL, Farmington Hills, MI 48331–3586. PHONE: (800) 470–7958. GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, PHONE: (248) 615–9000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $39,076,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, $59,569,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, American Safety Casualty Insurance NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, Company (NAIC #39969) OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 250 INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. Commercial Street, Suite 5000, ASPEN AMERICAN INSURANCE Manchester, NH 03101. PHONE: (603) Amerisure Partners Insurance COMPANY (NAIC #43460) 656–2200. UNDERWRITING Company (NAIC #11050) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 Capital LIMITATION b/: $14,862,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. Box 2060, Boulevard, Suite 300, Rocky Hill, CT LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, Farmington Hills, MI 48331–3586. 06067. PHONE: (860) 258–3500. CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, PHONE: (248) 615–9000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $26,281,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, $2,281,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37738 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, $86,489,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Berkley Regional Insurance Company NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, AL, AK, AS, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, (NAIC #29580) OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 11201 Douglas UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, Avenue, Urbandale, IA 50322. PHONE: INCORPORATED IN: Texas. MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, (515) 473–3174. UNDERWRITING OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, Associated Indemnity Corporation LIMITATION b/: $66,657,000. SURETY TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. (NAIC #21865) LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, INCORPORATED IN: New York. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 777 San Marin IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, Drive, Novato, CA 94998. PHONE: (415) Bankers Insurance Company (NAIC #33162) MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, 899–2000. UNDERWRITING NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, LIMITATION b/: $8,423,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, 15707, ST. PETERSBURG, FL 33733. INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, PHONE: (727) 823–4000. IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BITCO GENERAL INSURANCE MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, $6,910,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CORPORATION (NAIC #20095) NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 320—18TH TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, STREET, ROCK ISLAND, IL 61201– INCORPORATED IN: California. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, 8744. PHONE: (309) 786–5401. Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #27154) OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, $28,850,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 601 Carlson INCORPORATED IN: Florida. FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, Parkway Suite 700, Minnetonka, MN MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, 55305. PHONE: (781) 332–7000. Bankers Standard Insurance Company NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #18279) PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, $72,151,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 436 WALNUT WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, STREET, P.O. Box 1000, Philadelphia, Illinois. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, PA 19106. PHONE: (215) 640–1000. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, BOND SAFEGUARD INSURANCE UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: COMPANY (NAIC #27081) NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, $14,127,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 10002 UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Shelbyville Road, Suite 100, Louisville, INCORPORATED IN: New York. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, KY 40223. PHONE: (615) 553–9500. Auto-Owners Insurance Company NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #18988) OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, $3,556,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX VT, VA, WA, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, 30660, LANSING, MI 48909–8160. ME, MD, MA, MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, PHONE: (517) 323–1200. Beazley Insurance Company, Inc. NV, NH, NJ, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #37540) RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, $796,907,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 30 Batterson WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: AL, AZ, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, South Dakota. KS, KY, MI, MN, MS, MO, NE, NV, NM, Park Road, Farmington, CT 06032. NC, ND, OH, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, UT, PHONE: (860) 677–3700. Bondex Insurance Company (NAIC VA, WA, WI. INCORPORATED IN: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: #12965) Michigan. $12,226,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 6, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Florham Park, NJ 07932. PHONE: (973) AXIS Insurance Company (NAIC FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, #37273) 377–7000. UNDERWRITING ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, LIMITATION b/: $330,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 11680 Great NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, LICENSES c,f/: DE, NJ, NY, PA. Oaks Way, Ste. 500, Alpharetta, GA OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, INCORPORATED IN: New Jersey. 30022. PHONE: (678) 746–9400. VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. Boston Indemnity Company, Inc. (NAIC #30279) $57,815,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Berkley Insurance Company (NAIC AL, AK, AS, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, #32603) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 21 High Street, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, Suite 208B, North Andover, MA 01845. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 475 PHONE: (978) 984–5783. MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, STEAMBOAT ROAD, GREENWICH, CT UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, 06830. PHONE: (203) 542–3800. $477,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AZ, AR, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IN, KS, INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. $456,381,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: KY, LA, ME, MA, MN, MS, MT, NE, NV, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, NC, ND, OK, PA, SD, TN, WV. AXIS Reinsurance Company (NAIC FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, INCORPORATED IN: South Dakota. #20370) LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 11680 Great MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, Brierfield Insurance Company (NAIC Oaks Way, Suite 500, Alpharetta, GA OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, #10993) 30022. PHONE: (678) 746–9400. UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 6300 UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. University Parkway, Sarasota, FL VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37739 34240–8424. PHONE: (800) 226–3224 x- GA, IL, IN, IA, KY, MA, MI, NV, NH, NJ, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. 2726. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/ NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, PA, TN, TX, VA. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. : $842,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. Cincinnati Insurance Company (The) AR, GA, MS, TN. INCORPORATED IN: CENTURY SURETY COMPANY (NAIC (NAIC #10677) Mississippi. #36951) BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX BRITISH AMERICAN INSURANCE BUSINESS ADDRESS: 550 Polaris 145496, CINCINNATI, OH 45250–5496. COMPANY (NAIC #32875) Parkway, Westerville, OH 43082. PHONE: (513) 870–2000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1590, PHONE: (614) 895–2000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Dallas, TX 75221–1590. PHONE: (214) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $414,199,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: 443–5500. UNDERWRITING $13,800,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, LIMITATION b/: $3,292,000. SURETY AZ, IN, OH, WV, WI. INCORPORATED FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, LICENSES c,f/: TX. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, IN: Texas. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, Capitol Indemnity Corporation (NAIC (The) (NAIC #25615) UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. #10472) BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 5900, SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. Madison, WI 53705–0900. PHONE: PHONE: (860) 277–0111. CITIZENS INSURANCE COMPANY OF (608) 829–4200. UNDERWRITING UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AMERICA (NAIC #31534) LIMITATION b/: $18,034,000. SURETY $25,365,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 808 NORTH LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, HIGHLANDER WAY, HOWELL, MI CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, 48843–1070. PHONE: (517) 546–2160. IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, $63,364,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. HI, IL, IN, IA, KS, ME, MD, MA, MI, INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, Capitol Preferred Insurance Company, Cherokee Insurance Company (NAIC TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI. Inc. (NAIC #10908) #10642) INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2255 Killearn BUSINESS ADDRESS: 34200 Mound Center Boulevard, Tallahassee, FL Road, Sterling Heights, MI 48310. COLONIAL AMERICAN CASUALTY 32309. PHONE: (850) 521–0742. PHONE: (800) 201–0450 x-3400. AND SURETY COMPANY (NAIC UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: #34347) $2,290,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: FL, $15,893,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1400 GA, SC. INCORPORATED IN: Florida. AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, AMERICAN LANE, TOWER I, 18TH ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, FLOOR, SCHAUMBURG, IL 60196– Carolina Casualty Insurance Company MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, 1056. PHONE: (847) 605–6000. (NAIC #10510) NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 11201 Douglas TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. $2,182,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Avenue, Urbandale, IA 50322. PHONE: INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, (515) 473–3174. UNDERWRITING FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, CHUBB INDEMNITY INSURANCE LIMITATION b/: $9,555,000. SURETY ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, COMPANY (NAIC #12777) LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 15 Mountain OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, View Road, Warren, NJ 07059. PHONE: VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, (212) 612–4000. UNDERWRITING INCORPORATED IN: Maryland. NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, LIMITATION b/: $14,066,000. SURETY TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, COLONIAL SURETY COMPANY (NAIC INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, #10758) IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 50 Chestnut Centennial Casualty Company (NAIC MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, Ridge Road, Montvale, NJ 07645. #34568) NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, PHONE: (201) 573–8788. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2200 TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Woodcrest Place, Suite 200, INCORPORATED IN: New York. $2,874,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Birmingham, AL 35209. PHONE: (205) AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Cincinnati Casualty Company (The) 414–2600. UNDERWRITING FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, (NAIC #28665) LIMITATION b/: $6,394,000. SURETY LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, LICENSES c,f/: AL. INCORPORATED BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, IN: Alabama. 145496, Cincinnati, OH 45250–5496. ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, PHONE: (513) 870–2000. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, CENTRAL MUTUAL INSURANCE UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: WY. INCORPORATED IN: COMPANY (NAIC #20230) $33,022,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Pennsylvania. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 351, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, VAN WERT, OH 45891–0351. PHONE: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Continental Casualty Company (NAIC (419) 238–1010. UNDERWRITING ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, #20443) LIMITATION b/: $50,540,000. SURETY NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 333 S. LICENSES c,f/: AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WABASH AVE, CHICAGO, IL 60604. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37740 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices PHONE: (312) 822–5000. CorePointe Insurance Company (NAIC NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: #10499) OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, $808,254,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 401 South Old UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Woodward Avenue, Suite 300, INCORPORATED IN: Massachusetts. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Birmingham, MI 48009. PHONE: (800) Employers Insurance Company of ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, 782–9164. UNDERWRITING Wausau (NAIC #21458) NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, LIMITATION b/: $7,853,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2000 OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, Westwood Drive, Wausau, WI 54401. UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, PHONE: (617) 357–9500. INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, $127,078,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CONTINENTAL HERITAGE NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, #39551) INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 6140 CUMIS INSURANCE SOCIETY, INC. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, PARKLAND BLVD, STE 321, (NAIC #10847) OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, MAYFIELD HEIGHTS, OH 44124. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1084, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. PHONE: (440) 229–3420. Madison, WI 53701. PHONE: (608) 238– INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 5851. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION Employers Mutual Casualty Company $695,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AZ, b/: $64,223,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/ (NAIC #21415) CA, CO, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, : AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. BOX 712, LA, ME, MD, MN, MS, NE, NV, NJ, ND, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, DES MOINE, IA 50306–0712. PHONE: OH, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, (515) 280–2511. UNDERWRITING WV. INCORPORATED IN: Florida. MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, LIMITATION b/: $121,498,000. OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, Continental Insurance Company (The) SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. (NAIC #35289) AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 333 S. CUMIS Specialty Insurance Company, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, WABASH AVE, CHICAGO, IL 60604. Inc. (NAIC #12758) NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, PHONE: (312) 822–5000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: Post Office Box SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 1084, Madison, WI 53701. PHONE: WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. $143,734,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (608) 238–5851. UNDERWRITING Endurance American Insurance AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, LIMITATION b/: $7,265,000. SURETY Company (NAIC #10641) FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LICENSES c,f/: AL, CA, CT, DC, FL, GA, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 4 HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, MD, MA, MI, MANHATTANVILLE ROAD, MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, MN, MO, NE, NV, NJ, NY, NC, OH, OK, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, PURCHASE, NY 10577. PHONE: (914) OR, PA, SC, SD, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, 468–8000. UNDERWRITING TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. WY. INCORPORATED IN: LIMITATION b/: $24,120,000. SURETY Pennsylvania. Darwin National Assurance Company LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, (NAIC #16624) 4 DE, DC, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, CONTRACTORS BONDING AND LA, MD, MA, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, Developers Surety and Indemnity NH, NJ, NM, NY, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC Company (NAIC #12718) #37206) 3 RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, WV, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 9025 N. 19725, IRVINE, CA 92623–9725. Delaware. Lindbergh Drive, Peoria, IL 61615. PHONE: (949) 263–3300. PHONE: (309) 692–1000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Endurance Reinsurance Corporation of UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $6,154,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: America (NAIC #11551) $11,217,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 4 AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MANHATTANVILLE ROAD, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, PURCHASE, NY 10577. PHONE: (914) ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, 468–8000. UNDERWRITING NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, LIMITATION b/: $43,286,000. SURETY OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. ELECTRIC INSURANCE COMPANY MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, (NAIC #21261) Cooperativa de Seguros Multiples de NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, Puerto Rico (NAIC #18163) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 75 Sam Fonzo SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WY. Drive, Beverly, MA 01915–1000. INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. BUSINESS ADDRESS: PO BOX PHONE: (978) 921–2080. 363846, SAN JUAN, PR 00936–3846. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Erie Insurance Company (NAIC PHONE: (787) 622–3575 x-2512. $53,755,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: #26263) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 100 ERIE $14,286,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, INSURANCE PLACE, ERIE, PA 16530. PR. INCORPORATED IN: Puerto Rico. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, PHONE: (814) 870–2000. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37741 UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LICENSES c,f/: CO, ID, IA, KS, MN, MO, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, $31,195,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: MT, NE, NM, ND, OK, SD. NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, DC, IL, IN, KY, MD, MN, NY, NC, OH, INCORPORATED IN: Kansas. OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, PA, TN, VA, WV, WI. INCORPORATED VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Farmington Casualty Company (NAIC IN: Pennsylvania. INCORPORATED IN: Minnesota. #41483) Everest Reinsurance Company (NAIC BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER Fidelity and Deposit Company of #26921) SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. Maryland (NAIC #39306) BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 830, PHONE: (860) 277–0111. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1400 Liberty Corner, NJ 07938–0830. PHONE: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AMERICAN LANE, TOWER I, 18TH (908) 604–3000. UNDERWRITING $28,765,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: FLOOR, SCHAUMBURG, IL 60196– LIMITATION b/: $289,300,000. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, 1056. PHONE: (847) 605–6000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, $14,666,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, MI, MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, Farmland Mutual Insurance Company Delaware. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, (NAIC #13838) WY. INCORPORATED IN: Maryland. Evergreen National Indemnity BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE WEST Company (NAIC #12750) NATIONWIDE BLVD., 1–04–701, FIDELITY AND GUARANTY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 6140 COLUMBUS, OH 43215–2220. PHONE: INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC PARKLAND BLVD, STE 321, (515) 508–3300. UNDERWRITING #35386) MAYFIELD HEIGHTS, OH 44124. LIMITATION b/: $16,855,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 385 PHONE: (440) 229–3420. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, Washington Street, St. Paul, MN 55102. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, PHONE: (651) 310–7911. $3,321,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NC, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, $1,910,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, ND, OH, OK, OR, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, FCCI Insurance Company (NAIC PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, #10178) WA, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, Ohio. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 6300 VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. University Parkway, Sarasota, FL INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. Executive Risk Indemnity Inc. (NAIC 34240–8424. PHONE: (800) 226–3224 x– #35181) 2726. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance BUSINESS ADDRESS: 15 Mountain b/: $53,402,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/ Underwriters, Inc. (NAIC #25879) View Road, Warren, NJ 07059. PHONE: : AL, AZ, AR, CO, FL, GA, IL, IN, IA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 385 (908) 903–2000. UNDERWRITING KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MS, MO, NE, NC, Washington Street, St. Paul, MN 55102. LIMITATION b/: $125,802,000. OH, OK, PA, SC, TN, TX, VA. PHONE: (651) 310–7911. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, INCORPORATED IN: Florida. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AR, CA, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, $10,086,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Federal Insurance Company (NAIC IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, #20281) MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 15 Mountain ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, View Road, Warren, NJ 07059. PHONE: NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: (908) 903–2000. UNDERWRITING OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, Delaware. LIMITATION b/: $1,342,970,000. VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. Explorer Insurance Company (NAIC AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, #40029) HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, Financial Casualty & Surety, Inc. (NAIC BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, NE, #35009) 85563, SAN DIEGO, CA 92186–5563. NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 3131 Eastside, PHONE: (858) 350–2400 x-2550. OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, Suite 600, Houston, TX 77098. PHONE: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. (800) 392–1604. UNDERWRITING $8,064,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. LIMITATION b/: $1,299,000. SURETY AZ, CA, CO, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, MT, NV, LICENSES c,f/: AZ, CA, CT, DE, FL, GA, FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE NM, OR, PA, TX, UT, WA. ID, IN, IA, KS, LA, MD, MI, MN, MS, COMPANY (NAIC #13935) INCORPORATED IN: California. MO, MT, NV, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, PA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 121 EAST SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV. Farmers Alliance Mutual Insurance PARK SQUARE, OWATONNA, MN INCORPORATED IN: Texas. Company (NAIC #19194) 55060. PHONE: (507) 455–5200. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1401, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Financial Pacific Insurance Company McPherson, KS 67460. PHONE: (620) $265,710,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (NAIC #31453) 241–2200. UNDERWRITING AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX LIMITATION b/: $14,733,000. SURETY FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, 73909, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52407–3909. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37742 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices PHONE: (319) 399–5700. LIMITATION b/: $23,871,000. SURETY WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, Illinois. $8,634,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, GRAY CASUALTY & SURETY AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, FL, ID, IL, IA, KS, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, COMPANY (THE) (NAIC #10671) MN, MO, MT, NE, NV, NM, ND, OK, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA, WI. OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 6202, INCORPORATED IN: California. UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Metairie, LA 70009–6202. PHONE: (504) INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. 888–7790. UNDERWRITING Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company LIMITATION b/: $1,461,000. SURETY (NAIC #21873) General Reinsurance Corporation LICENSES c,f/: AL, AZ, AR, CA, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 777 San Marin (NAIC #22039) GA, IL, KY, LA, MD, MS, MO, NV, NM, Drive, Novato, CA 94998. PHONE: (415) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 120 LONG NY, NC, OK, PA, SC, TN, TX. 899–2000. UNDERWRITING RIDGE ROAD, STAMFORD, CT 06902– INCORPORATED IN: Louisiana. LIMITATION b/: $204,995,000. 1843. PHONE: (203) 328–5000. GRAY INSURANCE COMPANY (THE) SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #36307) AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, $1,170,661,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/ ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, : AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, 6202, METAIRIE, LA 70009–6202. NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, PHONE: (504) 888–7790. SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, $9,686,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: California. WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Delaware. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, First Founders Assurance Company ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, (NAIC #12150) GRANGE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 6 Mill Ridge MICHIGAN (NAIC #11136) OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, Lane, Chester, NJ 07930–2486. PHONE: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 671 South VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. (908) 879–0990. UNDERWRITING High Street, P.O. Box 1218, Columbus, INCORPORATED IN: Louisiana. LIMITATION b/: $393,000. SURETY OH 43216–1218. PHONE: (614) 445– Great American Alliance Insurance LICENSES c,f/: NJ, NY. 2900. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/ Company (NAIC #26832) INCORPORATED IN: New Jersey. : $3,773,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 301 E Fourth First Insurance Company of Hawaii, MI. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202. PHONE: Ltd. (NAIC #41742) GRANGE MUTUAL CASUALTY (513) 369–5000. UNDERWRITING BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 2866, COMPANY (NAIC #14060) LIMITATION b/: $2,911,000. SURETY Honolulu, HI 96803. PHONE: (808) 527– LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 671 South 7777. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/ CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, High Street, Columbus, OH 43206–1014. : $28,883,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, PHONE: (614) 445–2900. GU, HI. INCORPORATED IN: Hawaii. MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, First Liberty Insurance Corporation $101,957,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. (The) (NAIC #33588) AL, GA, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, MO, OH, INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2815 Forbs PA, SC, TN, VA, WI. INCORPORATED Avenue, Suite 200, Hoffman Estates, IL IN: Ohio. Great American Insurance Company (NAIC #16691) 60192. PHONE: (617) 357–9500. GRANITE RE, INC. (NAIC #26310) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 301 E Fourth $2,225,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 14001 Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202. PHONE: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Quailbrook Drive, Oklahoma City, OK (513) 369–5000. UNDERWRITING FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, 73134. PHONE: (405) 752–2600. LIMITATION b/: $138,445,000. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, $1,852,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, AL, AZ, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. NE, NV, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, SC, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WV, WI, WY. PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, First Net Insurance Company (NAIC INCORPORATED IN: Oklahoma. VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. #10972) Granite State Insurance Company INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 424 WEST (NAIC #23809) 5 GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE O’BRIEN DRIVE, STE 202, HAGATNA, COMPANY OF NEW YORK (NAIC GU 96910. PHONE: (671) 477–8613. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 WATER #22136) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: STREET, 18TH FLOOR, NEW YORK, $1,102,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NY 10038. PHONE: (212) 770–7000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 301 E Fourth GU, MP. INCORPORATED IN: Guam. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202. PHONE: $3,087,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (513) 369–5000. UNDERWRITING General Casualty Company Of AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DC, FL, GA, LIMITATION b/: $4,719,000. SURETY Wisconsin (NAIC #24414) HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: One General MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, Drive, Sun Prairie, WI 53596. PHONE: NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, (608) 837–4440. UNDERWRITING PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37743 NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Hartford Insurance Company of the TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. $18,323,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Midwest (NAIC #37478) INCORPORATED IN: New York. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Hartford FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, Great Northern Insurance Company Plaza, Hartford, CT 06155–0001. MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, (NAIC #20303) PHONE: (860) 547–5000. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 15 Mountain OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, $45,293,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: View Road, Warren, NJ 07059. PHONE: VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, (908) 903–2000. UNDERWRITING INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, LIMITATION b/: $47,697,000. SURETY ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, Harleysville Worcester Insurance Company (NAIC #26182) 6 NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, Hartford Accident and Indemnity VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, Company (NAIC #22357) INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Hartford Hartford Insurance Company of the INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. Plaza, Hartford, CT 06155–0001. Southeast (NAIC #38261) Greenwich Insurance Company (NAIC PHONE: (860) 547–5000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Hartford #22322) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Plaza, Hartford, CT 06155–0001. $241,154,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: PHONE: (860) 547–5000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: SEAVIEW AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: HOUSE, 70 SEAVIEW AVENUE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, $5,884,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CT, STAMFORD, CT 06902. PHONE: (203) ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, FL, GA, KS, LA, MI, PA. 964–5200. UNDERWRITING NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. LIMITATION b/: $39,734,000. SURETY OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, Hudson Insurance Company (NAIC LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. #25054) CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 100 William MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, Hartford Casualty Insurance Company Street, 5th Floor, New York, NY 10038. NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, (NAIC #29424) PHONE: (212) 978–2800. SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Hartford WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: $44,018,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Plaza, Hartford, CT 06155–0001. Delaware. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, PHONE: (860) 547–5000. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Guarantee Company of North America UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, USA (The) (NAIC #36650) $91,334,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Towne AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, Square, Suite 1470, Southfield, MI FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. 48076–3725. PHONE: (248) 281–0281 x- ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. 66012. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, b/: $16,627,000. SURETY LICENSES OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, IMT Insurance Company (NAIC c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. #14257) DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1336, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, Hartford Fire Insurance Company Des Moines, IA 50306–1336. PHONE: MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, (NAIC #19682) (515) 327–2777. UNDERWRITING OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, LIMITATION b/: $12,785,000. SURETY TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Hartford LICENSES c,f/: IL, IA, MN, MO, NE, SD, INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. Plaza, Hartford, CT 06155–0001. WI. INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. Hanover Insurance Company (The) PHONE: (860) 547–5000. Indemnity Company of California (NAIC #22292) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #25550) $1,379,745,000. SURETY LICENSES BUSINESS ADDRESS: 440 LINCOLN c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX STREET, WORCESTER, MA 01653– DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, 19725, IRVINE, CA 92623–9725. 0002. PHONE: (508) 853–7200. KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, PHONE: (949) 263–3300. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $132,703,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, $2,070,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. AK, AZ, CA, CO, GA, HI, ID, IN, MD, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. MT, NV, NM, OR, SC, UT, VA, WA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, WY. INCORPORATED IN: California. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, Hartford Insurance Company of Illinois Indemnity Insurance Company of North OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, (NAIC #38288) America (NAIC #43575) VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: New Hampshire. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Hartford BUSINESS ADDRESS: 436 WALNUT Plaza, Hartford, CT 06155–0001. STREET, P.O. Box 1000, Philadelphia, HARCO NATIONAL INSURANCE PHONE: (860) 547–5000. PA 19106. PHONE: (215) 640–1000. COMPANY (NAIC #26433) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 702 OBERLIN $133,484,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $11,198,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: ROAD, RALEIGH, NC 27605–0800. CT, HI, IL, MI, NY, PA. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, PHONE: (919) 833–1600. INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37744 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Insurance Company of the West (NAIC INCORPORATED IN: Minnesota. Indemnity National Insurance #27847) Company (NAIC #18468) BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE BUSINESS ADDRESS: 4800 Old 85563, SAN DIEGO, CA 92186–5563. COMPANY (NAIC #25445) Kingston Pike, Suite 120, Knoxville, TN PHONE: (858) 350–2400 x-2550. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 37919. PHONE: (865) 934–4360. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 3407, New York, NY 10008. PHONE: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $54,776,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (646) 826–6600. UNDERWRITING $1,186,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, DC, FL, LIMITATION b/: $32,582,000. SURETY AL, AZ, AR, CO, GA, KY, LA, MS, NV, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, LICENSES c,f/: AZ. INCORPORATED NM, OK, SC, TN, TX, UT. MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, IN: Arizona. INCORPORATED IN: Mississippi. NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, ISLAND INSURANCE COMPANY, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, Independence Casualty and Surety LIMITED (NAIC #22845) Company (NAIC #10024) 7 VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: California. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1520, Indiana Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Honolulu, HI 96806—1520. PHONE: Company (NAIC #14265) Insurors Indemnity Company (NAIC (808) 564–8200. UNDERWRITING #43273) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2005 Markert LIMITATION b/: $12,230,000. SURETY Street, Suite 1200, Philadelphia, PA BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 2683, LICENSES c,f/: HI. INCORPORATED IN: 19103. PHONE: (267) 825–9206. Waco, TX 76702–2683. PHONE: (254) Hawaii. 759–3703 x-3727. UNDERWRITING UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LEXINGTON NATIONAL INSURANCE LIMITATION b/: $1,242,000. SURETY $1,541,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CORPORATION (NAIC #37940) AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, LICENSES c,f/: AR, NM, OK, TX. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, INCORPORATED IN: Texas. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, 6098, LUTHERVILLE, MD 21094. INTEGRAND ASSURANCE COMPANY PHONE: (410) 625–0800. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, (NAIC #26778) OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: PO Box 70128, $1,560,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. San Juan, PR 00936–8128. PHONE: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, (787) 781–0707 x-200. UNDERWRITING GA, HI, ID, IN, IA, KS, LA, ME, MD, Inland Insurance Company (NAIC LIMITATION b/: $8,455,000. SURETY MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, #23264) LICENSES c,f/: PR, VI. INCORPORATED NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box IN: Puerto Rico. RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, 80468, Lincoln, NE 68501. PHONE: WV, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Integrity Mutual Insurance Company (402) 435–4302. UNDERWRITING Maryland. (NAIC #14303) LIMITATION b/: $19,806,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 539, Lexon Insurance Company (NAIC LICENSES c,f/: AZ, CO, IA, KS, MN, #13307) MO, MT, NE, ND, OK, SD, WY. Appleton, WI 54912–0539. PHONE: INCORPORATED IN: Nebraska. (920) 734–4511. UNDERWRITING BUSINESS ADDRESS: 10002 LIMITATION b/: $4,496,000. SURETY Shelbyville Rd, Suite 100, Louisville, Insurance Company Of North America LICENSES c,f/: IL, IA, MN, OH, WI. KY 40223. PHONE: (615) 553–9500. (NAIC #22713) INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 436 WALNUT $5,251,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: STREET, P.O. Box 1000, Philadelphia, International Fidelity Insurance AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, 8 PA 19106. PHONE: (215) 640–1000. Company (NAIC #11592) FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Newark LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, $22,523,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Center, Newark, NJ 07102–5207. MP, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NC, ND, OH, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, PHONE: (973) 624–7200. OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, $6,287,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: INCORPORATED IN: Texas. MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Liberty Insurance Corporation (NAIC ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, #42404) TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 Berkeley OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, Street, Boston, MA 02116. PHONE: Insurance Company of the State of TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING Pennsylvania (The) (NAIC #19429) INCORPORATED IN: New Jersey. LIMITATION b/: $22,324,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 WATER LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, STREET, 18TH FLOOR, NEW YORK, IRONSHORE INDEMNITY INC. (NAIC CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, NY 10038. PHONE: (212) 770–7000. #23647) IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, $11,991,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: 3407, NEW YORK, NY 10008. PHONE: NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, (646) 826–6600. UNDERWRITING RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, LIMITATION b/: $15,660,000. SURETY WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, Illinois. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37745 Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance NM, NY, NC, OH, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Company (NAIC #23035) UT, VT, VA, WA. INCORPORATED IN: $4,239,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 Berkeley Pennsylvania. AZ, AR, CA, CO, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, NY, NC, ND, Street, Boston, MA 02116. PHONE: MARKEL INSURANCE COMPANY OH, OK, OR, PA, SD, TN, VA, WA, WI, (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING (NAIC #38970) LIMITATION b/: $121,033,000. WY. INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 4521 Highwoods Parkway, Glen Allen, VA Mid-Century Insurance Company AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, (NAIC #21687) ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, 23060. PHONE: (804) 747–0136. MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, $40,722,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: 4402, WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91365. RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, PHONE: (323) 932–3200. WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Wisconsin. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, $98,644,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, IN, IA, KS, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, (NAIC #23043) VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 Berkeley INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. OR, PA, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Street, Boston, MA 02116. PHONE: Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company California. (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING (NAIC #22306) LIMITATION b/: $1,373,795,000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 440 LINCOLN MID–CONTINENT CASUALTY SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, COMPANY (NAIC #23418) AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, STREET, WORCESTER, MA 01653– ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, 0002. PHONE: (508) 853–7200. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1409, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Tulsa, OK 74101. PHONE: (918) 587– NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, $6,273,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: 7221. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, b/: $12,606,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/ WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, : AL, AZ, AR, CO, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, Massachusetts. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, LA, MD, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NM, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, NC, ND, OH, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, LM Insurance Corporation (NAIC OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VT, VA, WA, WY. INCORPORATED IN: #33600) VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Ohio. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 Berkeley INCORPORATED IN: New Hampshire. Motorists Commercial Mutual Street, Boston, MA 02116. PHONE: Merchants Bonding Company (Mutual) Insurance Company (NAIC #13331) (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING (NAIC #14494) LIMITATION b/: $11,370,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 471 East Broad LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2100 Fleur Street, Columbus, OH 43215. PHONE: CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, Drive, Des Moines, IA 50321–1158. (614) 225–8211. UNDERWRITING IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, PHONE: (515) 243–8171. LIMITATION b/: $14,623,000. SURETY MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LICENSES c,f/: AK, AZ, CA, CO, CT, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, $8,495,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: DE, DC, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, ME, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, MI, MN, MO, NE, NV, NH, NJ, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, Illinois. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. Lyndon Property Insurance Company OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, Motorists Mutual Insurance Company (NAIC #35769) VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. (NAIC #14621) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 14755 North INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. Outer Forty Rd., Suite 400, St. Louis, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 471 East Broad MO 63017. PHONE: (636) 536–5600. Merchants National Bonding, Inc. Street, Columbus, OH 43215. PHONE: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #11595) (614) 225–8211. UNDERWRITING $14,514,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2100 Fleur LIMITATION b/: $55,741,000. SURETY AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Drive, Des Moines, IA 50321–1158. LICENSES c,f/: IN, KY, MI, OH, PA, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, PHONE: (515) 243–8171. WV. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Motors Insurance Corporation (NAIC NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, $1,152,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: #22012) OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 300 GALLERIA INCORPORATED IN: Missouri. MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, OFFICENTRE, SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034. NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PHONE: (248) 263–6900. Manufacturers Alliance Insurance PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Company (NAIC #36897) WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: $105,992,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 3031, Iowa. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Blue Bell, PA 19422–0754. PHONE: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, (610) 397–5000. UNDERWRITING Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, LIMITATION b/: $6,182,000. SURETY Company (NAIC #14508) NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. Box OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, CT, DE, DC, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, ME, 30060, Lansing, MI 48909–7560. VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. MD, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, PHONE: (517) 482–6211 x-7754. INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37746 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, (NAIC #10227) NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 555 COLLEGE OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, ROAD EAST—P.O. BOX 5241, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, PRINCETON, NJ 08543. PHONE: (609) INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, 243–4200. UNDERWRITING National Indemnity Company (NAIC WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: LIMITATION b/: $516,231,000. #20087) SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, Ohio. AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 3024 Harney Street, Omaha, NE 68131–3580. PHONE: NAVIGATORS INSURANCE ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, COMPANY (NAIC #42307) MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, (402) 916–3000. UNDERWRITING NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, LIMITATION b/: $9,399,765,000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 400 Atlantic RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, SURETY LICENSES Street, 8th Floor, Stamford, CT 06901. WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, PHONE: (203) 905–6090. Delaware. DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, $89,395,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: National American Insurance Company NV, NH, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, (NAIC #23663) RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 9, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, Chandler, OK 74834. PHONE: (405) Nebraska. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, 258–0804. UNDERWRITING National Surety Corporation (NAIC OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, LIMITATION b/: $6,331,000. SURETY #21881) VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, INCORPORATED IN: New York. CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 777 San Marin KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, Drive, Novato, CA 94998. PHONE: (312) New Hampshire Insurance Company 9 NE, NV, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, 346–6400. UNDERWRITING (NAIC #23841) PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, LIMITATION b/: $12,901,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 WATER WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, STREET, 18TH FLOOR, NEW YORK, Oklahoma. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, NY 10038. PHONE: (212) 770–7000. IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: National Casualty Company (NAIC MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, #11991) $16,611,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE WEST SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WY. FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, NATIONWIDE BLVD., 1–04–701, INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, COLUMBUS, OH 43215–2220. PHONE: NATIONAL TRUST INSURANCE MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, (480) 365–4000. UNDERWRITING COMPANY (NAIC #20141) ND, OH, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, LIMITATION b/: $13,014,000. SURETY TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 6300 INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, University Parkway, Sarasota, FL IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, 34240–8424. PHONE: (800) 226–3224 x– NGM Insurance Company (NAIC MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, 2726. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/ #14788) NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, : $3,627,000. SURETY LICENSES BUSINESS ADDRESS: 55 WEST TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. c,f/: AZ, FL, GA, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, MD, STREET, KEENE, NH 03431. PHONE: INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. MI, MS, MO, NE, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX. INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. (904) 380–7282. UNDERWRITING NATIONAL FARMERS UNION LIMITATION b/: $93,443,000. SURETY PROPERTY AND CASUALTY National Union Fire Insurance LICENSES c,f/: AL, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, COMPANY (NAIC #16217) Company of Pittsburgh, PA (NAIC DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: One General #19445) ME, MD, MA, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, Drive, Sun Prairie, WI 53596. PHONE: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 WATER NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, (608) 837–4440. UNDERWRITING STREET, 18TH FLOOR, NEW YORK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, LIMITATION b/: $4,041,000. SURETY NY 10038. PHONE: (212) 770–7000. VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: INCORPORATED IN: Florida. CO, DE, DC, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, $668,077,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NORTH AMERICAN SPECIALTY KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, #29874) OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 650 ELM INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, STREET, MANCHESTER, NH 03101. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. PHONE: (603) 644–6600. National Fire Insurance Company of INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Hartford (NAIC #20478) $30,973,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 333 S. Nationwide Mutual Insurance AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, WABASH AVE, CHICAGO, IL 60604. Company (NAIC #23787) FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, PHONE: (312) 822–5000. BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE WEST ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: NATIONWIDE BLVD., 1–04–701, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, $12,102,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: COLUMBUS, OH 43215–2220. PHONE: OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, (614) 249–7111. UNDERWRITING UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, LIMITATION b/: $1,174,083,000. INCORPORATED IN: New Hampshire. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37747 NOVA Casualty Company (NAIC ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, OneBeacon America Insurance #42552) TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Company (NAIC #20621) 10 BUSINESS ADDRESS: 5 WATERSIDE INCORPORATED IN: New Hampshire. OneBeacon Insurance Company (NAIC 11 CROSSING, SUITE 201, WINDSOR, CT Oklahoma Surety Company (NAIC #21970) 06095. PHONE: (860) 683–4250. #23426) Pacific Indemnity Company (NAIC UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: #20346) $9,174,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1409, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Tulsa, OK 74101. PHONE: (918) 587– BUSINESS ADDRESS: 15 Mountain View Road, Warren, NJ 07059. PHONE: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, 7221. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION (908) 903–2000. UNDERWRITING ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, b/: $1,662,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/ NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, LIMITATION b/: $292,221,000. : AR, KS, LA, OH, OK, TX. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. VT, VA, WA, WI, WY. INCORPORATED AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, IN: New York. OLD DOMINION INSURANCE ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, COMPANY (NAIC #40231) MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, Ohio Casualty Insurance Company NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, (The) (NAIC #24074) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 55 WEST SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 62 Maple STREET, KEENE, NH 03431. PHONE: WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Avenue, Keene, NH 03431. PHONE: (904) 380–7282. UNDERWRITING Wisconsin. (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $3,379,000. SURETY PACIFIC INDEMNITY INSURANCE LIMITATION b/: $143,041,000. LICENSES c,f/: CT, DE, FL, GA, ME, COMPANY (NAIC #18380) SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, MD, MA, NH, NY, NC, PA, RI, SC, TN, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 348 WEST AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, VT, VA. INCORPORATED IN: Florida. ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, O’BRIEN DRIVE, HAGATNA, GU 96910. MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, Old Republic General Insurance PHONE: (671) 477–1663. NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, Corporation (NAIC #24139) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, $1,850,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: New BUSINESS ADDRESS: 307 NORTH GU, MP. INCORPORATED IN: Guam. MICHIGAN AVENUE, CHICAGO, IL Hampshire. PARTNER REINSURANCE COMPANY 60601. PHONE: (312) 346–8100. OF THE U.S. (NAIC #38636) Ohio Farmers Insurance Company UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #24104) $49,409,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. Box 5001, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, GREENWICH PLAZA, GREENWICH, CT Westfield Center, OH 44251–5001. FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, 06830–6352. PHONE: (203) 485–4200. PHONE: (330) 887–0101. MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, $130,363,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AZ, CA, CO, DC, IL, KS, MI, MS, $190,245,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, NE, NY, TX, UT, WA. INCORPORATED AL, AZ, AR, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, IL, IN, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. IN: New York. IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, PARTNERRE INSURANCE COMPANY OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, Old Republic Insurance Company OF NEW YORK (NAIC #10006) VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. (NAIC #24147) INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 789, Greenwich Plaza, Greenwich, CT Ohio Indemnity Company (NAIC Greensburg, PA 15601–0789. PHONE: 06830–6352. PHONE: (203) 485–4200. #26565) (724) 834–5000. UNDERWRITING UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 250 East Broad LIMITATION b/: $103,578,000. $11,642,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Street, 7th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AL, AZ, CA, CO, DE, DC, ID, IL, IN, IA, PHONE: (614) 228–2800. AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, KS, KY, MD, MI, MN, MS, MT, NE, NJ, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, NM, NY, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, $4,527,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, SD, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, INCORPORATED IN: New York. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, Pekin Insurance Company (NAIC ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. #24228) NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2505 COURT VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Old Republic Surety Company (NAIC STREET, PEKIN, IL 61558–0001. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. #40444) PHONE: (309) 346–1161. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Ohio Security Insurance Company BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX $11,870,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (NAIC #24082) 1635, MILWAUKEE, WI 53201–1635. AZ, IL, IN, IA, MI, OH, WI. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 62 Maple PHONE: (262) 797–2640. INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Avenue, Keene, NH 03431. PHONE: Pennsylvania Insurance Company $5,606,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING (NAIC #21962)12 LIMITATION b/: $1,518,000. SURETY AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DC, FL, GA, ID, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, IL, IN, IA, KS, MD, MN, MS, MO, MT, Pennsylvania Manufacturers Indemnity CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, NE, NV, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, Company (NAIC #41424) KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 3031, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. Blue Bell, PA 19422–0754. PHONE: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00168 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37748 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices (610) 397–5000. UNDERWRITING Plaza Insurance Company (NAIC Regent Insurance Company (NAIC LIMITATION b/: $7,220,000. SURETY #30945) #24449) LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 518 East Broad CT, DE, DC, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, ME, BUSINESS ADDRESS: One General Street, Columbus, OH 43215. PHONE: Drive, Sun Prairie, WI 53596. PHONE: MD, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, (614) 464–5000. UNDERWRITING (608) 837–4440. UNDERWRITING NM, NY, NC, OH, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, LIMITATION b/: $2,627,000. SURETY LIMITATION b/: $3,051,000. SURETY UT, VT, VA, WA. INCORPORATED IN: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, Pennsylvania. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, Association Insurance Company (NAIC MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, #12262) ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 3031, INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Blue Bell, PA 19422–0754. PHONE: INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. (610) 397–5000. UNDERWRITING ProCentury Insurance Company (NAIC LIMITATION b/: $26,607,000. SURETY #21903) Republic—Franklin Insurance Company (NAIC #12475) LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 550 Polaris CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IA, KS, Parkway, Westerville, OH 43082. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. Box 530, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MS, MO, MT, PHONE: (614) 895–2000. Utica, NY 13503–0530. PHONE: (315) NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 734–2000. UNDERWRITING PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, $4,871,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: LIMITATION b/: $4,904,000. SURETY WV. INCORPORATED IN: AK, AZ, AR, CA, DE, DC, GA, IL, IN, IA, Pennsylvania. LICENSES c,f/: CT, DE, DC, GA, IL, IN, KS, LA, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, KS, MD, MA, MI, NH, NJ, NY, NC, OH, Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, ND, OK, PA, PA, RI, TN, TX, VA, WI. Insurance Company (NAIC #14990) SC, SD, TX, UT, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P. O. Box 2361, RLI Indemnity Company (NAIC Harrisburg, PA 17105–2361. PHONE: Progressive Casualty Insurance #28860) (717) 234–4941. UNDERWRITING Company (NAIC #24260) LIMITATION b/: $56,883,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX BUSINESS ADDRESS: 9025 N. LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, 89490, CLEVELAND, OH 44101–6490. Lindbergh Drive, Peoria, IL 61615. DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, PHONE: (440) 461–5000. PHONE: (309) 692–1000. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MT, NE, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, OR, $161,138,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $4,370,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, WA, WV, WI. INCORPORATED IN: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, Pennsylvania. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, #18058) UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Bala Plaza, Suite 100, Bala Cynwyd, PA Progressive Northwestern Insurance RLI Insurance Company (NAIC #13056) 19004–1403. PHONE: (610) 617–7900. Company (NAIC #42919) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 9025 N. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX Lindbergh Drive, Peoria, IL 61615. $233,738,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: 89490, CLEVELAND, OH 44101–6490. PHONE: (309) 692–1000. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, PHONE: (440) 461–5000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $69,343,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, $38,759,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, HI, ID, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, INCORPORATED IN: Pennsylvania. NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, RI, SC, SD, TN, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI. PLATINUM UNDERWRITERS UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. 13 INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. REINSURANCE, INC. (NAIC #10357) INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. PLATTE RIVER INSURANCE Protective Insurance Company (NAIC COMPANY (NAIC #18619) #12416) Roche Surety and Casualty Company, Inc. (NAIC #42706) BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 5900, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 2000, Madison, WI 53705–0900. PHONE: Carmel, IN 46082–2000. PHONE: (317) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1910 Orient (608) 829–4200. UNDERWRITING 636–9800 x-2632. UNDERWRITING Road, Tampa, FL 33619. PHONE: (813) LIMITATION b/: $4,154,000. SURETY LIMITATION b/: $27,273,000. SURETY 623–5042. UNDERWRITING LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, LIMITATION b/: $848,000. SURETY CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, LICENSES c,f/: AK, AZ, AR, CT, DE, FL, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, GA, HI, ID, IN, IA, KS, LA, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, MS, MO, MT, NE., NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA. INCORPORATED INCORPORATED IN: Nebraska. WY. INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. IN: Florida. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00169 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37749 Rockwood Casualty Insurance Selective Insurance Company of UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. Company (NAIC #35505) America (NAIC #12572) INCORPORATED IN: Florida. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 654 Main BUSINESS ADDRESS: 40 WANTAGE SERVICE INSURANCE COMPANY INC. Street, Rockwood, PA 15557. PHONE: AVENUE, BRANCHVILLE, NJ 07890. (THE) (NAIC #28240) (814) 926–4661. UNDERWRITING PHONE: (973) 948–3000. LIMITATION b/: $6,330,000. SURETY UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 80 Main Street, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, $49,297,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: West Orange, NJ 07052. PHONE: (973) DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, AL, AK, AR, CT, DE, DC, GA, IL, IN, IA, 731–7650. UNDERWRITING MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NV, NM, KS, KY, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, LIMITATION b/: $650,000. SURETY NY, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TX, MT, NE., NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OR, PA, LICENSES c,f/: CT, DE, MD, MA, NH, UT, VA, WV. INCORPORATED IN: RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, WA, WV, WI, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VA. INCORPORATED Pennsylvania. WY. INCORPORATED IN: New Jersey. IN: New Jersey. SAFECO Insurance Company of Seneca Insurance Company, Inc. (NAIC SIRIUS AMERICA INSURANCE America (NAIC #24740) #10936) COMPANY (NAIC #38776) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 Berkeley BUSINESS ADDRESS: 160 Water BUSINESS ADDRESS: 140 Street, Boston, MA 02116. PHONE: Street, New York, NY 10038–4922. BROADWAY—32ND FLOOR, NEW (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING PHONE: (212) 344–3000. YORK, NY 10005–1108. PHONE: (212) LIMITATION b/: $127,892,000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 312–2500. UNDERWRITING SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, $13,415,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: LIMITATION b/: $62,059,000. SURETY AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, CT, DC, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE., NV, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MD, MA, MI, MS, MT, NE, NJ, NM, NY, NE., NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TX, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI. INCORPORATED UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: IN: New York. INCORPORATED IN: New York. New Hampshire. SOUTHWEST MARINE AND Sentry Insurance A Mutual Company Safety National Casualty Corporation GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC #24988) (NAIC #15105) (NAIC #12294) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1800 NORTH BUSINESS ADDRESS: 412 Mt. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1832 Schuetz POINT DRIVE, STEVENS POINT, WI Road, St. Louis, MO 63146–3540. Kemble Ave, Suite 300C, Morristown, 54481–8020. PHONE: (715) 346–6000. NJ 07960. PHONE: (800) 774–2755. PHONE: (314) 995–5300. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $392,929,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $5,745,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $136,763,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NJ, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NE., NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, NV, NH, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, MT, NE., NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Arizona. TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. INCORPORATED IN: Missouri. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Sentry Select Insurance Company Company (NAIC #24767) Sagamore Insurance Company (NAIC (NAIC #21180) #40460) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1800 NORTH BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER BUSINESS ADDRESS: 111 POINT DRIVE, STEVENS POINT, WI SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. Congressional Blvd., Suite 500, Carmel, 54481–8020. PHONE: (715) 346–6000. PHONE: (860) 277–0111. IN 46032. PHONE: (317) 636–9800 x– UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 7433. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION $23,513,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $330,162,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: b/: $12,466,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/ AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, : AL, AK, AZ, CO, CT, DE, DC, GA, HI, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE., NJ, NM, NY, NE., NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, NC, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY. VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. INCORPORATED IN: Wisconsin. INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. SECURA INSURANCE, A Mutual SERVICE INSURANCE COMPANY ST. PAUL GUARDIAN INSURANCE Company (NAIC #22543) (NAIC #36560) COMPANY (NAIC #24775) BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 819, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 702 OBERLIN BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Tower Appleton, WI 54912–0819. PHONE: ROAD, RALEIGH, NC 27605–0800. Square, Hartford, CT 06183. PHONE: (920) 739–3161. UNDERWRITING PHONE: (919) 833–1600. (860) 277–0111. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $33,382,000. SURETY UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LIMITATION b/: $2,613,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AZ, AR, CO, ID, IL, IN, $3,467,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, IA, KS, KY, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE., NV, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, DC, FL, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, NM, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SD, TN, UT, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, WA, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: MI, MS, MO, MT, NE., NV, NM, NC, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, NY, Wisconsin. ND, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00170 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37750 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, SureTec Insurance Company (NAIC INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, #10916) St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1330 POST (NAIC #24791) OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, OAK BLVD, SUITE 1100, HOUSTON, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. TX 77056. PHONE: (713) 812–0800. BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Tower INCORPORATED IN: Texas. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Square, Hartford, CT 06183. PHONE: $8,188,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: State Auto Property and Casualty (860) 277–0111. UNDERWRITING AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, LIMITATION b/: $13,025,000. SURETY Insurance Company (NAIC #25127) FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 518 EAST BROAD STREET, COLUMBUS, OH NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, 43215. PHONE: (614) 464–5000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, Texas. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. $62,890,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, SURETY BONDING COMPANY OF GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, AMERICA (NAIC #24047) Standard Fire Insurance Company MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, (The) (NAIC #19070) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 333 S. NV, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, WABASH AVE, CHICAGO, IL 60604. BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WV, PHONE: (312) 822–5000. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: PHONE: (860) 277–0111. $821,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, State Automobile Mutual Insurance UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, DC, GA, ID, IL, IN, $121,517,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Company (NAIC #25135) KS, MN, MO, MT, NE, NV, NM, NY, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, ND, OK, OR, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 518 EAST BROAD STREET, COLUMBUS, OH WY. INCORPORATED IN: South ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, Dakota. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, 43215. PHONE: (614) 464–5000. OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Swiss Reinsurance America UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. $39,743,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: Corporation (NAIC #25364) INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 175 KING GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, STREET, ARMONK, NY 10504–1606. Star Insurance Company (NAIC MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, #18023) PHONE: (913) 676–5200. NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 26255 OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, $425,983,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: American Drive, Southfield, MI 48034. VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, PHONE: (248) 358–1100. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, State Farm Fire and Casualty Company $32,428,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, (NAIC #25143) AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE STATE VT, VA, WA, WI. INCORPORATED IN: ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, New York. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, FARM PLAZA, BLOOMINGTON, IL OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, 61710. PHONE: (309) 766–2311. TEXAS PACIFIC INDEMNITY VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: COMPANY (NAIC #20389) INCORPORATED IN: Michigan. $1,219,384,000. SURETY LICENSES BUSINESS ADDRESS: 15 Mountain c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, View Road, Warren, NJ 07059. PHONE: StarNet Insurance Company (NAIC DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, #40045) (214) 754–0777. UNDERWRITING LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, LIMITATION b/: $729,000. SURETY BUSINESS ADDRESS: 11201 Douglas MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, LICENSES c,f/: AR, OK, TX. Avenue, Urbandale, IA 50322. PHONE: OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, INCORPORATED IN: Texas. (515) 473–3174. UNDERWRITING UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LIMITATION b/: $11,125,000. SURETY INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. TRANSATLANTIC REINSURANCE LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, COMPANY (NAIC #19453) CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, Stillwater Property and Casualty BUSINESS ADDRESS: One Liberty IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, Insurance Company (NAIC #16578) Plaza, 165 Broadway, NEW YORK, NY MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 10006. PHONE: (212) 365–2200. NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 45126, Jacksonville, FL 32232–5126. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. $477,050,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: PHONE: (800) 849–6140. INCORPORATED IN: Delaware. AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, DC, GA, ID, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MI, MN, MS, NE, Starr Indemnity & Liability Company $11,239,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: (NAIC #38318) NV, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, PA, SD, UT, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, WA, WI. INCORPORATED IN: New BUSINESS ADDRESS: 399 Park HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, York. Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, NY MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, 10022. PHONE: (646) 227–6400. NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, Travelers Casualty and Surety UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, Company (NAIC #19038) $183,233,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, New York. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00171 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37751 PHONE: (860) 277–0111. Travelers Indemnity Company of UNITED FIRE & INDEMNITY UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Connecticut (The) (NAIC #25682) COMPANY (NAIC #19496) $406,716,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. 73909, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52407–3909. FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, PHONE: (860) 277–0111. PHONE: (319) 399–5700. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, $38,307,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $1,713,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, AL, CO, IN, KY, LA, MS, MO, NM, TX. TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, INCORPORATED IN: Texas. INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, United States Fidelity and Guaranty Travelers Casualty and Surety NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, Company (NAIC #25887) Company of America (NAIC #31194) OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. PHONE: (860) 277–0111. Travelers Property Casualty Company PHONE: (860) 277–0111. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: of America (NAIC #25674) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $211,466,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $246,623,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, PHONE: (860) 277–0111. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, $50,501,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, Travelers Casualty Insurance Company NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, United States Fire Insurance Company of America (NAIC #19046) OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, (NAIC #21113) VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 305 Madison BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. Avenue, Morristown, NJ 07962. PHONE: PHONE: (860) 277–0111. U.S. Specialty Insurance Company (973) 490–6600. UNDERWRITING UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #29599) LIMITATION b/: $89,862,000. SURETY $56,618,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: 13403 LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, Northwest Freeway, Houston, TX 77040. CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, PHONE: (713) 462–1000. IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, $57,707,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, Delaware. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, Travelers Indemnity Company (The) United States Surety Company (NAIC OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, (NAIC #25658) #10656) VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER INCORPORATED IN: Texas. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 20 W. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. Aylesbury Road, Timonium, MD 21093. PHONE: (860) 277–0111. UNITED CASUALTY AND SURETY PHONE: (410) 453–9522. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $663,341,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: #36226) $3,702,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CT, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1250 Hancock DE, DC, FL, GA, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Street, Suite 803N, Quincy, MA 02169. NY, NC, OH, PA, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, PHONE: (617) 471–1112 x–109. WV. INCORPORATED IN: Maryland. NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNITED SURETY AND INDEMNITY OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, $474,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: CT, COMPANY (NAIC #44423) UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. DC, FL, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. RI. INCORPORATED IN: Massachusetts. BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 2111, SAN JUAN, PR 00922–2111. TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY United Fire & Casualty Company (NAIC PHONE: (787) 625–1105. OF AMERICA (THE) (NAIC #25666) #13021) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX $5,532,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: PR. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. 73909, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52407–3909. INCORPORATED IN: Puerto Rico. PHONE: (860) 277–0111. PHONE: (319) 399–5700. Universal Surety Company (NAIC UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: #25933) $20,280,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $58,240,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DC, FL, GA, BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, 80468, Lincoln, NE 68501. PHONE: MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, (402) 435–4302. UNDERWRITING NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, LIMITATIONb/: $13,531,000. SURETY SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. LICENSES c,f/: AZ, AR, CO, ID, IL, IN, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Connecticut. INCORPORATED IN: Iowa. IA, KS, KY, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, NM, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00172 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37752 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices ND, OH, OK, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA, WI, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Nebraska. OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: South Dakota. UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS INCORPORATED IN: New Hampshire. INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC Westfield Insurance Company (NAIC #41181) West American Insurance Company #24112) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1400 (NAIC #44393) BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 5001, AMERICAN LANE, TOWER I, 18TH BUSINESS ADDRESS: 350 E. 96th Westfield Center, OH 44251–5001. FLOOR, SCHAUMBURG, IL 60196– Street, Indianapolis, IN 46240. PHONE: PHONE: (330) 887–0101. 1056. PHONE: (847) 605–6000. (617) 357–9500. UNDERWRITING UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: LIMITATION b/: $4,517,000. SURETY $104,304,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $33,889,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, KY, LA, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: Indiana. INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. INCORPORATED IN: Illinois. WEST BEND MUTUAL INSURANCE Westfield National Insurance Company Utica Mutual Insurance Company COMPANY (NAIC #15350) (NAIC #24120) (NAIC #25976) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1900 South BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 5001, BUSINESS ADDRESS: POST OFFICE 18th Avenue, West Bend, WI 53095. Westfield Center, OH 44251–5001. BOX 530, UTICA, NY 13503–0530. PHONE: (262) 334–5571. PHONE: (330) 887–0101. PHONE: (315) 734–2000. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $82,312,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $26,306,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: $75,978,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, MI, MN, MO, NE, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, IL, IN, IA, KY, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, OH, WI. INCORPORATED IN: MD, MI, MN, NM, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, Wisconsin. SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, WV, WI. ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, INCORPORATED IN: Ohio. Westchester Fire Insurance Company NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, (NAIC #10030) Westport Insurance Corporation (NAIC OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, #39845) UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 436 Walnut INCORPORATED IN: New York. Street, P.O. Box 1000, Philadelphia, PA BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. Box 2991, 19106. PHONE: (215) 640–1000. OVERLAND PARK, KS 66202–1391. VerTerra Insurance Company (NAIC UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: PHONE: (913) 676–5200. #10024) $90,606,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, $124,631,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: 85563, SAN DIEGO, CA 92186–5563. FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, PHONE: (858) 350–2400. LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, FL, GA, GU, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, $2,981,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, TX. INCORPORATED IN: Texas. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WY. INCORPORATED IN: VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, WY. Vigilant Insurance Company (NAIC Pennsylvania. INCORPORATED IN: Missouri. #20397) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 15 Mountain Western National Mutual Insurance XL Reinsurance America Inc. (NAIC View Road, Warren, NJ 07059. PHONE: Company (NAIC #15377) #20583) (212) 612–4000. UNDERWRITING BUSINESS ADDRESS: P.O. BOX BUSINESS ADDRESS: SEAVIEW LIMITATION b/: $29,231,000. SURETY 1463, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440. HOUSE, 70 SEAVIEW AVENUE, LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, PHONE: (952) 835–5350. STAMFORD, CT 06902. PHONE: (203) CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 964–5200. UNDERWRITING IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, $34,995,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: LIMITATION b/: $169,308,000. MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, AK, AZ, CO, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, MD, MI, SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, MN, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, ND, OH, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, WA, WI. ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, MI, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: New INCORPORATED IN: Minnesota. MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, York. NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, Western Surety Company (NAIC SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, Washington International Insurance #13188) WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: New Company (NAIC #32778) BUSINESS ADDRESS: 333 S. York. BUSINESS ADDRESS: 475 NORTH WABASH AVE, CHICAGO, IL 60604. MARTINGALE ROAD, SCHAUMBURG, PHONE: (312) 822–5000. XL Specialty Insurance Company IL 60173. PHONE: (603) 644–6600. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: (NAIC #37885) UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: $135,982,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: BUSINESS ADDRESS: SEAVIEW $7,449,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, HOUSE, 70 SEAVIEW AVENUE, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, STAMFORD, CT 06902. PHONE: (203) FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, 964–5200. UNDERWRITING ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, LIMITATION b/: $14,318,000. SURETY VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00173 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37753 LICENSES c,f/: AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, PHONE: (860) 277–0111. as acceptable sureties on Federal bonds are CO, CT, DE, DC, FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: also acceptable as reinsuring companies. IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, $22,622,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/:. (b) The Underwriting Limitations MN, MS, MO, MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, published herein are on a per bond basis. Footnotes NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, Treasury requirements do not limit the penal RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, 1. AMERICAN CONTRACTORS sum (face amount) of bonds which surety WA, WV, WI, WY. INCORPORATED IN: INDEMNITY COMPANY (NAIC #10216) is companies may provide. However, when the Delaware. required by state law to conduct business in penal sum exceeds a company’s the state of Texas as TEXAS BONDING Underwriting Limitation, the excess must be Zurich American Insurance Company COMPANY. However, business is conducted protected by co-insurance, reinsurance, or (NAIC #16535) in all other covered states as AMERICAN other methods in accordance with 31 CFR CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY. Section 223.10, Section 223.11. Treasury BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1400 2. Arch Reinsurance Company (NAIC AMERICAN LANE, TOWER I, 18TH #10348) redomesticated from Nebraska to refers to a bond of this type as an Excess FLOOR, SCHAUMBURG, IL 60196– Delaware. The effective date of the Risk. When Excess Risks on bonds in favor 1056. PHONE: (847) 605–6000. redomestication is September 15, 2014. of the United States are protected by UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: 3. CONTRACTORS BONDING AND reinsurance, such reinsurance is to be $732,711,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/: INSURANCE COMPANY (NAIC #37206) effected by use of a Federal reinsurance form AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, redomesticated from Washington to Illinois. to be filed with the bond or within 45 days FL, GA, GU, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, The effective date of the redomestication is thereafter. In protecting such excess risks, the LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, December 31, 2014. underwriting limitation in force on the day 4. Darwin National Assurance Company in which the bond was provided will govern MP, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, (NAIC #16624) formally changed its name to absolutely. For further assistance, contact the ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, Allied World Specialty Insurance Company. TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, VI, WA, WV, WI, The effective date of the name change is Surety Bond Section at (202) 874–6850. WY. INCORPORATED IN: New York. October 28, 2014. (c) A surety company must be licensed in 5. Granite State Insurance Company (NAIC the State or other area in which it provides Certified Reinsurer Companies #23809) redomesticated from Pennsylvania to a bond, but need not be licensed in the State COMPANIES HOLDING CERTIFICATES Illinois. The effective date of the or other area in which the principal resides OF AUTHORITY AS ACCEPTABLE redomestication is December 31, 2014. or where the contract is to be performed [28 REINSURING COMPANIES UNDER 6. Harleysville Worcester Insurance Op. Atty. Gen. 127, Dec. 24, 1909; 31 CFR SECTION 223.3(b) OF TREASURY Company (NAIC #26182) voluntarily Section 223.5 (b)]. The term ‘‘other area’’ CIRCULAR NO. 297. [See Note (e)] relinquished its Treasury Certificate of includes the District of Columbia, American Authority, effective June 30, 2015. Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, 7. Independence Casualty and Surety Alterra Reinsurance USA Inc. (NAIC Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. #10829) Company (NAIC #10024) changed its name to VerTerra Insurance Company. The effective License information in this Circular is BUSINESS ADDRESS: Ten Parkway date of the name change is September 29, provided to the Treasury Department by the North, Deerfield, IL 60015. PHONE: 2014. companies themselves. For updated license (908) 630–2700. UNDERWRITING 8. International Fidelity Insurance information, you may contact the company LIMITATION b/: $74,937,000. SURETY Company’s (NAIC #11592) name is very directly or the applicable State Insurance LICENSES c,f/:. similar to another company that is NOT Department. Refer to the list of state certified by this Department. Please ensure Odyssey Reinsurance Company (NAIC insurance departments at the end of this that the name of the Company and the state publication. For further assistance, contact #23680) of incorporation are exactly as they appear in the Surety Bond Section at (202) 874–6850. this Circular. Do not hesitate to contact the BUSINESS ADDRESS: 300 FIRST (d) FEDERAL PROCESS AGENTS: Company to verify the authenticity of a bond. STAMFORD PLACE, STAMFORD, CT Treasury Approved surety companies are 06902. PHONE: (203) 977–8000. 9. New Hampshire Insurance Company (NAIC #23840) redomesticated from required to appoint Federal process agents in UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Pennsylvania to Illinois. The effective date of accord with 31 U.S.C. 9306 and 31 CFR 224. $285,283,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/:. the redomestication is December 31, 2014. (e) Companies holding Certificates of Phoenix Insurance Company (The) 10. OneBeacon America Insurance Authority as acceptable reinsuring (NAIC #25623) Company (NAIC #20621) voluntarily companies are acceptable only as reinsuring relinquished its Treasury Certificate of companies on Federal bonds and may not BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER Authority, effective June 30, 2015. directly write Federal bonds. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. 11. OneBeacon Insurance (NAIC #21970) (f) Some companies may be Approved PHONE: (860) 277–0111. voluntarily relinquished its Treasury surplus lines carriers in various states. Such UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: Certificate of Authority, effective June 30, approval may indicate that the company is 2015. $123,438,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/:. authorized to write surety in a particular 12. Pennsylvania Insurance Company RENAISSANCE REINSURANCE U.S. (NAIC #21962) voluntarily relinquished its state, even though the company is not INC. (NAIC #10357) Treasury Certificate of Authority, effective licensed in the state. Questions related to this may be directed to the appropriate State BUSINESS ADDRESS: 140 Broadway, June 30, 2015. 13. PLATINUM UNDERWRITERS Insurance Department. Refer to the list of Suite 4200, New York, NY 10005. REINSURANCE, INC. (NAIC #10357) state insurance departments at the end of this PHONE: (212) 238–9600. formally changed its name to RENAISSANCE publication. UNDERWRITING LIMITATION b/: REINSURANCE U.S. INC. The effective date $53,137,000. SURETY LICENSES c,f/:. of the name change is April 13, 2015. ST. PAUL PROTECTIVE INSURANCE Notes COMPANY (NAIC #19224) (a) All Certificates of Authority expire June BUSINESS ADDRESS: ONE TOWER 30, and are renewable July 1, annually. SQUARE, HARTFORD, CT 06183. Companies holding Certificates of Authority VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00174 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37754 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices State insurance departments Telephone No. Alabama, Montgomery 36104 ...... (334) 269–3550 Alaska, Anchorage 99501–3567 ...... (907) 269–7900 Arizona, Phoenix 85018–7256 ...... (602) 364–2499 Arkansas, Little Rock 72201–1904 ...... (501) 371–2600 California, Sacramento 95814 ...... (213) 897–8921 Colorado, Denver 80202 ...... (303) 894–7499 Connecticut, Hartford 06142–0816 ...... (860) 297–3800 Delaware, Dover 19904 ...... (302) 674–7300 District of Columbia, Washington 20002 ...... (202) 442–7813 Florida, Tallahassee 32399–6502 ...... (850) 413–3132 Georgia, Atlanta 30334 ...... (404) 656–2056 Hawaii, Honolulu 96813 ...... (808) 586–2790 Idaho, Boise 83720–0043 ...... (208) 334–4250 Illinois, Springfield 62767–0001 ...... (217) 782–4515 Indiana, Indianapolis 46204–2787 ...... (317) 232–2385 Iowa, Des Moines 50319–0065 ...... (515) 281–5705 Kansas, Topeka 66612–1678 ...... (785) 296–3071 Kentucky, Frankfort 40602–0517 ...... (502) 564–6082 Louisiana, Baton Rouge 70802 ...... (225) 342–1200 Maine, Augusta 04333–0034 ...... (207) 624–8475 Maryland, Baltimore 21202–2272 ...... (410) 468–2000 Massachusetts, Boston 02110 ...... (617) 521–7794 Michigan, Lansing 48933–1020 ...... (517) 284–8800 Minnesota, St. Paul 55101–2198 ...... (651) 539–1500 Mississippi, Jackson 39201 ...... (601) 359–3569 Missouri, Jefferson City 65102 ...... (573) 751–4126 Montana, Helena 59601 ...... (406) 444–2040 Nebraska, Lincoln 68508 ...... (402) 471–2201 Nevada, Carson City 89701–5753 ...... (775) 687–0700 New Hampshire, Concord 03301 ...... (603) 271–2261 New Jersey, Trenton 08625 ...... (609) 292–5360 New Mexico, Santa Fe 87504–1269 ...... (855) 427–5674 New York, New York 10004–2319 ...... (800) 342–3736 North Carolina, Raleigh 27611 ...... (919) 807–6750 North Dakota, Bismarck 58505–0320 ...... (701) 328–2440 Ohio, Columbus 43215 ...... (614) 644–2658 Oklahoma, Oklahoma City 73112 ...... (405) 521–2828 Oregon, Salem 97301–3883 ...... (503) 947–7980 Pennsylvania, Harrisburg 17120 ...... (877) 881–6388 Puerto Rico, Santurce 00968 ...... (787) 304–8686 Rhode Island, Providence 02903–4233 ...... (401) 462–9500 South Carolina, Columbia 29202–3105 ...... (803) 737–6160 South Dakota, Pierre 57501–3185 ...... (605) 773–4104 Tennessee, Nashville 37243–0565 ...... (615) 741–2218 Texas, Austin 78714 ...... (800) 252–3439 Utah, Salt Lake City 84114–1201 ...... (801) 538–3800 Vermont, Montpelier 05602 ...... (802) 828–3301 Virginia, Richmond 23218 ...... (804) 371–9741 Virgin Islands, St. Thomas 00802 ...... (340) 774–7166 Washington, Olympia 98504–0256 ...... (360) 725–7144 West Virginia, Charleston 25305–0540 ...... (304) 558–3386 Wisconsin, Madison 53707–7873 ...... (608) 266–3586 Wyoming, Cheyenne 82002–0440 ...... (307) 777–7401 [FR Doc. 2015–16280 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: The Department of the and the Internal Revenue Service BILLING CODE P Treasury, as part of its continuing effort relating to the issuance of certain to reduce paperwork and respondent taxpayer identifying numbers. burden, invites the general public and DATES: Written comments should be DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY other Federal agencies to take this received on or before August 31, 2015 opportunity to comment on proposed to be assured of consideration. Internal Revenue Service and/or continuing information collections, as required by the ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments Proposed Collection; Comment Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, to Christie Preston, Internal Revenue Request for Revenue Procedure Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution 3506(c)(2)(A)). The IRS is soliciting Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), comments concerning information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Treasury. collection requirements related to Requests for additional information or ACTION: Notice and request for guidance for qualification as an copies of the form(s) and instructions comments. acceptance agent, and execution of an should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala, agreement between an acceptance agent Internal Revenue Service, Room 6129, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00175 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices 37755 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., through the use of automated collection Service to make determinations on the Washington, DC 20224, (202) 31–5746 techniques or other forms of information issuance of various types of closing or through the internet at technology; and (e) estimates of capital agreements and compliance statements. [email protected]. or start-up costs and costs of operation, The issuance of the agreements and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: maintenance, and purchase of services statements allow individual plans to Title: Guidance for qualification as an to provide information. maintain their tax-qualified status. As a acceptance agent, and execution of an Approved: June 23, 2015. result, the favorable tax treatment of the benefits of the eligible employees is agreement between an acceptance agent Christie Preston, retained. Applicants under the and the Internal Revenue Service IRS, Reports Clearance Officer. relating to the issuance of certain Voluntary Correction Program (VCP) [FR Doc. 2015–16220 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] taxpayer identifying numbers. must file Forms 8950 and 8951, and the BILLING CODE 4830–01–P OMB Number: 1545–1499. appropriate scheduled(s) to the Revenue Procedure Number: Revenue applicable part of the model compliance statement, in order to request written Procedures 2006–10. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Abstract: Revenue Procedure 2006–10 approval from the IRS for a correction describes application procedures for Internal Revenue Service of a qualified plan that has failed to becoming an acceptance agent and the comply with the requirements of the requisite agreement that an agent must Proposed Information Collection; Internal Revenue Code. execute with the Internal Revenue Comment Request Current Actions: There is no change to Service. this existing collection. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Current Actions: There are no changes Type of Review: Extension of a Treasury. being made to the revenue procedure at currently approved collection. Affected Public: Individuals and this time. ACTION: Notice and request for business or other for-profit Type of Review: Extension of a comments. organizations, not-for profit institutions, currently approved collection. SUMMARY: The Department of the and state, local or tribal governments. Affected Public: Individuals, business Treasury, as part of its continuing effort Estimated Number of Responses: or other for-profit organizations, not-for- to reduce paperwork and respondent 14,300. profit institutions, Federal Government, burden, invites the general public and Estimated Time per Respondent: 13 and state, local or tribal governments. other Federal agencies to take this hours, 21 minutes. Estimated Number of Respondents: opportunity to comment on proposed Estimated Total Annual Burden 8,000. and/or continuing information Hours: 190,941. Estimated Time per Respondent: 3 collections, as required by the The following paragraph applies to all hrs., 12 minutes. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, of the collections of information covered Estimated Total Annual Burden Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. by this notice: Hours: 24,960. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is An agency may not conduct or The following paragraph applies to all soliciting comments concerning the sponsor, and a person is not required to of the collections of information covered Employee Plans Compliance Resolution respond to, a collection of information by this notice: System (EPCRS). unless the collection of information An agency may not conduct or displays a valid OMB control number. DATES: Written comments should be sponsor, and a person is not required to Books or records relating to a collection received on or before August 31, 2015 respond to, a collection of information of information must be retained as long to be assured of consideration. unless the collection of information as their contents may become material displays a valid OMB control number. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments in the administration of any internal Books or records relating to a collection to Christie Preston, Internal Revenue revenue law. Generally, tax returns and of information must be retained as long Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution tax return information are confidential, as their contents may become material Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. in the administration of any internal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Request for Comments: Comments revenue law. Generally, tax returns and Requests for additional information or submitted in response to this notice will tax return information are confidential, copies of the regulations should be be summarized and/or included in the as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. directed to R. Joseph Durbala at Internal request for OMB approval. All Request for Comments: Comments Revenue Service, Room 6129, 1111 comments will become a matter of submitted in response to this notice will Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, public record. Comments are invited on: be summarized and/or included in the DC 20224, or at (202) 317–5746, or (a) Whether the collection of request for OMB approval. All through the internet at information is necessary for the proper comments will become a matter of [email protected]. performance of the functions of the public record. Comments are invited on: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: agency, including whether the (a) Whether the collection of Title: Employee Plans Compliance information shall have practical utility; information is necessary for the proper Resolution System (R.P. 2015–27, R.P. (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate performance of the functions of the 2015–28)—including Forms 8950, 8951, of the burden of the collection of agency, including whether the 14568, 14568–A thru I. information; (c) ways to enhance the information shall have practical utility; OMB Number: 1545–1673. quality, utility, and clarity of the (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate Regulation Project Number: RP 2015– information to be collected; (d) ways to of the burden of the collection of 27 and RP 2015–28. minimize the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the Form Number: Forms 8950, 8951, information on respondents, including quality, utility, and clarity of the 14568, 14568–A thru I. through the use of automated collection information to be collected; (d) ways to Abstract: The information requested techniques or other forms of information minimize the burden of the collection of in Revenue Procedure 2015–27 is technology; and (e) estimates of capital information on respondents, including required to enable the Internal Revenue or start-up costs and costs of operation, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00176 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 37756 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Notices maintenance, and purchase of services FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An agency may not conduct or to provide information. Requests for additional information or sponsor, and a person is not required to Approved: June 24, 2015. copies of the form and instructions respond to, a collection of information Christie Preston, should be directed to R. Joseph Durbala, unless the collection of information (202) 317–5746, at Internal Revenue displays a valid OMB control number. IRS, Reports Clearance Officer. Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution Books or records relating to a collection [FR Doc. 2015–16222 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or of information must be retained as long BILLING CODE 4830–01–P through the internet at as their contents may become material [email protected]. in the administration of any internal DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: revenue law. Generally, tax returns and Title: Application for Extension of tax return information are confidential, Internal Revenue Service Time for Payment of Tax. as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. OMB Number: 1545–2131. Request for Comments: Comments Form Number: 1127. Proposed Collection; Comment submitted in response to this notice will Abstract: Under IRC 6161, individual Request for Form 1127 be summarized and/or included in the taxpayers and business taxpayers are request for OMB approval. All AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), allowed to request an extension of time comments will become a matter of Treasury. for payment of tax shown or required to public record. Comments are invited on: be shown on a return or for a tax due ACTION: Notice and request for (a) Whether the collection of on a notice of deficiency. In order to be comments. information is necessary for the proper granted this extension, they must file performance of the functions of the SUMMARY: The Department of the Form 1127, providing evidence of agency, including whether the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort undue hardship, inability to borrow, information shall have practical utility; to reduce paperwork and respondent and collateral to ensure payment of the (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate burden, invites the general public and tax. of the burden of the collection of other Federal agencies to take this Current Actions: There is no change information; (c) ways to enhance the opportunity to comment on proposed in the paperwork burden previously quality, utility, and clarity of the and/or continuing information approved by OMB. This form is being information to be collected; (d) ways to collections, as required by the submitted for renewal purposes only. minimize the burden of the collection of Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Type of Review: Extension of a information on respondents, including Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. currently approved collection. through the use of automated collection 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is Affected Public: Individuals and techniques or other forms of information soliciting comments concerning Form Households, Businesses and other for- technology; and (e) estimates of capital 1127, Application for Extension of Time profit organizations. or start-up costs and costs of operation, for Payment of Tax. Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,000. maintenance, and purchase of services DATES: Written comments should be Estimated Time per Respondent: 7 to provide information. received on or before August 31, 2015 hours, 50 minutes. Approved: June 23, 2015. to be assured of consideration. Estimated Total Annual Burden Christie Preston, ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments Hours: 7,960. to Christie Preston, Internal Revenue The following paragraph applies to all IRS Reports Clearance Officer. Service, Room 6129, 1111 Constitution of the collections of information covered [FR Doc. 2015–16221 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. by this notice: BILLING CODE 4830–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00177 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYN1.SGM 01JYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Vol. 80 Wednesday, No. 126 July 1, 2015 Part II Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Parts 87 and 1068 Proposed Finding That Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Aircraft Cause or Contribute to Air Pollution That May Reasonably Be Anticipated To Endanger Public Health and Welfare and Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Proposed Rule VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37758 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DATES: Comments. Comments must be Participation’’ for more information AGENCY received on or before August 31, 2015. about submitting written comments. Public Hearing. The EPA will hold a The EPA’s policy is that all comments 40 CFR Parts 87 and 1068 public hearing on August 11, 2015 in received will be included in the public Washington, DC, at the William docket without change and may be [EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0828; FRL 9924–06– Jefferson Clinton East Building, Room made available online at http:// OAR] 1153, 101 Constitution Avenue NW., www.regulations.gov, including any Washington, DC 20004. If no one personal information provided, unless RIN 2060–AS31 contacts the EPA requesting to speak at the comment includes information the hearing for this proposal by July 13, claimed to be confidential business Proposed Finding That Greenhouse 2015 the public hearing will not take information (CBI) or other information Gas Emissions From Aircraft Cause or place and will be cancelled with no whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Contribute to Air Pollution That May further notice. Speakers should contact Do not submit information that you Reasonably Be Anticipated To Ms. JoNell Iffland (see FOR FURTHER consider to be CBI or otherwise Endanger Public Health and Welfare INFORMATION CONTACT) to request to protected through http:// and Advance Notice of Proposed speak at the hearing. The last day to pre- www.regulations.gov or email. The Rulemaking register in advance to speak at the http://www.regulations.gov Web site is AGENCY: Environmental Protection hearing will be August 6, 2015. The an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which Agency (EPA). hearing will start at 10:00 a.m. local means the EPA will not know your time and continue until everyone has identity or contact information unless ACTION: Proposed rule and advance had a chance to speak. Requests to you provide it in the body of your notice of proposed rulemaking. speak will be taken the day of the comment. If you send an email SUMMARY: In this action, the hearing at the hearing registration desk, comment directly to the EPA without Administrator is proposing to determine although preferences on speaking times going through http:// that greenhouse gas concentrations in may not be able to be fulfilled. If you www.regulations.gov, your email the atmosphere endanger the public require the service of a translator or address will be automatically captured health and welfare of current and future special accommodations such as audio and included as part of the comment generations within the meaning of description, please let us know at the that is placed in the public docket and section 231(a) of the Clean Air Act. She time of registration. For further made available on the Internet. If you proposes to make this finding information on the public hearing or to submit an electronic comment, the EPA specifically with respect to the same six register to speak at the hearing, please recommends that you include your well-mixed greenhouse gases (GHGs)— see section I.B below or go to http:// name and other contact information in carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, www.epa.gov/otaq/aviation.htm. the body of your comment and with any hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA and sulfur hexafluoride—that together comments, identified by Docket ID No. cannot read your comment due to were defined as the air pollution in the EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0828, by one of technical difficulties and cannot contact 2009 Endangerment Finding under the following methods: you for clarification, the EPA may not section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act and • Online: www.regulations.gov be able to consider your comment. that together constitute the primary Follow the on-line instructions for Electronic files should avoid the use of cause of the climate change problem. submitting comments. special characters, or any form of The Administrator is also proposing to • Email: A-and-R-Docket@ encryption, and be free of any defects or find that greenhouse gas emissions from epamail.epa.gov Attention Docket ID viruses. For additional information certain classes of engines used in No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0828. about the EPA’s public docket visit the aircraft are contributing to air • Fax: (202) 566–9744, Attention EPA Docket Center homepage at: http:// pollution—the mix of greenhouse gases Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– www.epa.gov/dockets. For additional in the atmosphere—that endangers 0828. instructions on submitting comments, public health and welfare under section • Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send go to section I.B of this document. 231(a) of the Clean Air Act. Concurrent comments to Air and Radiation Docket Docket. The EPA has established a with these proposed findings, the EPA and Information Center, Environmental docket for this rulemaking under Docket is issuing an Advance Notice of Protection Agency, Mail Code: 28221T, ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0828. All Proposed Rulemaking to provide an 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., documents in the docket are listed in overview of and seek input on a variety Washington, DC 20460. Attention the www.regulations.gov index. of issues related to setting an Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– Although listed in the index, some international CO2 standard for aircraft at 0828. information is not publicly available, the International Civil Aviation • Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental e.g., CBI or other information whose Organization (ICAO), ICAO’s progress in Protection Agency, EPA West, EPA disclosure is restricted by statute. establishing global aircraft standards Docket Center, EPA West Building, Certain other material, such as that achieve meaningful reductions in Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. copyrighted material, is not placed on CO2 emissions, and (provided the EPA NW., Washington, DC 20004. Attention the Internet and will be publicly promulgates final endangerment and Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– available only in hard copy in the EPA’s cause and contribute findings for 0828. Such deliveries are only accepted docket. Publicly available docket aircraft engine GHG emissions) the during the Docket’s normal hours of materials are available either potential use of section 231 of the Clean operation, and special arrangements electronically in www.regulations.gov or Air Act to adopt and implement should be made for deliveries of boxed in hard copy at the Air and Radiation corresponding aircraft engine GHG information. Docket and Information Center, EPA/ emission standards domestically, Instructions: Direct your comments to DC, EPA WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 ensuring transparency and the Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, opportunity for public comment. 0828. See section I.B on ‘‘Public DC. The Public Reading Room is open VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37759 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday B. Air Pollutant, Public Health and Welfare 1. Non-Recurring Costs (Engineering through Friday, excluding legal IV. The Proposed Endangerment Finding Development Costs) holidays. The telephone number for the Under CAA Section 231 2. Technology Responses A. Scientific Basis of the 2009 3. Cost Effectiveness Analysis Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, Endangerment Finding Under CAA and the telephone number for the Air G. Request for Comment on the EPA’s section 202(a)(1) Domestic Implementation of Docket is (202) 566–1742. 1. The Definition of Air Pollution in the International CO2 Standards FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2009 Endangerment Finding VII. Statutory Authority and Executive Order JoNell Iffland, Office of Transportation 2. Public Health Impacts Detailed in the Reviews 2009 Endangerment Finding and Air Quality, Assessment and A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 3. Public Welfare Impacts Detailed in the Standards Division (ASD), Planning and Review and Executive 2009 Endangerment Finding Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 4. The Science Upon Which the Agency Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI Relied Regulatory Review 48105; Telephone number: (734) 214– B. Recent Science Further Supports the B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 4454; Fax number: (734) 214–4816; Administrator’s Judgment That the Six C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Email address: [email protected]. Well-Mixed Greenhouse Gases Endanger D. UnFunded Mandates Reform Act Please use this contact information for Public Health and Welfare (UMRA) general questions about this rulemaking, 1. More Recent Evidence That Elevated E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism to request a hearing, to determine if a Atmospheric Concentrations of the Six F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Greenhouse Gases Are the Root Cause of and Coordination With Indian Tribal hearing will be held, and to register to Observed Climate Change Governments speak at the hearing, if one is held. 2. More Recent Evidence that Greenhouse G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Gases Endanger Public Health Children From Environmental Health 3. More Recent Evidence that Greenhouse Table of Contents Risks and Safety Risks Gases Endanger Public Welfare H. Executive Order 13211: Actions I. General Information 4. Consideration of Other Climate Forcers Concerning Regulations That A. Does this action apply to me? C. Summary of the Administrator’s Significantly Affect Energy Supply, B. Public Participation Proposed Endangerment Finding Under Distribution or Use 1. What should I consider as I prepare my CAA Section 231 I. National Technology Transfer and comments for the EPA? V. The Proposed Cause or Contribute Finding Advancement Act (NTTAA) 2. Public Hearing for Greenhouse Gases Under CAA J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions Section 231 C. Did the EPA conduct a peer review To Address Environmental Justice in before issuing this notice? A. The Air Pollutant Minority Populations and Low-Income D. Children’s Environmental Health 1. Proposed Definition of Air Pollutant Populations E. Environmental Justice 2. How the Definition of Air Pollutant in II. Introduction: Overview and Context for the Endangerment Determination Affects K. Determination Under Section 307(d) This Proposal Section 231 Standards VIII. Statutory Provisions and Legal A. Summary B. Proposed Cause or Contribute Finding Authority B. Background Information Helpful to 1. The Administrator’s Approach in I. General Information Understanding This Proposal Making This Proposed Finding 1. Greenhouse Gases and Their Effects 2. Overview of Greenhouse Gas Emissions A. Does this action apply to me? 2. Statutory Basis for This Proposal 3. Proposed Contribution Finding for the C. The EPA’s Responsibilities Under the Single Air Pollutant Comprised of the of These proposed findings, if finalized, Clean Air Act Six Well-Mixed Greenhouse Gases would trigger new duties that would 1. The EPA’s Regulation of Greenhouse 4. Additional Considerations apply to the EPA, but would not Gases VI. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: themselves apply new requirements to Discussion of Ongoing International 2. Background on the Aircraft Petition, other entities outside the federal 2008 ANPR, and D.C. District Court Proceedings To Develop Aircraft CO2 Decision Emissions Standard and Request for government. Specifically, if the EPA D. U.S. Aircraft Regulations and the Comment issues final findings that greenhouse gas International Community A. Purpose of the International Standard emissions from certain classes of 1. International Regulations and U.S. B. Applicability of the International CO2 engines—those used in certain aircraft— Obligations Emissions Standard cause or contribute to air pollution 2. The International Community’s Reasons C. CAEP Discussion on In-Production which endangers public health or for Addressing Aircraft GHG Emissions Aircraft Applicability welfare, then the EPA would have a 3. Relationship of the EPA’s Proposed 1. Applicability to In-Production Aircraft duty under section 231 of the Clean Air Endangerment and Cause or Contribute and Date of Implementation Findings to International Aircraft 2. Reporting Requirement for New In- Act to promulgate aircraft engine Standards Production Aircraft emission standards applicable to E. The EPA’s Regulation of Aircraft D. Metric System, Applicability, and emissions of that air pollutant from Emissions Certification Requirement those classes of engines. Only those III. Legal Framework for This Action 1. CO2 Metric System standards would apply to and have an A. Section 231(a)(2)(A)—Endangerment 2. Applicability effect on other entities outside the and Cause or Contribute 3. Certification requirement federal government. Entities potentially 1. The Statutory Language 4. Regulating the Entire Aircraft Instead of interested in this proposed action are 2. How the Origin of the Current Statutory the Engine Language Informs the EPA’s E. Stringency Options those that manufacture and sell aircraft Interpretation of Section 231(a)(2)(A) F. Costs, Technology Responses for engines and aircraft in the United 3. Additional Considerations for the Cause Stringency Options, and Cost- States. Categories that may be regulated or Contribute Analysis Effectiveness Analysis in a future regulatory action include: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37760 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules Category NAICS a Code SIC b Code Examples of potentially affected entities Industry ...... 3364412 3724 Manufacturers of new aircraft engines. Industry ...... 336411 3721 Manufacturers of new aircraft. a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). b Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code. This table is not intended to be this document, we encourage you to EPA will make every effort to exhaustive, but rather provides a guide comment on any aspect of this accommodate all speakers who arrive for readers regarding entities likely to be rulemaking. and register. Because this hearing, if interested in this proposed action. This held, will be at a U.S. government Tips for Preparing Your Comments table lists the types of entities that the facility, individuals planning to attend EPA is now aware could potentially When submitting comments, the hearing should be prepared to show have an interest in this proposed action. remember to: valid picture identification to the If the EPA issues final affirmative • Identify the rulemaking by docket security staff in order to gain access to findings under section 231(a) regarding number and other identifying the meeting room. Please note that the greenhouse gases, the EPA would then information (subject heading, Federal REAL ID Act, passed by Congress in be required to undertake a separate Register date and page number). 2005, established new requirements for notice and comment rulemaking to issue • Follow directions—The agency may entering federal facilities. These emission standards applicable to ask you to respond to specific questions requirements took effect July 21, 2014. greenhouse gas emissions from the or organize comments by referencing a If your driver’s license is issued by classes of aircraft engines that the EPA Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, finds cause or contribute in such a or section number. Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, finding, and the FAA would be required • Explain why you agree or disagree, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, to Prescribe regulations to insure suggest alternatives, and substitute New York, Oklahoma, or the state of compliance with these emissions language for your requested changes. Washington, you must present an standards pursuant to section 232 of the • Describe any assumptions and additional form of identification to enter Clean Air Act. Other types of entities provide any technical information and/ the federal buildings where the public not listed in the table could also be or data that you used. hearings will be held. Acceptable interested and potentially affected by • If you estimate potential costs or alternative forms of identification subsequent actions at some future time. burdens, explain how you arrived at include: Federal employee badges, If you have any questions regarding the your estimate in sufficient detail to passports, enhanced driver’s licenses scope of this proposed action, consult allow for it to be reproduced. and military identification cards. In • the person listed in the preceding FOR Provide specific examples to addition, you will need to obtain a FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. illustrate your concerns, and suggest property pass for any personal alternatives. belongings you bring with you. Upon B. Public Participation • Explain your views as clearly as leaving the building, you will be The EPA requests comment on all possible, avoiding the use of profanity required to return this property pass to aspects of the proposed aircraft or personal threats. the security desk. No large signs will be endangerment and cause or contribute • Make sure to submit your allowed in the building, cameras may findings and the Advance Notice of comments by the comment period only be used outside of the building and Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR). This deadline identified. demonstrations will not be allowed on section describes how you can Do not submit information to the EPA federal property for security reasons. participate in this process. containing CBI through http:// The EPA may ask clarifying questions If you submitted comments on the www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly during the oral presentations but will issues raised by this proposal in dockets mark the part or all of the information not respond to the presentations at that for other, earlier Agency efforts (e.g., the that you claim to be CBI. For CBI time. Written statements and supporting 2009 Endangerment and Cause or information on a disk or CD–ROM that information submitted during the Contribute Findings for Greenhouse you mail to the EPA, mark the outside comment period will be considered Gases Under Section 202 of the Clean of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then with the same weight as oral comments Air Act or the Advance Notice of identify electronically within the disk or and supporting information presented at Proposed Rulemaking on Regulating CD–ROM the specific information that the public hearings. Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air is claimed as CBI. In addition to one Speakers should contact Ms. JoNell Act), you must still submit your complete version of the comment that Iffland (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION comments to the docket for this action includes information claimed as CBI, CONTACT) if they will need specific (EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0828) by the you must submit a copy of the comment equipment, or if there are other special deadline if you want them to be that does not contain the information needs related to providing comments at considered. claimed as CBI for inclusion in the the hearing. Oral testimony will be public docket. Information so marked limited to no more than 10 minutes for 1. What should I consider as I prepare will not be disclosed except in each commenter, although we may need my comments for the EPA? accordance with procedures set forth in to adjust the time for each speaker if We are opening a formal comment 40 CFR part 2. there is a large turnout. The EPA period by publishing this document. We requests that commenters provide the will accept comments during the period 2. Public Hearing EPA with three copies of their oral indicated in the DATES section. If you If a hearing is held, it will provide testimony in hard copy form the day of have an interest in the proposed aircraft interested parties the opportunity to the hearing or an electronic copy in endangerment and cause or contribute present data, views or arguments advance of the hearing date. Verbatim findings and/or the ANPR described in concerning the proposed action. The transcripts of the hearings and written VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37761 statements will be included in the adequately reviewed in accordance with elderly, the poor, and indigenous docket for the rulemaking. The EPA will the OMB Bulletin and the EPA’s Peer peoples in the United States, make every effort to follow the schedule Review Handbook. For the presentation particularly Alaska Natives. The more as closely as possible on the day of the of emissions inventory information to recent assessment reports strengthen hearing; however, please plan for the support the cause or contribute finding, these conclusions by providing more hearing to run either ahead of schedule the EPA disaggregated the existing data detail regarding these populations’ or behind schedule. in one area of the GHG Inventory (for vulnerabilities and projected impacts Information regarding the hearing the General Aviation Jet Fuel Category) they may experience. (including information as to whether or and had the disaggregation methodology In addition, the most recent not one will be held) will be available and results peer reviewed in accordance assessment reports provide new analysis at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ with the EPA’s Peer Review Handbook. about how low-income populations and aviation.htm. Again, if we do not The EPA Science Advisory Board some populations defined jointly by receive a request to speak at the August reviewed this approach to the ethnic/racial characteristics and 11, 2015 public hearing by July 13, 2015 underlying technical and scientific geographic location are vulnerable to the hearing will be cancelled. information supporting this action, and certain climate change health impacts, raising environmental justice concerns. C. Did the EPA conduct a peer review concluded that the approach had Factors that contribute to increased before issuing this notice? precedent and the action will be based on well-reviewed information. All vulnerability to the health effects of As outlined in section IV.A of this relevant peer review documentation is climate change include limited action, the EPA’s approach to providing located in the docket for today’s action resources to adapt to and recover from the technical and scientific information (EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0828). climate impacts, as well as existing to inform the Administrator’s judgment health disparities (e.g., higher regarding the question of whether D. Children’s Environmental Health prevalence of chronic health conditions greenhouse gases endanger public As described in detail in section IV of such as diabetes). health and welfare was to rely primarily this preamble, the scientific evidence upon the recent, major assessments by and conclusions in the USGCRP, IPCC, II. Introduction: Overview and Context the U.S. Global Change Research and the NRC assessment reports cited in for This Proposal Program (USGCRP), the the 2009 Endangerment Finding 4 A. Summary Intergovernmental Panel on Climate indicate that children are uniquely Pursuant to section 231(a)(2)(A) of the Change (IPCC), and the National vulnerable to climate change related Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), the Research Council (NRC) of the National health effects given behavioral, Administrator proposes to find that Academies. These assessments draw developmental, and physiological greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from synthesis conclusions across thousands factors. The new assessment literature aircraft engines used in certain types of of individual peer-reviewed studies that published since 2009 strengthens these aircraft (referred to as ‘‘covered aircraft’’ appear in scientific journals, and the conclusions by providing more detailed throughout this notice) contribute to air reports themselves undergo additional findings regarding children’s pollution that endangers public health peer review. The EPA has considered vulnerabilities and projected impacts and welfare. Covered aircraft would be the processes and procedures employed they may experience. those aircraft to which ICAO has agreed by the USGCRP, IPCC, and the NRC, and These assessments describe that the international CO standard would has determined that these assessments 2 children will be disproportionately apply: 5 subsonic jet aircraft with a have been adequately peer reviewed in impacted by climate change given the maximum takeoff mass (MTOM) greater a manner commensurate with the EPA’s unique physiological and than 5,700 kilograms, and subsonic Peer Review Policy 1 and the guidelines developmental factors that occur during propeller-driven (e.g., turboprop) in Office of Management and Budget’s this lifestage. Impacts to children are aircraft with a MTOM greater than 8,618 (OMB) Final Information Quality expected from heat waves, air pollution, kilograms. Examples of covered aircraft Bulletin for Peer Review (‘‘OMB infectious and waterborne illnesses, and would include smaller jet aircraft such Bulletin’’) for highly influential mental health effects resulting from as the Cessna Citation CJ2+ and the scientific assessments. According to extreme weather events. In addition, the Embraer E170, up to and including the guidelines in the EPA’s Peer Review assessments find that climate change largest commercial jet aircraft—the Handbook, if the Agency has will influence production of pollen that Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747. Other determined that information has already affects asthma and other allergic examples of covered aircraft would been subject to adequate peer review, respiratory diseases, to which children include larger turboprop aircraft, such then it is not necessary to have further are among those especially susceptible. as the ATR 72 and the Bombardier peer review of that information.2 E. Environmental Justice Q400. The EPA also cites data from its In this proposed action, the EPA relies annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse As described in detail in section IV primarily on the extensive scientific and 3 Gas Emissions and Sinks report, which below, the scientific evidence and technical evidence in the record the Agency has determined to have been conclusions in the USGCRP, IPCC, and supporting the Endangerment and Cause the NRC assessment reports cited in the or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse 1 U.S. EPA, 2006: EPA Peer Review Policy. 2009 Endangerment Finding indicate Available at http://www.epa.gov/peerreview/ (Last Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean that certain populations are most Air Act; Final Rule, 74 FR 66496, accessed May 12, 2015). vulnerable to the health and welfare 2 U.S. EPA, 2012: EPA Peer Review Handbook, (December 15, 2009) (collectively Third Edition. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ effects of climate change, including the _ _ _ peerreview/pdfs/peer review handbook 2012.pdf 5 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification (Last accessed May 12, 2015). 4 U.S. EPA, 2009: Endangerment and Cause or Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions 3 U.S. EPA, 2015: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Standards, Circular (Cir) 337, AN/192, Available at: Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2013, 564 pp. Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act; Final Rule, 74 http://www.icao.int/publications/catalogue/cat_ Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ FR 66496 (December 15, 2009) (‘‘2009 2015_en.pdf. The ICAO Circular 337 is found on ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html#fullreport, Endangerment Finding’’); 74 FR 18886 (April 24, page 85 of the catalog and is copyright protected; (Last accessed May 12, 2015). 2009) (‘‘Proposed 2009 Endangerment Finding’’). Order No. CIR337 (last accessed May 12, 2015. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37762 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules referred to as the 2009 Endangerment determination under section 231(a)— The heating effect caused by the human- Finding in this action). This includes that is, the aggregate group of the same induced buildup of these and other the major, peer-reviewed scientific six well-mixed GHGs. Based on the data GHGs in the atmosphere, plus other assessments that were used to address summarized in section V, the human activities (e.g., land use change the question of whether GHGs in the Administrator is proposing to find that and aerosol emissions), is extremely atmosphere endanger public health and GHG emissions from aircraft engines likely (>95 percent likelihood) to be the welfare, and on the analytical used in covered aircraft, contribute to cause of most of the observed global framework and conclusions upon which the air pollution that endangers public warming since the mid-20th century.7 A the EPA relied in making that finding. health and welfare under section 231(a). detailed explanation of climate change The Administrator’s view is that the The Administrator’s proposed and its impact on health, society, and body of scientific evidence amassed in findings come in response to a citizen the environment is included in the the record for the 2009 Endangerment petition submitted by Friends of the record for the 2009 Endangerment Finding also compellingly supports an Earth, Oceana, the Center for Biological Finding. The relevant scientific endangerment finding under CAA Diversity, and Earthjustice (Petitioners) information from that record has also section 231(a). Furthermore, this requesting that the EPA issue an been included in the docket for this proposed finding under section 231 endangerment finding and standards proposed determination under CAA reflects the EPA’s careful consideration under section 231(a)(2)(A) of the Act for section 231 (EPA–HQ–OAR–02914– not only of the scientific and technical the GHG emissions from aircraft. The 0828). Section IV of this preamble record for the 2009 Endangerment EPA is not proposing or taking action discusses this information, as well as Finding, but also of science assessments under any other provision of the CAA. information from the most recent released since 2009, which, as Further, the EPA anticipates that ICAO scientific assessments, in the context of illustrated below, strengthen and further will adopt a final CO2 emissions the Administrator’s proposed support the judgment that GHGs in the standard in February 2016. This endangerment finding under CAA atmosphere may reasonably be proposal, and any final endangerment section 231. anticipated to endanger public health and cause or contribute findings for The U.S. transportation sector and welfare. No information or analyses aircraft engine GHG emissions, are also constitutes a meaningful part of total published since late 2009 suggest that it part of preparing for a possible U.S. and global anthropogenic GHG would be reasonable for the EPA to now subsequent domestic rulemaking emissions. In 2013, aircraft remained reach a different or contrary conclusion process to adopt standards that are of at the single largest GHG-emitting least equivalent stringency as the for purposes of CAA section transportation source not yet subject to anticipated ICAO CO standards. Once 231(a)(2)(A) than the Agency reached 2 any GHG regulations. Aircraft clearly an international standard is finalized by for purposes of section 202(a). However, contribute to U.S. transportation ICAO, member states are then required as explained below, in proposing this emissions, accounting for 11 percent of to adopt standards that are of at least finding for purposes of section 231, we all U.S transportation GHG emissions equivalent stringency to those set by are not reopening or revising our prior and representing more than 3 percent of findings under CAA section 202. ICAO. Section II. D provides additional total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013.8 The Administrator is proposing to discussion of the international aircraft Globally, U.S. aircraft GHG emissions define the ‘‘air pollution’’ referred to in standard-setting process. represent 29 percent of all global aircraft section 231(a)(2)(A) of the CAA to be the B. Background Information Helpful to mix of six well-mixed GHGs: CO , emissions and 0.5 percent of total global 2 Understanding This Proposal methane, nitrous oxide, GHG emissions. Section V of this hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, 1. Greenhouse Gases and Their Effects preamble provides detailed information and sulfur hexafluoride. This is the on aircraft GHG emissions in the context GHGs in the atmosphere effectively of the Administrator’s proposed cause same definition that was used for the trap some of the Earth’s heat that would finding for purposes of section 202(a). It or contribute finding under CAA section otherwise escape to space. GHGs are 231. is the Administrator’s judgment that the both naturally occurring and total body of scientific evidence anthropogenic. The primary GHGs 2. Statutory Basis for This Proposal compellingly supports a positive directly emitted by human activities endangerment finding that elevated Section 231(a)(2)(A) of the CAA states include CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, concentrations of the six well-mixed that ‘‘The Administrator shall, from hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, time to time, issue proposed emission GHGs constitute air pollution that and sulfur hexafluoride. Of these six endangers both the public health and standards applicable to the emission of gases, two (CO2 and nitrous oxide) are any air pollutant from any class or the public welfare of current and future emitted by aircraft engines. generations within the meaning of classes of aircraft engines which in [her] These six gases, once emitted, remain judgment causes, or contributes to, air section 231(a) of the Clean Air Act. in the atmosphere for decades to pollution which may reasonably be Under section 231 of the CAA, the centuries. Thus, they become well anticipated to endanger public health or Administrator must also determine mixed globally in the atmosphere and welfare.’’ whether emissions of any air pollutant their concentrations accumulate when from a class or classes of aircraft engines emissions exceed the rate at which cause or contribute to the air pollution natural processes remove them from the Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth that may reasonably be anticipated to Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel atmosphere. Observations of the Earth’s on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. endanger public health or welfare. globally averaged combined land and Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Following the rationale outlined in the ocean surface temperature over the Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. 2009 Endangerment Finding, the period 1880 to 2012 show a warming of Cambridge University Press, 29 pp. Administrator in this action is 7 Ibid. 0.85 [0.65 to 1.06] degrees Celsius or 8 proposing to use the same definition of 6 U.S. EPA, 2015: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse 1.53 [1.17 to 1.91] degrees Fahrenheit. Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2013, 564 pp. the air pollutant as was used for Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ purposes of section 202(a) for purposes 6 ‘‘IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html#fullreport, of making the cause or contribute Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. (last accessed May 12, 2015). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37763 Before the Administrator may issue proposed findings in response to a 2007 a dozen environmental, renewable standards addressing emissions of GHGs citizens’ petition.10 energy, and other organizations. under section 231, the Administrator The Administrator is applying the Following the Supreme Court must satisfy a two-step test. First, the rulemaking provisions of CAA section decision, the EPA proposed (74 FR Administrator must decide whether, in 307(d) to this action, pursuant to CAA 18886, April 24, 2009) and then her judgment, the air pollution under section 307(d)(1)(V), which provides finalized (74 FR 66496, December 15, consideration may reasonably be that the provisions of 307(d) apply to 2009) the 2009 Endangerment Finding, anticipated to endanger public health or ‘‘such other actions as the Administrator which can be summarized as follows: may determine.’’ 11 Any standard setting • Endangerment Finding: The welfare. Second, the Administrator must Administrator found that the then- decide whether, in her judgment, rulemaking under section 231 will also be subject to the notice and comment current and projected concentrations of emissions of an air pollutant from rulemaking procedures under 307(d), as the six key well-mixed GHGs—CO2, certain classes of aircraft engines cause methane, nitrous oxide, 9 provided in CAA section 307(d)(1)(F) or contribute to this air pollution. If the (applying the provisions of 307(d) to the hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, Administrator answers both questions promulgation or revision of any aircraft and sulfur hexafluoride—in the in the affirmative, she must issue emission standard under section 231). atmosphere threaten the public health standards under section 231. See Thus, these proposed findings will be and welfare of current and future Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497,533 subject to the same rulemaking generations. • (2007) (interpreting analogous provision requirements that would apply if the Cause or Contribute Finding: The in CAA section 202). Section III of this proposed findings were part of a Administrator found that the combined preamble summarizes the legal standard-setting rulemaking. emissions of these well-mixed GHGs framework for this proposed action from new motor vehicles and new motor under CAA section 231. Typically, past C. The EPA’s Responsibilities Under the vehicle engines contribute to the GHG Clean Air Act endangerment and cause or contribute pollution which threatens public health findings have been proposed The CAA provides broad authority to and welfare. concurrently with proposed standards combat air pollution to protect public The findings did not themselves under various sections of the CAA, health and welfare. Cars, trucks, impose any requirements on industry or including section 231. Comment has construction equipment, airplanes, and other entities. However, these findings compelled the EPA to promulgate GHG been taken on these proposed findings ships, as well as a broad range of emission standards for new motor as part of the notice and comment electric generation, industrial, vehicles under section 202(a). process for the emission standards. See, commercial and other facilities, are subject to various CAA programs. Subsequently, in May 2010 the EPA, in e.g., Rulemaking for non-road Implementation of the Act over the past collaboration with the National compression-ignition engines under four decades has resulted in significant Highway Traffic Safety Administration section 213(a)(4) of the CAA, Proposed reductions in air pollution while the (NHTSA), finalized Phase 1 GHG Rule at 58 FR 28809, 28813–14 (May 17, nation’s economy has continued to emission standards for light-duty 1993), Final Rule at 59 FR 31306, 31318 grow. vehicles (2012–2016 model years).12 (June 17, 1994); Rulemaking for This was followed in August 2011 by highway heavy-duty diesel engines and 1. The EPA’s Regulation of Greenhouse adoption of the first-ever GHG emission diesel sulfur fuel under sections 202(a) Gases standards for heavy-duty engines and and 211(c) of the CAA, Proposed Rule In Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 vehicles (2014–2018 model years).13 On at 65 FR 35430 (June 2, 2000), and Final (2007), the Supreme Court found that August 29, 2012, the second phase of Rule 66 FR 5002 (January 18, 2001). GHGs are air pollutants that can be the GHG emission standards for light- However, there is no requirement that regulated under the CAA. The Court duty vehicles (2017–2025 model years) the Administrator propose the held that the Administrator must was finalized further reducing GHG endangerment and cause or contribute determine whether emissions of GHGs emissions from light-duty vehicles.14 In findings concurrently with proposed from new motor vehicles cause or 2014, the President directed the EPA standards. See 74 FR 66502 (December contribute to air pollution which may and the Department of Transportation to 26, 2001), (explaining that nothing in reasonably be anticipated to endanger set standards by March 2016 that further section 202(a) requires the EPA to public health and/or welfare, or whether increase fuel efficiency and reduce GHG propose or issue endangerment and the science is too uncertain to make a emissions from medium- and heavy- 15 cause or contribute findings in the same reasoned decision. In making these duty vehicles. decisions, the Administrator was bound rulemaking, and that Congress left the by the provisions of section 202(a) of the 12 U.S. EPA, 2010: Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse EPA discretion to choose an approach CAA. The Supreme Court decision Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average that satisfied the requirements of section Fuel Economy Standards; Final Rule, 75 FR 25324 resulted from a petition for rulemaking 202(a)). The same analysis applies to (May 7, 2010). under section 202(a) filed by more than 13 section 231(a)(2)(A), which is analogous US EPA, 2011: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for to section 202(a). The EPA is choosing 10 Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles; to propose these findings at this time for Safety, Friends of the Earth, International Center for Final Rule, 76 Federal Register 57106 (September a number of reasons, including its Technology Assessment, and Oceana, 2007: Petition 15, 2011). for Rulemaking Under the Clean Air Act to Reduce 14 U.S. EPA, 2012: 2017 and Later Model Year previous commitment to issue such the Emissions of Air Pollutants from Aircraft the Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Contribute to Global Climate Change, December 5. Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards; Final 9 To clarify the distinction between air pollution Available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/aviation.htm Rule, 77 FR 62623 (October 15, 2012). and air pollutant, the air pollution is the (last accessed May 12, 2015). 15 Executive Office of the President, 2014: atmospheric concentrations and can be thought of 11 As the Administrator is applying the provisions Remarks by the President on Fuel Efficiency as the total, cumulative stock of GHGs in the of section 307(d) to this rulemaking under section Standards of Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, atmosphere. The air pollutants, on the other hand, 307(d)(1)(V), we need not determine whether those Office of the Press Secretary, February 18. Available are the emissions of GHGs and can be thought of provisions would apply to this action under section at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/ as the flow that changes the size of the total stock. 307(d)(1)(F). Continued VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37764 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules The GHG rules for cars and trucks In the Climate Action Plan, the to the emission of any air pollutant from have been supported by a broad range President also indicated that the U.S. any classes of aircraft engines which in of stakeholders, including states, major was working internationally to make her judgment causes or contributes to automobile and truck manufacturers, progress in a variety of areas and air pollution which may reasonably be and environmental and labor specifically noted the progress being anticipated to endanger public health or organizations. Together these new made by ICAO to develop global CO2 welfare. standards for cars and trucks are emission standards for aircraft.23 The On December 5, 2007, Friends of the resulting in significant reductions in proposed endangerment and cause or Earth, Oceana, the Center for Biological GHG emissions, and over the lifetime of contribute findings for aircraft GHG Diversity, Earthjustice, and others these vehicles GHG emissions will have emissions under section 231(a)(2)(A) of (Petitioners) sent a letter to the EPA been reduced by 6 billion metric the CAA are a preliminary but necessary petitioning the Agency to undertake tons.16 17 first step to begin to address GHG rulemaking regarding GHG emissions On June 25, 2013, President Obama emissions from the aviation sector, the from aircraft.28 Specifically, Petitioners announced a Climate Action Plan that highest-emitting category of requested that the EPA make a finding set forth a series of executive actions to transportation sources that the EPA has that GHG emissions from aircraft further reduce GHGs, prepare the U.S. not yet addressed. As presented in more engines ‘‘may reasonably be anticipated for the impacts of climate change, and detail in Section V of this preamble, to endanger public health and welfare’’ lead international efforts to address total U.S. aircraft GHG emissions in and that the EPA promulgate standards global climate change.18 As part of the 2013 represented 11 percent of GHG for GHG emissions from aircraft. Climate Action Plan, the President emissions from the U.S. transportation Following the Supreme Court’s issued a Presidential Memorandum sector,24 and in 2010, the latest year decision in Massachusetts v. EPA in directing the EPA to work expeditiously with complete global emissions data, 2007, the EPA issued an ANPR in 2008 to complete carbon pollution standards U.S. aircraft GHG emissions represented presenting information relevant to for the power sector.19 In response, in 29 percent of global aircraft GHG potentially regulating GHGs under the January 2014, the EPA proposed carbon emissions.25 26 U.S. aircraft GHG Act, and soliciting public comment on pollution standards for new electric emissions are projected to increase by how to respond to the Court’s ruling and utility generating units.20 This was almost 50 percent over the next two the potential ramifications of the followed in June 2014, by proposed decades.27 See section V of this Agency’s decision to regulate GHGs standards to address carbon pollution preamble for more information about under the CAA. This ANPR described from modified and reconstructed power the data sources that compose the and solicited comment on numerous plants 21 and from existing power aircraft GHG emissions inventory. petitions the Agency had received to plants.22 regulate GHG emissions from both 2. Background on the Aircraft Petition, stationary and mobile sources, 2008 ANPR, and D.C. District Court including aircraft. 73 FR 44354, 44468– 2014/02/18/remarks-president-fuel-efficiency- Decision standards-medium-and-heavy-duty-vehicl (last 44473 (July 30, 2008). With regard to accessed May 12, 2015). Section 231(a)(2)(A) of the CAA aircraft, the Agency sought comment on 16 U.S. EPA. ‘‘EPA and NHTSA Set Standards to directs the Administrator of the EPA to, the impact of aircraft operations on GHG Reduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve Fuel Economy for Model Years 2017–2025 Cars and from time to time, propose aircraft emissions and the potential for Light Trucks.’’ Office of Transportation and Air engine emissions standards applicable reductions in GHG emissions from these Quality Document No. EPA–420–F–12–051, August operations. 2012. Available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 23 Executive Office of the President, 2013: The In response to the ANPR, the EPA climate/documents/420f12051.pdf (last accessed President’s Climate Action Plan at 21, June. received comments from a wide range of May 26, 2015). See also US EPA, 2012: Regulatory Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/ Impact Analysis: Final Rulemaking for 2017–2025 default/files/image/ aviation sector stakeholders including Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions president27sclimateactionplan.pdf (last accessed industry trade groups, individual Standards and Corporation Average Fuel Economy May 12, 2015). manufacturers, states and local Standards, August, Document No. EPA–420–R–12– 24 U.S. EPA, 2015: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse 016, Table 7.4–2. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ governments, and nongovernmental Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2013, 564 pp. organizations (NGOs). Industry groups oms/climate/documents/420r12016.pdf (last Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ accessed May 12, 2015). ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html#fullreport and individual manufacturers stressed 17 76 FR 57106 (September 15, 2011). (last accessed May 12, 2015). that fuel costs (and market forces) 18 Executive Office of the President, 2013: The 25 Ibid. created an economic incentive to reduce President’s Climate Action Plan, June 25. Available 26 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ fuel consumption and thus GHG Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III emissions. One industry association image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf (last to the Fifth Assessment Report of the accessed May 26, 2015). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicated its commitment to achieve an 19 Executive Office of the President, 2013: [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. additional 30 percent fuel efficiency Presidential Memorandum—Power Sector Carbon Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, improvement by 2025. Another Pollution Standards, Office of the Press Secretary, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. commenter identified engine June 25. Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ Savolainen, S. Schlo¨mer, C. von Stechow, T. the-press-office/2013/06/25/presidential- Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University technologies that were improving fuel memorandum-power-sector-carbon-pollution- Press, pp. 599–670. efficiency by more than 15 percent in standards (last accessed May 12, 2015). 27 As discussed in section V.B.2.c., fuel burn the next generation of aircraft. With 20 U.S. EPA, 2014: Standards of Performance for growth rates for air carriers and general aviation regard to CO2 engine emissions Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New Stationary aircraft operating on jet fuel are projected to grow Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units; Proposed by 49 percent from 2010 to 2035, and this provides standards, these commenters felt that Rule, 79 FR 1430 (January 8, 2014). a scaling factor for growth in GHG emissions which 21 U.S. EPA, 2014: Carbon Pollution Standards for would increase at a similar rate as the fuel burn by 28 Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Modified and Reconstructed Stationary Sources: 2030, 2035, and 2040. FAA, 2015: FAA Aerospace Safety, Friends of the Earth, International Center for Electric Utility Generating Units; Proposed Rules, Forecast Fiscal Years 2015–2035, 134 pp. Available Technology Assessment, and Oceana, 2007: Petition 79 FR 34960 (June 18, 2014). at https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/ for Rulemaking Under the Clean air Act to Reduce 22 U.S. EPA, 2014: Carbon Pollution Emission headquarters_offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/ the Emissions of Air Pollutants from Aircraft the Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric aerospace_forecasts/2015–2035/media/2015_ Contribute to Global Climate Change, December 5. Utility Generating Units; Proposed Rule, 79 FR National_Forecast_Report.pdf (last accessed May Available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/aviation.htm 34830 (June 18, 2014). 12, 2015). (last accessed May 12, 2015). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37765 international CO2 standards for aircraft its intent to file suit under CAA section then-awaited ruling might provide engines were not necessary and that, if 304(a) against the EPA for the Agency’s important guidance for the EPA in pursued, such standards would burden alleged unreasonable delay in conducting future GHG endangerment the industry and necessitate the responding to its aircraft petition and in findings. The EPA further explained development of new test procedures if making an endangerment finding under that after receiving the Court of Appeal’s CO2 emissions standards were based on section 231. On June 11, 2010, ruling, it would take at least 22 months aircraft cruise conditions instead of Petitioners filed a complaint against the from that point for the Agency to landing and takeoff operations (LTO). EPA in the U.S. District Court for the conduct an additional finding regarding Industry commenters also argued that District of Columbia claiming that, aircraft GHG emissions. other potential approaches to reducing among other things, the EPA had Meanwhile, the Court upheld EPA’s aircraft related emissions, such as unreasonably delayed because it had section 202 findings in a decision of a averaging of GHGs among existing failed to answer the 2007 Petition and three-judge panel on June 26, 2012, and aircraft fleets and cap-and-trade to determine whether or not GHG denied petitions for rehearing of that schemes as existed in the European emissions from aircraft cause or decision on December 20, 2012. Union, were beyond the scope of the contribute to air pollution which may Coalition for Responsible Regulation, EPA’s authority under section 231 of the reasonably be anticipated to endanger Inc., v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102 (D.C. Cir. CAA. Finally, industry commenters public health and/or welfare. 2012), reh’g denied 2012 U.S. App. noted that any program developed by The District Court found that while LEXIS 26315, 25997 (D.C. Cir. 2012).32 the EPA should incentivize market CAA section 231 generally confers Given these rulings, we are proceeding forces and provide for flexibility. broad discretion to the EPA in with this proposed findings regarding State/local governments and NGO determining what standards to aircraft engine GHG emissions as a commenters felt strongly that the EPA promulgate, section 231(a)(2)(A) further step toward responding to the had clear authority to find imposed a nondiscretionary duty on the Petition for Rulemaking. endangerment under section 231 and EPA to make a finding with respect to D. U.S. Aircraft Regulations and the that there were multiple options to endangerment from aircraft GHG International Community reduce aircraft emissions, so that the emissions. Center for Biological Agency must set a GHG emissions Diversity, et al. v. EPA, 794 F. Supp. 2d The EPA and the Federal Aviation standard for aircraft engines as states 151 (D.D.C. 2011). This ruling was Administration (FAA) traditionally were preempted from doing so under issued in response to EPA’s motion to work within the standard-setting CAA section 233. These commenters dismiss the case on jurisdictional process of ICAO’s Committee on also argued that GHG standards for grounds and did not address the merits Aviation Environmental Protection aircraft engines could provide aircraft of the Plaintiffs’ claims regarding the (CAEP) to establish international manufacturers the incentive to renew or Agency’s alleged unreasonable delay. emission standards and related redesign aircraft and to adopt advanced Therefore, it did not include an order requirements. Historically, under this engines brought to market. In addition for the EPA to make such a finding by approach, international emission these commenters suggested that an a certain date. In a subsequent ruling on standards have first been adopted by engine GHG standard could be set as a the merits, the Court found that the ICAO, and subsequently the EPA has function of thrust similar to ICAO’s Plaintiffs had not shown that EPA had initiated rulemakings under CAA 29 standard for oxides of nitrogen (NOX) unreasonably delayed in making an section 231 to establish domestic and should also include provisions for endangerment determination regarding standards equivalent to ICAO’s an averaging, banking, and trading GHG emissions from aircraft. Center for standards where appropriate. This (ABT) program.30 Some commenters Biological Diversity, et al. v. EPA, No. approach has been affirmed as also stated their support for fleet-wide 1:10–985 (D.D.C. March, 20, 2012). reasonable by the U.S. Court of Appeals (in-use fleet) emission reductions Thus, the Court did not find the EPA to for the D.C. Circuit. NACAA v. EPA, 489 through a cap-and-trade system. Finally, be liable based on the Plaintiffs’ claims F.3d 1221, 1230–32 (D.C. Cir. 2007). these stakeholders stated that, absent and did not place the Agency under a After EPA promulgates aircraft engine the EPA rulemaking, quick international remedial order to make an emissions standards, CAA section 232 actions were unlikely and that the EPA endangerment finding or to issue requires the FAA to issue subsequent should engage internationally to push standards. The Plaintiffs did not appeal regulations to ensure compliance with these standards when issuing for action on reducing CO2 emissions this ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals from aircraft. for the D.C. Circuit. certificates under its United States Code On July 31, 2008, Earthjustice, on The EPA issued a Response to the Title 49 authority. In exercising the behalf of Petitioners, notified the EPA of Aircraft Petition 31 on June 27, 2012 EPA’s standard-setting and FAA’s stating our intention to move forward enforcement authorities, we expect to 29 Sections II.D.1 and II.E provide an overview of with a proposed endangerment finding proceed using a similar approach for the the history ICAO’s regulation of aircraft engine NOX for aircraft GHG emissions under future CAA section 231 aircraft engine emissions from 1981 through 2012 and the EPA’s section 231, while explaining that it adoption of equivalent aircraft engine NOX 32 Petitions for certiorari were filed in the standards under the CAA. would take the Agency significant time to complete this action. The EPA Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court granted six 30 ABT programs have been utilized in a number of those petitions but ‘‘agreed to decide only one of Clean Air Act programs to provide greater explained that the Agency would not question: ‘‘Whether EPA permissibly determined flexibilities that lower overall costs by allowing a begin this effort until after the U.S. that its regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturer to comply with performance Court of Appeals completed its then- new motor vehicles triggered permitting standards through averaging emissions among the pending review of the previous section requirements under the Clean Air Act for stationary vehicles it manufactures. Companies that achieve sources that emit greenhouse gases’’. Utility Air Reg. extra pollution reductions can bank these as 202 Endangerment Finding, since the Group v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, 2438 (2014); see also ‘credits’’ and then ‘trade or sell’ emission credits to Virginia v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418 (2013), Pac. Legal other companies, typically those that face higher 31 U.S. EPA, 2012: Memorandum in Response to Found. v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418 (2013), and CRR, 134 costs to control pollution. Well-designed ABT Petition Regarding Greenhouse Gas Emissions from S. Ct. 468 (2013) (all denying cert.). Thus, the programs can sometimes achieve greater emissions Aircraft, June 14. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ Supreme Court did not disturb the D.C. Circuit’s reductions at less cost and provide incentives for otaq/aviation.htm (last accessed May 12, 2015) and holding that affirmed the 2009 Endangerment technology innovation. Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0828. Finding. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37766 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules GHG standard (which may take the form finds it impracticable to comply in all constrained, a member State which of a CO2 standard), provided the EPA respects with any international standard elects to adopt more stringent domestic issues final positive endangerment and or procedure, or which deems it emission standards is obligated to notify cause or contribute findings under CAA necessary to adopt regulations or ICAO of the differences between its section 231. This approach is contingent practices differing in any particular standards and ICAO standards.39 on ICAO’s adoption of an international respect from those established by an ICAO’s CAEP, which consists of aircraft CO2 standard that is consistent international standard, is required to Members and Observers from States, with CAA section 231 and is give immediate notification to ICAO of intergovernmental and non- appropriate for domestic needs in the the differences between its own practice governmental organizations United States. and that established by the international representing aviation industry and standard.36 environmental interests, undertakes 1. International Regulations and U.S. ICAO’s work on the environment ICAO’s technical work in the Obligations focuses primarily on those problems environmental field. The Committee is As noted above, we have worked with that benefit most from a common and responsible for evaluating, researching, the FAA since 1973, and later with coordinated approach on a worldwide and recommending measures to the ICAO, to develop domestic and basis, namely aircraft noise and engine ICAO Council that address the international standards and other emissions. Standards and environmental impacts of international recommended practices pertaining to Recommended Practices (SARPs) for the civil aviation. CAEP’s terms of reference aircraft engine emissions. ICAO is a certification of aircraft noise and aircraft indicate that ‘‘CAEP’s assessments and United Nations (UN) specialized agency, engine emissions are covered by Annex proposals are pursued taking into established in 1944 by the Convention 16 of the Chicago Convention. To account: technical feasibility; on International Civil Aviation (Chicago continue to address aviation environmental benefit; economic Convention), ‘‘in order that environmental issues, in 2004, ICAO reasonableness; interdependencies of international civil aviation may be established three environmental goals: measures (for example, among others, developed in a safe and orderly manner (1) Limit or reduce the number of measures taken to minimize noise and and that international air transport people affected by significant aircraft emissions); developments in other services may be established on the basis noise; (2) limit or reduce the impact of fields; and international and national of equality of opportunity and operated aviation emissions on local air quality; programs.’’ 40 CAEP is composed of soundly and economically.’’ 33 ICAO and (3) limit or reduce the impact of various task groups, work groups, and sets standards and regulations necessary aviation greenhouse gas emissions on other committees whose contributing for aviation safety, security, efficiency, the global climate. members include atmospheric, capacity and environmental protection, The Convention has a number of other economic, aviation, environmental, and and serves as the forum for cooperation features that govern international other professionals interested in and in all fields of international civil commerce. First, member States that knowledgeable about aviation and aviation. ICAO works with the Chicago wish to use aircraft in international environmental protection. The ICAO Convention’s member States and global transportation must adopt emissions Council reviews and adopts the aviation organizations to develop standards and other recommended recommendations made by CAEP. It international Standards and practices that are at least as stringent as then reports to the ICAO Assembly, the Recommended Practices (SARPs), ICAO’s standards. Member States may highest body of the Organization, where which member States reference when ban the use of any aircraft within their the main policies on aviation developing their legally-enforceable airspace that does not meet ICAO environmental protection are adopted 37 national civil aviation regulations. The standards. Second, member States are and translated into Assembly U.S. is currently one of 191 required to recognize the airworthiness Resolutions. participating ICAO member States.34 35 certificates of any State whose standards At CAEP meetings, the U.S. is In the interest of global harmonization are at least as stringent as ICAO’s represented by the FAA and plays an and international air commerce, the standards, thereby assuring that aircraft active role.41 The EPA has historically Chicago Convention urges its member of any member State will be permitted been a principal participant in various 38 States to collaborate in securing the to operate in any other member State. ICAO/CAEP working groups and other highest practicable degree of uniformity Third, to ensure that international international venues, assisting and in regulations, standards, procedures commerce is not unreasonably advising FAA on aviation emissions, and organization. The Chicago technology, and policy matters. In turn, 36 ICAO, 2006: Doc 7300-Convention on the FAA assists and advises the EPA on Convention also recognizes that member International Civil Aviation, Ninth edition, States may adopt standards that are Document 7300/9. Available at http://www.icao.int/ more stringent than those agreed upon publications/catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last 39 ICAO, 2006: Convention on International Civil by ICAO. Any member State which accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO Document 7300 Aviation, Article 38, Ninth Edition, Document 7300/ is found on page 1 of the ICAO Products & Services 9. Available at http://www.icao.int/publications/ 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 33 ICAO, 2006: Convention on International Civil 7300. 2015). The ICAO Document 7300 is found on page Aviation, Ninth Edition, Document 7300/9. 37 ICAO, 2006: Convention on International Civil 1 of the ICAO Products & Services 2015 catalog and Available at: http://www.icao.int/publications/ Aviation, Article 87, Ninth Edition, Document 7300/ is copyright protected; Order No. 7300. _ _ catalogue/cat 2015 en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 9. Available at http://www.icao.int/publications/ 40 CAEP’s terms of reference are available at 2015). catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last accessed May 12, http://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/ The ICAO Document 7300 is found on page 1 of 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is found on page 85 Pages/Caep.aspx#ToR (last accessed May 12, 2015). the ICAO Products & Services 2015 catalog and is of the ICAO Products & Services 2015 catalog and 41 Pursuant to the President’s memorandum of copyright protected; Order No. 7300. is copyright protected; Order No. CIR337. August 11, 1960 (and related Executive Order No. 34 Members of ICAO’s Assembly are generally 38 ICAO, 2006: Convention on International Civil 10883 from 1960), the Interagency Group on termed member States or contracting States. These Aviation, Article 33, Ninth Edition, Document 7300/ International Aviation (IGIA) was established to terms are used interchangeably throughout this 9. Available at http://www.icao.int/publications/ facilitate coordinated recommendations to the preamble. catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last accessed May 12, Secretary of State on issues pertaining to 35 There are currently 191 Contracting States 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is found on page 85 international aviation. The DOT/FAA is the chair of according to ICAO’s Web site: www.icao.int (last of the ICAO Products & Services 2015 catalog and IGIA, and as such, the FAA represents the U.S. on accessed May 12, 2015). is copyright protected; Order No. CIR337. environmental matters at CAEP. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37767 aviation technology and certification standards applied only to new engine goal for international aviation of matters. If ICAO adopts a CAEP designs certified (or newly-certified improving annual fuel efficiency by two proposal for a new environmental engines) after December 31, 2003 (i.e., percent and stabilizing CO2 emissions at standard, it then becomes part of ICAO unlike the CAEP/2 standards, the CAEP/ 2020 levels.52 The Resolution included standards and recommended practices 4 requirements did not apply to in- the following statements regarding (Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention). production engines). In 2004, CAEP/6 ICAO policies and practices related to 42 43 recommended a 12 percent NOX climate change. The first international standards and reduction, which ICAO approved in —. . . ICAO and its member States recognize 46 47 recommended practices for aircraft 2005. The CAEP/6 standards applied the importance of providing continuous engine emissions were recommended by to new engine designs certified after leadership to international civil aviation in CAEP’s predecessor, the Committee on December 31, 2007. In 2010, CAEP/8 limiting or reducing its emissions that Aircraft Engine Emissions (CAEE), and recommended a further tightening of the contribute to global climate change; 44 adopted by ICAO in 1981. These NOX standards by 15 percent for new —Reemphasizing the vital role which standards limited aircraft engine engine designs certified after December international aviation plays in global emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon 31, 2013.48 49 The Committee also economic and social development and the need to ensure that international aviation monoxide, and NOX. The 1981 recommended that the CAEP/6 continues to develop in a sustainable standards applied to newly standards be applied to in-production manner; manufactured engines, which are those engines (eliminating the production of —. . . the ultimate objective of the United engines built after the effective date of CAEP/4 compliant engines with the Nations Framework Convention on Climate the regulations—also referred to as in- exception of spare engines). ICAO Change (UNFCCC) is to achieve production engines. In 1993, ICAO approved these recommendations in stabilization of greenhouse gas (GHG) adopted a CAEP/2 proposal to tighten 2011, then equivalent standards (to concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous the original NOX standard by 20 percent CAEP/6 and CAEP/8 standards) were 45 anthropogenic interference with the and amend the test procedures. These promulgated domestically in 2012 by climate system; and 50 1993 standards applied both to newly- the EPA in consultation with FAA. —Acknowledging that international aviation certified turbofan engines, which are 2. The International Community’s emissions, currently accounting for less those engine models that received their Reasons for Addressing Aircraft GHG than 2 per cent of total global CO2 initial type certificate after the effective emissions, are projected to grow as a result date of the regulations—also referred to Emissions of the continued development of the sector. as newly-certified engines or new In October 2010, the 37th Assembly As the above statements indicate, engine designs—and to in-production (Resolution A37–19) of ICAO requested reducing climate impacts of engines, but with different effective the development of an ICAO CO2 international aviation is a critical 51 dates for newly-certified engines and in- emissions standard. Also, Resolution element of ICAO’s strategic objective of production engines. In 1995, CAEP/3 A37–19 provided a framework towards achieving environmental protection and recommended a further tightening of the the achievement of an environmentally sustainable development of air NOX standards by 16 percent and sustainable future for international transport. ICAO is currently pursuing a additional test procedure amendments, aviation. With this Resolution, the ICAO comprehensive set of measures to but in 1997 the ICAO Council rejected Assembly agreed to a global aspirational reduce aviation’s climate impact, this stringency proposal and approved including alternative fuels, CO2 46 only the test procedure amendments. At CAEP/5 did not address new aircraft engine emissions technology-based standards, the CAEP/4 meeting in 1998, the emission standards. 47 ICAO, 2008: Aircraft Engine Emissions, Annex operational improvements, and market Committee adopted a similar 16 percent 16, Volume II, Third Edition, July 2008, based measures. The development and NO reduction proposal, which ICAO X Amendment 5 effective on July 11, 2005. Available adoption of a CO2 emissions standard is approved in 1998. The CAEP/4 at http://www.icao.int/publications/catalogue/cat_ 2015_en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The an important part of ICAO’s ICAO Annex 16 Volume II is found on page 19 of comprehensive set of measures. 42 ICAO, 2008: Aircraft Engine Emissions, the ICAO Products & Services 2015 catalog and is International Standards and Recommended copyright protected; Order No. AN16–2. 3. Relationship of the EPA’s Proposed Practices, Environmental Protection, Annex 16, 48 CAEP/7 did not address new aircraft engine Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Volume II, Third Edition, July. Available at _ emission standards. Findings to International Aircraft http://www.icao.int/publications/catalogue/cat 49 _ ICAO, 2010: Committee on Aviation Standards 2015 en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The Environmental Protection (CAEP), Report of the ICAO Circular 337 is found on page 85 of the ICAO Eighth Meeting, Montreal, February 1–12, 2010, As described earlier, the EPA and the Products & Services 2015 catalog and is copyright CAEP/8–WP/80 Available in Docket EPA–HQ– FAA work within the ICAO/CAEP protected; Order No. CIR337. OAR–2010–0687. 43 standard setting process to establish CAEP develops new emission standards based 50 ICAO, 2011: Aircraft Engine Emissions, Annex on an assessment of the technical feasibility, cost, 16, Volume II, Third Edition, July 2008, international emission standards and and environmental benefit of potential Amendment 7 effective on July 18, 2011. Available related requirements. Under this requirements. at http://www.icao.int/publications/catalogue/cat_ approach international emission 44 ICAO, 2008: Aircraft Engine Emissions: 2015_en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The Foreword, International Standards and ICAO Annex 16 Volume II is found on page 19 of standards have first been adopted by Recommended Practices, Environmental Protection, the ICAO Products & Services 2015 catalog and is Annex 16, Volume II, Third Edition, July. Available copyright protected; Order No. AN16–2/E/10 (last 52 The global aspirational goal for international at http://www.icao.int/publications/catalogue/cat_ accessed February 5, 2015). U.S. EPA, 2012: Control aviation of improving annual fuel efficiency by 2 2015_en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The of Air Pollution from Aircraft and Aircraft Engines; percent is for the annual international civil aviation ICAO Annex 16 Volume II is found on page 19 of Emission Standards and Test Procedures; Final in-service fleet. Fuel efficiency is measured on the the ICAO Products & Services 2015 catalog and is Rule, 77 FR 36342 (June 18, 2012). basis of the volume of fuel used per revenue tonne copyright protected; Order No. AN16–2. 51 A consolidated statement of continuing kilometer performed. (ICAO, CAEP, Aspirational 45 CAEP conducts its work over a period of years. policies and practices related to environmental Goals and Implementation Options, HLM–ENV/09– Each work cycle is numbered sequentially and that protection (known as Assembly Resolutions) is WP/5, High-Level Meeting on International identifier is used to differentiate the results from revised and updated by the Council every three Aviation and Climate Change, Presented by the one CAEP to another by convention. The first years for adoption by the ICAO Assembly. ICAO, Secretariat, Montreal, October 7 to 9, 2009. technical meeting on aircraft emission standards 2010: Resolutions Adopted by the Assembly, 37th Available at http://www.icao.int/Meetings/AMC/ was CAEP’s successor, i.e., CAEE. The first meeting Session, Montreal, September 29–October 8, 2010, MA/High%20Level%202009/hlmenv_wp005_en.pdf of CAEP, therefore, is referred to as CAEP/2. Provisional Edition, November. (last accessed May 12, 2015). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37768 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules ICAO (with U.S. participation and E. The EPA’s Regulation of Aircraft turbofan aircraft engines, and these NOX agreement), and subsequently the EPA Emissions standards align with ICAO’s CAEP/6 has initiated rulemakings under CAA As required by the CAA, the EPA has and CAEP/8 requirements that became section 231 to establish domestic been engaged in reducing harmful air effective in 2013 and 2014, 59 60 aircraft engine emission standards that pollution from aircraft engines for over respectively. are of at least equivalent stringency as 40 years. In 1973, the EPA began to The EPA’s actions to regulate certain ICAO’s standards. This approach has regulate gaseous exhaust emissions, pollutants emitted from aircraft engines been affirmed as reasonable by the U.S. smoke, and fuel venting from aircraft come directly from its authority in Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. engines.53 We have occasionally revised section 231 of the CAA, and we have NACAA v. EPA, 489 F.3d 1221, 1230– these regulations. In a 1997 rulemaking, aligned the U.S. emissions requirements 32 (D.C. Cir. 2007). In exercising the for example, we made our emission with those promulgated by ICAO. In EPA’s standard-setting authority, standards and test procedures more addressing CO2 emissions, however, provided the EPA makes positive consistent with those of ICAO’s CAEP ICAO has moved to regulating a whole endangerment and cause or contribute for turbofan engines used in commercial aircraft. This ICAO extension beyond findings under CAA section 231 and aviation with rated thrusts greater than pollutant emissions from engines to the ICAO adopts an international aircraft 26.7 kilonewtons. These ICAO whole aircraft was described in a 2013 ICAO circular.61 Several factors are CO2 standard that is consistent with requirements are generally referred to as CAA section 231 and is appropriate for CAEP/2 standards.54 That action considered when addressing whole- aircraft CO2 emissions, as the CO2 domestic needs in the United States, the included new NOX emission standards EPA expects to proceed along a similar for newly manufactured commercial emissions are influenced by approach for the future CAA section 231 turbofan engines (as described earlier, aerodynamics, weight, and engine- specific fuel consumption. Since each of aircraft GHG standard (or aircraft CO2 those engines built after the effective standard). date of the regulations that were already these factors may affect aircraft engine We anticipate that ICAO/CAEP will certified to pre-existing standards—also fuel consumption, they ultimately affect CO2 emissions. Rather than viewing CO2 adopt a final aircraft CO2 emissions referred to as in-production engines) 55 as a measurable emission from engines, standard in February 2016. This and for newly-certified commercial therefore, ICAO now addresses CO proposal, and any final endangerment turbofan engines (as described earlier, 2 emissions as a characteristic applicable and cause or contribute finding for those engine models that received their to the entirety of the aircraft based on aircraft GHG emissions, are part of initial type certificate after the effective fuel consumption. In this proposed preparing for the possible subsequent date of the regulations—also referred to action, we are giving advance notice domestic rulemaking process to adopt as new engine designs).56 It also that the EPA may propose to adopt standards that are of at least equivalent included a carbon monoxide emission domestic GHG emission standards stringency as the anticipated ICAO CO2 standard for in-production commercial (which may take the form of CO standards. These findings, which are 57 2 turbofan engines. In 2005, we standards) for aircraft engines used in factual and science-based, encompass a promulgated more stringent NOX covered aircraft as an outgrowth of the determination of whether GHG emission standards for newly-certified international negotiations that emissions from aircraft cause or 58 commercial turbofan engines. That commenced in 2010 under the auspices contribute to air pollution which may final rule brought the U.S. standards ICAO/CAEP. Such standards could then reasonably be anticipated to endanger closer to alignment with ICAO CAEP/4 discharge the EPA’s duties under CAA public health or welfare. If positive requirements that became effective in sections 231(a)(2)(A) and 231(a)(3), if findings are made, the EPA will be 2004. In 2012, we issued more stringent triggered by final positive endangerment obligated under section 231 of the CAA two-tiered NOX emission standards for and cause or contribute findings, to to set emission standards applicable to newly-certified and in-production ‘‘issue proposed emission standards GHG emissions from the classes of commercial and non-commercial applicable to the emission of’’ GHG aircraft engines for which the EPA 53 makes the cause or contribute finding. If U.S. EPA, 1973: Emission Standards and Test 59 U.S. EPA, 2012: Control of Air Pollution from positive findings are not made, the EPA Procedures for Aircraft; Final Rule, 38 FR 19088 Aircraft and Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards will not have triggered its obligation to (July 17, 1973). and Test Procedures; Final Rule, 77 FR 36342 (June 54 The full CAEP membership meets every three set GHG emission standards under CAA 18, 2012). years and each session is denoted by a numerical 60 While ICAO’s standards were not limited to section 231. identifier. For example, the second meeting of ‘‘commercial’’ aircraft engines, our 1997 standards The EPA has worked diligently over CAEP is referred to as CAEP/2, and CAEP/2 were explicitly limited to commercial engines, as occurred in 1994. the past four years within the ICAO/ our finding that NOX and carbon monoxide 55 This does not mean that in 1997 we CAEP process on a range of technical emissions from aircraft engines cause or contribute promulgated requirements for the re-certification or to air pollution which may reasonably be issues regarding aircraft CO2 emission retrofit of existing in-use engines. anticipated to endanger public health or welfare standards. The ANPR that accompanies 56 In the existing EPA regulations, 40 CFR part 87, was so limited. See 62 FR 25358 (May 8, 1997). In this proposal, in Section VI, discusses newly-certified aircraft engines are described as the 2012 rulemaking, we expanded the scope of that the issues arising in the ongoing engines of a type or model of which the date of finding and of our standards pursuant to Section manufacture of the first individual production 231(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act to include such international proceedings and U.S. model was after the implementation date. Newly emissions from both commercial and non- input to CAEP regarding the manufactured aircraft engines are characterized as commercial aircraft engines based on the physical international CO2 standard to help engines of a type or model for which the date of and operational similarities between commercial ensure transparency about this process. manufacturer of the individual engine was after the and noncommercial civilian aircraft and to bring implementation date. our standards into full alignment with ICAO’s. In addition, in the ANPR the EPA 57 U.S. EPA, 1997: Control of Air Pollution from 61 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification requests public comments on a variety Aircraft and Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions of issues to assist the Agency in and Test Procedures; Final Rule, 62 FR 25355 (May Standard, Circular (Cir) 337, AN/192. Available at developing its position with regard to 8, 1997). http://www.icao.int/publications/catalogue/cat_ 58 U.S. EPA, 2005: Control of Air Pollution from 2015_en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The these issues and the aircraft engine GHG Aircraft and Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards ICAO Circular 337 is found on page 85 of the ICAO emission standards that it may and Test Procedures; Final Rule, 70 FR 2521 Products & Services 2015 catalog and is copyright potentially adopt under the CAA. (November 17, 2005). protected; Order No. CIR337. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37769 from aircraft engines and to issue final permissibly determined that its In making this scientific judgment, ‘‘regulations with such modifications as regulation of greenhouse gas emissions the Administrator is guided by five [she] deems appropriate.’’ from new motor vehicles triggered principles. First, the Administrator is permitting requirements under the required to protect public health and III. Legal Framework for This Action Clean Air Act for stationary sources that welfare. She is not asked to wait until The EPA has previously made an emit greenhouse gases.’ ’’ Utility Air Reg. harm has occurred but instead must be endangerment finding for GHGs under Group v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, 2438 ready to take regulatory action to Title II of the CAA, in the 2009 (2014); see also Virginia v. EPA, 134 S. prevent harm before it occurs.64 The Endangerment Finding for section Ct. 418 (2013), Pac. Legal Found. v. Administrator is thus to consider both 202(a) source categories. In the 2009 EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418 (2013), and CRR, current and future risks. Endangerment Finding, the EPA 134 S. Ct. 468 (2013) (all denying cert.). Second, the Administrator is to explained its legal framework for Thus, the Supreme Court did not exercise judgment by weighing risks, making an endangerment finding under disturb the D.C. Circuit’s holding that assessing potential harms, and making section 202(a) of the CAA (74 FR 18886, affirmed the 2009 Endangerment reasonable projections of future trends 18890–94 (April 24, 2009), and 74 FR Finding. Accordingly, the Agency and possibilities. It follows that when 66496, 66505–10 (December 15, 2009)). proposes that it is reasonable to use that exercising her judgment the The text in section 202(a) that was the same approach under section Administrator balances the likelihood basis for the 2009 Endangerment 231(a)(2)(A)’s similar endangerment and severity of effects. This balance Finding addresses ‘‘the emission of any text, and as explained in the following involves a sliding scale: On one end the air pollutant from any class or classes of discussion, is acting consistently with severity of the effects may be significant, new motor vehicles or new motor that judicially sanctioned framework for but the likelihood low, while on the vehicle engines, which in [the purposes of this proposed section 231 other end the severity may be less Administrator’s] judgment cause, or finding. significant, but the likelihood high.65 At contribute to, air pollution which may Two provisions of the CAA govern different points along this scale, the reasonably be anticipated to endanger this proposal. Section 231(a)(2)(A) sets Administrator is permitted to find public health or welfare.’’ Similarly, forth a two-part predicate for regulatory endangerment. Accordingly, the section 231(a)(2)(A) concerns ‘‘the action under that provision: Administrator need not set a precise or emission of any air pollutant from any Endangerment and cause or contribute. minimum threshold of risk or harm as class or classes of aircraft engines which Section 302 of the Act contains part of making an endangerment in [the Administrator’s] judgment definitions of the terms ‘‘air pollutant’’ finding, but rather may base her causes, or contributes to, air pollution and ‘‘welfare’’ used in section determination on ‘‘ ‘a lesser risk of which may reasonably be anticipated to 231(a)(2)(A). These statutory provisions greater harm . . . or a greater risk of endanger public health or welfare.’’ are discussed below. lesser harm’ or any combination in Thus, the text of the CAA section between.’’ CRR, 684 F.3d at 123 (quoting concerning aircraft emissions in section A. Section 231(a)(2)(A)—Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Ethyl Corp. v. EPA, 541 F.2d, 1, 18 (D.C. 231(a)(2)(A) mirrors the text of CAA Cir. 1976)). section 202(a) that was the basis for the As noted above, section 231(a)(2)(A) Third, because scientific knowledge is 2009 Endangerment Finding. of the CAA (like section 202(a)) calls for constantly evolving, the Administrator The EPA’s approach in the 2009 the Administrator to exercise her may be called upon to make decisions Endangerment Finding (described below judgment and make two separate while recognizing the uncertainties and in Sections III.A and III.B) was affirmed determinations: First, whether the limitations of the data or information by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. relevant kind of air pollution—here, available, as risks to public health or Circuit in Coalition for Responsible GHGs—may reasonably be anticipated welfare may involve the frontiers of Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102 to endanger public health or welfare, scientific or medical knowledge.66 At (D.C. Cir. 2012), reh’g denied 2012 U.S. and second, whether emissions of any the same time, the Administrator must App. LEXIS 26313, 26315, 25997 (D.C. air pollutant from classes of the sources exercise reasoned decision making, and Cir 2012) (CRR). In particular, the D.C. in question (aircraft engines under avoid speculative inquiries. Circuit ruled that the 2009 section 231 and new motor vehicles or Fourth, the Administrator is to Endangerment Finding (including the engines under section 202) cause or consider the cumulative impact of agency’s denial of petitions for contribute to this air pollution.62 sources of a pollutant in assessing the reconsideration of that Finding) was not The Administrator interprets the two- risks from air pollution, and is not to arbitrary or capricious, was consistent part test required under section look only at the risks attributable to a with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision 231(a)(2)(A) as being the same as that single source or class of sources. We in Massachusetts v. EPA and the text explained in the 2009 Endangerment additionally note that in making an and structure of the CAA, and was Finding. (See 74 FR 66505–06, endangerment finding, the adequately supported by the December 15, 2009.) As in the section Administrator is not limited to administrative record. CRR, 684 F.3d at 202(a) context, this analysis entails a 116–128. The D.C. Circuit found that the scientific judgment by the 2009 endangerment finding, ‘‘although we perform EPA had based its decision on Administrator about the potential risks a searching and careful inquiry into the facts ‘‘substantial scientific evidence’’ and posed by GHG emissions to public underlying the agency’s decisions, we will presume noted that the EPA’s reliance on major the validity of the agency action as long as a health and welfare. See CRR, 684 F.3d rational basis for it is presented.’’ CRR, 684 F.3d at scientific assessments was consistent at 117–118.63 120 (internal citations and marks omitted). with the methods that decision-makers 64 See id. at 121–122. often use to make a science-based 62 See CRR, 684 F.3d at 117 (explaining two-part 65 See id. at 122–123 (noting that the § 202(a)(1) judgment. Id. at 120–121. Petitions for analysis under section 202(a)). inquiry ‘‘necessarily entails a case-by-case, sliding certiorari were filed in the Supreme 63 When agencies such as the EPA make scale approach’’ because endangerment is determinations based on review of scientific data ‘‘ ‘composed of reciprocal elements of risk and Court, and the Supreme Court granted within their technical expertise, those decisions are harm, or probability and severity’ ’’ (quoting Ethyl six of those petitions but ‘‘agreed to given an ‘‘extreme degree of deference’’ by the D.C. Corp. v. EPA, 541 F.2d, 1, 18 (D.C. Cir. 1976)). decide only one question: ‘Whether EPA Circuit, and as that court noted in reviewing the 66 See id. at 121–122. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37770 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules considering only those impacts that can cert. denied 426 U.S. 941 (1976). Both emission standards to prevent be traced to the amount of air pollution ‘‘the Clean Air Act ‘and common sense reasonably anticipated endangerment directly attributable to the GHGs * * * demand regulatory action to from maturing into concrete harm.’’ Id. emitted by the subject source classes. prevent harm, even if the regulator is The same language appears in section Such an approach would collapse the less than certain that harm is otherwise 231(a)(2)(A), and the same two prongs of the test by requiring that inevitable.’ ’’ See Massachusetts v. EPA, interpretation applies in that context. any climate change impacts upon which 549 U.S. at 506, n.7 (citing Ethyl Corp.); Moreover, by instructing the an endangerment determination is made see also CRR, 684 F.3d at 121–122. Administrator to consider whether result solely from the GHG emissions of In the 2009 Endangerment Finding, emissions of an air pollutant cause or aircraft. See 74 FR 66542, December 15, the Administrator recognized that the contribute to air pollution in the second 2009 (explaining the same point in the scientific context for an action part of the two-part test, the Act makes context of analogous language in section addressing climate change was unique clear that she need not find that 202(a)). Similarly, the Administrator is at that time because there was a very emissions from any one sector or class not, in making the endangerment and large and comprehensive base of of sources are the sole or even the major cause or contribute findings, to consider scientific information that had been part of an air pollution problem. The the effect of emissions reductions from developed over many years through a use of the term ‘‘contribute’’ clearly the resulting standards.67 The threshold global consensus process involving indicates that such emissions need not endangerment and cause or contribute numerous scientists from many be the sole or major cause of the criteria are separate and distinct from countries and representing many pollution. Finally, the phrase ‘‘in [her] the standard setting criteria that apply if disciplines. 74 FR 66506, December 15, judgment’’ authorizes the Administrator the threshold findings are met, and they 2009. That informational base has since to weigh risks and to consider serve a different purpose. Indeed, the grown. The Administrator also projections of future possibilities, while more serious the endangerment to previously recognized that there are also recognizing uncertainties and public health and welfare, the more varying degrees of uncertainty across extrapolating from existing data. important it may be that action be taken many of these scientific issues, which Finally, when exercising her to address the actual or potential harm remains true. It is in this context that judgment in making both the even if no one action alone can solve the she is exercising her judgment and endangerment and cause-or-contribute problem, and a series of actions is called applying the statutory framework in this findings, the Administrator balances the for. proposed section 231 finding. Further likelihood and severity of effects. Fifth, the Administrator is to consider discussion of the language in section Notably, the phrase ‘‘in [her] judgment’’ the risks to all parts of our population, 231(a)(2)(A), and parallel language in modifies both ‘‘may reasonably be including those who are at greater risk 202(a), is provided below to explain anticipated’’ and ‘‘cause or contribute.’’ for reasons such as increased more fully the basis for this 2. How the Origin of the Current susceptibility to adverse health effects. interpretation, which the D.C. Circuit Statutory Language Informs the EPA’s If vulnerable subpopulations are upheld in the 202(a) context. Interpretation of Section 231(a)(2)(A) especially at risk, the Administrator is 1. The Statutory Language In the proposed and final 2009 entitled to take that point into account The interpretation described above Endangerment Finding, the EPA in deciding the question of flows from the statutory language itself. explained that when Congress revised endangerment. Here too, both likelihood The phrase ‘‘may reasonably be the section 202(a) language that and severity of adverse effects are anticipated’’ and the term ‘‘endanger’’ in governed that finding, along with other relevant. As explained previously in the section 231(a)(2)(A) (as in section provisions, as part of the 1977 2009 Endangerment Finding and as 202(a)) authorize, if not require, the amendments to the CAA, it was reiterated below for this proposed Administrator to act to prevent harm responding to decisions issued by the section 231 finding, vulnerable and to act in conditions of uncertainty. D.C. Circuit in Ethyl Corp. v. EPA subpopulations face serious health risks They do not limit her to merely reacting regarding the pre-1977 version of as a result of climate change. to harm or to acting only when certainty section 211(c) of the Act. 74 FR 18891, As the Supreme Court recognized in has been achieved; indeed, the (April 24, 2009); see also 74 FR 66506, Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. at 534, references to anticipation and to (December 15, 2009). Section 231 was the EPA may make an endangerment endangerment imply that to fail to look one of those other CAA provisions finding despite the existence of ‘‘some to the future or to less than certain risks included in the 1977 amendments; residual uncertainty’’ in the scientific would be to abjure the Administrator’s therefore, the Agency’s discussion for record. See also CRR, 684 F.2d at 122. statutory responsibilities. As the D.C. the 2009 Endangerment Finding Thus, this framework recognizes that Circuit explained, the language ‘‘may regarding the history of section 202 and regulatory agencies such as the EPA reasonably be anticipated to endanger how it supports the EPA’s approach is must be able to deal with the reality that public health or welfare’’ in CAA also relevant for section 231. The ‘‘[m]an’s ability to alter his environment § 202(a) requires a ‘‘precautionary, legislative history of those amendments, has developed far more rapidly than his forward-looking scientific judgment particularly the report by the House ability to foresee with certainty the about the risks of a particular air Committee on Interstate and Foreign effects of his alterations.’’ See Ethyl pollutant, consistent with the CAA’s Commerce, demonstrates that the EPA’s Corp v. EPA, 541 F.2d 1, 6 (D.C. Cir.), precautionary and preventive interpretation of the section 231(a)(2)(A) orientation.’’ CRR, 684 F.3d at 122 language as set forth here in support of 67 As the D.C. Circuit explained in reviewing the 2009 Endangerment Finding under analogous (internal citations omitted). The court the Agency’s section 231 finding (which language in section 202(a): ‘‘At bottom, § 202(a)(1) determined that ‘‘[r]equiring that EPA is the same as its interpretation of the requires EPA to answer only two questions: find ‘certain’ endangerment of public parallel language in section 202(a) as Whether particular ‘air pollution’—here, health or welfare before regulating explained in the 2009 Endangerment greenhouse gases—‘may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare,’ and whether greenhouse gases would effectively Finding), is fully consistent with motor-vehicle emissions ‘cause, or contribute to’ prevent EPA from doing the job that Congress’ intention in crafting these that endangerment.’’ CRR, 648 F.3d at 117. Congress gave it in § 202(a)—utilizing provisions. See H.R. Rep. 95–294 (1977), VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37771 as reprinted in 4 A Legislative History level of ‘‘certainty [was] required by the future possibilities, consider of the Clean Air Act Amendments of Clean Air Act before EPA may act.’’ 541 uncertainties, and extrapolate from 1977 (1978) at 2465 (hereinafter LH).68 F.2d at 7. limited data. Thus, the Administrator The legislative history clearly The petitioners argued that the must balance the likelihood of effects indicates that the House Committee statutory language ‘‘will endanger’’ with the severity of the effects in believed the Ethyl Corp. decisions posed required proof of actual harm, and that reaching her judgment. The Committee several ‘‘crucial policy questions’’ the actual harm had to come from emphasized that the Administrator’s regarding the protection of public health emissions from the fuels in and of exercise of ‘‘judgment’’ 73 may include and welfare. H.R. Rep. 95–294 at 48, 4 themselves. Id. at 12, 29. The en banc making projections, assessments and LH at 2515.69 The following paragraphs court rejected this approach, finding estimates that are reasonable, as summarize the en banc decision in that the term ‘‘endanger’’ allowed the opposed to a speculative or ‘‘ ‘crystal Ethyl Corp. v. EPA and describe how the Administrator to act when harm is ball’ inquiry.’’ Moreover, procedural House Committee revised the threatened, and did not require proof of safeguards apply to the exercise of endangerment language in the 1977 actual harm. Id. at 13. ‘‘A statute judgment, and final decisions are amendments to the CAA to serve several allowing for regulation in the face of subject to judicial review. Also, the purposes consistent with that decision. danger is, necessarily, a precautionary phrase ‘‘in [her] judgment’’ modifies In particular, the language: (1) statute.’’ Id. Optimally, the court held, both the phrases ‘‘cause and contribute’’ Emphasizes the preventive or regulatory action would not only and ‘‘may reasonably be anticipated,’’ as precautionary nature of the CAA 70; (2) precede, but prevent, a perceived threat. discussed above. H.R. Rep. 95–294 at authorizes the Administrator to Id. 50–51, 4 LH at 2517–18. The court also rejected petitioner’s reasonably project into the future and As the Committee further explained, argument that any threatened harm weigh risks; (3) assures the the phrase ‘‘may reasonably be consideration of the cumulative impact must be ‘‘probable’’ before regulation anticipated’’ points the Administrator in of all sources; (4) instructs that the was authorized. Specifically, the court the direction of assessing current and health of susceptible individuals, as recognized that danger ‘‘is set not by a future risks rather than waiting for proof well as healthy adults, should be part of fixed probability of harm, but rather is of actual harm. This phrase is also the analysis; and (5) indicates an composed of reciprocal elements of risk intended to instruct the Administrator awareness of the uncertainties and and harm, or probability and severity.’’ to consider the limitations and limitations in information available to Id. at 18. Next, the court held that the difficulties inherent in information on the Administrator. H.R. rep. 95–294 at EPA’s evaluation of risk is necessarily 71 an exercise of judgment, and that the public health and welfare. H.R. Rep. 95– 49–50, 4 LH 2516–17. 74 In revising the statutory language, statute did not require a factual finding. 294 at 51, 4 LH at 2518. Congress relied heavily on the en banc Id. at 24. Thus, ultimately, the Finally, the phrase ‘‘cause or decision in Ethyl Corp. v. EPA, which Administrator must ‘‘act, in part on contribute’’ ensures that all sources of reversed a 3-judge panel opinion ‘factual issues,’ but largely ‘on choices the contaminant which contribute to air regarding an EPA rule restricting the of policy, on an assessment of risks, pollution are considered in the content of lead in leaded gasoline.72 [and] on predictions dealing with endangerment analysis (e.g., not a single After reviewing the relevant facts and matters on the frontiers of scientific source or category of sources). It is also law, the full court evaluated the knowledge * * *.’’ Id. at 29 (citations intended to require the Administrator to statutory language at issue to see what omitted). Finally, the en banc court consider all sources of exposure to a agreed with the EPA that even without pollutant (for example, food, water, and 68 The committee explained that its action the language in section 202(a) (which is air) when determining risk. Id. addressed not only section 211(c)(1)(A) but rather also in section 231(a)(2)(A)) regarding 3. Additional Considerations for the the entire proposal, and would thus apply its ‘‘cause or contribute to,’’ it was interpretation to all other sections of the Act Cause or Contribute Analysis relating to public health protection. 4 LH at 2516. appropriate for the EPA to consider the It also noted that it had used the same basic cumulative impact of lead from By instructing the Administrator to formulation in section 202 and section 231, as well numerous sources, not just the fuels consider whether emissions of an air as in other sections. Id. at 2517. being regulated under section 211(c). Id. pollutant cause or contribute to air 69 The Supreme Court recognized that the current language in section 202(a)(1), which uses the same at 29–31. pollution, the statute is clear that she formulation as that in section 231(a)(2)(A), is ‘‘more The dissent in the original Ethyl Corp. need not find that emissions from any protective’’ than the 1970 version that was similar decision and the en banc opinion were one sector or class of sources are the to the section 211 language before the D.C. Circuit of ‘‘critical importance’’ to the House sole or even the major part of an air in Ethyl Corp. Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. at Committee which proposed the 506, fn 7. pollution problem. The use of the term 70 See H.R. Rep. 95–294 at 49, 4 LH at 2516 (‘‘To revisions to the endangerment language emphasize the preventive or precautionary nature in the 1977 amendments to the CAA. 73 Throughout this Notice under CAA section of the Act, i.e. to assure that regulatory action can H.R. Rep. 95–294 at 48, 4 LH at 2515. 231, as throughout the previous Notices concerning effectively prevent harm before it occurs’’). The Committee addressed those the 2009 Endangerment Finding under section 202, 71 Congress also standardized this language across questions with the language that now the judgments on endangerment and cause or the various sections of the CAA which address contribute are described as a finding or findings. emissions from both stationary and mobile sources. appears in section 231(a)(2)(A) and This is for ease of reference only, and is not H.R. Rep. 95–294 at 50, 4 LH at 2517; section 401 several other CAA provisions— intended to imply that the Administrator’s of the CAA Amendments of 1977. ‘‘emission of any air pollutant * * * judgment is solely a fact finding exercise; rather, the 72 At the time of the 1973 rules requiring the which in [the Administrator’s] judgment Administrator’s exercise of judgment is to consider reduction of lead in leaded gasoline, section and weigh multiple factors when applying the 211(c)(1)(A) of the CAA stated that the causes, or contributes to, air pollution scientific information to the statutory criteria. Administrator may promulgate regulations that: which may reasonably be anticipated to 74 Thus, the statutory language does not require ‘‘Control or prohibit the manufacture, introduction endanger public health or welfare.’’ that the EPA prove the effects of climate change into commerce, offering for sale, or sale of any fuel As noted above in section III.A.1, the ‘‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’’ Indeed, such an or fuel additive for use in a motor vehicle or motor approach is inconsistent with the concepts of vehicle engine (A) if any emissions product of such phrase ‘‘in [her] judgment’’ calls for the reasonable anticipation and endangerment fuel or fuel additive will endanger the public health Administrator to make a comparative embedded in the statute. See also CRR, 684 F.3d at or welfare * * *.’’ CAA 211(c)(1)(A) (1970). assessment of risks and projections of 121–122. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37772 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules contribute clearly indicates a lower contribution in the context of CAA provisions in section 202(a), the D.C. threshold than the sole or major cause. section 213 and rules for nonroad Circuit has explained that the Act at the Moreover, like the section 202(a) vehicles in Bluewater Network v. EPA, endangerment finding step did not language that governed the 2009 370 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2004). In that case, require the EPA to identify a precise Endangerment Finding, the statutory industry argued that section 213(a)(3) numerical value or ‘‘a minimum language in section 231(a)(2)(A) does requires a finding of a significant threshold of risk or harm before not contain a modifier on its use of the contribution before the EPA can determining whether an air pollutant term ‘‘contribute.’’ Unlike other CAA regulate, while the EPA’s view was that endangers.’’ CRR, 684 F.3d at 122–123. provisions, it does not require the CAA requires a finding only of Accordingly, EPA ‘‘may base an ‘‘significant’’ contribution. Compare, contribution. Id. at 13. Section 213(a)(3), endangerment finding on ‘a lesser risk e.g., CAA sections 111(b); 213(a)(2), (4). like section 231(a)(2)(A), is triggered by of greater harm . . . or a greater risk of Congress made it clear that the a finding that certain sources ‘‘cause, or lesser harm’ or any combination in Administrator is to exercise her contribute to,’’ air pollution, while an between.’’ Id. (quoting Ethyl Corp., 541 judgment in determining contribution, adjacent provision, section 213(a)(2), is F.2d at 18). Recognizing the substantial and authorized regulatory controls to triggered by a finding of a ‘‘significant’’ record of empirical data and scientific address air pollution even if the air contribution. The court looked at the evidence that the EPA relied upon in pollution problem results from a wide ‘‘ordinary meaning of ‘contribute’ ’’ the 2009 Endangerment Finding, the variety of sources. While the when upholding the EPA’s reading. court determined that its ‘‘failure to endangerment test looks at the entire air After referencing dictionary definitions distill this ocean of evidence into a pollution problem and the risks it poses, of ‘‘contribute,’’ the court also noted specific number at which greenhouse the cause or contribute test is designed that ‘‘[s]tanding alone, the term has no gases cause ‘dangerous’ climate change to authorize the EPA to identify and inherent connotation as to the is a function of the precautionary thrust then address what may well be many magnitude or importance of the relevant of the CAA and the multivariate and different sectors, classes, or groups of ‘share’ in the effect; certainly it does not sometimes uncertain nature of climate sources that are each part of the incorporate any ‘significance’ science, not a sign of arbitrary or problem. requirement.’’ 370 F.3d at 13.75 The capricious decision-making.’’ Id. at 123. As explained for the 2009 court found that the bare ‘‘contribute’’ As the language in section 231(a)(2)(A) Endangerment Finding, the D.C. Circuit language invests the Administrator with is analogous to that in section 202(a), it has discussed the concept of discretion to exercise judgment is clearly reasonable to apply this contribution in the CAA, and its case regarding what constitutes a sufficient interpretation to the endangerment law supports the EPA’s interpretation contribution for the purpose of making determination under section that the level of contribution need not a cause or contribute finding. Id. at 14.76 231(a)(2)(A). Moreover, the logic be significant. 74 FR 66542, December Like the statutory language underlying this interpretation supports 15, 2009. In Catawba County v. EPA, considered in Catawba County and the general principle that under CAA 571 F.3d 20 (D.C. Cir. 2009), the court Bluewater Network, as well as the section 231 the EPA is not required to upheld EPA’s PM[2.5] attainment and section 202(a) language that governed identify a specific minimum threshold nonattainment designation decisions, the Agency’s previous findings for of contribution from potentially subject analyzing CAA section 107(d), which GHGs emitted by other types of mobile source categories in determining requires EPA to designate an area as sources, section 231(a)(2)(A) refers to whether their emissions ‘‘cause or nonattainment if it ‘‘contributes to contribution and does not specify that contribute’’ to the endangering air ambient air quality in a nearby area’’ not the contribution must be significant pollution. The reasonableness of this attaining the national ambient air before an affirmative finding can be principle is further supported by the quality standards. Id. at 35. The court made. To be sure, any finding of a fact that section 231 does not impose on noted that it had previously held that ‘‘contribution’’ requires some threshold the EPA a requirement to find that such the term ‘‘contributes’’ is ambiguous in to be met; a truly trivial or de minimis contribution is ‘‘significant,’’ let alone the context of CAA language. See EDF ‘‘contribution’’ might not count as such. the sole or major cause of the v. EPA, 82 F.3d 451, 459 (D.C. Cir. The Administrator therefore has ample endangering air pollution. This context 1996). ‘‘[A]mbiguities in statutes within discretion in exercising her reasonable further supports the EPA’s an agency’s jurisdiction to administer judgment and determining whether, interpretation that section 231(a)(2)(A) are delegations of authority to the under the circumstances presented, the requires some level of contribution that, agency to fill the statutory gap in cause or contribute criterion has been while exceeding de minimis or trivial reasonable fashion.’’ 571 F.3d at 35 met.77 As noted above, in addressing thresholds, does not need to rise to a (citing Nat’l Cable & Telecomms. Ass’c pre-determined numerical level of v. Brand X Internet Servs, 545 U.S. 967, 75 Specifically, the decision noted that significance. 980 (2005)). The court then proceeded ‘‘ ‘contribute’ means simply ‘to have a share in any In addition, when exercising her to consider and reject petitioners’ act or effect,’ Webster’s Third New International judgment in making a cause or argument that the verb ‘‘contributes’’ in Dictionary 496 (1993), or ‘to have a part or share in producing,’ 3 Oxford English Dictionary 849 (2d contribute determination, the CAA section 107(d) necessarily ed. 1989).’’ Id. at 13. Administrator not only considers the connotes a significant causal 76 The court explained, ‘‘[t]he repeated use of the cumulative impact, but also looks at the relationship. Specifically, the D.C. term ‘significant’ to modify the contribution totality of the circumstances (e.g., the air Circuit again noted that the term is required for all nonroad vehicles, coupled with the pollutant, the air pollution, the nature of ambiguous, leaving it to EPA to omission of this modifier from the ‘cause, or contribute to’ finding required for individual the endangerment, the type or classes of interpret in a reasonable manner. In the categories of new nonroad vehicles, indicates that sources at issue, the number of sources context of this discussion, the court Congress did not intend to require a finding of in the source sector or class, and the noted that ‘‘a contribution may simply ‘significant contribution’ for individual vehicle number and type of other source sectors exacerbate a problem rather than cause categories.’’ Id. at 13. 77 Section V discusses the evidence in this case or categories that may emit the air it * * *.’’ 571 F.3d at 39. that supports the proposed finding of contribution. This is consistent with the D.C. The EPA need not determine at this time the or de minimis and would not warrant a finding of Circuit’s discussion of the concept of circumstances in which emissions would be trivial contribution. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37773 pollutant) when determining whether precipitation as well as from the from the new scientific assessments the emissions ‘‘justify regulation’’ under spreading of invasive species or insects. described in section IV.B below the CAA. See Catawba County, 571 F.3d Prior welfare effects evaluated by the provides further support that the six at 39 (discussing EPA’s interpretation of EPA in other contexts include impacts well-mixed GHGs are the primary cause the term ‘‘contribute’’ under CAA on vegetation, as well as reduced and driver of climate change. The § 107(d) and finding it reasonable for the visibility, changes in nutrient balance Administrator considered other climate- agency to adopt a totality of the and acidity of the environment, soiling forcing agents both in the 2009 circumstances approach); see also 74 FR of buildings and statues, and erosion of Endangerment Finding and in this at 66542, (December 15, 2009). Further building materials. See, e.g., Final action; however, these substances are discussion of this issue can be found in Secondary National Ambient Air not included in the air pollution sections IV and V of this preamble. Quality Standards for Oxides of definition proposed in this action for Nitrogen and Sulfur, 77 FR 20218, April B. Air Pollutant, Public Health and the reasons discussed below in section 3, 2012; Control of Emissions from Welfare IV.B.4. Nonroad Large Spark Ignition Engines The Administrator is proposing to The CAA defines both ‘‘air pollutant’’ and Recreational Engines (Marine and find, for purposes of CAA section and ‘‘welfare.’’ Air pollutant is defined Land-Based), 67 FR 68242, November 8, 231(a)(2)(A), that elevated as: ‘‘Any air pollution agent or 2002; Final Heavy-Duty Engine and concentrations of the six well-mixed combination of such agents, including Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel GHGs constitute air pollution that any physical, chemical, biological, Sulfur Control Requirements, 66 FR endangers both the public health and radioactive (including source material, 5002, January 18, 2001. the public welfare of current and future special nuclear material, and byproduct Although the CAA defines ‘‘effects on generations. The Administrator’s view is material) substance or matter which is welfare’’ as discussed above, there are that the body of scientific evidence emitted into or otherwise enters the no definitions of ‘‘public health’’ or amassed in the record for the 2009 ambient air. Such term includes any ‘‘public welfare’’ in the Clean Air Act. Endangerment Finding compellingly precursors to the formation of any air The Supreme Court has discussed the supports an endangerment finding pollutant, to the extent the concept of ‘‘public health’’ in the under CAA section 231(a). Information Administrator has identified such context of whether costs can be from the new scientific assessments precursor or precursors for the considered when setting National described in section IV.B below particular purpose for which the term Ambient Air Quality Standards. provides further support and ‘air pollutant’ is used.’’ CAA section Whitman v. American Trucking Ass’n, justification for this proposed finding. 302(g). Greenhouse gases fit well within 531 U.S. 457 (2001). In Whitman, the Section IV.A below summarizes the this capacious definition. See Court imbued the term with its most 2009 Endangerment Finding under CAA Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. at 532. natural meaning: ‘‘The health of the section 202, explains the approach EPA They are ‘‘without a doubt’’ physical public.’’ Id. at 466. When considering took in compiling an extensive record to chemical substances emitted into the public health, the EPA has looked at inform the Administrator’s judgment on ambient air. Id. at 529. Section V below morbidity, such as impairment of lung that finding, and describes the recent contains further discussion of the ‘‘air function, aggravation of respiratory and judicial affirmation of the 2009 pollutant’’ for purposes of this section cardiovascular disease, and other acute Endangerment Finding. Section IV.B 231 proposed contribution finding, and chronic health effects, as well as provides a summary of new scientific which uses the same definition of air mortality. See, e.g., Final National assessments that strengthen or provide pollutant as the EPA adopted for Ambient Air Quality Standard for further scientific evidence, in addition purposes of the 2009 Endangerment Ozone, 73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008. to that which the Administrator relied Finding. upon in making her prior judgment, for Regarding ‘‘welfare,’’ the CAA states IV. The Proposed Endangerment a finding that GHGs endanger public that ‘‘[a]ll language referring to effects Finding Under CAA Section 231 health and welfare.78 Finally, section on welfare includes, but is not limited This section describes the IV.C summarizes the Administrator’s to, effects on soils, water, crops, Administrator’s proposed endangerment vegetation, man-made materials, finding under CAA section 231(a)(2) conclusion for purposes of section 231, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, and its basis. Beginning with the air in light of the evidence, analysis, and and climate, damage to and pollution under consideration, the conclusions that led to the 2009 deterioration of property, and hazards to Administrator is proposing to use the Endangerment Finding as well as more transportation, as well as effects on same definition of the ‘‘air pollution’’ recent evidence, that emissions of the economic values and on personal under CAA section 231(a)(2) as that six well-mixed GHGs in the atmosphere comfort and well-being, whether caused used under CAA section 202(a)(1), endanger public health and welfare. by transformation, conversion, or namely the mix of six well-mixed GHGs A. Scientific Basis of the 2009 combination with other air pollutants.’’ mentioned above: CO2, methane, nitrous Endangerment Finding Under CAA CAA section 302(h). This definition is oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, Section 202(a)(1) quite broad. Importantly, it is not an perfluorocarbons, and sulfur In the 2009 Endangerment Finding, exclusive list due to the use of the term hexafluoride. As described in section the Administrator found that elevated ‘‘includes, but is not limited to, * * *.’’ IV.A below, it is the Administrator’s concentrations of the well-mixed GHGs Effects other than those listed here may view that the reasons detailed in the in the atmosphere may reasonably be also be considered effects on welfare. 2009 Endangerment Finding for Moreover, the terms contained within defining the scope and nature of the air 78 While the EPA is providing a summary of the definition are themselves expansive. pollution to be these six well-mixed newer scientific assessments below, the EPA is also For example, deterioration to property GHGs remain valid and well-supported relying on the same scientific and technical could include damage caused by by the current science and are therefore evidence discussed in the notices for the 2009 Endangerment Finding in this proposed finding for extreme weather events. Effects on reasonable bases for adopting the same purposes of CAA section 231. See sections III of the vegetation could include impacts from definition of ‘‘air pollution’’ in this 2009 Proposed Endangerment Finding and sections changes in temperature and section 231(a)(2)(A) finding. Information III and IV of the 2009 Endangerment Finding. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37774 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules anticipated to endanger public health mixed in the atmosphere, resulting in increase the risk of morbidity and and welfare of current and future similar GHG concentrations around the mortality.85 In making that public health generations. See, e.g., 74 FR 66516, globe regardless of geographic location finding, the Administrator considered December 15, 2009. The Administrator of emissions; all trap outgoing heat that direct temperature effects, air quality reached this judgment by carefully would otherwise escape to space; and effects, the potential for changes in considering a significant body of all are directly emitted as GHGs rather vector-borne diseases, and the potential scientific evidence and public than becoming a GHG in the atmosphere for changes in the severity and comments submitted to the Agency. The after emission of a precursor gas. The frequency of extreme weather events. In sections below summarize the scope Administrator acknowledged that other addition, the Administrator considered and nature of the relevant air pollution anthropogenic climate forcers also play whether and how susceptible for the 2009 Endangerment Finding, as a role in climate change but for various populations may be particularly at risk. well as the public health and welfare scientific and policy reasons, these As explained in more detail in the 2009 considerations within the finding. substances were not included in the air Endangerment Finding, with respect to pollution definition.82 direct temperature effects, by raising 1. The Definition of Air Pollution in the As explained in more detail in the average temperatures, climate change 2009 Endangerment Finding 2009 Endangerment Finding, the EPA increases the likelihood of heat waves, The Administrator defined the scope made the judgment that the scientific which are associated with increased and nature of the relevant air pollution evidence is compelling that elevated deaths and illnesses. Climate change is as the aggregate group of six key, well- concentrations of heat-trapping GHGs also expected to lead to reductions in mixed GHGs: CO2, methane, nitrous are the root cause of recently observed cold-related mortality. The 2009 oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, climate change and that the scientific Endangerment Finding, while noting perfluorocarbons, and sulfur record showed that most of the observed uncertainty about how heat and cold hexafluoride.79 The Administrator increase in global average temperatures related mortality would change in the considered five primary reasons for since the mid-20th century is very likely future, also pointed to a USGCRP focusing on this aggregate group as the due to the observed increase in assessment report discussion that air pollution in the 2009 Endangerment anthropogenic GHG concentrations. The increases in heat-related mortality due Finding: (1) They share common attribution of observed climate change to global warming in the United States physical properties that influence their to anthropogenic activities was based on was unlikely to be compensated for by climate effects; (2) on the basis of these multiple lines of evidence.83 The first decreases in cold-related mortality (74 common physical properties, they have line of evidence arises from our basic FR 66525, December 15, 2009). With been determined to be the primary physical understanding of the effects of regard to air quality effects, climate cause of human-induced climate changing concentrations of GHGs, change is expected to increase ozone change, are the best-understood driver natural factors, and other human pollution over broad areas of the of climate change, and are expected to impacts on the climate system. The country, including large metropolitan remain the key driver of future climate second line of evidence arises from population centers, and thereby increase change; (3) they are the common focus indirect, historical estimates of past the risks of respiratory infection, of climate change science research and climate changes that suggest that the aggravation of asthma, and premature policy analyses and discussions; (4) changes in global surface temperature death. Other public health threats stem using the combined mix of these gases over the last several decades are from the potential for increased deaths, as the definition (versus an individual unusual. The third line of evidence injuries, infectious and waterborne gas-by-gas approach) is consistent with arises from the use of computer-based diseases, stress-related disorders, and the science, because risks and impacts climate models to simulate the likely other adverse effects associated with associated with GHG-induced climate patterns of response of the climate increased hurricane intensity and change are not assessed on an system to different forcing mechanisms increased frequency of intense storms individual gas-by-gas basis; and (5) (both natural and anthropogenic). and heavy precipitation associated with using the combined mix of these gases climate change. In addition, climate is consistent with past EPA practice, 2. Public Health Impacts Detailed in the change is expected to be associated with where separate substances from 2009 Endangerment Finding an increase in the spread of food-, different sources, but with common Climate change resulting from water-, and vector-borne diseases in properties, may be treated as a class anthropogenic GHG emissions threatens susceptible populations. Climate change (e.g., oxides of nitrogen, particulate multiple aspects of public health.84 In also has the potential to change matter, volatile organic compounds).80 determining that the well-mixed GHG aeroallergen production (for example, The common physical properties air pollution is reasonably anticipated to through lengthening the growing season these six GHGs share that are relevant endanger public health for current and for allergen-producing plants), and to the climate change problem include future generations, the Administrator subsequent human exposures could the following: All are long-lived in the noted her view that climate change can increase allergenic illnesses. Children, atmosphere; 81 all become globally well the elderly, and the poor are among the around 130 years; sulfur hexafluoride over 3,000 most vulnerable to climate-related 79 74 FR 66516, December 15, 2009. years; and some perfluorocarbons up to 10,000 to health effects. 80 74 FR 66517 to 66519, December 15, 2009. 50,000 years. CO2 is sometimes approximated as 81 We use ‘‘long-lived’’ here to mean that the gas having a lifetime of roughly 100 years, but for a 3. Public Welfare Impacts Detailed in has a lifetime in the atmosphere sufficient to given amount of CO2 emitted a better description the 2009 Endangerment Finding become globally well-mixed throughout the entire is that some fraction of the atmospheric increase in atmosphere, which requires a minimum concentration is quickly absorbed by the oceans and Climate change resulting from atmospheric lifetime of about one year. IPCC also terrestrial vegetation, some fraction of the anthropogenic GHG emissions also refers to these six greenhouse gases as long-lived. atmospheric increase will only slowly decrease over a number of years, and a small portion of the threatens multiple aspects of public According to the most recent IPCC Fifth Assessment welfare.86 In determining that the well- Report (2014), methane has an atmospheric lifetime increase will remain for many centuries or more. of about 12 years. One of the most commonly used 82 74 FR 66519 to 66521, December 15, 2009. hydrofluorocarbons (HFC–134a) has a lifetime of 83 74 FR 66518, December 15, 2009. 85 74 FR 66524, December 15, 2009. about 13 years. Nitrous oxide has a lifetime of 84 74 FR 66524 to 66530, December 15, 2009. 86 74 FR 66530 to 66536, December 15, 2009. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37775 mixed GHG air pollution is reasonably 4. The Science Upon Which the Agency The 2009 Endangerment Finding and anticipated to endanger public welfare Relied the 2010 Reconsideration Denial were for current and future generations, the As outlined in section III.A of the challenged in a lawsuit before the U.S. 90 Administrator considered the multiple 2009 Endangerment Finding,87 the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. pathways by which GHG air pollution EPA’s approach to providing the On June 26, 2012, the Court upheld the and resultant climate change affect technical and scientific information to Endangerment Finding and the public welfare by evaluating the inform the Administrator’s judgment Reconsideration Denial, ruling that the numerous and far-ranging risks to food regarding the question of whether GHGs Finding (including the Reconsideration production and agriculture; forestry; endanger public health and welfare was Denial) was not arbitrary or capricious, was consistent with the U.S. Supreme water resources; sea level rise and to rely primarily upon the recent, major Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. coastal areas; energy, infrastructure, and assessments by the USGCRP, the IPCC, EPA (which affirmed the EPA’s settlements; and ecosystems and and the NRC. These assessments addressed the scientific issues that the authority to regulate greenhouse wildlife. The Administrator also gases) 91 and the text and structure of considered impacts on the U.S. EPA was required to examine, were comprehensive in their coverage of the the CAA, and was adequately supported population from climate change effects by the administrative record.92 The occurring outside of the United States. GHG and climate change issues, and underwent rigorous and exacting peer Court also agreed with the EPA that the As explained in more detail in the 2009 review by the expert community, as Petitioners had ‘‘not provided Endangerment Finding, the potential well as rigorous levels of U.S. substantial support for their argument serious adverse impacts of extreme government review, in which the EPA that the Endangerment Finding should 93 events, such as wildfires, flooding, took part. Primary reliance on the major be revised.’’ The Court found that the drought, and extreme weather scientific assessments provided EPA had based its decision on conditions provided strong support for assurance that the Administrator was ‘‘substantial scientific evidence,’’ the determination. Climate change is basing her judgment on the best observing that ‘‘EPA’s scientific expected to place large areas of the available, well-vetted science that evidence of record included support for country at serious risk of reduced water reflected the consensus of the climate the proposition that greenhouse gases supplies, increased water pollution, and science research community. The major trap heat on earth that would otherwise increased occurrence of extreme events findings of the USGCRP, IPCC, and NRC dissipate into space; that this such as floods and droughts. Coastal assessments supported the ‘greenhouse effect’ warms the climate; areas are expected to face increased Administrator’s determination that that human activity is contributing to risks from storm and flooding damage to elevated concentrations of GHGs in the increased atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases; and that the climate property, as well as adverse impacts atmosphere may reasonably be system is warming,’’ as well as from rising sea level such as land loss anticipated to endanger the public health and welfare of current and future providing extensive scientific evidence due to inundation, erosion, wetland for EPA’s determination that submergence and habitat loss. Climate generations. The EPA presented this scientific support at length in the anthropogenically induced climate change is expected to result in an change threatens both public health and increase in peak electricity demand, and comprehensive record for the 2009 Endangerment Finding. Relevant welfare.94 The court further noted that extreme weather from climate change sections of documents from the 2009 the EPA’s reliance on assessments was threatens energy, transportation, and Endangerment Finding record have been consistent with the methods decision- water resource infrastructure. Climate placed in the docket for this proposed makers often use to make a science- change may exacerbate existing finding under CAA section 231. based judgment.95 Moreover, the Court environmental pressures in certain The EPA then reviewed ten supported the EPA’s reliance on the settlements, particularly in Alaskan administrative petitions for major scientific assessment reports indigenous communities. Climate reconsideration of the Endangerment conducted by USGCRP, IPCC, and NRC change is also very likely to Finding in 2010.88 In the and found: fundamentally change U.S. ecosystems Reconsideration Denial, the The EPA evaluated the processes used to over the 21st century and to lead to Administrator denied those petitions on develop the various assessment reports, predominantly negative consequences the basis of the Petitioners’ failure to reviewed their contents, and considered the for biodiversity, ecosystem goods and provide substantial support for their depth of the scientific consensus the reports services, and wildlife. Though there argument that the EPA should revise the may be some benefits for agriculture and Endangerment Finding and their Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under objections’ lack of ‘‘central relevance’’ to section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, 75 FR 49557 forestry in the next few decades, the (August 13, 2010) (‘‘Reconsideration Denial’’). In body of evidence points towards the Finding. The EPA prepared an that notice, the EPA thoroughly considered the increasing risks of net adverse impacts accompanying three-volume Response scientific and technical information relevant to the petitions. In addition to the other information on U.S. food production, agriculture and to Petitions document to provide additional information, often more discussed in the present notice, the EPA is also forest productivity as average relying on the scientific and technical evidence technical in nature, in response to the temperature continues to rise. Looking discussed in that prior notice for purposes of its arguments, claims, and assertions by the proposed determination under CAA section 231. across all sectors discussed above, the Petitioners to reconsider the See section III of the Reconsideration Denial. risk and the severity of adverse impacts Endangerment Finding.89 90 Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. on public welfare are expected to Environmental Protection Agency, 684 F.3d 102 (D.C. Cir. 2012),), reh’g en banc denied, 2012 U.S. increase over time. Lastly, these impacts 87 74 FR 66510 to 66512, December 15, 2009. App. LEXIS 25997, 26313, 26315 (D.C. Cir. 2012) 88 are global and may exacerbate problems Administrative petitions are available from (CRR). http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/ outside the United States that raise 91 549 U.S. 497 (2007). petitions.html (last accessed May 12, 2015), and in 92 humanitarian, trade, and national the docket for the 2009 Endangerment Finding: CRR, 684 F.3d at 117–27. security issues for the United States. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–017. 93 Id. at 125 89 U.S. EPA, 2010: Denial of the Petitions to 94 Id. at 120–121. Reconsider the Endangerment and Cause or 95 Id. at 121 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37776 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules represented. Based on these evaluations, the or less weight on, the major findings • IPCC’s 2012 ‘‘Special Report on EPA determined the assessments represented reflected in the previous assessment Managing the Risks of Extreme Events the best source material to use in deciding reports that underpinned the and Disasters to Advance Climate whether GHG emissions may be reasonably Administrator’s judgment that the six Change Adaptation’’ (SREX) 101 anticipated to endanger public health or • welfare. . . . It makes no difference that well-mixed GHGs endanger public USGCRP’s 2014 ‘‘Climate Change much of the scientific evidence in large part health and welfare. From its review, the Impacts in the United States: the Third consisted of ‘‘syntheses’’ of individual EPA finds that these new assessments National Climate Assessment’’ studies and research. Even individual studies are largely consistent with, and in many (NCA3) 102 and research papers often synthesize past cases strengthen and add to, the already • NRC’s 2010 ‘‘Ocean Acidification: work in an area and then build upon it. This compelling and comprehensive A National Strategy to Meet the is how science works. The EPA is not scientific evidence detailing the role of required to re-prove the existence of the atom Challenges of a Changing Ocean’’ the six well-mixed GHGs in driving (Ocean Acidification) 103 every time it approaches a scientific climate change, detailed in the 2009 question.96 • NRC’s 2011 ‘‘Climate Change, the Endangerment Finding. Therefore, the In addition, the EPA’s reliance on the Indoor Environment, and Health’’ new scientific assessments do not 104 major assessments to inform the (Indoor Environment) provide any reasonable basis on which • Administrator’s judgment allowed for to propose under CAA section NRC’s 2011 ‘‘Report on Climate full and explicit recognition of scientific 231(a)(2)(A) a different conclusion than Stabilization Targets: Emissions, uncertainty regarding the endangerment the one the EPA reached in 2009 under Concentrations, and Impacts over posed by the atmospheric buildup of Decades to Millennia’’ (Climate CAA section 202(a). Rather, they 105 GHGs. The Administrator considered provide further support for this Stabilization Targets) • the fact that ‘‘some aspects of climate proposed finding under section 231. In NRC’s 2011 ‘‘National Security change science and the projected particular, the new assessments Implications for U.S. Naval Forces’’ impacts are more certain than others.’’ 97 discussed in this preamble provide (National Security Implications) 106 The D.C. Circuit subsequently noted additional detail regarding public health • NRC’s 2011 ‘‘Understanding Earth’s that ‘‘the existence of some uncertainty impacts, particularly on groups and Deep Past: Lessons for Our Climate does not, without more, warrant people at certain lifestages especially Future’’ (Understanding Earth’s Deep invalidation of an endangerment vulnerable to climate change including Past) 107 finding.’’ 98 children, the elderly, low-income • NRC’s 2012 ‘‘Sea Level Rise for the As noted above the Supreme Court communities and individuals, Coasts of California, Oregon, and granted some of the petitions for indigenous groups, and communities of Washington: Past, Present, and Future’’ certiorari that were filed, while denying color. (Sea Level Rise) 108 others, but agreed to decide only the The subsections below present brief • NRC’s 2013 ‘‘Climate and Social question: ‘‘Whether EPA permissibly summaries of the relevant key findings Stress: Implications for Security determined that its regulation of from the new major peer-reviewed Analysis’’ (Climate and Social Stress) 109 greenhouse gas emissions from new scientific assessments, which include motor vehicles triggered permitting the following: • Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University requirements under the Clean Air Act IPCC’s 2013–2014 Fifth Assessment Press, 1435 pp. for stationary sources that emit Report (AR5) 100 101 IPCC, 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme greenhouse gases.’’ 99 Thus, the Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Supreme Court did not disturb the D.C. 100 IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Circuit’s holding that affirmed the 2009 Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Change [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, Endangerment Finding. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. B. Recent Science Further Supports the S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, 582 Administrator’s Judgment That the Six and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University pp. Well-Mixed Greenhouse Gases Endanger Press, 1535 pp, doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324; 102 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Public Health and Welfare IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and in the United States: The Third National Climate Since the closure of the Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, administrative record concerning the to the Fifth Assessment Report of the 841 pp. 2009 Endangerment Finding (including Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, 103 NRC, 2010: Ocean Acidification: A National C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Strategy to Meet the Challenges of a Changing the denial of petitions for Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Ocean. The National Academies Press, 188 pp. reconsideration), a number of new Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. 104 NRC Institute of Medicine, 2011: Climate major, peer-reviewed scientific Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. Change, the Indoor Environment, and Health. assessments have been released. The White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, 1132 pp; Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, 272 pp. EPA carefully reviewed the updated Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional 105 NRC 2011: Climate Stabilization Targets: Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the scientific conclusions in these Emissions, Concentrations, and Impacts over Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental assessments, largely to evaluate whether Decades to Millennia. The National Academies Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B. Field, Press, 298 pp. they would lead the EPA in this CAA D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, T.E. 106 section 231(a)(2)(A) finding to propose a Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. NRC, 2011: National Security Implications of different interpretation of, or place more Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. Climate Change for U.S. Naval Forces. The National MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White Academies Press, 226 pp. (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, 688 pp; and 107 NRC, 2011: Understanding Earth’s Deep Past: 96 Id. at 120. IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Lessons for Our Climate Future. The National 97 74 FR at 66524, December 15, 2009. Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III Academies Press, 212 pp. 98 CRR, 684 F.3d at 121. to the Fifth Assessment Report of the 108 NRC, 2012: Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of 99 Utility Air Reg. Group v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, 2438 (2014) (internal marks and citations omitted). [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. and Future. The National Academies Press, 201 pp. See also Virginia v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418 (2013), Pac. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, 109 NRC, 2013: Climate and Social Stress: Legal Found. v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418 (2013), and S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Implications for Security Analysis. The National CRR, 134 S. Ct. 468 (2013) (all denying cert.). Savolainen, S. Schlo¨mer, C. von Stechow, T. Academies Press, 280 pp. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37777 • NRC’s 2013 ‘‘Abrupt Impacts of forcing estimates as ‘‘high’’ for methane trends. As an example, the IPCC AR5 110 Climate Change’’ (Abrupt Impacts) and ‘‘very high’’ for CO2 and nitrous notes that the rate of warming over the • NRC’s 2014 ‘‘The Arctic in the oxide. 15 year period from 1998–2012 was less Anthropocene: Emerging Research The new assessments also have than that over the period 1951–2012. Questions’’ (Arctic) 111. greater confidence in attributing recent This short term variability does not alter warming to human causes. The IPCC 1. More Recent Evidence That Elevated the long-term climate trend that the AR5 stated that it is extremely likely Atmospheric Concentrations of the Six IPCC AR5 finds after its review of (>95 percent likelihood) that human Greenhouse Gases Are the Root Cause of independently verified observational influences have been the dominant Observed Climate Change records: ‘‘Each of the past three decades cause of warming since the mid-20th has been successively warmer at the The EPA has carefully reviewed the century, which is a stronger statement Earth’s surface than all the previous recent assessments regarding elevated than the AR4 conclusion that it is very decades in the instrumental record, and concentrations of the six well-mixed likely (>90 percent likelihood) that most the first decade of the 21st century has GHGs in the atmosphere. The EPA finds of the increase in temperature since the been the warmest.’’ 116 117 that the new assessments of the IPCC, mid-20th century was due to the The NRC Climate Stabilization USGCRP, and NRC support and increase in GHG concentrations. The Targets assessment concludes that CO strengthen the science underlying the AR4 conclusion was referred to in the 2 emissions are currently altering the 2009 Endangerment Finding that the six record for the 2009 Endangerment atmosphere’s composition and will well-mixed GHGs are the root cause of Finding. In addition, the IPCC AR5 continue to alter Earth’s climate for recently observed climate change. Key found that concentrations of CO2 and findings are described briefly here. several other of the major GHGs are thousands of years. The NRC According to the IPCC AR5, higher than they have been in at least Understanding Earth’s Deep Past observations of the Earth’s globally 800,000 years. This is an increase from assessment finds that ‘‘the magnitude averaged combined land and ocean what was reported in IPCC AR4, which and rate of the present greenhouse gas surface temperature over the period found higher concentrations than in at increase place the climate system in 1880 to 2012 show a warming of 0.85 least 650,000 years. what could be one of the most severe [0.65 to 1.06] degrees Celsius or 1.53 The USGCRP NCA3 states that there increases in radiative forcing of the [1.17 to 1.91] degrees Fahrenheit.112 The is very high confidence 114 that the global climate system in Earth IPCC AR5 concludes that the global global climate change of the past 50 history.’’ 118 This assessment finds that average net effect of the increase in years is primarily due to human if no emissions reductions are made CO2 atmospheric GHG concentrations, plus activities. Human activities are affecting concentrations by the end of the century other human activities (e.g., land use climate through increasing atmospheric are projected to increase to levels that change and aerosol emissions), on the levels of heat-trapping gases, through Earth has not experienced for more than global energy balance since 1750 has changing levels of various particles that 30 million years. been one of warming. This total net can have either a heating or cooling 2. More Recent Evidence That heating effect, referred to as ‘‘forcing,’’ influence on the atmosphere, and Greenhouse Gases Endanger Public is estimated to be 2.3 Watts per square through activities such as land use Health meter (W/m2), which has increased changes that alter the reflectivity of the from the previous 2007 IPCC Fourth Earth’s surface and cause climatic The EPA has carefully reviewed the Assessment Report (AR4) total net warming and cooling effects. The key conclusions in the recent estimate of 1.6 Watts per square meter USGCRP concludes that ‘‘considering assessments regarding human-induced (W/m2) that was referred to in the all known natural and human drivers of climate change risks and impacts on record for the 2009 Endangerment climate since 1750, a strong net public health. The EPA finds that the Finding. The reasons for this increase warming from long-lived greenhouse new assessments are consistent with or include continued increases in GHG gases produced by human activities strengthen the underlying science concentrations, as well as reductions in dominates the recent climate considered in the 2009 Endangerment the estimated negative forcing due to record.’’ 115 Finding regarding public health effects aerosols. The IPCC AR5 rates the level These recent and strong conclusions from changes in temperature, air of confidence 113 in their radiative attributing recent observed global quality, extreme weather, and climate- warming to human influence have been sensitive diseases and aeroallergens. 110 NRC, 2013: Abrupt Impacts of Climate made despite what some have termed a These key findings are described briefly Change: Anticipating Surprises. The National warming slowdown or ‘‘hiatus’’ over the here. Academies Press, 250 pp. past 15 years or so. The IPCC AR5 notes 111 NRC, 2014: The Arctic in the Anthropocene: Emerging Research Questions. The National that global mean surface temperature 116 IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Academies Press, 220 pp. exhibits substantial natural decadal and Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working 112 ‘‘IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: interannual variability, such that trends Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. based on short records are very sensitive Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth to the beginning and end dates and do [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. not in general reflect long-term climate and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Press, p. 161. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. 114 The NCA expresses levels of confidence using 117 Furthermore, we would note that according to Cambridge University Press, 29 pp. four qualifiers: low, medium, high, and very high. both NOAA and NASA, 2014 was the warmest year 113 The IPCC expresses levels of confidence using These levels are based on the strength and in the modern instrumental record for globally five qualifiers: very low, low, medium, high, and consistency of the observed evidence; the skill, averaged surface temperature, and that the ten very high. These levels are based on a qualitative range, and consistency of model projections; and warmest years, with the exception of 1998, have evaluation of the robustness of the evidence insights from peer-reviewed sources. now occurred since 2000. Available at http:// (considering the type, amount, quality, and 115 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20150116/ (last consistency of evidence such as data, mechanistic Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts accessed May 12, 2015). understanding, theory, models, and expert in the United States: The Third National Climate 118 NRC, 2011: Understanding Earth’s Deep Past: judgment) and the degree of agreement among the Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Lessons for Our Climate Future. The National findings. p. 741 Academies Press, p. 138. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37778 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules Regarding temperature effects, the with adverse health effects in many cited in the 2009 Endangerment conclusions of the assessment literature locations in North America, and that Finding, including a likely increase in cited in the 2009 Endangerment Finding ozone concentrations could increase the spread of several food and water- were uncertain with respect to the exact under future climate change scenarios if borne pathogens among susceptible balance of how heat- versus cold-related emissions of precursors were held populations, and the potential for range mortality will change in the future, but constant. For particulate matter, both expansion of some zoonotic disease noted that the available evidence the USGCRP NCA3 and IPCC AR5 carriers such as the Lyme disease- suggested that the increased risk from discuss increasing wildfire risk under carrying tick. The new assessment heat would exceed the decreased risk climate change, and explain that literature similarly focuses on increased from cold in a warming climate. The wildfire smoke exposure can lead to exposure risk for some diseases under most recent assessments now have various respiratory and cardiovascular climate change, finding that increasing greater confidence that increases in impacts. The NRC Indoor Environment temperatures may expand or shift the assessment identifies potential adverse heat-related mortality will be larger than ranges of some disease vectors like health risks associated with climate- the decreases in cold-related mortality. mosquitoes, ticks, and rodents. The The USGCRP NCA3 concludes that, change induced alterations in the indoor environment, including possible IPCC AR5 notes that climate change ‘‘While deaths and injuries related to may influence the ‘‘growth, survival, extreme cold events are projected to exposure to air pollutants like ozone via persistence, transmission, or virulence decline due to climate change, these changes in outdoor air quality. Other of pathogens’’ 123 that cause food and reductions are not expected to risks include potential for alterations in water-borne disease. The USGCRP compensate for the increase in heat- indoor allergens due to climate change- related deaths.’’ 119 The IPCC AR5 also related increases in outdoor pollen NCA3 notes that uncertainty remains notes a potential benefit of climate levels, potential chemical exposures due regarding future projections of increased change could include ‘‘modest to greater use of pesticides to address human burden of vector-borne disease, reductions in cold-related mortality and changes in geographic ranges of pest given complex interacting factors such morbidity in some areas due to fewer species, and dampness/mold associated as ‘‘local, small-scale differences in cold extremes (low confidence),’’ 120 but symptoms and illness due to potential weather, human modification of the that, ‘‘[o]verall, we conclude that the flooding and water damage in buildings landscape, the diversity of animal hosts, increase in heat-related mortality by from projected climate change-related and human behavior that affects vector- mid-century will outweigh gains due to increases in storm intensity and extreme human contact, among other fewer cold periods.’’ 121 precipitation events in some regions of factors.’’ 124 the United States. Regarding air quality effects, the Regarding aeroallergens, the Regarding extreme weather events assessment literature cited in the 2009 assessment literature cited in the 2009 Endangerment Finding concluded that (e.g., storms, heavy precipitation, and, in some regions of the United States, Endangerment Finding found potential climate change is expected to increase for climate change to affect the regional ozone pollution, with floods and droughts), the conclusions of the assessment literature cited in the prevalence and severity of allergy associated risks in respiratory illnesses symptoms, but that definitive data or and premature death, but that the 2009 Endangerment Finding found potential for increased deaths, injuries, conclusions were lacking on how directional effect of climate change on climate change might impact ambient particulate matter levels was infectious and waterborne diseases, and stress-related disorders. Similarly, the aeroallergens in the United States. The less certain. The USGCRP NCA3 USGCRP NCA3 discusses elevated most recent assessments now express similarly concludes that, ‘‘Climate waterborne disease outbreaks and the greater confidence that climate change change is projected to harm human potential for mold contamination and will influence production of pollen, health by increasing ground-level ozone degraded indoor air quality following which in turn could affect the incidence and/or particulate matter air pollution heavy precipitation. Other impacts of asthma and other allergic respiratory in some locations. . . . There is less include mortality associated with certainty in the responses of airborne illnesses such as allergic rhinitis, as flooding and impacts on mental health, particles to climate change than there is well as effects on conjunctivitis and such as anxiety and post-traumatic about the response of ozone.’’ 122 The dermatitis. Both the USGCRP NCA3 and stress disorder. The IPCC AR5 also the IPCC AR5 found that increasing IPCC AR5 finds that ozone and discusses death and injury in coastal particulate matter have been associated temperature has lengthened the zones and regions vulnerable to inland allergenic pollen season for ragweed, flooding. The USGCRP NCA3 and the 119 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and and that increased CO2 by itself can Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts IPCC AR5 both find that climate change elevate production of plant-based in the United States: The Third National Climate may increase exposure to and health allergens. The IPCC AR5 concludes that Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, risks associated with drought in North America, ‘‘warming will lead p. 224. conditions, which includes impacts 120 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, from wildfires, dust storms, extreme Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and 123 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II heat events, flash flooding, degraded Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and to the Fifth Assessment Report of the water quality, reduced water quantity, Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, and water-related diseases. The IPCC to the Fifth Assessment Report of the C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. SREX assessment projects further Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. increases in some extreme weather and Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. climate events during this century, and Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, p. 713. specifically notes that changes in Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. 121 Ibid. at p. 721. extreme weather events have White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, p. 726. 122 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and implications for disaster risk in the 124 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate health sector. in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, The effects of climate change on Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, p. 222. climate-sensitive diseases were also p. 225. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37779 to further changes in the seasonal timing affect local resilience and ability to increase health risks associated with of pollen release (high confidence).’’ 125 recover from impacts. extreme weather and floods. The assessment literature cited in the The USGCRP NCA3 also finds that 3. More Recent Evidence That 2009 Endangerment Finding concluded climate change, in addition to chronic Greenhouse Gases Endanger Public that certain populations, including stresses such as extreme poverty, is Welfare children, the elderly, and the poor, are affecting indigenous peoples’ health in most vulnerable to climate-related the United States through impacts such The EPA has carefully reviewed the health effects. The 2009 Endangerment as reduced access to traditional foods, recent scientific conclusions in the Finding also described climate change decreased water quality, and increasing assessments regarding human-induced impacts facing indigenous peoples in exposure to health and safety hazards. climate change impacts on public the United States, particularly Alaska The IPCC AR5 finds that climate welfare.128 The EPA finds that they are Natives. The new assessment literature change-induced warming in the Arctic largely consistent with or strengthen the strengthens these conclusions by and resultant changes in environment underlying science supporting the 2009 providing more detailed findings (e.g., permafrost thaw, effects on Endangerment Finding regarding public regarding these populations’ traditional food sources) have welfare effects on food production and vulnerabilities and the projected significant observed and projected agriculture; forestry; water resources; impacts they may experience. In impacts on the health and well-being of sea level rise and coastal areas; energy, addition, the most recent assessment Arctic residents, especially indigenous infrastructure, and settlements; reports provide new analysis about how peoples. Small, remote, predominantly- ecosystems and wildlife; and impacts on some populations defined jointly by indigenous communities are especially the U.S. population from climate change ethnic/racial characteristics and vulnerable given their ‘‘strong effects occurring outside of the United geographic location may be vulnerable dependence on the environment for States. These key findings are described to certain climate change health food, culture, and way of life; their briefly here. impacts. The following paragraphs political and economic marginalization; Regarding agriculture, the assessment summarize information from the most existing social, health, and poverty literature cited in the 2009 recent assessment reports on these disparities; as well as their frequent Endangerment Finding found potential vulnerable populations. close proximity to exposed locations for increased CO2 levels to benefit yields The USGCRP NCA3 finds that, along ocean, lake, or river of certain crops in the short-term, but ‘‘Climate change will, absent other shorelines.’’ 127 In addition, increasing with considerable uncertainty. The body changes, amplify some of the existing temperatures and loss of Arctic sea ice of evidence pointed towards increasing health threats the nation now faces. increases the risk of drowning for those risk of net adverse impacts on U.S. food Certain people and communities are engaged in traditional hunting and production and agriculture over time, especially vulnerable, including fishing. with the potential for significant children, the elderly, the sick, the poor, The USGCRP NCA3 concludes that disruptions and crop failure in the and some communities of color.’’ 126 future. The most recent assessments Limited resources make low-income children will suffer disproportionately from climate change given the unique now have greater confidence that populations more vulnerable to ongoing climate change will negatively affect climate-related threats, less able to physiological and developmental factors that occur during this lifestage. Impacts U.S. agriculture over this century. adapt to anticipated changes, and less Specifically, the USGCRP NCA3 able to recover from climate change on children are expected from heat waves, air pollution, infectious and concludes, ‘‘While some U.S. regions impacts. Low-income populations also and some types of agricultural face higher prevalence of chronic health waterborne illnesses, and mental health effects resulting from extreme weather production will be relatively resilient to conditions than higher income groups, climate change over the next 25 years or which increases their vulnerability to events. The IPCC AR5 indicates that children are among those especially so, others will increasingly suffer from the health effects of climate change. stresses due to extreme heat, drought, According to the USGCRP NCA3 and susceptible to most allergic diseases, as well as health effects associated with disease, and heavy downpours. From IPCC AR5, some populations defined mid-century on, climate change is jointly by ethnic/racial characteristics heat waves, storms, and floods. Both the USGCRP and IPCC conclude projected to have more negative impacts and geographic location are more on crops and livestock across the vulnerable to certain health effects of that climate change will increase health country.’’ 129 The IPCC AR5 concludes, climate change due to factors such as risks facing the elderly. Older people are ‘‘Overall yields of major crops in North existing health disparities (e.g., higher at much higher risk of mortality during America are projected to decline prevalence of chronic health extreme heat events. Pre-existing health conditions), increased exposure to conditions also make older adults 128 The CAA states that ‘‘[a]ll language referring health stresses, and social factors that susceptible to cardiac and respiratory to effects on welfare includes, but is not limited to, impacts of air pollution and to more effects on soils, water, crops, vegetation, man-made 125 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, severe consequences from infectious materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, and Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional and waterborne diseases. Limited climate, damage to and deterioration of property, Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the mobility among older adults can also and hazards to transportation, as well as effects on Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental economic values and on personal comfort and well- Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B. Field, being, whether caused by transformation, D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, T.E. 127 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, conversion, or combination with other air Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional pollutants.’’ CAA section 302(h). This language is Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the quite broad. Importantly, it is not an exclusive list MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental due to the use of the term ‘‘includes, but is not (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B. Field, limited to, . . . .’’ Effects other than those listed 1465–1466. D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, T.E. here may also be considered effects on welfare. 126 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. 129 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, p. 221. 1581. p. 16. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37780 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules modestly by mid-century and more drought, and other concerns such as larger than, and in some cases more steeply by 2100 among studies that do water pollution. Similarly, the new than twice as large as, the projected rise not consider adaptation (very high assessments further support projections estimated in the IPCC AR4 assessment, confidence).’’ 130 The IPCC AR5 notes of water resource impacts associated which was referred to in the 2009 that in the absence of extreme events, with increased floods and short-term Endangerment Finding.134 The NRC Sea climate change may benefit certain drought in most U.S. regions. The Level Rise assessment projects a global regions and crops, but that in North USGCRP NCA3 also finds that, sea level rise of 0.5 to 1.4 meters by America significant harvest losses have ‘‘[c]limate change is expected to affect 2100, which is sufficient to lead to a been observed due to recent extreme water demand, groundwater relative rise in sea level even around the weather events. In addition, the IPCC withdrawals, and aquifer recharge, northern coasts of Washington State, SREX assessment specifically notes that reducing groundwater availability in where the land is still rebounding from projected changes in extreme weather some areas.’’ 131 The IPCC AR5 finds the disappearance of the great ice events will increase disaster risk in the that in part of the western United States, sheets. The NRC National Security agriculture sector. ‘‘water supplies are projected to be Implications assessment suggests that Regarding forestry, the assessment further stressed by climate change, ‘‘the Department of the Navy should literature cited in the 2009 resulting in less water availability and expect roughly 0.4 to 2 meters global Endangerment Finding found that near increased drought conditions.’’ 132 The average sea-level rise by 2100.’’ 135 The term benefits to forest growth and IPCC AR5 also projects that climate NRC Climate Stabilization Targets productivity in certain parts of the change will degrade surface water assessment states that an increase of 3°C country from elevated CO2 quality, including the Great Lakes, and will lead to a sea level rise of 0.5 to 1 concentrations and temperature will negatively affect drinking water meter by 2100. While these NRC and increases to date are offset by longer treatment/distribution and sewage IPCC assessments continue to recognize term risks from wildfires and the spread collection systems. and characterize the uncertainty of destructive pests and disease that The assessment literature cited in the inherent in accounting for ice sheet present serious adverse risks for forest 2009 Endangerment Finding found that processes, these revised estimates are productivity. The most recent the most serious potential adverse consistent with the assessments assessments provide further support for effects to coastal areas are the increased underlying the 2009 Endangerment this conclusion. Both the USGCRP risk of storm surge and flooding in Finding. NCA3 and the IPCC AR5 conclude that coastal areas from sea level rise and Regarding climate impacts on energy, climate change is increasing risks to more intense storms. Coastal areas also infrastructure, and settlements, the 2009 forest health from fire, tree disease and face other adverse impacts from sea Endangerment Finding cited the insect infestations, and drought. The level rise such as land loss due to assessment literature’s findings that IPCC AR5 also notes risks to forested inundation, erosion, wetland temperature increases will change ecosystems associated with changes in submergence, and habitat loss. The most heating and cooling demand; that temperature, precipitation amount, and recent assessments provide further declining water quantity may adversely CO2 concentrations, which can affect evidence in line with the science impact the availability of cooling water species and ecological communities, supporting the 2009 Endangerment and hydropower in the energy sector; leading to ecosystem disruption, Finding. The USGCRP NCA3 finds that, and that changes in extreme weather reorganization, movement or loss. The ‘‘Sea level rise, combined with coastal events will threaten energy, NRC Arctic assessment states that storms, has increased the risk of erosion, transportation, water, and other key climate change is likely to have a large storm surge damage, and flooding for societal infrastructure, particularly on negative impact on forested ecosystems coastal communities, especially along the coast. The most recent assessments in the high northern latitudes due to the the Gulf Coast, the Atlantic seaboard, provide further evidence in line with 133 effects of permafrost thaw and greater and in Alaska.’’ the science supporting the 2009 wildfire frequency, extent, and severity. The IPCC AR5, the USGCRP NCA3, Endangerment Finding. For example, The NRC Climate Stabilization Targets and three of the new NRC assessments the USGCRP NCA3 finds that, ‘‘Coastal assessment found that for an increase in provide estimates of projected global sea infrastructure, including roads, rail ° level rise. These estimates, while not global average temperature of 1 to 2 C lines, energy infrastructure, airports, always directly comparable as they above pre-industrial levels, the area port facilities, and military bases, are assume different emissions scenarios burnt by wildfires in western North increasingly at risk from sea level rise and baselines, are at least 40 percent America will likely more than double. and damaging storm surges.’’ 136 The Regarding water resources, the NRC Arctic assessment identifies threats assessment literature cited in the 2009 131 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and to human infrastructure in the Arctic Endangerment Finding concluded that Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate from increased flooding, erosion, and increasing temperatures and increased Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, shoreline ice pile-up, or ivu, associated variability in precipitation associated p. 70. with climate change will impact water 132 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, 134 The 2007 IPCC AR4 assessment cited in 2009 quality and quantity through changes in Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Endangerment Finding estimated a projected sea snowpack, increased risk of floods, Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental level rise of between 0.18 and 0.59 meters by the Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B. Field, end of the century, relative to 1990. It should be 130 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, T.E. noted that in 2007, the IPCC stated that including Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. poorly understood ice sheet processes could lead to Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. an increase in the projections. Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White 135 NRC, 2011: National Security Implications of Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B. Field, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. Climate Change for U.S. Naval Forces. The National D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, T.E. 1456–1457. Academies Press, p. 28. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. 133 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and 136 Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White in the United States: The Third National Climate in the United States: The Third National Climate (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, 1462. p. 9. p. 9. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37781 with summer sea ice loss and the inundation) are so severe that some oceanic Atlantic Meridional increasing frequency and severity of communities are already relocating from Overturning Circulation (AMOC) and storms. historical homelands to which their sudden releases of high-latitude Regarding ecosystems and wildlife, traditions and cultural identities are methane from hydrates and permafrost. the assessment literature cited in the tied.’’ 139 The IPCC AR5 notes, ‘‘Climate- But, the same report found that the 2009 Endangerment Finding found that related hazards exacerbate other potential for abrupt changes in climate change will predominantly stressors, often with negative outcomes ecosystems, weather and climate adversely impact both terrestrial and for livelihoods, especially for people extremes, and groundwater supplies marine biodiversity and the ability of living in poverty (high confidence). critical for agriculture now seem more these ecosystems to provide goods and Climate-related hazards affect poor likely, severe, and imminent. The services. The NRC Arctic assessment people’s lives directly through impacts assessment found that some abrupt states that major marine and terrestrial on livelihoods, reductions in crop changes were already underway (e.g., biomes will likely shift pole ward, with yields, or destruction of homes and Arctic sea ice retreat and increases in significant implications for changing indirectly through, for example, extinction risk due to the speed of species composition, food web increased food prices and food climate change), and cautioned that structures, and ecosystem function. The insecurity.’’ 140 even abrupt changes such as the AMOC NRC Climate Stabilization Targets In the 2009 Endangerment Finding, disruption that are not expected in this assessment found that coral bleaching the Administrator considered impacts century can have severe impacts if/ will increase due both to warming and on the U.S. population from climate when they happen. ocean acidification. The NRC change effects occurring outside of the 4. Consideration of Other Climate Understanding Earth’s Deep Past United States, such as national security Forcers assessment notes four of the five major concerns that may arise as a result of coral reef crises of the past 500 million climate change impacts in other regions Both in the 2009 Endangerment years were caused by acidification and of the world. The most recent Finding and in this action, the warming that followed GHG increases of assessments provide further evidence in Administrator recognizes that there are similar magnitude to the emissions line with the science supporting the other substances in addition to the six increases expected over the next 2009 Endangerment Finding. The NRC well-mixed GHGs that are emitted from hundred years. Similarly, the NRC Climate and Social Stress assessment human activities and affect Earth’s Ocean Acidification assessment finds found that it would be ‘‘prudent for climate (referred to as climate forcers). that ‘‘[t]he chemistry of the ocean is security analysts to expect climate These can be grouped into two changing at an unprecedented rate and surprises in the coming decade . . . and categories: (1) other substances with similar physical properties to the six magnitude due to anthropogenic CO2 for them to become progressively more emissions; the rate of change exceeds serious and more frequent well-mixed GHGs—these include the any known to have occurred for at least thereafter.’’ 141 The NRC National ozone-depleting substances of the past hundreds of thousands of Security Implications assessment chlorofluorocarbons, years.’’ 137 The assessment notes that the recommends preparing for increased hydrochlorofluorocarbons, and halons, full range of consequences is still needs for humanitarian aid; responding as well as nitrogen trifluoride and unknown, but the risks ‘‘threaten coral to the effects of climate change in similar recently identified substances; reefs, fisheries, protected species, and geopolitical hotspots, including possible and (2) short-lived substances— other natural resources of value to mass migrations; and addressing tropospheric ozone and its precursor society.’’ 138 The IPCC AR5 also projects changing security needs in the Arctic as gases, water vapor, and aerosol particles biodiversity losses in marine sea ice retreats. and precursors. For some short-lived ecosystems, especially in the Arctic and In addition, the NRC Abrupt Impacts substances—namely, water vapor; NOX; tropics. report examines the potential for tipping and aerosol particles including black In general, climate change impacts points, thresholds beyond which major carbon—their physical properties result related to public welfare are expected to and rapid changes occur in the Earth’s in these substances having different, be unevenly distributed across different climate system, as well as in natural and and often larger, climate effects when regions of the United States and have a human systems that are impacted by the emitted at high altitudes. However, the greater impact on certain populations, changing climate. The Abrupt Impacts very properties that lead to differential such as indigenous peoples and the report did find less cause for concern climate effects depending on the poor. The USGCRP NCA3 finds climate than some previous assessments altitude of emission—properties that are change impacts such as the rapid pace regarding some abrupt events within the different from those of the six well- of temperature rise, coastal erosion and next century such as disruption of the mixed, long-lived GHGs—lead to more inundation related to sea level rise and uncertainty in the scientific 139 understanding of these short-lived storms, ice and snow melt, and Melillo, Jerry M., Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and Gary W. Yohe, Eds., 2014: Climate Change Impacts substances’ total effect on Earth’s permafrost thaw are affecting in the United States: The Third National Climate climate. More detail is provided below. indigenous people in the United States. Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, As described in section III.B of the Particularly in Alaska, critical p. 17. 140 2009 Endangerment Finding and in infrastructure and traditional IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, section IV.A.1 of this preamble, the livelihoods are threatened by climate Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II primary reasons for defining the air change and, ‘‘[i]n parts of Alaska, to the Fifth Assessment Report of the pollution as the aggregate group of the Louisiana, the Pacific Islands, and other Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, six well-mixed GHGs include their coastal locations, climate change C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. common physical properties relevant to impacts (through erosion and Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. climate change (i.e., long-lived, well- Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. mixed, directly emitted), the fact that 137 NRC, 2010: Ocean Acidification: A National White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, p. 796. Strategy to Meet the Challenges of a Changing 141 NRC, 2013: Climate and Social Stress: these gases are considered the primary Ocean. The National Academies Press, p. 5. Implications for Security Analysis. The National drivers of climate change, and the fact 138 Ibid. Academies Press, p. 18. that these gases remain the best VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37782 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules understood drivers of anthropogenic 2010),144 and the NRC’s Atmospheric a. Changes in Clouds From High climate change. The common physical Effects of Aviation: A Review of NASA’s Altitude Emissions of Water Vapor and properties of the six well-mixed GHGs Subsonic Assessment Project (NRC Particles not only support grouping them together 1999).145 In addition to high altitude Aviation-induced cloudiness as a class, but also contribute to their water vapor and NO , the literature X (sometimes called AIC) refers to all higher degree of scientific indicates that aerosol particles, changes in cloudiness associated with understanding related to climate including black carbon, emitted at high aviation operations, which are primarily change, relative to short-lived altitudes have more interactions with due to the effects of high altitude substances that are not well-mixed, or clouds and therefore have different emissions of water vapor and particles substances that are formed indirectly effects on the global energy balance than (primarily sulfates and black carbon). rather than being directly emitted. After do particles emitted at the surface. Changes in cloudiness affect the climate considering additional information in The state of the science as represented by both reflecting solar radiation the new assessments regarding the in the assessment literature highlights (cooling) and trapping outgoing climate-relevant substances outside the significant scientific uncertainties longwave radiation (warming). Unlike basket of the six well-mixed GHGs, it is regarding the total net forcing effect of the warming effects associated with the the Administrator’s view that the water vapor, NOX, and aerosol particles six long-lived, well-mixed GHGs, the reasons originally stated for not warming effects associated with changes including these substances in the scope when emitted at high altitudes. Given these uncertainties, the Agency is not in cloud cover are more regional and of the GHG air pollution still apply at temporal in nature. The three key this time. For example, nitrogen including them in the proposed definition of air pollution for purposes components of aviation-induced triflouride and some other recently cloudiness are persistent contrails, discovered substances are not as well of the endangerment finding under section 231 of the CAA. The short-lived contrail-induced cirrus, and induced studied or understood as the six well- cirrus. mixed GHGs. Similarly, for tropospheric nature of these substances means that, Aircraft engine emissions of water ozone—a short-lived gas in the unlike the long-lived GHGs, the climatic vapor at high altitudes during flight can atmosphere that is not directly emitted impact of the substance is dependent on lead to the formation of condensation (it forms from emissions of various a number of factors such as the location trails, or contrails, under certain precursor gases)—the understanding and time of its emission. The magnitude, and often the direction conditions such as ice-supersaturated and quantification of the link between air masses with specific humidity levels precursor emissions and climate change (positive/warming or negative/cooling), of the globally averaged climate impact and temperature. The NRC estimates is not as strong as for the six well-mixed that persistent contrails increased will differ depending on the location of GHGs. cloudiness above the United States by the emission due to the local Regarding the short-lived substances two percent between 1950 and 1988, with different climate effects when atmospheric conditions (e.g., due to with similar results reported over emitted at high altitudes, the Aircraft differing concentrations of other Europe.146 As stated above, clouds can Petition (see section II of this preamble) compounds with which the emissions have both warming and cooling effects, mentions the effects of water vapor and can react, background humidity levels, and persistent contrails were once or the presence or absence of clouds). In NOX on clouds and atmospheric considered to have significant net chemistry. The major peer-reviewed addition, for emissions at any given warming effects. However, more recent scientific assessments of the IPCC and location, the spatial and temporal estimates suggest a smaller overall NRC provide the current state of pattern of the climate forcing will be climate forcing effect of persistent scientific understanding of these effects; heterogeneous, again often differing in contrails. The IPCC AR5 best estimate the USGCRP assessments have not dealt direction (for example, in the case of for the global mean radiative forcing specifically with emissions at high NOX emissions, the near term effect in from contrails is 0.01 W/m2 (medium altitude. The EPA considered the the hemisphere in which the emissions confidence and with an uncertainty following assessment reports to obtain occur is usually warming due to range of 0.005 to 0.03 W/m2).147 To put the best estimates of these substances’ increased ozone concentrations, but the this number into context, some net impact on the climate system, which longer term effects, and effects in the examples of other IPCC AR5 best is generally discussed in terms of other hemisphere, are often cooling due estimates for global mean radiative 2 radiative forcing: the IPCC AR5, the to increased destruction of methane). As forcing include: 1.68 W/m for CO2 IPCC 2007 Fourth Assessment Report the climatic effects of these substances (very high confidence and with an 2 (AR4),142 the IPCC Special Report: when emitted at high altitudes were not uncertainty range of 1.33 to 2.03 W/m ), 2 Aviation and the Global Atmosphere addressed at length in the 2009 0.97 W/m for methane (high (IPCC 1999),143 the NRC’s Advancing Endangerment Finding, the following confidence and with an uncertainty range of 0.74 to 1.20 W/m2), and 0.17 the Science of Climate Change (NRC subsections briefly summarize the 2 findings of the major scientific W/m for nitrous oxide (very high confidence and with an uncertainty 142 IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: The assessments regarding these substances’ Physical Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working climatic effects at altitude and the Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the 146 NRC, 1999: Atmospheric Effects of Aviation: A Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change various sources of uncertainty Review of NASA’s Subsonic Assessment Project. [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. surrounding these estimates. The National Academies Press, 54 pp. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller 147 IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, 996 pp. Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working 143 IPCC, 1999: Aviation and the Global Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the 144 NRC, 2010: Advancing the Science of Climate Atmosphere, Special Report to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Change. The National Academies Press, 528 pp. [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, [Penner, J.E., D.H. Lister, D.J. Griggs, D.J. Dokken, 145 NRC, 1999: Atmospheric Effects of Aviation: A S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex M. McFarland (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, Review of NASA’s Subsonic Assessment Project. and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University 373 pp. The National Academies Press, 54 pp. Press, 1535 pp. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37783 range of .013 to 0.21 W/m2).148 In and particles. Going back to the 1999 surface rather than warming) was not addition, the NRC (2010) assessment IPCC assessment, the science is included in its calculations, its suggested that contrails may affect characterized as ‘‘very uncertain’’ with estimates of radiative forcing were likely regional diurnal temperature a range for the best estimate between 0 to be too high. differences, but this has been called into to 0.040 W/m2.151 c. Changes in Atmospheric Chemistry question by the recent findings From High Altitude Nitrogen Oxides presented in the IPCC AR5, which b. Direct Radiative Forcing Effects of Emissions suggests that aviation contrails do not High Altitude Particle Emissions have an effect on mean or diurnal range The 2009 Endangerment Finding Emissions of NOX do not themselves of surface temperatures (medium noted that much of the uncertainty have warming or cooling effects, but confidence). range surrounding the estimate of total affect the climate through catalyzing Persistent contrails also sometimes net forcing due to all human activities changes in the chemical equilibrium of lose their linear form and develop into was due to uncertainties about the the atmosphere. High altitude emissions cirrus clouds, an effect referred to as cooling and warming effects of of NOX increase the concentration of contrail-induced cirrus. Studies to date aerosols 152 (though from all sources, not ozone, which has a warming effect in have been unable to isolate this climate just aircraft). The Finding noted that the the short term. Elevated NOx forcing effect, but the IPCC AR5 magnitude of aerosol effects can vary concentrations also lead to an increased provides a combined contrail and immensely with location and season of rate of destruction of methane, which contrail-induced cirrus best estimate of emissions, and also discussed black has a cooling effect in the long-term. 0.05 W/m2 (low confidence and with an carbon as a specific type of aerosol The reduced methane concentrations uncertainty range of 0.02 and 0.15 W/ particle, noting that estimates of its total eventually contribute to decreases in m2).149 climate forcing effect have a large ozone, which also decreases the long- Particles emitted or formed in the uncertainty range.153 Here, we discuss term net warming effect. Thus, the net atmosphere as a result of aircraft the direct radiative forcing effects of radiative impact of NOX emissions emissions may also act as ice nuclei and high altitude emissions of the two depends on the balance between the modify naturally forming cirrus clouds, primary aviation-induced particles, reductions in methane versus the an effect referred to as ‘‘induced cirrus.’’ sulfates and black carbon. production of ozone, which in turn The two primary aviation-induced Aircraft emit precursor gases that depends on the time scale under particles are sulfates and black carbon, convert to sulfate particles in the consideration. Quantifying these and their effects on cirrus cloud atmosphere, such as sulfur dioxide. impacts is an area of active study with modification is an area of active Sulfate particles have direct effects on large uncertainties. The quantification research. There are significant the climate by scattering solar radiation, of the net global effect of NOX is challenges in estimating the climatic which results in cooling. The more difficult because the atmospheric impacts of induced cirrus; for example, recent assessments have not quantified chemistry effects are heavily dependent the 2007 IPCC AR4 characterizes our this effect from aviation. Going back to on highly localized atmospheric knowledge of the natural freezing modes the 1999 IPCC assessment, the direct properties and mixing ratios. Because in cirrus conditions as ‘‘poor,’’ and effect of sulfate aerosols from aviation the background atmospheric notes that cirrus cloud processes are not for the year 1992 is estimated at ¥0.003 concentration of NOX is important for well represented in global models.150 W/m2 with an uncertainty range quantifying the impact of aviation NOX Neither IPCC AR4 nor AR5 provided between ¥0.001 and ¥0.009 W/m2.154 emissions on ozone and methane global or regional estimates related to Black carbon emissions from aviation, concentrations, the location of aircraft this forcing. which are produced by the incomplete emissions would be an important Given differences in scientific combustion of jet fuel, primarily absorb additional factor. In addition, NOX has understanding of the three components solar radiation and heat the surrounding different residence times in the of aviation-induced cloudiness, the air, resulting in a warming effect. The atmosphere depending on the altitude at more recent assessments have not more recent assessments have not which it is emitted. The residence time provided estimates of the net climate quantified this effect from aviation. The of NOX in the upper troposphere, or forcing effect of changes in clouds from 1999 IPCC assessment estimates the roughly the cruise altitude for jet high altitude emissions of water vapor global mean radiative forcing of black aircraft, is on the order of several days. carbon emissions to be 0.003 W/m2 with Going back to the IPCC 1999 148 IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: uncertainty spanning 0.001 to 0.009 W/ assessment, the globally averaged Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. 2 155 radiative forcing estimates for aircraft Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth m . The IPCC 1999 assessment suggests that because the contribution of emissions of NOX in 1992 were 0.023 Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel 2 on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. black carbon in the stratosphere (which W/m for O3-induced changes Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. actually contribute to cooling of the (uncertainty range of 0.011 to 0.046 W/ Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. m2), and ¥0.014 W/m2 for methane- Cambridge University Press, 29 pp. 151 induced changes (uncertainty range of 149 IPCC, 1999: Aviation and the Global IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The ¥ ¥ 2 156 Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Atmosphere, Special Report to the 0.005 to 0.042 W/m ). Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change The IPCC AR5 presents the impact of [Penner, J.E., D.H. Lister, D.J. Griggs, D.J. Dokken, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change aviation NOX emissions using a [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, M. McFarland (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, different metric, global warming S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex 373 pp. 152 potential (GWP), which is a measure of and P.M. Midgley (eds.)].Cambridge University 74 FR at 66517, December 15, 2009. Press, 1535 pp. 153 74 FR at 66520, December 15, 2009. the warming impact of a pulse of 150 IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: The 154 IPCC, 1999: Aviation and the Global Physical Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Atmosphere, Special Report to the 156 IPCC, 1999: Aviation and the Global Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Atmosphere, Special Report to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Penner, J.E., D.H. Lister, D.J. Griggs, D.J. Dokken, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. M. McFarland (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, [Penner, J.E., D.H. Lister, D.J. Griggs, D.J. Dokken, Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller 373 pp. M. McFarland (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, 996 pp. 155 Ibid. 373 pp. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37784 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules emissions of a given substance over 100 C. Summary of the Administrator’s purposes of the endangerment finding years relative to the same mass of CO2. Proposed Endangerment Finding Under under CAA section 231 to be the The AR5 presents a range from ¥21 to CAA Section 231 aggregate of six well-mixed GHGs in the 157 +75 for GWP of aviation NOX. The In sum, the Administrator proposes to atmosphere. The second step of the two- uncertainty in sign indicates uncertainty find, for purposes of CAA section part endangerment test for this proposed whether the net effect is one of warming 231(a)(2)(A), that elevated atmospheric finding is for the Administrator to or cooling. This report further suggests concentrations of the six well-mixed determine whether the emission of any that at cruise altitude there is strong GHGs constitute air pollution that air pollutant from certain classes of regional sensitivity of ozone and endangers both the public health and aircraft engines causes or contributes to methane to NOX, particularly notable at the public welfare of current and future this air pollution. This is referred to as low latitudes. generations. In this proposed action the cause or contribute finding, and is The Administrator notes that NOX under CAA section 231(a)(2)(A), the the second proposed finding by the emissions are already regulated under EPA relies primarily on the extensive Administrator in this action. the EPA’s rules implementing CAA scientific and technical evidence in the Section V.A of this proposal describes section 231, at 40 CFR part 87. The record supporting the 2009 the Administrator’s reasoning for using prerequisite endangerment and cause or Endangerment Finding, including the the same definition and scope of the contribute findings that formed the basis major, peer-reviewed scientific GHG air pollutant that was used in the for these standards, however, did not assessments used to address the 2009 Endangerment Finding. Section rely upon any conclusions regarding the question of whether GHGs in the V.0 puts forth the Administrator’s climate forcing impacts of NOX, but atmosphere endanger public health and proposed finding that emissions of well- rather the role of NOX emissions as a welfare, and on the analytical mixed GHGs from classes of aircraft precursor to ozone formation in areas framework and conclusions upon which engines used in covered aircraft that did not meet the National Ambient the EPA relied in making that finding. contribute to the air pollution which Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for This proposed finding under section endangers public health and welfare. ozone.158 The continuing significant 231 accounts for the EPA’s careful A. The Air Pollutant uncertainties regarding NOX as a climate consideration not only of the scientific forcer do not undermine the Agency’s and technical record for the 2009 1. Proposed Definition of Air Pollutant prior conclusion under CAA section 231 Endangerment Finding, but also of new, Under section 231, the Administrator that emissions of NOX from aircraft major scientific assessments issued is to determine whether emissions of engines cause or contribute to air since closing the administrative record any air pollutant from any class or pollution which may reasonably be for the 2009 Endangerment Finding. No classes of aircraft engines cause or anticipated to endanger public health or recent information or analyses contribute to air pollution which may welfare due to their contribution to published since late 2009 suggest that it reasonably be anticipated to endanger ozone concentrations that exceed the would be reasonable for the EPA to now public health or welfare. As with the NAAQS. reach a different or contrary conclusion 2009 Endangerment Finding that the for purposes of CAA section EPA conducted for purposes of CAA d. Summary 231(a)(2)(A) than the Agency reached section 202(a), when making a cause or Overall, the state of the science as for purposes of section 202(a). In contribute finding under section represented in the assessment literature proposing this finding for purposes of 231(a)(2), the Administrator must first highlights significant scientific section 231, we are not reopening or define the air pollutant being evaluated. uncertainties regarding the total net revisiting our 2009 Endangerment The Administrator has reasonably and forcing effect of water vapor, NOX, and Finding. To the contrary, in light of the logically considered the relationship aerosol particles, when emitted at high recent judicial decisions upholding between the GHG air pollution and air altitudes. The dependence of the effects those findings, the EPA believes the pollutant: while the air pollution is the on where the substance is emitted, and 2009 Endangerment Finding is firmly concentration (e.g., stock) of the well- the complex temporal and spatial established and well settled.159 mixed GHGs in the atmosphere, the air patterns that result, mean that the Moreover, there is no need for the EPA pollutant is the same combined current level of understanding regarding to reopen or revisit that finding for grouping of the well-mixed GHGs, the these short-lived substances is much purposes of making an additional emissions of which are analyzed for lower than for the six long-lived, well- finding under section 231 of the CAA. contribution (e.g., the flow into the mixed GHGs. Given the aforementioned Therefore, public comments addressing stock). See 74 FR at 66537, (December scientific uncertainties at present, the this finding for purposes of section 15, 2009), (similar discussion with Agency is not including these 231(a)(2)(A) should be limited to the respect to the finding for section 202). constituents in the proposed definition section 231 context; the EPA will not Thus, for purposes of section 231, the of air pollution for purposes of the consider or respond to comments on Administrator is proposing to use the endangerment finding under section 231 this proposal that seek a reevaluation of same definition of the air pollutant that of the CAA. our 2009 Endangerment Finding for was used in the 2009 Endangerment purposes of section 202(a). Finding, namely, the aggregate group of 157 IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The V. The Proposed Cause or Contribute the same six GHGs: CO2, methane, Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Finding for Greenhouse Gases Under nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the perfluorocarbons, and sulfur Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change CAA Section 231 hexafluoride. See 74 Federal Register at [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, As noted above, the Administrator has S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex 66536–66537, (December 15, 2009), and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University proposed to define the air pollution for (discussing the definition of the GHG air Press, 1535 pp. pollutant with respect to the finding for 158 U.S. EPA, ‘‘Control of Air Pollution from 159 CRR, 684 F.3d at 117 (D.C. Cir. 2012), reh’g en Aircraft and Aircraft Engines, Emission Standards banc denied, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25997, 26313, section 202). That is, as for the 2009 and Test Procedures for Aircraft.’’ Final Rule, 38 FR 26315 (D.C. Cir. 2012); see also Utility Air Reg. Endangerment Finding, the 19088, July 17, 1973. Group v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. at 2438 (2014). Administrator is proposing to define a VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37785 single air pollutant made up of these six common, relevant attributes is true B. Proposed Cause or Contribute GHGs. regardless of the type of sources being Finding To reiterate what the Agency has evaluated for contribution. By proposing 1. The Administrator’s Approach in previously stated on this subject, this to use the definition of the air pollutant Making This Proposed Finding collective approach for the contribution as comprised of the six GHGs with test is consistent with the treatment of common attributes, the Administrator is As it did for the 2009 Endangerment GHGs by those studying climate change taking account of these shared attributes Finding, and consistent with prior science and policy, where it is common and how they are relevant to the air practice and current science, the EPA practice to evaluate GHGs on a pollution that endangers public health uses annual emissions as a reasonable 160 collective, CO2-equivalent basis. This and welfare. proxy for contributions to the air collective approach to defining the air pollution, i.e., elevated atmospheric pollutant is not unique; grouping of 2. How the Definition of Air Pollutant concentrations of GHGs. Cumulative many substances with common in the Endangerment Determination anthropogenic emissions are primarily attributes as a single pollutant is Affects Section 231 Standards responsible for the observed change in common practice under the CAA, for Under section 231(a), the concentrations in the atmosphere (i.e., example with particulate matter and Administrator is required to set the fraction of a country’s or an volatile organic compounds (VOC). As ‘‘emission standards applicable to the economic sector’s cumulative emissions noted in section IV, these substances emission of any air pollutant’’ from compared to the world’s GHG emissions share common attributes that support classes of aircraft engines that the over a long time period will be roughly their grouping as the air pollution for Administrator determines causes or equal to the fraction of the change in purposes of the endangerment finding. contributes to air pollution that concentrations attributable to that These same common attributes also endangers public health or welfare. If country or economic sector); likewise, support the Administrator grouping the the Administrator makes a final annual emissions are a reasonable proxy six GHGs for purposes of defining the determination under section 231 that for annual incremental changes in air pollutant for the proposed cause or the emissions of the GHG air pollutant atmospheric concentrations. contribute finding under CAA section from certain classes of aircraft engines There are a number of possible ways 231. contribute to the air pollution that may of assessing whether air pollutants The Administrator recognizes that in reasonably be anticipated to endanger cause or contribute to the air pollution this case, the aircraft engines covered by public health and welfare, then she is which may reasonably be anticipated to this notice emit two of the six gases, but called on to set standards applicable to endanger public health and welfare, and not the other four gases. Nonetheless, it the emissions of this air pollutant. The no single approach is required or has is entirely appropriate, and in keeping term ‘‘standards applicable to the been used exclusively in previous determinations under the CAA. Because with the 2009 Endangerment Finding emissions of any air pollutant’’ is not the air pollution against which the and past EPA practice, for the defined, and the Administrator has the contribution is being evaluated is the six Administrator to define the air pollutant discretion to interpret it in a reasonable well-mixed GHGs, the logical starting in a manner that recognizes the shared manner to effectuate the purposes of point for any contribution analysis is a relevant properties of all these six gases, section 231 to set standards that either comparison of the emissions of the air even though they are not all emitted control the emissions of the group of six 161 pollutant from the section 231 category from the classes of sources before her. well-mixed gases as a whole and/or to the total U.S. and total global For example, a source may emit only 20 control emissions of individual gases, as emissions of the six GHGs. The of the possible 200-plus chemicals that constituents of the class. For example, it Administrator recognizes that there are meet the definition of VOC in the EPA’s might be appropriate to set a standard regulations, but that source is evaluated other valid comparisons that can be that measures and controls the aggregate based on its emissions of VOC and not considered in evaluating whether emissions of the group of GHGs, on its emissions of the 20 chemicals by emissions of the air pollutant cause or weighted by CO equivalent. Depending name. The fact that these six substances 2 contribute to the combined on the circumstances, however, it may within the definition of GHGs share concentration of the six GHGs. To be appropriate to set standards for inform the Administrator’s assessment, certain individual gases, or some 160 As detailed in the 2009 Endangerment Finding section V.B.2 presents the following proposal (74 FR 18904 (April 24, 2009) and combination of group and individual types of simple and straightforward continuing today, the UNFCCC, the U.S. and other standards. These and other similar comparisons of U.S. aircraft GHG Parties report their annual emissions of the six approaches could appropriately be GHGs in CO2-equivalent units. This facilitates emissions: comparisons of the multiple GHGs from different considered in setting a standard or • As a share of current total U.S. GHG sources and from different countries, and provides standards applicable to the emissions of emissions; a measure of the collective warming potential of the group of GHGs that are defined as • As a share of current U.S. multiple GHGs. Emissions of different GHGs are the air pollutant. The Administrator compared using GWPs, which as described in transportation GHG emissions; section IV.B of this preamble are measures of the would consider a variety of factors in warming impact of a pulse of emissions of a given determining what approach to take in analysis which indicated that there was a wide substance over 100 years relative to the same mass setting the standard or standards; for range of technologies available for manufacturers to of CO2. Therefore, GWP-weighted emissions are example, she would consider the use when upgrading vehicles to reduce CO2 emissions and improve fuel economy. The final measured in teragrams of CO2 equivalent (Tg characteristics of the aircraft emissions, CO2eq). The EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting standards were based on CO2 emissions-footprint Program (http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/ such as rate and variability, the kind curves, where each vehicle has a different CO2 index.html, (last accessed May 12, 2015)) also and availability of control technology, emissions compliance target depending on its reports GHG emissions on a CO2-equivalent basis, and other matters relevant to setting footprint value (related to the size of the vehicle). recognizing the common and collective treatment of 162 The EPA also set standards to cap tailpipe nitrous the six GHGs. standards under section 231. oxide, methane emissions, and provided 161 In the 2009 Endangerment Finding, the compliance credits to manufacturers who improved Administrator found that four of the six gases that 162 In setting GHG emissions standards for model air conditioning systems, such as through reduced were included in the definition of the air pollutant years 2012–2016 light-duty vehicles, the EPA set refrigerant leakage (hydrofluorocarbons) and were emitted by section 202 sources. 74 FR 66496, fleet-wide average CO2 equivalent standards for cars indirect CO2 emissions related to the increased load 66537 (December 15, 2009). and trucks based on a technology assessment on the engine. 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37786 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules • As a share of current total global were 43,816 Tg of CO2eq, representing GHG emissions have increased by GHG emissions; and an increase in global GHG emissions of almost 6 percent between 1990 and • As a share of the current global about 42 percent since 1990 and 30 2013, while U.S. transportation GHG transportation GHG emissions. percent since 2000 (excluding land use, emissions from all categories have All annual GHG emissions data are land use change and forestry). These grown 15 percent since 1990. The U.S. reported on a CO2-equivalent (CO2eq) estimates are generally consistent with transportation sector was the second basis, which as described above is a those of IPCC. In 2011, WRI/CAIT data largest GHG emitting sector (behind commonly accepted metric for indicate that total U.S. GHG emissions electricity generation), contributing comparing different GHGs. This were responsible for about 16 percent of 1,911 Tg CO2eq or about 30 percent of approach is consistent with how EPA global emissions, which is also total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013. This determined contribution for GHGs generally in line with the percentages sectoral total and the total U.S. GHG under section 202 of the CAA in 2009. using IPCC’s 2010 estimate described emissions include emissions from above. According to WRI/CAIT, current combustion of U.S. international bunker 2. Overview of Greenhouse Gas U.S. GHG emissions rank only behind fuels, which are fuels used for transport Emissions China’s, which was responsible for 24 activities, from aviation (both Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 percent of total global GHG emissions. commercial and military) and marine and other GHGs are now at essentially The Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas sources.168 Consistent with IPCC unprecedented levels compared to the Emissions and Sinks Report 167 guidelines for common and consistent distant and recent past.163 This is the (hereinafter ‘‘U.S. Inventory’’), in which accounting and reporting of GHGs under unambiguous result of human emissions 2013 is the most recent year for which the UNFCCC, the ‘‘U.S. international of these gases. Global emissions of well- data are available, indicates that total aviation bunker fuels’’ category includes mixed GHGs have been increasing, and U.S. GHG emissions increased by 5.7 emissions from combustion of fuel are projected to continue increasing for percent from 1990 to 2013 (or by about purchased in and used by aircraft the foreseeable future. According to 4.7 percent when including the effects departing from the United States, IPCC AR5, total global (from all major of carbon sinks), and emissions regardless of whether they are a U.S. emitting sources including forestry and increased from 2012 to 2013 by 1.8 flagged carrier. Total U.S. aircraft other land use) emissions of GHGs in percent. This 2012 to 2013 increase was emissions clearly contribute to the U.S. 2010 were about 49,000 teragrams 164 of attributable to multiple factors transportation sector’s emissions, 165 CO2 equivalent (Tg CO2eq). This including an increase in carbon accounting for 216 Tg CO2eq or 11 represents an increase in global GHG intensity of fuels consumed for percent of such emissions (see Table emissions of about 29 percent since electricity generation, a small increase V.1.). In 2013, emissions from aircraft 1990 and 23 percent since 2000. In in vehicle miles traveled and vehicle (216 Tg CO2eq) were the third largest 2010, total U.S. GHG emissions were fuel use, and a colder winter leading to transportation source of GHGs within responsible for about 14 percent of an increase in heating requirements. the United States, behind light-duty global GHG emissions (and about 12 The U.S. Inventory also shows that vehicles and medium- and heavy-duty percent when factoring in the effect of while overall U.S. GHG emissions grew trucks (totaling 1,494 Tg CO2eq). carbon sinks from U.S. land use and between 1990 and 2013, transportation For purposes of making this cause or forestry). GHG emissions grew at a significantly contribute finding, the EPA is focused Because 2010 is the most recent year higher rate, 15 percent, more rapidly on, and proposes to include, a set of for which IPCC emissions data are than any other U.S. sector. Within the aircraft engine classes used in types of available, we provide 2011 estimates transportation sector, aircraft remain the aircraft as described below, which from another widely used and single largest source of GHG emissions corresponds to the scope of the recognized global dataset, the World not yet subject to any GHG regulations. international CO2 emissions standard Resources Institute’s (WRI) Climate Section V.B.2.a which follows contemplated by ICAO. Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT),166 for describes U.S. aircraft GHG emissions As mentioned earlier in section II.D, comparison. According to WRI/CAIT, within the domestic context, while traditionally the EPA (and FAA) the total global GHG emissions in 2011 section V.B.2.b describes these same participates at ICAO in the development GHG emissions in the global context. of international standards, and then 163 IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Section V.B.2.c addresses future where appropriate, the EPA establishes Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. projections of aircraft GHG emissions. domestic aircraft engine emission Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth standards under CAA section 231 of at Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel a. U.S. Aircraft GHG Emissions Relative on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. to U.S. GHG Transportation and Total least equivalent stringency to ICAO’s Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. U.S. GHG Inventory standards. An international CO2 Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. emissions standard is anticipated in Relying on data from the U.S. Cambridge University Press, p. 11. February 2016, and provided that the 164 One teragram (Tg) = 1 million metric tons = Inventory, we compare U.S. aircraft EPA makes a positive endangerment 1 megatonne (Mt). 1 metric ton = 1,000 kg = 1.102 GHG emissions to the transportation finding and ICAO adopts an short tons = 2,205 lbs. sector and to total U.S. GHG emissions 165 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation as an indication of the role this source of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group 168 According to IPCC guidelines for common and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the plays in the total domestic contribution consistent accounting and reporting of GHGs under Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to the air pollution that is causing the UNFCCC, the total U.S. GHG emissions from the [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. climate change. In 2013, total U.S. GHG U.S. Inventory that is reported to the UNFCCC Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, emissions from all sources were 6,774 excludes international bunker fuel emissions S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. (aviation and marine international bunker fuel Savolainen, S. Schlo¨mer, C. von Stechow, T. Tg CO2eq. As stated above, total U.S. emissions) from the reported total national GHG Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University emissions. However, the total U.S. GHG emissions Press, 1435 pp. 167 U.S. EPA, 2015: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse in this proposed cause or contribute finding section 166 World Resources Institute (WRI) Climate Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2013, 564 pp. of this action do include international bunker fuel Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT) Data Explorer Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ emissions because we want to capture the full (Version 2.0). Available at http://cait.wri.org (last ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html#fullreport, contribution of U.S. emissions, including those accessed May 12, 2015). (last accessed May 12, 2015). from U.S. aircraft. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37787 international CO2 emissions standard aircraft would not be covered aircraft It is important to note that in regard that is both consistent with CAA section and consequently, we are also not to the six well-mixed GHGs (CO2, 231 and appropriate for domestic needs, including GHG emissions from classes methane, nitrous oxide, we would expect to proceed with of engines used in these types of aircraft hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, promulgating a CO2 emissions standard in our proposed cause or contribute and sulfur hexafluoride), only two of (or GHG standard) of at least equivalent finding. these gases—CO2 and nitrous oxide—are stringency domestically. As described Thus, for the purposes of the cause or reported as non-zero emissions for total 175 later in section VI.D, the thresholds of contribute finding, the EPA proposes to aircraft and covered aircraft. CO2 applicability for the international CO2 include GHG emissions from aircraft represents 99 percent of all GHGs from emissions standard are based on gross engines used in covered aircraft in the both total aircraft (214 Tg CO2eq) and weight as follows: For subsonic jet scope of this proposed cause or U.S. covered aircraft (193 Tg CO2eq), aircraft, a maximum takeoff mass contribute finding. This is an equivalent and nitrous oxide represents about one (MTOM) greater than 5,700 kilograms; scope of applicability as that percent from total aircraft (2 Tg CO2eq) and for subsonic propeller driven (e.g., contemplated by ICAO. The majority of and covered aircraft (1.8 Tg CO2eq). turboprop) aircraft, a MTOM greater the GHG emissions from all classes of Modern aircraft do not emit methane,176 than 8,618 kilograms.169 Applying these aircraft engines would be covered by and hydrofluorocarbons, gross weight thresholds, our proposed this scope of applicability. Below we perfluorocarbons, and sulfur cause or contribute finding applies to describe the contribution of these U.S. hexafluoride are not products of aircraft GHG emissions from classes of engines covered aircraft GHG emissions to U.S. engine combustion. used in covered aircraft. Examples of GHG emissions, and later in section covered aircraft would include smaller V.B.2.b we discuss the contribution of burn and emissions, and the accelerated retirement jet aircraft such as the Cessna Citation these U.S. covered aircraft emissions to of older, less fuel efficient aircraft. CJ2+ and the Embraer E170, up to the global GHG emissions. Also, the U.S. transportation GHG emissions were In 2013, GHG emissions from U.S. changing at similar rates as total U.S. aircraft GHG largest commercial jet aircraft—the emissions and U.S. covered aircraft GHG emissions Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747. Other covered aircraft (which includes U.S. for these same time periods, and thus, the aircraft examples of covered aircraft would international aviation bunker fuels in GHG emissions share of U.S. Transportation include larger turboprop aircraft, such certain cases) comprised 90 percent (195 remains approximately constant (over these time periods). as the ATR 72 and the Bombardier Tg CO2eq) of total U.S. aircraft GHG emissions 172 and 10 percent of total (U.S. EPA, 2015: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Q400. Our intention is for the scope of Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2013, 564 pp. the contribution finding to correspond U.S. transportation sector GHG Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ to the aircraft engine GHG emissions emissions (See Table V.1.). Overall, U.S. ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html#fullreport, that are from aircraft that match the covered aircraft comprised the third Last accessed May 12, 2015; U.S. FAA. 2015, APO largest source of GHG emissions in the Terminal Area Forecast Summary Report—Forecast applicability thresholds for the Issued January 2015, http://aspm.faa.gov/apowtaf/ international aircraft CO2 standard. As U.S. transportation sector behind only .). such we have also identified aircraft the light-duty vehicle and medium- and 175 U.S. EPA, 2015: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse that are not covered aircraft for purposes heavy-duty truck sectors, which is the Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2013, 564 pp. same ranking as total U.S. aircraft.173 Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ of our proposed contribution finding. ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html#fullreport, That includes aircraft that fall below the The U.S. covered aircraft also represent (last accessed May 12, 2015). international applicability thresholds: 3 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions, 176 Emissions of methane from jet fuels are no Smaller turboprop aircraft, such as the which is approximately equal to the longer considered to be emitted (based on the latest Beechcraft King Air 350i, and smaller jet contribution from total U.S. aircraft of studies) across the time series from aircraft gas 3.2 percent (Table V.1).174 turbine engines burning jet fuel A at higher power aircraft, such as the Cessna Citation M2. settings (EPA, Recommended Best Practice for In addition, ICAO (with U.S. Quantifying Speciated Organic Gas Emissions from 172 participation) has agreed to exclude Eastern Research Group, Incorporated (ERG), Aircraft Equipped with Turbofan, Turbojet and U.S. Jet Fuel Use and CO2 Emissions Inventory for ‘‘piston-engine aircraft,’’ ‘‘helicopters,’’ Turboprop Engines, EPA–420–R–09–901, May 27, Aircraft Below ICAO CO2 Standard Thresholds, 2009 (see http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/ 170 and ‘‘military aircraft’’ from the types Final Report, EPA Contract Number EP–D–11–006, aviation/420r09901.pdf (last accessed May 12, of aircraft that would be covered by the May 7, 2015. 2015)). Based on this data, methane emissions anticipated ICAO standards.171 These 173 Compared independently, total U.S. aircraft factors for jet aircraft were reported as zero to reflect GHG emissions and U.S. covered aircraft GHG the latest emissions testing data. Also, the 2006 emissions are both ranked the third largest source IPCC Guidelines indicate the following: ‘‘Methane 169 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification in the U.S. transportations sector, behind only light- (CH4) may be emitted by gas turbines during idle Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions duty vehicle and medium- and heavy-duty truck and by older technology engines, but recent data Standard, Circular (Cir) 337, AN/192, Available at sectors. suggest that little or no CH4 is emitted by modern http://www.icao.int/publications/ 174 Total U.S. aircraft GHG emissions and U.S. engines.’’ (IPCC, 2006: IPCC Guidelines for National _ ICAOProducts&Services2015catalogue/cat covered aircraft GHG emissions were from 12 to 32 Greenhouse Gas Inventories, The National 2015en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO percent greater in 2000 and 2005 than in 1990. Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, The Circular 337 is found on page 85 of the ICAO These increases in aircraft GHG emissions are Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, H.S. Products & Services 2015 catalog and is copyright primarily because aircraft operations (or number of Eggleston, L. Buendia, K. Miwa, T Ngara, and K. protected; Order No. CIR337. flights) grew by similar amounts during this time Tanabe (eds.). Hayama, Kanagawa, Japan.) The EPA 170 ICAO regulations only apply to civil aviation period. Also, total U.S. aircraft GHG emissions and uses an emissions factor of zero to maintain (aircraft and aircraft engines), and consequently, U.S. covered aircraft GHG emissions were from 10 consistency with the IPCC reporting guidelines, ICAO regulations do not apply to military aircraft. to 17 percent greater in 2000 and 2005 than in 2013. while continuing to stay abreast of the evolving 171 The applicability of the anticipated These decreases in aircraft GHG emissions are research in this area. For example, one recent study international CO2 standard would be limited to partly because aircraft operations decreased by has indicated that modern aircraft jet engines subsonic aircraft, and would not extend to similar amounts during this time period. In operating at higher power modes consume rather supersonic aircraft. Since space vehicles (or addition, the decreases in aircraft emissions are due than emit methane (Santoni et al., 2011: Aircraft spacecraft) will be operated at supersonic speeds, in part to improved operational efficiency that Emissions of Methane and Nitrous Oxide during the space vehicles would not be covered by the results in more direct flight routing, improvements Alternative Aviation Fuel Experiment, Environ. Sci. anticipated international CO2 standard. in aircraft and engine technologies to reduce fuel Technol., 45, pp. 7075–7082). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37788 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules TABLE V.1—COMPARISONS OF U.S. AIRCRAFT GHG EMISSIONS TO TOTAL U.S. TRANSPORTATION AND TOTAL U.S. GHG EMISSIONS 1990 2000 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total U.S. Aircraft GHG emissions (Tg CO2eq) ...... 228 262 254 216 215 212 216 Share of U.S. Transportation ...... 14% 13% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% Share of total U.S. Inventory ...... 3.6% 3.6% 3.4% 3.1% 3.1% 3.2% 3.2% U.S. Covered Aircraft GHG emissions (Tg CO2eq) ...... 169 223 217 190 193 190 195 Share of U.S. aircraft GHG emissions .... 74% 85% 85% 88% 90% 90% 90% Share of U.S. Transportation ...... 10% 11% 10% 9.7% 10% 9.9% 10% Share of total U.S. Inventory ...... 2.6% 3% 2.9% 2.7% 2.8% 2.9% 2.9% Transportation Sector emissions (Tg CO2eq) ...... 1,659 2,044 2,137 1,966 1,932 1,907 1,911 Share of total U.S. Inventory ...... 26% 28% 29% 28% 28% 29% 28% Total U.S. GHG emissions ...... 6,406 7,315 7,464 7,017 6,889 6,652 6,744 b. U.S. Aircraft GHG Emissions Relative comparisons from both total U.S. Comparing data from the U.S. to Global Aircraft GHG Inventory and aircraft and U.S. covered aircraft. Inventory to IPCC AR5, we find that the Total Global GHG Inventory According to IPCC AR5, global aircraft total U.S. aircraft GHG emissions GHG emissions in 2010 were 11 percent represented about 29 percent of global For background information and of global transport GHG emissions and aircraft GHG emissions, about 3.1 context, we first provide information on 2 percent of total global GHG emissions. percent of global transport GHG the contribution of GHG emissions from Data from ICAO’s 2013 Environmental emissions, and about 0.5 percent of total global aircraft and the global Report indicate that the vast majority of global GHG emissions in 2010 (see transportation sector to total global GHG global emissions from the aircraft sector Table V.2). For U.S. covered aircraft in emissions, and describe how this are emitted by the types of aircraft that 2010 GHG emissions represented about compares to the emissions from aircraft would be covered by the anticipated 26 percent of global aircraft GHG that would be covered by the ICAO CO2 standard (‘‘ICAO covered emissions, 2.7 percent of global anticipated ICAO CO2 standard. We aircraft’’).177 When compared to global transport GHG emissions, and 0.5 then compare U.S. aircraft GHG data from IPCC AR5, worldwide GHG percent of total global GHG emissions emissions to the global aircraft sector, to emissions from ICAO covered aircraft (see Table V.2). Because 2010 is the the global transport sector, and to total represented about 93 percent (688 Tg most recent year for which IPCC global GHG emissions as an indication CO2eq) of global aircraft GHG emissions data are available, we also of the role this source plays in the total emissions,178 10 percent of global made comparisons using 2011 estimates global contribution to the air pollution transport GHG emissions, and 1.5 from WRI/CAIT and the International that is causing climate change. As in the percent of total global GHG emissions in Energy Agency (IEA) 179 and found that preceding section, we present 2010. they yield very similar results.180 TABLE V.2—COMPARISONS OF U.S. AIRCRAFT GHG EMISSIONS TO TOTAL GLOBAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN 2010 Total U.S. U.S. Covered Global Air- 2010 Aircraft Aircraft Share craft Share (Tg CO2 eq) Share (%) (%) (%) Global Aircraft GHG emissions ...... 743 29 26 ...... Global Transport GHG emissions ...... 7,000 3.1 2.7 11 Total Global GHG emissions ...... 49,000 0.5 0.5 2 For additional background States, India, Russian Federation, Japan, emissions from China, which globally is information and context, we used 2011 Brazil, Germany, and Indonesia, and the second ranked country for aircraft WRI/CAIT and IEA data to make ahead of about 175 other countries. GHG emissions, and about 5 times comparisons between the aircraft sector Total U.S. aircraft GHG emissions have higher than aircraft GHG emissions from and the emissions inventories of entire historically been and continue to be by all of Asia. U.S. covered aircraft GHG countries and regions. When compared far the largest contributor to global emissions are about 6 times more than to entire countries, total global aircraft aircraft GHG emissions. Total U.S. aircraft GHG emissions from China, and GHG emissions in 2011 ranked 9th aircraft GHG emissions are about 7 about 4 times more than aircraft GHG overall, behind only China, United times higher than aircraft GHG emissions from all of Asia. If U.S. 177 ICAO CAEP, 2013: ICAO Environmental international and domestic aircraft operations 28 percent of global aircraft GHG emissions, about Report 2013, Aviation and Climate Change, 224 pp. around the world. 3.7 percent of global transport GHG emissions, and Available at http://cfapp.icao.int/Environmental- 179 International Energy Agency, Data Services. about 0.5 percent of total global GHG emissions. Report-2013/ (last accessed May 12, 2015). Available at http://data.iea.org (last accessed May U.S. covered aircraft represented about 25 percent 12, 2015). 178 Worldwide GHG emissions from ICAO of global aircraft GHG emissions, 3.3 percent of 180 global transport GHG emissions, and 0.5 percent of covered aircraft include emissions from both Data from WRI/CAIT and IEA show that, in 2011, total U.S. aircraft emissions represented about total global GHG emissions in 2011. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37789 covered aircraft emissions of GHGs were restructuring in recent years, the U.S. aircraft and U.S. covered aircraft would ranked against total GHG emissions for commercial air carriers have regained increase at a similar rate as the fuel burn entire countries, these covered aircraft profitability and are forecasted by the by 2030, 2035, and 2040. emissions would rank ahead of Belgium, FAA to grow more over the next 20 to 3. Proposed Contribution Finding for Czech Republic, Ireland, Sweden and 30 years.187 With regard to global the Single Air Pollutant Comprised of about 150 other countries in the world. aircraft GHG emissions, the aviation the of Six Well-Mixed Greenhouse markets in Asia/Pacific, Europe (where c. Aircraft GHG Emissions Are Projected Gases airline deregulation has stimulated To Increase in the Future significant new demands in this period), Taking into consideration the data While overall GHG emissions from and the Middle East (and other summarized in section V.B.2 above, the U.S. covered aircraft increased by about emerging markets) have been growing Administrator proposes to find that 13 percent from 1990 to 2010, the rapidly, and the global market is GHG emissions from classes of engines portion attributable to U.S. international expected to continue to grow used in U.S. covered aircraft, which are aviation bunker fuels 181 increased by significantly over the next 20 to 30 subsonic jet aircraft with a maximum about 90 percent.182 During this same years.188 takeoff mass (MTOM) greater than 5,700 time period, global aircraft GHG Recent studies estimate that both kilograms and subsonic propeller driven emissions grew by about 40 percent, and ICAO covered aircraft and U.S. covered (e.g., turboprop) aircraft with a MTOM the portion attributable to global aircraft will experience substantial greater than 8,618 kilograms, contribute international aviation bunker fuels growth over the next 20 to 30 years in to the air pollution that endangers increased by 80 percent.183 184 their absolute fuel burn, and that this public health and welfare. The Notwithstanding the substantial growth will translate into increased GHG Administrator is not at this time in GHG emissions from U.S. emissions. ICAO estimates that the proposing a contribution finding for international aviation bunker fuels, U.S. global fuel burn from ICAO covered GHG emissions from engines not used covered aircraft emissions have not aircraft will increase by about 120 in covered aircraft (i.e., those used in increased as much as global aircraft percent from 2010 to 2030 and by about smaller turboprops, smaller jet aircraft, emissions primarily because the U.S. 210 percent from 2010 to 2040 (for a piston-engine aircraft, helicopters and aviation market was relatively mature scenario with moderate technology and military aircraft). We solicit comment compared to the markets in Europe and operational improvements).189 The FAA on the scope of the proposed other emergent markets, and because projects that the fuel consumption from contribution finding, whether a broader during this time period the U.S. U.S. air carriers and general aviation contribution finding (e.g., including all commercial air carriers suffered several aircraft operating on jet fuel will grow engines used in aircraft certified by the major shocks that reduced demand for by 49 percent from 2010 to 2035, FAA) would be appropriate, and the air travel.185 186 After consolidation and corresponding to an average annual extent to which EPA has discretion to increase rate in fuel consumption of 1.6 establish standards pursuant to a 181 The U.S. international aviation bunker fuels percent.190 These aircraft groups (U.S. contribution finding that do not impose category includes emissions from combustion of air carriers and general aviation aircraft requirements on every engine or class of fuel purchased in and used by aircraft departing from the United States, regardless of whether they operating on jet fuel) are of similar engines within the scope of that finding. are a U.S. flagged carrier. GHG emissions from U.S. scope to the U.S. covered aircraft whose It is the Administrator’s judgment that international aviation bunker fuels are a subset of engine GHG emissions are the subject of the collective GHG emissions from the GHG emissions from U.S. covered aircraft. From this proposed finding. Using fuel burn classes of engines used in U.S. covered 1990 to 2010, GHG emissions from U.S. covered aircraft clearly contribute, whether the aircraft increased from 169 to 190 Tg CO2eq, and growth rates provided above as a scaling GHG emissions from the portion attributable to U.S. factor for growth in GHG emissions comparison is domestic (10 percent of international aviation bunker fuels grew from 30 to (globally and nationally), it is estimated all U.S. transportation GHG emissions, 58 Tg CO2eq during this same time period. From that GHG emissions from ICAO covered representing 3 percent of total U.S. 1990 to 2011, GHG emissions from U.S. covered emissions) or global (26 percent of total aircraft increased from 169 to 192 Tg CO2eq (about 14 percent), and GHG emissions from the portion 2014-2034/media/2014_FAA_Aerospace_ global aircraft GHG emissions attributable to U.S. international aviation bunker Forecast.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). representing 3 percent of total global fuels grew from 30 to 62 Tg CO2eq (about 110 186 These shocks include the September 11 terror transportation emissions and 0.5 percent). attacks, significant increases in fuel prices, debt percent of all global GHG emissions). 182 U.S. EPA, 2015: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse restructuring in Europe and U.S., and a global Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2013, 564 pp. recession. The proposed scope of GHG emissions Available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ 187 According to the FAA Aerospace Forecast from engines used in U.S. covered ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html#fullreport, 2014–2034, in 2013 U.S. air carriers were profitable aircraft under this cause or contribute (last accessed May 12, 2015). for the fourth consecutive year. finding would result in the vast majority 183 188 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation According to the FAA Aerospace Forecast (90 percent) of U.S. aircraft GHG of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group 2014–2034, the International Air Transport III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Association (IATA) reports that world air carriers emissions being included in this Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (including U.S. airlines) are expected to register an determination. The Administrator [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. operating profit for 2013. Based on financial data believes that consideration of the global Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, compiled by ICAO and IATA, between 2004 and S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. 2013 world airlines produced cumulative operating context is important for the cause or Savolainen, S. Schlo¨mer, C. von Stechow, T. profits (with nine years out of ten posting gains) contribute test, but that the analysis Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University and net profits (with six years out of ten posting should not solely consider the global Press, pp. 599–670. gains). context. GHG emissions from engines 184 According to IEA, from 1990 to 2011, global 189 ICAO CAEP, 2013: ICAO Environmental used in U.S. covered aircraft will aircraft GHG emissions grew by about 50 percent, Report 2013, Aviation and Climate Change, 224 pp. and global international aviation bunker fuels Available at http://cfapp.icao.int/Environmental- become globally well-mixed in the increased by 80 percent. International Energy Report-2013/ (last accessed May 12, 2015). atmosphere, and thus will have an effect Agency Data Services, Available at http:// 190 FAA, 2015: FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal not only on the U.S. regional climate but data.iea.org (last accessed May 12, 2015, 2015). Years 2015–2035, 134 pp. Available at https:// also on the global climate as a whole, for 185 FAA, 2014: FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_ Years 2014–2034, 129 pp. Available at https:// offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/aerospace_forecasts/ years and indeed many decades to www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_ 2015-2035/media/2015_National_Forecast_ come. It is the Administrator’s view that offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/aerospace_forecasts/ Report.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). the cause or contribute test used here VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37790 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules under CAA section 231 can follow the in U.S. covered aircraft contribute 3 growth in aircraft engine GHG emissions same reasoning that was used in the percent of total U.S. GHG emissions for from U.S. covered aircraft appears to be 2009 GHG cause or contribute finding the proposed contribution finding and greater in percentage terms than other under CAA section 202; that is, the comprise the single largest transportation sources, this future Administrator believes a positive cause transportation source in the United consideration adds weight to the or contribute finding for GHG emissions States that has not yet been regulated for Administrator’s proposed positive from engines used in U.S. covered GHG emissions. contribution finding. aircraft is justified whether only the VI. Advance Notice of Proposed domestic context is considered, only the 4. Additional Considerations Rulemaking: Discussion of Ongoing global context is considered, or both the The Administrator is also concerned International Proceedings To Develop domestic and global GHG emissions that reasonable estimates of GHG Aircraft CO Emissions Standard and comparisons are viewed in combination. emissions from engines used in U.S. 2 Request for Comment As was the case in 2009, no single covered aircraft are projected to grow GHG source category dominates on the over the next 20 to 30 years. Given the For more than four years, the EPA and global scale, and many (if not all) projected growth in aircraft emissions FAA have been engaged with the individual GHG source categories could compared to other sectors, it is ICAO’s Committee on Aviation appear small in comparison to the total, reasonable for the Administrator to Environmental Protection (ICAO/CAEP) when, in fact, they could be very consider future emissions projections as to establish an international CO2 important contributors in terms of both adding weight to her primary reliance emissions standard which the EPA absolute emissions or in comparison to on annual emissions. Recent projections could then consider proposing for other source categories, globally or reveal that by 2035 GHG emissions from adoption under its section 231 authority within the United States. If the United all aircraft and U.S. covered aircraft of the CAA. This section of this States and the rest of the world are to engines are likely to increase by almost document serves as an ANPR to discuss combat the risks associated with global 50 percent.193 By contrast, it is the key issues of the ongoing climate change, contributors must do estimated that by 2035 the light duty international proceedings prior to their part even if their contributions to vehicle sector will see a 30 percent February 2016, when ICAO/CAEP is the global problem, measured in terms reduction in GHG emissions from the expected to finalize an international of percentage, are smaller than typically 2010 baseline, while the heavy duty aircraft CO2 standard. An ANPR is encountered when tackling solely vehicle sector will experience a 33 intended to solicit comments and/or regional or local environmental percent increase in GHG emissions from information from the public prior to an issues.’’ 191 Moreover, as the Supreme the 2010 baseline (this projected agency determining whether to propose Court explained in Massachusetts v. increase does not reflect the impact of a rulemaking. As such, an ANPR does EPA, agencies commonly take an GHG reductions anticipated from the not propose or impose any regulatory incremental approach to resolving large Phase 2 heavy duty GHG standards that requirements. The EPA may choose to issues, stating that, ‘‘[a]gencies, like have not yet been promulgated). In develop an ANPR for actions (such as legislatures, do not generally resolve addition, by 2035 the rail sector is the promulgation of standards pursuant massive problems in one fell regulatory projected to experience a 6 percent to CAA section 231 to implement an swoop.... They instead whittle away reduction in GHG emissions from 2010 international aircraft CO2 standard at them over time, refining their baseline.194 Because the projected domestically) which are still in the early preferred approach as circumstances stages of development and for which change and as they develop a more as well as test procedures. See 40 CFR part 87, public input may be particularly nuanced understanding of how best to subparts B, G and H. Given both the absence of a helpful. This also helps ensure proceed.’’ 549 U.S. 497, 524 (2007) statutory directive on what form a CAA section 231 transparency, while assisting the EPA in standard must take (in contrast to, for example, (citations omitted). The Administrator CAA section 129(a)(4), which requires numerical obtaining input from a wide range of continues to believe that these unique, emissions limitations for emissions of certain stakeholders as we continue work global aspects of the climate change pollutants from solid waste incinerators), and the within CAEP to establish an problem—including that from a U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit’s 2007 international CO aircraft standard. The NACAA v. EPA ruling that section 231 confers an 2 percentage perspective there are no unusually broad degree of discretion in establishing EPA is seeking comments from all dominating sources emitting GHGs and aircraft engine emission standards, it should be interested parties, including small few sources that would even be possible to reconcile an ICAO ‘‘aircraft standard’’ businesses, on a variety of issues related considered to be close to dominating— that effectively limits aircraft engine GHG emissions to setting an international CO standard with a CAA section 231 aircraft engine emission 2 tend to support consideration of standard that achieves the same result, even if the for aircraft, including whether such contribution to the air pollution at lower GHG standards take a different form than the standards should apply to in-production percentage levels than EPA typically traditional thrust-based NOx aircraft engine aircraft instead of new aircraft types encounters when analyzing contribution emission standards recently issued by ICAO and the only, the appropriate effective dates for towards a more localized air pollution EPA. See 40 CFR part 87, subpart C. 193 As discussed in Section V.B.2.c fuel burn the potential international CO2 problem. Thus, the Administrator, growth rates for air carriers and general aviation standard, as well as the appropriate similar to the approach taken in the aircraft operating on jet fuel are projected to grow stringency levels. 2009 GHG cause or contribute finding by 49 percent from 2010 to 2035 and this provides CAEP met an important milestone at under CAA section 202, is placing a scaling factor for growth in GHG emissions which its 9th meeting (CAEP/9) in 2013 in 192 would increase at a similar rate as the fuel burn by weight on the fact that engines used 2030, 2035, and 2040. reaching an agreement on the 194 U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 191 74 FR 66543 (December 15, 2009). 2015: Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2015 with subsectors due to availability of fuel-saving 192 For a standard promulgated under CAA projections to 2040, DOE/EIA–0383, 154 pp. EIA’s technologies and fuel price effects. EIA counts section 231 to be ‘‘applicable to’’ emissions of air reference case (used as the baseline in this biofuels as zero tailpipe GHG emissions. Because pollutants from aircraft engines, it could take many comparison) assumes fuel economy levels for light the comparison in this section focuses on tailpipe forms, and include multiple elements in addition to duty vehicles required to meet federal light duty emissions, we include them here, at volumes as numeric permissible engine exhaust rate. For GHG standards for years 2012–2025, and for heavy forecast in the AEO 2015 reference case. Available example, under CAA section 231, EPA’s rules have duty trucks GHG standards for years 2014–2018, at http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/ (last accessed long-standing regulations addressing fuel venting, plus improvements in vehicles and engines for all May 12, 2015). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37791 appropriate metric to be used in emissions standard (or GHG standard) of comment on this potential alternative assessing fuel efficiency (or CO2 at least equivalent stringency option. emissions) 195 of an engine/aircraft domestically. In-production aircraft and new combination. They also reached aircraft types are defined as follows: A. Purpose of the International agreement on a mature certification —In-production aircraft: Those aircraft 196 Standard requirement to evaluate CO2 types which have already received a emissions for new aircraft types and At the CAEP Steering Group meeting Type Certificate, and for which also agreed on certain aspects of the in 2011, the U.S provided a paper manufacturers either have existing scope of applicability of the CO2 recommending that CAEP agree that the undelivered sales orders or would be emissions standard; however, work on purpose of the international CO2 willing and able to accept new sales orders.199 200 201 applicability options for in-production emissions standard be ‘‘to achieve CO2 aircraft continues. emissions reductions from the aviation —New aircraft types: Aircraft types that 202 At the CAEP Steering Group meeting sector beyond expected ‘business as have applied for a Type Certificate in November 2013, there was agreement usual’—i.e., a standard that achieves after the effective date of a standard and that have never been on a set of stringency options to be used CO2 emissions reductions from the for the cost-effectiveness analysis, and aviation sector beyond what would be manufactured prior to the effective at the Steering Group meeting in achieved in the absence of a standard. date of a standard. In addition, for context, out of September 2014 there was a decision on This would be analyzed using ICAO production aircraft are those aircraft the associated inputs for costs and criteria of technical feasibility, types which have already received a technology responses to be utilized in environmental benefit, cost Type Certificate, but for which the cost-effectiveness analysis of these effectiveness, and impacts of manufacturers either have no existing stringency options. This analysis, and interdependencies.’’ 198 The Steering work on the applicability of the undelivered sales orders or would not Group accepted the U.S. proposal for be willing and able to accept new sales standard to in-production aircraft and the purpose of the international CO2 orders. These aircraft are aircraft types the certification requirement are standard, and it is expected to be scheduled to be completed prior to the that are no longer in active included in the standard setting process. production.203 10th CAEP meeting (CAEP/10) in The metric system, stringency options, February 2016. As described in section As described earlier in section II.E, costs, technology responses (inputs to CAEP’s Steering Group meeting in 2010 II.A, the EPA and the FAA traditionally be utilized in the cost-effectiveness work within the ICAO/CAEP standard- analysis), and applicability ultimately 199 setting process to establish international ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification chosen will all have an effect on Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions emission standards and related whether the international CO emissions Standard. Available at http://www.icao.int/ 2 _ _ requirements. Under this approach, standard adheres to this stated purpose publications/catalogue/cat 2015 en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015).The ICAO Circular 337 is international emission standards have of the standard. The U.S. continues to first been adopted by ICAO, and found on page 85 of the ICAO Products & Services support the adoption of an international 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. subsequently the EPA has initiated CO2 emissions standard that meets this CIR337. rulemakings under CAA section 231 to 200 stated purpose, and the EPA requests As described earlier in section D, in existing establish domestic standards that are of U.S. aviation emissions regulations, in-production comment on this continued support. at least equal stringency as ICAO’s means newly-manufactured or built after the The EPA requests comment on how to standards. This approach has been effective date of the regulations—and already achieve the purpose of the standard. certified to pre-existing standards (if emission affirmed as reasonable by the U.S. Court standards were established previously).). This is of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Provided B. Applicability of the International CO2 similar to the current CAEP definition for in- the EPA makes a positive endangerment Emissions Standard production aircraft types for purposes of the CO2 finding 197 under CAA section 231 and standard. 201 According to ICAO Cir 337, a Type Certificate ICAO adopts an international aircraft The EPA requests comments on the applicability approaches that CAEP is is ‘‘[a] document issued by a Contracting State to CO2 standard that is consistent with define the design of an aircraft type and to certify CAA section 231 and U.S. domestic considering. Specifically, we request that this design meets the appropriate airworthiness needs, we would expect to proceed with comment on whether the aircraft CO2 requirements of that State’’. standard should apply to in-production 202 A Type Certificate is a design approval process a similar approach promulgating a CO2 aircraft, including aircraft with any whereby the FAA ensures the manufacturer’s designs meet the minimum requirements for aircraft 195 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification engineered fuel efficiency safety and environmental regulations. This is Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions improvements (e.g., different engines, typically issued only once for each aircraft, and Standard, Circular (Cir) 337, AN/192, Available at redesigned wings, or engine modified as needed as an aircraft is modified over http://www.icao.int/publications/catalogue/cat_ the course of its production life. This Type _ performance improvement packages, 2015 en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The Certificate (for new aircraft types) would be the ICAO Circular 337 is found on page 85 of the ICAO etc.) or whether the aircraft CO2 initial or new Type Certificate for this aircraft. Products & Services 2015 catalog and is copyright standard should apply only to 203 Out of production aircraft that are still in protected; Order No. CIR337. Section 3.2 of this completely new aircraft type designs. operational use would become subject to the Circular states the following: ‘‘An important Phase CAEP is also considering a third, international standard only if the standard applied 1 milestone in the development of the CO Standard 2 alternative approach, which would to ‘‘in-use’’ aircraft, which it will not since CAEP was reached on 11 July 2012, when the CAEP has agreed that the international aircraft CO2 Steering Group agreed unanimously on a CO2 redefine a new aircraft type for CO2 standard should not apply to out of production metric system to measure the aeroplane fuel burn purposes to include in-production aircraft types. Note, the EPA’s CAA section 231 performance and therefore the CO2 emissions aircraft that have a significant change in aircraft engine standards have applied to in-use produced.’’ aircraft only in very limited situations, such as the CO2 emissions. We are also requesting 196 ICAO defines a certification requirement as a prohibition against fuel venting at 40 CFR 87.11 and combination of metric, procedures, instrumentation smoke number standards at 40 CFR 87.31. Note, and measurement methodology, and compliance 198 CAEP (U.S. Working Paper), ‘‘U.S. Position on however, that unlike the EPA’s authority to requirements. the Development of ICAO’S Aircraft CO2 Standard,’’ promulgate emission standards for motor vehicles 197 As shorthand in this action, in many places CAEP–SG/20112–WP/25, Presented by the United under CAA section 202(a) or for nonroad engines we will use the term ‘‘endangerment finding’’ for States, U.S. Working Paper for CAEP Steering and vehicles under section 213(a), section 231 of both endangerment and cause or contribute Group meeting, Beijing, China, 12 to 16 September the CAA does not restrict the EPA’s authority to set findings. 2011. standards for only new aircraft. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37792 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules agreed that the scope of applicability for that it is unlikely a new type design will approach CAEP is considering would be the international aircraft CO2 standard seek certification in the next 10 to 15 to limit the applicability of any 209 will be subsonic jets with an years. (New aircraft types (and international CO2 standard to only new applicability weight threshold of similarly for significant partial type designs (or new aircraft types). maximum takeoff mass (MTOM) greater redesigns) typically yield large fuel burn Under this approach the international than 5,700 kg (12,566 lb) and turboprop reductions—10 percent to 20 percent CO2 standard would not apply to aircraft with a MTOM greater than 8,618 over the prior generation they replace, significant partial redesigned aircraft kg (19,000 lb). CAEP also agreed that the and as one might expect, these and incremental improvements. Under international CO2 standard will apply to significant fuel burn reductions do not another approach CAEP is considering, new aircraft types, but not apply to out happen frequently. Also, aircraft CAEP would also apply the of production aircraft types, and that development programs are expensive. It international CO2 standard to in- applying the standard to in-production is not unusual for new type designs to production aircraft (in addition to new aircraft types should not be ruled out.204 take 8–10 years to develop, from aircraft types). Significant partial It is important to further describe the preliminary design to entry into service. redesigned aircraft and incremental difference between new aircraft types 210 211) Significant partial redesigns do improvements would be characterized and in-production aircraft. There are not occur often, but are slightly more as changes made to in-production three categories of aircraft under frequent than new type designs. For aircraft; thus, these categories of aircraft consideration when describing a CO2 example, after the current significant (or these changes) would need to meet 212 standard: New aircraft types submitted partial redesign wave has passed the international CO2 standard under for certification (known as clean sheet (which includes the Boeing 747–8, this approach (or they would need to designs), those with lesser levels of Boeing 737 Max, Airbus 320 Neo, and meet the standard if it also applied to design change, such as a new series in Boeing 777–X), we do not currently in-production aircraft).215 an established type and model have knowledge of many additional Another approach for applicability of (considered to be significant partial significant partial redesigns anticipated the international CO2 standard that redesigns), or an aircraft with over the next decade (as the previous CAEP could adopt (or CAEP is incremental improvements.205 New wave of significant partial redesigns considering) would be an approach aircraft types or new type designs are included the Boeing 777–200LR in based on criteria addressing significant significant investments for 2004, 777–300ER in 2006, 737NG in changes to aircraft designs, which could manufacturers and are used for new and 1998, Airbus 319 in 1996, and Airbus be considered an applicability significantly different designs (also 330–200 in 1998).213 214 Incremental requirement different than that for new characterized as complete redesigns). improvements will likely be frequent aircraft types only and in-production Significant partial redesigns may be and occur in the near term. One aircraft. This alternative approach could characterized as a new or later series of redefine a new aircraft type for CO2 an established model that may www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/ purposes to include in-production incorporate newly designed wings and ba-reveals-airbus-a380-superjumbo-flight-plans- aircraft that have a significant change in 8405961.html (last accessed May 12, 2015). give purchasers more choices of 208 CO2 emissions, thus including in- ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- engines. Incremental improvements are Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, production aircraft in the applicability less extensive changes to an aircraft EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, of the CO2 standard. The alternative such as performance improvement 2015. approach could even cover significant 209 packages that may be added to an Ibid. partial redesigned aircraft, depending 210 Ibid. upon the definition. CAEP’s current aircraft or engine at some point during 211 Analysts estimate a new single aisle would the production cycle. have cost $10–12 billion to develop. The A380 and mature certification requirement for the 216 New aircraft types or new type 787 are estimated to each have cost around $20 international CO2 standard provides designs are infrequent. The most recent billion to develop; the A350 is estimated to have further detail on technology changes to cost $15 billion, excluding engine development. aircraft that would affect the aircraft’s new type designs introduced in service, Due to the large development cost of a totally new such as the Airbus A380 in 2007, the aircraft design, manufacturers are opting to re-wing CO2 metric value. A changed version of Boeing 787 in 2011, and the original or just re-engine their aircraft (significant partial an aircraft could be defined as follows: Boeing 777 in 1995,206 207 208 indicate redesigns). Boeing is said to have budgeted $5 An aircraft which incorporates changes billion for the re-wing of the 777 and Airbus and in type design that may adversely Boeing have budgeted $1–2 billion each for the re- 204 217 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification engine of the A320 and the 737, respectively affect its CO2 emissions. This Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions (excluding engine development costs). Embraer has possible definition could also note the Standard. Available at http://www.icao.int/ publically stated they will need to spend $1–2 publications/catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last billion to re-wing the EMB–175 and variants. (ICF 215 As described earlier, CAEP has not ruled out accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is International, CO2 Analysis of CO2-Reducing found on page 85 of the ICAO Products & Services applying the international CO2 standard to in- Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, EPA production aircraft types, which are aircraft types 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, 2015.) that have already received a Type Certificate and CIR337. 212 In general, design waves are prompted by the are produced after the effective date of the standard. 205 New aircraft types fall under the initial or new combination of market demand for new aircraft In-production aircraft types would include Type Certificate, and significant partial redesigns performance needs (e.g., more seats for longer significant partial redesigned aircraft and and incremental improvements fall under an range) and the age of existing aircraft, and design incremental improvements. CAEP is currently amended Type Certificate. Significant partial waves are typically enabled by advances in considering and analyzing in-production redesigns would be a new or later series of an propulsion technology. applicability. established model, and incremental improvements 213 ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- 216 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification would be a part of the same series as the established Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions model. EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, Standard. Available at http://www.icao.int/ 206 Boeing, 2011: Boeing Unveils First 787 to 2015. publications/catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last Enter Service for Japan Airlines, December 14. 214 Insofar as we are going through a wave of accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is Available at http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2011-12- major redesign and service entry now, prospects for found on page 85 of the ICAO Products & Services 14-Boeing-Unveils-First-787-to-Enter-Service-for- further step-function improvements will be low in 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. Japan-Airlines (last accessed May 12, 2015). the coming 10–15 years. (ICF International, CO2 CIR337. See Chapter 1. 207 217 The Independent, 2012: BA reveals Airbus Analysis of CO2-Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Due to substantial market forces to alleviate A380 superjumbo flight plans, by Peter Woodman, Final Report, EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, any adverse effects on aircraft fuel burn or CO2 December 11. Available at http:// March 17, 2015.) emissions, adverse changes are rare. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37793 following: (1) Where the proposed fuselage but fell under an amended emissions would not be expected to change in design, configuration, power Type Certificate for the original Boeing begin to deviate from business-as-usual or mass is so extensive that a 747 that was certified in 1969 (and (in comparison to CO2 emissions substantially new investigation of entered into service in 1969). An reductions that would be achieved in compliance with the applicable example of incremental improvements the absence of a standard) before 2025. airworthiness regulations is required, to in-production aircraft, is the Boeing Therefore, an international standard the aircraft should be considered to be Next Generation 737 performance developed for only new aircraft types a new type design rather than a changed improvement package which was may not actually apply to any new version, and (2) ‘‘adversely’’ refers to an implemented between 2011 and 2013 aircraft for at least a decade. Even if a increase in CO2 emissions of more than and the Boeing 767–300 winglets that few new type aircraft are introduced in an amount (or percentage) that has yet entered into service in 2008, both of this timeframe, it will take even longer to be determined (this amount or which improve aircraft fuel efficiency. for these aircraft to comprise any criterion is still being considered by There are many other examples that significant portion of the fleet. CAEP). The EPA requests comment on exist for different manufacturers and Therefore, applying an international this change-based criteria approach, aircraft around the world as well, but for standard which applies only to new including how to identify those changes conciseness, we are limiting our aircraft types will likely result in no that would result in treating in- discussion to these above examples. additional CO2 reductions beyond what production aircraft as new types subject These examples illustrate the typical would have occurred absent a CO2 to the standard. certification for significant partial standard, either for the near- and mid- If CAEP were to limit the scope of redesigns and incremental term, about 5 to 10 years from 2016, or applicability to new aircraft types only improvements by various aircraft even in the longer-term of 20 years (and without the significant change certificating or certifying authorities (or plus.223 224 criteria approach described above), the national airworthiness authorities) The EPA requests comments on the international CO2 standard would not around the world. timeframes described above for apply to later series aircraft with Using CAEP’s current definition of introducing new aircraft types and their redesigned wings, aircraft that are new aircraft types (clean sheet designs, subsequent penetration into the fleet. available with different engines, or which are completely new aircraft) we Are there any aircraft manufacturer aircraft that undergo incremental cannot today identify the first aircraft to announcements that we missed in improvements. Following are several which the new standard would apply. regard to new aircraft types that will be examples that illustrate this situation. As the examples above illustrate, new introduced or apply for a Type The re-engined Boeing 737 Max is an aircraft types are infrequent,220 and Certificate after 2020 and 2023 (or new example of a significant partial there are no currently announced new aircraft types that will be introduced or redesigned aircraft that is expected to type designs that are expected to be apply for a Type Certificate five years enter into service in 2017.218 This introduced after the implementation after these dates)? 225 If so, what are aircraft would fall under the original dates being analyzed by CAEP—2020 these new aircraft types? How many Boeing 737 Type Certificate that was and 2023. Furthermore, based on new types are projected to enter the fleet issued in 1967 (and entered into service provisions to which CAEP has already in this timeframe and what portion of in 1968)—or more specifically it would agreed,221 new aircraft types subject to the fleet will they represent? fall under an amended Type Certificate, the CO2 standard would be aircraft that The alternative approach being and it would not be considered a new submit an application for a Type considered by CAEP and described aircraft type as defined by CAEP. The Certificate after the implementation earlier (addressing changes in design of current in-production 737s (Next dates of 2020 and 2023 (dates for the in-production aircraft) may offer an Generation 737s or commonly stringency analysis) which would likely opportunity to cover more aircraft in an abbreviated as 737 NGs) feature newer result in entry into service dates of earlier timeframe (including significant engines, have redesigned wings, and about 2025 or 2028.222 If the partial redesigns), but it is unclear what entered service in 1998 under the international CO2 standard is applied effect this approach would have on original 737 Type Certificate that was only to new aircraft types, then CO2 issued in 1967, and these also were not 223 Approximate time-scales are considered to be 220 5 years for near-term, 10 years for mid-term, and 20 considered a new type aircraft when ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- 219 Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, years or more for long-term. they were introduced in 1998. 224 EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- Another example of an aircraft that does 2015. Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, not qualify as a new type is the Boeing 221 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, 2015. 747–8 aircraft, that entered into service Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions in 2011, and which included a new Standard. Available at http://www.icao.int/ 225 In November 2014, Boeing indicated that it publications/catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last would replace the 737 with a new aircraft type in wing, new engines, and a lengthened accessed May.12, 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is 2030. Earlier this decade, Boeing was assessing an found on page 85 of the ICAO Products & Services all new clean sheet 737 replacement, but eventually 218 Boeing, 737 Max Program ‘‘LEAPS’’ into 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. they decided to re-engine the 737 (the 737 Max) Engine Testing, Article by Eric Olson, July 11, 2014. CIR337. Section 1.5 states that that the date to be instead. (Flight Club, Paul Thompson, Here’s The Available at http://www.boeing.com/boeing/ used in determining the applicability of the CO2 Skinny On What’s Next For Boeing, November 16, Features/2014/07/bca_737max_leap_07_11_ standard is the date the application for a Type 2014. Available at http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/ 14.page, (last accessed May 12, 2015). Certificate was submitted to the certificating heres-the-skinny-on-whats-next-for-boeing- 219 The original 737 entered service in 1968. The authority having jurisdiction over the manufacturer 1656206527 (last accessed May 12, 2015), Also, 737 Classic entered service in 1984, and it had new responsible for the aircraft design. Section 1.6 Wichita Business Journal, Daniel McCoy, Boeing high bypass engines, an updated wing, and other specifies that an application shall be effective for planning 737 MAX replacement by 2030—What it aerodynamic improvements. The 737 NGs entered the period specified in the designation of the could mean for Spirit AeroSystems, November 5, service in 1998, and they featured a new wing and airworthiness regulations appropriate to the aircraft 2014. Available at http://www.bizjournals.com/ updated engines. Several mid-life upgrades were type. An application for a Type Certificate is valid wichita/blog/2014/11/boeing-planning-737-max- produced for the 737 NGs, offering improved range, for 5 years. replacement-by-2030-what.html) (last accessed May 222 payload, and efficiency. (ICF International, CO2 These dates assume 5 years from application 12, 2015). We would consider this as a Boeing Analysis of CO2-Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, for the aircraft Type Certificate to entry into service, projection or sketching out of plans for a new Final Report, EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, which is how long an application is valid for a Type aircraft type, but it is not a commitment from March 17, 2015.) Certificate. Boeing. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37794 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules additional CO2 emissions reductions the earliest possible date for an in- EPA requests comments regarding compared to a standard for only new production aircraft standard to allow whether applying an international CO2 aircraft types. The EPA requests time to promulgate domestic regulations standard to in-production aircraft is comments on the timeframe for CO2 and process manufacturer certification consistent with the purpose of the emissions reductions and the likely applications. CAEP did not rule out standard as accepted by the CAEP share of annual aircraft production (or later dates though and could consider Steering Group meeting in 2011: ‘‘to share of in-production aircraft built implementation dates for an in- achieve CO2 emission reductions from annually) that would be affected under production aircraft CO2 standard later the aviation sector beyond expected this alternative approach. than 2023 (CAEP could consider ‘business as usual’ . . . analyzed using If ICAO applies the aircraft CO2 applicability dates for in-production ICAO criteria of technical feasibility, emission standard to in-production aircraft that are five years following the environmental benefit, cost aircraft, and subsequently (provided the new aircraft type applicability date, i.e. effectiveness, and impacts of EPA makes a positive endangerment dates ranging from 2023 to 2028). interdependencies.’’ 229 The finding under CAA section 231(a)) the The EPA seeks comments on both a International Coalition for Sustainable EPA establishes domestic aircraft engine 2023 implementation date and on Aviation (ICSA),230 which is a CAEP standards that are equivalent to the possible later implementation dates for Observer organization, submitted papers ICAO international aircraft CO2 an in-production domestic CO2 (or to CAEP that analyzed this issue. Also, standard, this means that all aircraft GHG) aircraft engine emissions standard a member of ICSA 231 has developed built (in-production) after the effective that would be adopted under CAA similar analyses which indicate that date would need to certify and comply section 231,226 the impact the date of applying the international standard only with the standard to remain in implementation might have on per- to new aircraft types would likely result 227 production. This includes (as described aircraft GHG or CO2 emissions rates in no additional CO2 reductions beyond earlier) in-production aircraft with and the ability of a domestic GHG or what would have occurred absent a CO2 incremental improvements (though we CO2 standard to achieve aircraft standard, either for the near- and mid- reiterate this would not include in-use emission reductions beyond what term, about 5 to 10 years from 2016, or aircraft). As an example of in- would occur in the absence of such a even in the longer-term of 20 years plus. production aircraft, the Gulfstream standard. This occurs, the ICCT states, because the G650, which is currently in production As described in section VI.F.2, the development cycles for new aircraft are and expected to remain so after 2020, technologies considered for the CAEP very lengthy and it is not unusual for would need to certify and comply with analyses are those technologies that will new aircraft to take 8 to 10 years to the new CO2 standard. In the next be widely used on in-production aircraft develop from preliminary design to section we discuss in more detail how by 2016 or shortly thereafter.228 The entry into service and once in service it applicability to in-production aircraft takes significant time for new aircraft could work. 226 Traditionally, international emission types to penetrate the fleet.232 233 standards have first been adopted by ICAO, and C. CAEP Discussion on In-Production subsequently the EPA had initiated rulemakings thereafter. This generation of technology was under CAA section 231 to establish domestic Aircraft Applicability defined within CAEP as a Technology Readiness standards equivalent to ICAO’s standards where Level (TRL) 8—an actual system completed and At the request of the CAEP Steering appropriate. Provided ICAO adopts an international ‘‘flight qualified’’ through test and demonstration— Group meeting in November 2013, aircraft CO2 standard that is consistent with CAA by 2016 or shortly thereafter. section 231 and it is appropriate for domestic needs CAEP began work on defining potential 229 CAEP (U.S. Working Paper), ‘‘U.S. Position on in the United States, we expect to proceed along a the Development of ICAO’S Aircraft CO Standard,’’ options to implement applicability similar approach for the future CAA section 231 2 CAEP–SG/20112–WP/25, Presented by the United requirements for in-production aircraft. aircraft engine CO standard (or aircraft engine GHG 2 States, U.S. Working Paper for CAEP Steering Subsequently, based on the options standard), provided the EPA issues final positive Group meeting, Beijing, China, 12 to 16 September provided to the 2014 Steering Group endangerment and cause or contribute findings 2011. Available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ under CAA section 231. aviation.htm. (last accessed May 12, 2015). meeting, CAEP decided that it should 227 For a standard promulgated under CAA International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation continue to investigate potential in- section 231 to be ‘‘applicable to’’ emissions of air (ICSA), ‘‘ICAO’S CO2 Standard as Part of a Basket production aircraft applicability pollutants from aircraft engines, it could take many of Measures to Meet Emission Reduction Goals’’, options, and that these should be forms, and include multiple elements in addition to ICAO Assembly—38th Session, Executive presented at the July 2015 Steering numeric permissible engine exhaust rate. For Committee, Agenda Item 17—Environmental example, under CAA section 231, EPA’s rules have Group meeting, so that a decision can be Protection, A38–WP/297, EX/99, September 19, long-standing regulations addressing fuel venting, 2013. taken at the 10th meeting of CAEP as well as test procedures. See 40 CFR part 87, 230 The International Coalition for Sustainable (CAEP/10) in February 2016 regarding subparts B, G and H. Given both the absence of a Aviation (ICSA) is a structured network of statutory directive on what form a CAA section 231 whether the international CO2 standard environmental non-governmental organizations standard must take (in contrast to, for example, will apply to in-production aircraft. (NGOs) who share a common concern with civil CAA section 129(a)(4), which requires numerical aviation’s contribution to air quality issues, climate There are a wide range of options under emissions limitations for emissions of certain change and noise, and who are committed to consideration, including both pollutants from solid waste incinerators), and the developing and providing technical expertise, mandatory and voluntary options for U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s 2007 common policy positions and strategies with a view NACAA v. EPA ruling that section 231 confers an to reducing emissions and noise from aviation. See reporting and certification processes for unusually broad degree of discretion in establishing http://www.icsa-aviation.org/ (last accessed May 12, in-production aircraft applicability, but aircraft engine emission standards, it should be 2015). the 2014 Steering Group meeting possible to reconcile an ICAO ‘‘aircraft standard’’ 231 The International Council on Clean requested that CAEP focus on defining that effectively limits aircraft engine GHG emissions Transportation (ICCT) is a member of ICSA, and with a CAA section 231 aircraft engine emission ICCT is an independent nonprofit organization the mandatory options (in contrast to standard that achieves the same result, even if the founded to provide research and technical and options such as voluntary reporting and GHG standards take a different form than the scientific analysis to environmental regulators. See certification). traditional thrust-based NOX aircraft engine http://www.theicct.org/ (last accessed May 12, emission standards recently issued by ICAO and the 2015). 1. Applicability to In-Production EPA. See 40 CFR part 87, subpart C. 232 ICCT, Efficiency Trends for New Commercial Aircraft and Date of Implementation 228 CAEP determined in 2012 that all technology Jet Aircraft 1960 to 2008, November 2009. Available responses would have to be based on technology at http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/ At the 2014 Steering Group meeting, that would be in common use by the time the publications/ICCT_Aircraft_Efficiency_final.pdf CAEP also agreed that 2023 represented standard was to be decided upon in 2016 or shortly (last accessed May 12, 2015). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37795 Another study funded by the EPA aircraft CO2 emissions rates (measured The EPA’s experience with reporting corroborates this analysis.234 The EPA according to the aircraft test procedure programs indicates that the EPA and the requests comments on whether applying that was agreed upon at CAEP/9) as an public would be able to track CO2 the international CO2 aircraft standard alternative to establishing an aircraft emissions rates trends (i.e., trends of only to new aircraft types would be CO2 standard for in-production aircraft. aircraft cruise fuel burn rates) from consistent with the accepted purpose of Although a reporting requirement aircraft over time. Requiring the the international standard (the purpose provides policy relevant information, it reporting of aircraft CO2 emissions rates of the standard that has been accepted does not necessarily translate into trends from aircraft over time is by the CAEP Steering Group). Lastly, the specific emissions reductions. The EPA appropriate and feasible. Requiring EPA requests comment on the recognizes that only a mandatory aircraft manufacturers to report aircraft appropriateness of a possible EPA standard for in-production aircraft CO2 emissions rates shortly after an in- regulation following either of these would ensure that the aircraft CO2 production international aircraft approaches (applicability to only new standard reduces per-aircraft CO2 standard is adopted would enable and aircraft types or applicability to both emissions rates. However, a reporting expedite the tracking and understanding new types and in-production aircraft) requirement could be an important of these emission trends. In addition, which are under consideration at CAEP. component of an in-production aircraft reporting programs typically raise Also, there have been concerns raised CO2 standard, especially if it is awareness of emissions and can in CAEP about applying the implemented shortly after an in- improve the understanding of the international CO2 standard to in- production aircraft standard is adopted. factors that influence emission rates as production aircraft. These concerns It would ensure that CO2 emissions rates well as the actions that can be taken to include (a) the added resource burden data are gathered quickly prior to an reduce emissions. When similar on certificating authorities 235 to process effective date for the final standard methods for monitoring, measurement, manufacturers’ certification (tracking CO2 emissions rates is and reporting are applied across an applications, which will be more beneficial for the reasons discussed later industry, it can lead to more consistent, numerous compared to new aircraft in this section and for potentially accurate, and timely data to inform types; and (b) the potential added costs assisting with the assessment of a future decision-making for individual to manufacturers to certify in- CO2 standard). The EPA requests manufacturers and the EPA (including a production aircraft. The EPA requests comment on an aircraft manufacturer comparison of the CO2 emissions rates comment on these two concerns, reporting requirement that is from aircraft of various manufacturers). including providing supporting implemented soon after the adoption of Thus, a reporting requirement could documentation on the extent of these an in-production international aircraft potentially contribute to efforts to concerns and any other issues the CO2 standard, as a component of the in- identify and implement future aircraft commenters may identify with applying production aircraft CO2 standard. CO2 emission reduction opportunities. the international CO2 standard to in- In 2009 the EPA promulgated a final Independent of action that CAEP may production aircraft. GHG reporting rule that applies to many or may not take in February 2016, the EPA could under its CAA section 114(a) 2. Reporting Requirement for New In- sectors in the United States, including authority pursue a reporting Production Aircraft manufacturers of heavy-duty and offroad vehicles and engines, and requirement for aircraft cruise GHG or CAEP is working to define mandatory manufacturers of aircraft engines.239 240 CO2 emissions rates—to ensure we have in-production aircraft options, and one GHG or CO2 emissions rates data on all possible option is a reporting CO2 standard applies to only new aircraft types, it in-production aircraft (and any new 236 237 238 requirement for in-production could be many years before any data exists in this aircraft types that enter service).241 The database. EPA could use the same metric agreed 233 237 ICCT, ‘‘Could ICAO’s CO2 Standard Not For many years, ICAO has maintained an to at CAEP/9 (and in ICAO circular 337). Aircraft Engine Emissions Databank for landing and Actually Cover Any Aircraft? Yes, If Nobody’s This will be described in detail in Watching’’. Blog, December 9, 2014. Available at takeoff certificated emissions values of NOX, http://www.theicct.org/blogs/staff/could-icaos-co2- hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and smoke number standard-not-cover-any-aircraft (last accessed May (ICAO and the EPA also have aircraft engine Manufacturers of these engines were already 12, 2015). emission standards for these pollutants). It contains measuring and recording CO2 emissions as part of 234 ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- certified emissions data voluntarily reported from existing criteria air pollutant emission requirements Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, each aircraft engine manufacturer. This databank is for the landing and takeoff cycle, but prior to this EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, available at https://easa.europa.eu/document- 2009 rule, these data were not reported to the EPA. 2015. library/icao-aircraft-engine-emissions-databank Manufacturers voluntarily reported the data to 235 Pursuant to CAA section 232, the FAA, after (last accessed May 12, 2015). ICAO, but there was no assurance that the EPA consultation with the EPA, shall prescribe 238 In 2012, the EPA promulgated annual would receive this information, and thus, the 2009 regulations to insure compliance with all standards reporting requirements for aircraft engine emissions rule required reporting of the aircraft engine CO2 prescribed by the EPA under CAA section 231. of NOX, hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and smoke and NOX emissions during the landing and takeoff Section 232 then directs the FAA to include number and related parameters. One of the reasons cycle to the EPA. provisions making the EPA’s standards applicable that the EPA issued these reporting requirements 240 An aircraft manufacturer reporting in the issuance, amendment, modification, was due to the varying amount of voluntary data requirement for in-production aircraft CO2 emission suspension, or revocation of any certificate reported by aircraft engine manufacturers. (U.S. rates would require the reporting of aircraft CO2 authorized by the FAA under part A of subtitle VII EPA, ‘‘Control of Air Pollution from Aircraft and emissions during the cruise phase of operation to of Title 49. Under this unique statutory structure, Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards and Test the EPA. The majority of aircraft CO2 emissions the EPA promulgates the substantive emission Procedures.’’ Final Rule, 77 FR 36342 (June 18, occurs in the cruise phase of operation, and thus, standards, and the FAA enforces the EPA’s 2012)). reporting CO2 emission rates from this phase will standards and insures all necessary inspections are 239 EPA’s 2009 rule on Mandatory Reporting of improve our ability to track full-flight aircraft CO2 accomplished. Greenhouse Gases included engine manufacturers emission rates over time (in addition to reporting 236 Currently, CAEP is developing a publicly for the following mobile source sectors: Highway the aircraft engine CO2 emissions during the available database for aircraft CO2 emissions (CAEP heavy-duty (engine and vehicle), non-road, aircraft, landing and takeoff cycle). Also, the aircraft test is now considering format, parameters, etc. for the locomotive, marine, snowmobiles, and motorcycles. procedure that was agreed upon at CAEP/9 now database), but submissions to this database by Manufacturers of aircraft jet engines of rated output enables us to measure aircraft CO2 emissions during aircraft manufacturers would be voluntary. There (or thrust) greater than 26.7 kilonewtons are cruise. 241 will not be a CAEP mandatory reporting required under this program to report annually to This GHG or CO2 emissions rate data will help requirement associated with this potential CO2 the EPA CO2 and NOX emissions from aircraft to track trends, raise awareness, better understand database. In addition, if the international aircraft engines during the landing and takeoff cycle. the technology in the fleet, etc. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37796 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules VI.D.1 below. In general, the EPA asks 1. CO2 Metric System (MTOM). To account for these for comment on a mandatory reporting The metric system was developed to occurrences, and the variety of methods requirement for in-production aircraft cover a wide range of aircraft types, that manufacturers may use to make GHG or CO2 emissions rates—either as designs, technology, and uses. To do such a change, an adjustment factor was part of the CAEP international standard this, the metric system was designed to added (the RGF with a 0.24 exponent or as an independent domestic differentiate between generations of used in the metric system). requirement to be adopted by the EPA. aircraft and to equitably capture 2. Applicability If the EPA were to pursue this improvements in aerospace technology CAEP has decided the scope of requirement independently from CAEP, (structural, propulsion, and applicability for a future international what lead time would be appropriate for aerodynamic) that contribute to a CO2 standard should be subsonic jet and manufacturers to report the GHG or CO2 reduction in the airplane CO2 emissions. In addition, the metric system propeller-driven aircraft meeting the emissions rates from all of their in- following criteria: 242 accommodates a wide range of production aircraft (after we All subsonic jet aircraft over 12,566 promulgate such a requirement)? technologies and designs which manufacturers may choose to lbs (5,700 kg) MTOM. Additionally, if we were to pursue such All subsonic propeller driven (e.g., an independent reporting requirement, implement to reduce CO2 emissions from their aircraft. turboprop) aircraft over 19,000 lbs (8618 should we require the annual reporting The metric system agreed to at CAEP kg) MTOM, except amphibious of the GHG or CO2 emissions rates from uses multiple Specific Air Range (SAR) airplanes and those designed and used in-production aircraft (and any new test points to represent cruise fuel burn. for fire-fighting operations. 243 type aircraft) to enable us to track any SAR is a traditional measure of aircraft No military aircraft will be subject to updates? We are not at this time cruise performance which measures the this international standard. proposing to promulgate such a distance an aircraft can travel for a unit 3. Certification Requirement requirement in advance of ICAO’s of fuel. This is similar to the decision. Due to the possibility of instantaneous ‘‘miles per gallon’’ CAEP has developed a mature 246 ICAO’s adoption of a reporting readings in many cars today. However, certification requirement that would requirement, we believe it is reasonable here the inverse of SAR is used (1/SAR); allow for the determination of an to await the outcome of that decision in therefore a lower metric value aircraft CO2 metric value for any aircraft order to determine whether to strictly represents a better fuel efficiency. The meeting the applicability criteria set forth above. This certification follow ICAO’s possible reporting SAR data are gathered at three gross requirement incudes the metric system requirement or make changes to it in the weight points. The three equally and test procedure. The test procedure form of an additional U.S. domestic weighted points are used to represent a was based upon industry’s current best requirement, as appropriate. range of day to day aircraft operations.245 The functional form of practices for establishing the cruise D. Metric System, Applicability, and the metric system is provided below. performance of their aircraft, and input Certification Requirement from certification authorities. These procedures include specifications for The CO2 metric system and mature aircraft conformity, weighing, fuel certification procedure were agreed specifications, test condition stability upon by CAEP in 2013.244 This section criteria, required confidence intervals, describes the metric system that was measurement instrumentation required, developed, the scope of aircraft to be and corrections to reference conditions. covered by the international CO2 These CO2 test procedures are based standard, the certification test upon manufacturer’s existing practices procedures that would be used to when certifying new aircraft. This demonstrate compliance with the means that there is a very heavy reliance (1/SAR)avg is calculated at 3 gross weight on dedicated flight testing of the international CO2 standard, and CAEP’s fractions of Maximum Takeoff Mass decision to focus on the entire aircraft (MTOM): aircraft. This potentially poses challenges for the certification of in- for the international CO2 standard. High gross mass: 92% MTOM Mid gross mass: Average of high gross mass production aircraft. Manufacturers have and low gross mass 242 stated that there could be logistical In this case, manufacturers would need to Low gross mass: (0.45 * MTOM) + (0.63 * report the GHG or CO emission rates for in- challenges associated with the 2 (MTOM¥0.924)) production aircraft (aircraft types which have certification of aircraft for CO2 that have already received a Type Certificate, and for which The Reference Geometric Factor (RGF) previously been type certificated (e.g. manufacturers either have existing undelivered is a measure of the fuselage size on a procuring and instrumenting an aircraft sales order or would be willing and able to accept new sales orders) that are built after a certain date, given aircraft. In analyzing various for flight testing). To address this, the which has yet to be determined but would likely metric system options it was found that EPA is currently working within CAEP be a date that occurs shortly after we promulgate in some instances, namely stretch to encourage the development of a the requirement. aircraft, changes in aircraft size, and modified or separate equivalent 243 By applying a reporting requirement to in- thus capability, were not reflected in certification test procedure that would production aircraft after a certain implementation date, this reporting requirement also includes new changes to the aircraft’s gross weight reduce this burden on manufacturers aircraft types that are produced after this implementation date. 245 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification 246 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification 244 As described earlier, the certification Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions requirement is the combination of metric, Standard. Available at http://www.icao.int/ Standard. Available at http://www.icao.int/ procedures, instrumentation and measurement publications/catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last publications/catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last methodology, and compliance requirements. We are accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is using the terms metric system and certification test found on page 85 of the ICAO Products & Services found on page 85 of the ICAO Products & Services procedures to describe these elements of the 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. certification requirement. CIR337. CIR337. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP01JY15.000 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37797 and allow for quicker/simpler For propulsion improvements, could impact many aircraft currently in- certification of in-production types. technologies include enhanced production and comprising much of the compressors (e.g., intercooled current operational fleet, and (3) CO 4. Regulating the Entire Aircraft Instead 2 compressors) and reduced hub-tip ratio stringency levels that could impact of the Engine fans.251 As another example, aircraft that have either just entered The CO2 metric system intends to manufacturers seek higher operating production or are in final design phase equitably reward improvements in pressure ratios (OPR) to improve but will be in-production by the time aircraft technologies that reduce combustion and engine cycle the international CO2 standard becomes emissions, including advances in refinements. effective. We are requesting comment on structures (aircraft weight), propulsion For aerodynamics, friction and lift- the level(s) at which the CO2 stringency (engine specific fuel consumption), and dependent drag are the biggest options should be set, what factors aerodynamics. These three factors are contributors to aerodynamic drag. should be considered in establishing the key to the overall aircraft CO2 Advances in aerodynamics enable stringency of the CO2 standard, and on emissions. In addition, CAEP has significant lift-dependent drag reduction their potential relationship to any future indicated (and EPA agrees) that it is best by maximizing effective wing span CAA section 231 standard. to consider the aircraft as a whole extension. For example, wing-tip The figures below are intended to instead of only the aircraft engine devices can give an increase in the show the range of stringency levels technology in addressing factors that effective aerodynamic span of wings, under consideration at CAEP and CO2 influence CO2 emissions, because of the particularly where wing lengths are metric value levels of today’s in- effects and interaction these key factors limited by airport gate sizes. production and in-development 255 have on the aircraft CO2 emissions from Manufacturers are also looking at ways aircraft. The data shown were generated engines.247 The three factors—and of decreasing the drag caused by skin by the EPA using a commercially technology categories that improve friction. An example of a technology to available aircraft modeling tool called these factors—are described as improve aircraft local skin friction is to PIANO.256 This model contains non- follows: 248 utilize riblets (which are micro-grooves manufacturer provided estimates of the Structures: Reducing basic aircraft on the surface) to maintain laminar flow performance of various aircraft. In weight to increase the commercial via Natural Laminar Flow and Hybrid contrast, CAEP is using manufacturer- payload or extend range for the same Laminar Flow Control (HLFC) to reduce provided estimates of the aircraft metric amount of thrust and fuel burn; turbulent skin friction.252 The first value performance. Propulsion (thermodynamic and production example of a HLFC system The stringency options under propulsion efficiency): Advancing the went into service on the new Boeing consideration at CAEP are functions of overall specific performance of the 787–9 in 2014. the aircraft CO2 Metric Value and have engine, to reduce the fuel burn per unit a correlating parameter of MTOM. They of delivered thrust; and E. Stringency Options are upwards sloping and have a ‘‘kink’’ Aerodynamics: Advancing the aircraft At the Steering Group meeting in at 60,000 kilograms MTOM. The ‘‘kink’’ aerodynamics, to reduce drag and its November 2013, CAEP agreed to analyze was included in the stringency options associate impacts on thrust. a range of CO2 stringency options that as a technical approach to reflect the Specific examples of technologies that cover the full range of aircraft in- different behaviors observed between affect these three factors help to further production and in-development around the larger and smaller aircraft. illustrate that it is best to consider the the world (within the applicable weight The official stringency options under aircraft as a whole in addressing CO2 thresholds and categories), and this consideration at CAEP have not been emissions. For structural improvements, includes the wide range of technology cleared for release outside of the aircraft manufacturers have shown that is currently in the aircraft fleet.253 participating members since significant weight reduction results over Generally, the stringency options that deliberations on the standard are still time due to the progressive introduction are being evaluated fall into three ongoing (proceedings are expected to be of new technologies such as: Advanced categories as follows: (1) CO2 stringency completed at CAEP/10 in February alloys and composite materials, levels that could impact 254 only the 2016). To show the relative efficiency of improved and new manufacturing oldest, least efficient aircraft in- the aircraft, Figure 1 and Figure 2 below processes and techniques (including production around the world, (2) show the aircraft metric values 257 integration and global evaluation middle range CO2 stringency levels that versus MTOM. In place of the official simulation), and new systems (e.g. fly- stringency options under consideration, 249 250 251 by-wire). ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- lines of constant technology are used to Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, notionally show how the stringency 247 ICAO, 2013: CAEP/9 Agreed Certification EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, options were set across the fleet. These Requirement for the Aeroplane CO2 Emissions 2015. Standard. Available at http://www.icao.int/ 252 ICAO, Environmental Report 2010—Aviation lines reflect the three ranges of options publications/catalogue/cat_2015_en.pdf (last and Climate Change, 2010, which is located at discussed above. Lower metric values, accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO Circular 337 is http://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/ for a given MTOM, represent an found on page 85 of the ICAO Products & Services Pages/EnvReport10.aspx.(last accessed May 12, increased fuel efficiency. Figure 1 2015 catalog and is copyright protected; Order No. 2015). CIR33. 253 The ICAO standard has the following 248 ICAO, Environmental Report 2010—Aviation applicability weight thresholds: Maximum takeoff 255 Aircraft that are currently in-development but and Climate Change, 2010, which is located at mass greater than 5,700 kilograms for subsonic jet will be in production by the applicability dates. http://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/ aircraft and maximum takeoff mass greater than These could be new types or significant partial Pages/EnvReport10.aspx (last accessed May 12, 8,618 kilograms for turboprops. redesigned aircraft. 2015). 254 The aircraft shown in these charts are in- 256 PIANO (Project Interactive Analysis and 249 Ibid. production and current in-development. These Optimization), Aircraft Design and Analysis 250 Fly-by-wire refers to a system which transmits aircraft could be impacted by an in-production Software by Dr. Dimitri Simos, Lissys Limited, UK, signals from the cockpit to the aircraft’s control standard in that, if they were above the standard, 1990-present; Available at www.piano.aero (last surfaces electronically rather than mechanically. they would need to either implement a technology accessed May 12, 2015). This is a commercially AirlineRatings.com, Available at http:// response or go out of production. For a new type available aircraft design and performance software www.airlineratings.com/did-you-know.php?id=18 only standard there will be no regulatory suite used across the industry and academia. (last accessed on May 12, 2015, 2015). requirement for these aircraft to respond. 257 Metric values were generated using PIANO. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37798 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules shows the makeup of the current of the CO2 standard. Figure 2 shows announced plans by industry to replace production fleet and the in-development what the EPA expects the market to look existing aircraft with new products. aircraft. This is what CAEP is using as like in 2023, considering the publicly BILLING CODE 6560–50–P the starting point for modeling the effect 3.0 2.5 "iii' r:::: 0 'iii .E"' Q,l N 0 2.0 u... Q,l $ ..Q ...."'u Q,l ;;:::: ...Q,l Q,l ..2 1.5 Ill ...> Q,l $ ..Q Q,l ..2 >Ill u ·;::.... 1.0 Q,l ~ --Lines of Constant Technology Level ~ Ill...... u b. In Production <( 0 In Development 0.5 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 MTOM (kg) Figure 1- Lines of constant technology level over the 2014 in-production and in development fleet VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP01JY15.001 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37799 3.0 2.5 "'r:::: 0 'iii .E"' Q,l N 0 2.0 u... Q,l $ ..Q ...."'u Q,l ;;:::: ...Q,l Q,l ..2 1.5 Ill ...> Q,l $ ..Q Q,l ..2 >Ill u ·;::.... 1.0 Q,l ~ ~ --Lines of Constant Technology Ill... Level ...u <( ~ In Production 0.5 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 MTOM (kg) Figure 2 -Lines of constant technology level over the predicted 2023 in-production fleet A standard set near the upper-most eligible to operate in U.S. air space (e.g., of single aisle aircraft from Boeing and line of constant technology in Figures 1 Russian and Ukraine aircraft). Airbus are in this middle range. and 2 would affect a very modest Aircraft around the middle two lines Aircraft near the lowest line of number of aircraft, namely the oldest, of constant technology in Figures 1 and constant technology in Figures 1 and 2 least efficient types. Many of the aircraft 2 reflect the performance of many reflect the most advanced aircraft that would be affected by such a aircraft that are currently in production currently for sale on the market. These stringency level are being produced in and compose much of the current are aircraft that have either just entered very limited numbers and may not be operational fleet. The current generation production or are still in-development VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP01JY15.002 37800 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules but will be in-production by the consideration and how aircraft fall and worst performing aircraft; Figure 3 effective date of a potential in- within those ranges, because of the provides the perspective from the production the standard. The scale, it is hard to see the range of current in-production and in- replacement single aisle aircraft and technology present in the fleet. development fleet, and Figure 4 projects new twin aisle aircraft from Boeing and Therefore Figure 3 and 4 expand the out to the 2023 fleet. In addition, these Airbus are modeled to be clustered view and show percent differences figures allow one to compare the around the lowest line. between the four constant technology technology level and efficiency of While Figures 1 and 2 show the lines represented in Figures 1 and 2. aircraft with differing MTOMs. ranges of stringency under This allows for a clearer view of best VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37801 5% 0% fj. fj. c fj. -5% fj.fj. fj. 6'ii ..Q fj.A fj. tJ; 0 ~ r:::: ..r::: ~ fj. lil -10% fj. 1- fj. .... t:::. r:::: fj. Ill fj. .... fj. r:::: "' fj. u0 0 -15% -CLI r:::: :.:::i t; CLI ..r::: '\fj.e .!!!I :::c 6.0 .s -20% fj. 0 r:::: fj.fj. '[a.... IS. oo Ill 0 ~ -25% ~~ 0 0 0 co 0 --Lines of Constant 0 Technology Level fj. A In Production -30% fj. 0 In Development 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 MTOM (kg) Figure 3- Percent from least efficient line of constant technology for the 2014 in production and in development fleet VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP01JY15.003 37802 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 5% 0% fj. fj. fj. -5% fj.fj. fj. 6'ii 0 0 r:::: ..r::: ~ lil -10% fj. 1-.... r:::: t:::. Ill fj. t; fj. r:::: fj. u0 0 -15% -CLI r:::: :.:::i.... "'CLI ..r::: '\fj.e .!!!I :::c fj.fj. fj. .s -20% fj. r:::: fj.fj. '[a IS. 6.fj. .... fj. Ill ~ -25% ~~ A ~ --Lines of Constant fj. -30% Technology Level fj. t:::. In Production 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 MTOM (kg) Figure 4 - Percent from least efficient line of constant technology for the predicted 2023 in-production fleet BILLING CODE 6560–50–C relationship to any future CAA section types and in-production aircraft at a The EPA requests comment on a range 231 standard. level closer to what could be achieved of stringency options within the CAEP is considering the possibility of by each aircraft type. Issues surrounding constant technology lines identified in adopting two separate CO2 stringency the potential for in-production Figure 1 and Figure 2, on their potential levels, one for new type aircraft and one standards are discussed in section impact, and on their potential for in-production aircraft. This would VI.C.1. allow stringencies to be set for both new VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP01JY15.004 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37803 There is ongoing discussion on what international CO2 standards. CAEP is A top-down approach is being used to appropriate levels of stringency may be still determining the best way to model large changes to aircraft design, for new type and in-production aircraft. conduct portions of this analysis. The such as what would be seen in Any final decisions will have to wait inputs that have been developed by the significant partial redesigns or new until the full analysis has been CAEP include non-recurring costs data types. For significant partial redesigns conducted at CAEP. As explained in and technology responses for the that result in new series of an sections VI.B and VI.C.1, new types are various stringency options under established model, these types of infrequently developed and typically consideration. This section describes changes may include: Redesigned represent a step change in technology. It the development of these inputs. The wings, new engine options, longer may be possible to set a level of EPA requests comments on how the fuselages, improved aerodynamics, or stringency that is reasonable for in- modeling should be conducted to reduced weight. When making production aircraft to meet, but at the differentiate in-production and new same time provide an incentive for new type scenarios. significant changes to an aircraft many type aircraft to improve. However, this other changes and updates get wrapped 1. Non-Recurring Costs (engineering is challenging to develop because of the into the process that do not have an development costs) significant efficiency improvements effect on the CO2 emissions of the typically seen between in-production CAEP developed a single cost aircraft, and significant partial redesigns and new type aircraft. The EPA requests estimate that could be used for all may not have been spurred by changes comment on the potential for aircraft as a function of MTOM and to fuel efficiency (CO2 reductions). This developing a standard with two percent metric value improvement confluence of changes led CAEP to agree stringency levels at CAEP. required. Based on past practice, that it was reasonable to use the full The development of a new aircraft industry provided estimates for development cost for a new type (clean type standard must take into developing clean sheet designs and sheet) or significant partial redesign for consideration the standard’s potential significant partial redesigns, only major changes. Total costs for past effect on any future type designs. Even including high level information that projects were used to estimate non- the most stringent option under has been made available to the public. recurring cost for the CAEP analysis. consideration at CAEP is still based on This was considered to be a top down This type of aircraft improvement/ technology available today. Any new estimate because it included all aircraft development program has historically development costs (airworthiness type aircraft that may be developed and ranged approximately from 1 to 15 certified 10 years or more from now certification, noise, etc.) not just those billion Dollars (U.S.) depending on the would be expected to use more for CO improvements. 2 size of the aircraft and scope of the advanced fuel efficient technology that Since the initial dataset provided by is not yet developed or tested. industry only included major changes improvements desired. The implications for an in-production (or major improvements), the EPA saw A bottom-up approach was used, by standard are more significant in the near the need to supplement this dataset CAEP, to model smaller incremental term for manufacturers. Aircraft with an estimate of CO2-only changes metric value changes to aircraft design. currently in-production, and not (or CO2-only improvements), which was The CAEP agreed that the above top- meeting the level of an in-production considered to be a bottom up estimate. down approach would not be the best standard, would need to be modified to These changes would be much smaller, approach for minor changes or meet the standard to remain in on the order of a few percent, and could incremental improvements because the production; this would take time and be applied to in-production aircraft at a significant design efforts include many resources from the manufacturers. The cost much lower than projected by changes that would not be required for full implications of this have not yet industry. The EPA contracted with ICF smaller CO2 reductions. The EPA used been resolved in CAEP. However, we International to develop an estimate of the information gathered by ICF expect that the effect on aircraft CO 2 the cost to modify in production aircraft International to provide input on the emissions would be minimal for less to comply with a CO standard. ICF 2 cost for individual technologies which stringent options. The aircraft with the International conducted a detailed were used to build up non-recurring highest CO2 metric values generally rely literature search, conducted a number of costs for these incremental on older technology and were designed interviews with industry leaders, and in the 1980’s to early 1990’s. Many of did its own modeling to estimate the improvements (a bottom-up approach). these aircraft are also expected to be cost of making modifications to in The technologies available to make replaced with updated versions in the production aircraft.258 The results from incremental improvements to aircraft is near future, before a CO2 standard this peer-reviewed study (small wide ranging and aircraft specific. Some would be implemented and go into changes) were then combined with examples of technologies that could be effect. The EPA requests comment on inputs from the industry and the other integrated into an aircraft for the levels at which in-production and CAEP participants (large changes) to incremental improvements include new type standards might be set and on develop the CO2 technology response improved fan blade design or reduction what factors should be considered in and cost estimation. For the cost in turbine clearances in the engine, establishing the stringency. estimation, the CAEP combined the two reducing the gap between control F. Costs, Technology Responses for different methodologies to develop the surfaces, carbon brake pads, or 259 Stringency Options, and Cost- final cost surface. advanced wing tip devices. As an Effectiveness Analysis example, ICF International estimated 258 ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- that depending on the additive nature of The EPA has been involved in CAEP’s Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, specific technologies and the magnitude effort to analyze the CO stringency EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, 2 improvement required, the cost to options and the potential costs and 2015. 259 environmental impacts that would The two datasets were merged together and a incrementally improve the Boeing 767 single cost surface was then generated to calculate could range from approximately 230 result from both new type only CO2 the cost to modify any aircraft based on the MTOM, standards and in-production and percent metric value change needed. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37804 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules million to 1.3 billion US dollars (3.5% standard, even though the standard stringent than ICAO standards. A to 11% metric value improvement).260 would not apply to them and has participating member state (or nation) assumed that the aviation sector is 2. Technology Responses that adopts more stringent standards is competitive enough that market forces obligated to notify ICAO of the When CAEP started to develop the will drive manufacturers to voluntarily differences between its standards and technology responses for the stringency upgrade their fleet to meet any new type ICAO’s standards.263 options, a determination needed to be aircraft standard. This scenario is made on what level of technology could Section 231(b) of the CAA requires modeled no differently from a that any emission standards ‘‘take effect be considered as a response to the mandatory in-production standard. The after such period as the Administrator standard. At the outset, CAEP decided EPA requests comment on modeling finds necessary (after consultation with the international CO2 standard would be cost and environmental impacts of new- the Secretary of Transportation) to a technology following standard, rather type standards based on the assumed permit the development and application than a technology forcing one. This attainment of such emissions levels by of the requisite technology, giving means that the international standard in-production aircraft. appropriate consideration to the cost of would reflect a level of emissions Because CAEP has modeled all in- compliance during such period.’’ 42 performance that is already achieved by production aircraft as responding by the U.S.C. 7571(b). Section 231(a)(2)(B) some portion of current in-production implementation date of the new-type provides that the Administrator shall aircraft. standard, CAEP has by definition, consult with the Administrator of the Additionally, CAEP determined in performed an in-production analysis. 2012 that all technology responses More stringent options for new-type FAA on standards, and ‘‘shall not would have to be based on technology aircraft may be restricted due to the change the aircraft engine emission that would be in common use by the assumed in-production impacts. standards if such change would time the standard was to be decided CAEP has recognized that its past significantly increase noise and upon in 2016 or shortly thereafter. This methods for modeling a new-type only adversely affect safety.’’ 42 U.S.C. generation of technology was defined standard (by assuming in-production 7571(a)(2)(B). within CAEP as a Technology Readiness 261 aircraft comply) may not be sufficient As discussed in the 2005 rule (CAEP/ Level (TRL) 8 —an actual system 264 for the CO standard analysis. Thus, 4 aircraft engine NOX standard), the completed and qualified through test 2 CAEP developed new methods to model EPA needs to have a technical basis for and demonstration—by 2016 or shortly what cost and environmental impacts expecting the standards will be thereafter. This means that the would result from only new types being achievable in a specific period of time. technology responses considered for the regulated under a new-type emission While the statutory language of section future international CO standard, going 2 231 is not identical to other provisions into effect in 2020 or 2023 for new types standard. CAEP is still determining the and potentially in 2023 or later for in- best way to conduct an analysis of in title II of the CAA that direct the EPA production, are based on what will be impacts only on new types using the to establish technology-based standards in operation by 2016 or shortly agreed upon technology responses and for various types of mobile sources, the thereafter. Considering the technology cost estimates. The EPA requests EPA interprets its authority under response assumptions agreed to at comments on how to model cost section 231 to be similar to those CAEP, the EPA requests comment on impacts for only new types for the provisions that grant us significant future international CO2 standard, if it discretion to identify a reasonable how the international CO2 standard should be established so that it meets were to apply only to new types. The balance of specified emissions the purpose of the standard—to achieve EPA also requests comment on how the reduction, and cost without adversely reductions beyond what would have modeling should be conducted to affecting safety or increasing noise. See, been achieved in the absence of a differentiate in-production and new e.g., Husqvarna AB v. EPA, 254 F.3d 195 standard. type scenarios. (D.C. Cir. 2001) (upholding the EPA’s promulgation of technology-based 3. Cost Effectiveness Analysis G. Request for Comment on EPA’s Domestic Implementation of standards for small non-road engines CAEP is currently conducting the cost under section 213(a)(3) of the CAA). In International CO2 Standards effectiveness analysis for new-type and this regard, we note CAEP’s intent for in-production aircraft. With rare As described earlier in section II.E, the purpose of the international CO2 exceptions CAEP has historically traditionally international emission standard (as accepted by the CAEP developed new type only standards. To standards for aircraft engines have first Steering Group in 2011), which is to been adopted by ICAO, and model cost impacts of a new type achieve aircraft CO2 emissions standard, CAEP has historically used an subsequently the EPA has initiated reductions beyond that which would assumption that the in-production rulemakings to establish domestic aircraft will respond to the new type standards that are of at least equal 263 According to the Chicago Convention, a stringency as ICAO’s engine standards. participating member State that adopts regulations 260 262 ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- However, the Chicago Convention, or practices differing in any particular respect from Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, which established ICAO, recognizes that those established by an international standard is EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, March 17, ICAO member states may adopt their obligated to notify ICAO of the differences between 2015. its standards and ICAO’s standards. However, 261 TRL is a measure of Technology Readiness own unique standards that are more member States that wish to use aircraft in Level. CAEP has defined TRL8 as the ‘‘actual international transportation must adopt emissions system completed and ‘flight qualified’ through test 262 ICAO, 2006: Doc 7300-Convention on standards and other recommended practices that and demonstration.’’ TRL is a scale from 1 to 9, International Civil Aviation, Ninth edition, are at least as stringent as ICAO’s standards. TRL1 is the conceptual principle, and TRL9 is the Document 7300/9. Available at: http:// Member States may ban the use of any aircraft ‘‘actual system ‘flight proven’ on operational www.icao.int/publications/ within their airspace that does not meet ICAO flight.’’ The TRL scale was originally developed by ICAOProducts&Services2015catalogue/cat_ standards. 264 NASA. ICF International, CO2 Analysis of CO2- 2015en.pdf (last accessed May 12, 2015). The ICAO U.S. EPA, ‘‘Control of Air Pollution from Reducing Technologies for Aircraft, Final Report, Document 7300 is found on page 1 of the ICAO Aircraft and Aircraft Engines; Emission Standards EPA Contract Number EP–C–12–011, see page 40, Products & Services 2015 catalog and is copyright and Test Procedures;’’ Final Rule, 70 FR 2521, March 17, 2015. protected; Order No. 7300. November 17, 2005. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37805 have occurred in the absence of a section 231 to implement these requirements but rather set forth the standard. standards domestically ensuring Administrator’s proposed determination In ruling on a petition for judicial transparency and the opportunity for that GHG emissions from certain classes review of the 2005 rule,265 the U.S. public comment. Any changes made in of aircraft engines—those used in U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit response to OMB recommendations covered aircraft—cause or contribute to held that the EPA’s approach in that have been documented in the docket. air pollution that may be reasonably action of tracking the ICAO standards anticipated to endanger public health B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) was reasonable and permissible under and welfare. Thus, Executive Order the CAA. NACAA v. EPA, 489 F.3d This action does not impose an 13175 does not apply to this action. 1221, 1230–32 (D.C. Cir. 2007). The information collection burden under the G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Court also held that section 231 of the PRA. The proposed endangerment and Children from Environmental Health CAA confers a broad degree of cause or contribute findings under CAA Risks and Safety Risks discretion on the EPA to adopt aircraft section 231 do not contain any emission standards that the Agency information collection activities. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not determines are reasonable. Id. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Although the EPA has traditionally economically significant as defined in established domestic standards that I certify that this action will not have Executive Order 12866. The track the ICAO standards, for purposes a significant economic impact on a Administrator considered climate of having a robust ANPR process, we substantial number of small entities change risks to children as part of this ask for comment on the possibility of under the RFA. This action will not proposed endangerment finding under the EPA adopting a more stringent impose any requirements on small CAA section 231. This action’s aircraft engine emissions standard than entities. The proposed endangerment discussion of climate change impacts on ICAO, provided ICAO/CAEP and cause or contribute findings under public health and welfare is found in promulgates a standard in 2016 and the CAA section 231 do not in-and-of- section IV of this preamble. Specific EPA makes a positive endangerment themselves impose any new discussion with regard to children are finding. In the same vein, the EPA requirements but rather set forth the contained in sections IV and I.D of the requests that commenters consider the Administrator’s proposed determination preamble titled ‘‘Children’s following factors (among others): The that GHG emissions from certain classes Environmental Health.’’ A copy of all potential to reflect the CO2 emissions of aircraft engines—those used in U.S. documents pertaining to the impacts on performance of products from U.S. covered aircraft—cause or contribute to children’s health from climate change manufacturers, competitive advantages air pollution that may be reasonably have been placed in the public docket and disadvantages for U.S. anticipated to endanger public health for this action. manufacturers, certification reciprocity and welfare. Accordingly, this action affords no opportunity for the EPA to H. Executive Order 13211: Actions with certificating authorities of other Concerning Regulations That nations, and the EPA’s role in the fashion for small entities less burdensome compliance or reporting Significantly Affect Energy Supply, ongoing ICAO negotiations. In addition, Distribution or Use the EPA asks for comment on what requirements or timetables or action the EPA should take if the ICAO/ exemptions from all or part of the This action is not a ‘‘significant CAEP process fails to result in the proposal. energy action’’ because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the adoption of an aircraft CO2 emissions D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act standard. supply, distribution or use of energy. (UMRA) Further, we have concluded that this VII. Statutory Authority and Executive This action does not contain any action is not likely to have any adverse Order Reviews unfunded mandate as described in energy effects because the proposed A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does endangerment and cause or contribute Planning and Review and Executive not significantly or uniquely affect small findings under section 231 do not in- Order 13563: Improving Regulation and governments. The action imposes no and-of themselves impose any new Regulatory Review enforceable duty on any state, local or requirements but rather set forth the tribal governments or the private sector. Administrator’s proposed determination This action is a significant regulatory E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism that GHG emissions from certain classes action because it raises novel policy of aircraft engines—those used in U.S. issues. Accordingly, it was submitted to This action does not have federalism covered aircraft—cause or contribute to the Office of Management and Budget implications. It will not have substantial air pollution that may be reasonably (OMB) for review. This action proposes direct effects on the states, on the anticipated to endanger public health a finding that GHG emissions from relationship between the national and welfare. aircraft cause or contribute to air government and the states, or on the pollution that may be reasonably distribution of power and I. National Technology Transfer and anticipated to endanger public health responsibilities among the various Advancement Act (NTTAA) and welfare along with an ANPR which levels of government. This action does not involve technical provides an overview of the standards. international efforts to reduce GHG F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation emissions, progress to date in and Coordination with Indian Tribal J. Executive Order 12898: Federal establishing global aircraft standards Governments Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and that achieve meaningful CO2 reductions This action does not have tribal and, if the EPA finds that aircraft GHG implications as specified in Executive Low-Income Populations emissions do cause or contribute to Order 13175. The proposed The EPA believes this action will not endangerment, the potential use of CAA endangerment and cause or contribute have potential disproportionately high findings under CAA section 231 do not and adverse human health or 265 Ibid. in-and-of-themselves impose any new environmental effects on minority, low- VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 37806 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules income, or indigenous populations been placed in the public docket for this List of Subjects because this action does not affect the action. 40 CFR Part 87 level of protection provided to human K. Determination Under Section 307(d) health or the environment. The Environmental protection, Air Administrator considered climate Section 307(d)(1)(V) of the CAA pollution control, Aircraft, Aircraft engines. change risks to minority, low-income, provides that the provisions of section and indigenous populations as part of 307(d) apply to ‘‘such other actions as 40 CFR Part 1068 this proposed endangerment finding the administrator may determine.’’ under CAA section 231. This action’s Environmental protection, Pursuant to section 307(d)(1)(V), the Administrative practice and procedure, discussion of climate change impacts on Administrator determines that this Confidential business information, public health and welfare is found in action is subject to the provisions of Imports, Motor vehicle pollution, section IV of the preamble. Specific section 307(d). Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping discussion with regard to minority, low- requirements, Warranties. income, and indigenous populations are VIII. Statutory Provisions and Legal found in sections IV and I.E of this Authority Dated: June 10, 2015. preamble titled ‘‘Environmental Gina McCarthy, Statutory authority for this action Justice.’’ A copy of all documents Administrator. comes from 42 U.S.C. 7571, 7601 and pertaining to the impacts on these [FR Doc. 2015–15192 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] 7607. communities from climate change have BILLING CODE 6560–50–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:14 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYP2.SGM 01JYP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Vol. 80 Wednesday, No. 126 July 1, 2015 Part III Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Part 413 Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal Disease Prospective Payment System, and Quality Incentive Program; Proposed Rules VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37808 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND following address ONLY: Centers for viewing by the public, including any HUMAN SERVICES Medicare & Medicaid Services, personally identifiable or confidential Department of Health and Human business information that is included in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Attention: CMS–1628–P, Mail a comment. We post all comments Services Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security received before the close of the Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. comment period on the following Web 42 CFR Part 413 4. By hand or courier. Alternatively, site as soon as possible after they have [CMS–1628–P] you may deliver (by hand or courier) been received: http:// your written comments ONLY to the www.regulations.gov. Follow the search RIN 0938–AS48 following addresses prior to the close of instructions on that Web site to view the comment period: public comments. Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal a. For delivery in Washington, DC— Comments received timely will also Disease Prospective Payment System, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid be available for public inspection as and Quality Incentive Program Services, Department of Health and they are received, generally beginning AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Human Services, Room 445–G, Hubert approximately 3 weeks after publication Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. H. Humphrey Building, 200 of a document, at the headquarters of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid ACTION: Proposed rule. Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201 Services, 7500 Security Boulevard, SUMMARY: This rule proposes to update (Because access to the interior of the Baltimore, Maryland 21244, Monday and make revisions to the End-Stage Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not through Friday of each week from 8:30 Renal Disease (ESRD) prospective readily available to persons without a.m. to 4 p.m. To schedule an payment system (PPS) for calendar year Federal government identification, appointment to view public comments, (CY) 2016. The proposals in this rule are commenters are encouraged to leave phone 1–800–743–3951. necessary to ensure that ESRD facilities their comments in the CMS drop slots Electronic Access receive accurate Medicare payment located in the main lobby of the amounts for furnishing outpatient building. A stamp-in clock is available This Federal Register document is maintenance dialysis treatments during for persons wishing to retain a proof of also available from the Federal Register calendar year 2016. This rule also filing by stamping in and retaining an online database through Federal Digital proposes to set forth requirements for extra copy of the comments being filed.) System (FDsys), a service of the U.S. the ESRD Quality Incentive Program b. For delivery in Baltimore, MD— Government Printing Office. This (QIP) for CY 2016. In an effort to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid database can be accessed via the incentivize ongoing quality Services, Department of Health and internet at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/. improvement among eligible providers, Human Services, 7500 Security Addenda Are Only Available Through the ESRD QIP proposes to establish and Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1810. the Internet on the CMS Web site revise requirements for quality reporting If you intend to deliver your In the past, a majority of the Addenda and measurement, including the comments to the Baltimore address, call referred to throughout the preamble of inclusion of new quality measures for telephone number (410) 786–9994 in our proposed and final rules were payment year (PY) 2019 and beyond and advance to schedule your arrival with available in the Federal Register. updates to programmatic policies for the one of our staff members. However, the Addenda of the annual PY 2017 and PY 2018 ESRD QIP. Comments erroneously mailed to the addresses indicated as appropriate for proposed and final rules will no longer DATES: To be assured consideration, be available in the Federal Register. comments must be received at one of hand or courier delivery may be delayed and received after the comment period. Instead, these Addenda to the annual the addresses provided below, no later proposed and final rules will be than 5 p.m. E.S.T. on August 25, 2015. For information on viewing public comments, see the beginning of the available only through the Internet on ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. the CMS Web site. The Addenda to the to file code CMS–1628–P. Because of End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: staff and resource limitations, we cannot Prospective Payment System (PPS) rules accept comments by facsimile (FAX) Stephanie Frilling, (410) 786–4507, for are available at: http://www.cms.gov/ transmission. issues related to the ESRD PPS, ESRDPayment/PAY/list.asp. Readers You may submit comments in one of refinement of the case-mix payment who experience any problems accessing four ways (please choose only one of the adjustments, drug designation process, any of the Addenda to the proposed and ways listed): delay of payment for oral-only drugs final rules of the ESRD PPS that are 1. Electronically. You may submit and biologicals, Part B payment for self- posted on the CMS Web site identified electronic comments on this regulation administered drugs, and reporting of above should contact Michelle Cruse at to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow medical director fees on the cost report. 410–786–7540. the ‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions. Michelle Cruse, (410) 786–7540, for 2. By regular mail. You may mail issues related to the ESRD PPS, Table of Contents written comments to the following refinement of the facility-level payment To assist readers in referencing address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & adjustments, and policy clarifications. sections contained in this preamble, we Medicaid Services, Department of Heidi Oumarou, (410) 786–7342, for are providing a Table of Contents. Some Health and Human Services, Attention: issues related to the ESRD PPS Market of the issues discussed in this preamble CMS–1628–P, P.O. Box 8010, Baltimore, Basket Update. affect the payment policies, but do not MD 21244–8010. Tamyra Garcia, (410) 786–0856, for require changes to the regulations in the Please allow sufficient time for mailed issues related to the ESRD QIP. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). comments to be received before the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Inspection I. Executive Summary close of the comment period. of Public Comments: All comments A. Purpose 3. By express or overnight mail. You received before the close of the 1. End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) may send written comments to the comment period are available for Prospective Payment System (PPS) VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37809 2. End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Quality iii. Proposed Productivity Adjustment 3. Proposed Payment Reductions for the PY Incentive Program (QIP) iv. Calculation of the ESRDB Market Basket 2018 ESRD QIP B. Summary of the Major provisions Update, Adjusted for Multifactor 4. Data Validation 1. ESRD PPS Productivity for CY 2016 G. Proposed Requirements for the PY 2019 2. ESRD QIP b. The Proposed CY 2016 ESRD PPS Wage ESRD QIP C. Summary of Cost and Benefits Indices 1. Proposed Replacement of the Four 1. Impacts of the Proposed ESRD PPS i. Annual Update of the Wage Index Measures Currently in the Dialysis 2. Impacts of the Proposed ESRD QIP ii. Implementation of New Labor Market Adequacy Clinical Measure Topic II. Calendar Year (CY) 2016 End-Stage Renal Delineations Beginning with the PY 2019 Program Disease (ESRD) Prospective Payment c. CY 2016 Update to the Outlier Policy Year System (PPS) i. CY 2016 Update to the Outlier Services 2. Proposed Measures for the PY 2019 A. Background MAP Amounts and Fixed-Dollar Loss ESRD QIP 1. Statutory Background Amounts a. PY 2018 Measures Continuing for PY 2. System for Payment of Renal Dialysis ii. Outlier Policy Percentage 2019 and Future Payment Years Services d. Annual Updates and Policy Changes to b. Proposed New Dialysis Adequacy 3. Updates to the ESRD PPS the CY 2016 ESRD PPS Clinical Measure Beginning with the PY B. Provisions of the Proposed Rule i. ESRD PPS Base Rate 2019 ESRD QIP 1. Analysis and Proposed Revision of the ii. Annual Payment Rate Update for CY c. Proposed New Reporting Measures Payment Adjustments under the ESRD 2016 Beginning with the PY 2019 ESRD QIP PPS 3. Section 217(c) of PAMA and the ESRD i. Proposed Ultrafiltration Rate Reporting a. Development and Implementation of the PPS Drug Designation Process Measure ESRD PPS Payment Adjustments a. Stakeholder Comments from the CY ii. Proposed Full-Season Influenza b. Regression Model Used to Develop 2015 ESRD PPS Proposed and Final Vaccination Reporting Measure Payment Adjustment Factors Rules 3. Proposed Performance Period for the PY i. Regression Analysis b. Background 2019 ESRD QIP ii. Dependent Variables c. Determination of When an Oral-Only 4. Proposed Performance Standards, (1) Average Cost per Treatment for Renal Dialysis Service Drug is No Longer Achievement Thresholds, and Composite Rate Services Oral-Only Benchmarks for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP (2) Average Medicare Allowable Payment d. Application of ESRD Drug and a. Proposed Performance Standards, (MAP) for Previously Separately Billable Biological Policies after Implementation Achievement Thresholds, and Services of the ESRD PPS Benchmarks for the Clinical Measures in e. Implementation of a Transitional Drug iii. Independent Variables the PY 2019 ESRD QIP Add-On Payment Adjustment under the iv. Control Variables b. Estimated Performance Standards, ESRD PPS c. Analysis and Revision of the Payment Achievement Thresholds, and 4. Delay of Payment for Oral-Only Renal Adjustments Benchmarks for the Clinical Measures Dialysis Services Proposed for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP i. Adult Case-Mix Payment Adjustments 5. Reporting Medical Director Fees on c. Proposed Performance Standards for the (1) Patient Age ESRD Facility Cost Reports PY 2019 Reporting Measures (2) Body Surface Area (BSA) and Body C. Clarifications Regarding the ESRD PPS Mass Index (BMI) 1. Laboratory Renal Dialysis Services 5. Proposal for Scoring the PY 2019 ESRD (3) Onset of Dialysis 2. Renal Dialysis Service Drugs and QIP Measures (4) Comorbidities Biologicals a. Scoring Facility Performance on Clinical d. Proposed Refinement of Facility-Level a. 2014 Part D Call Letter Follow-up Measures Based on Achievement Adjustments b. Oral or Other Forms of Renal Dialysis b. Scoring Facility Performance on Clinical i. Low-Volume Payment Adjustment Injectable Drugs and Biologicals Measures Based on Improvement ii. CY 2016 Proposals for the Low-Volume c. Reporting of Composite Rate Drugs c. Scoring the ICH CAHPS Clinical Payment Adjustment (LVPA) III. End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Quality Measure (1) Background Incentive Program (QIP) for Payment d. Proposal for Calculating Facility (2) The United States Government Year (PY) 2019 Performance on Reporting Measures Accountability Office Study on the A. Background 6. Weighting the Clinical Measure Domain LVPA B. Clarification of ESRD QIP Terminology: and Total Performance Score (3) Addressing GAO’s Recommendations ‘‘CMS Certification Number (CCN) Open i. Proposal for Weighting the Clinical (4) Elimination of the Grandfathering Date’’ Measure Domain for PY 2019 Provision C. Meeting PAMA Requirements for ii. Weighting the Total Performance Score (5) Geographic Proximity Mileage Criterion Measures Related to Conditions Treated 7. Proposed Minimum Data for Scoring iii. Geographic Payment Adjustment for with Oral-Only Drugs in the ESRD QIP Measures for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP ESRD Facilities Located in Rural Areas D. Sub-Regulatory Measure Maintenance in 8. Proposed Payment Reductions for the PY (1) Background the ESRD QIP 2019 ESRD QIP (2) Determining a Facility-Level Payment E. Proposed Requirements for the PY 2017 H. Future Achievement Threshold Policy Adjustment for ESRD Facilities Located ESRD QIP Under Consideration in Rural Areas Beginning in CY 2016 1. Proposal to Modify the Small Facility I. Monitoring Access to Dialysis Facilities (3) Further Investigation into Targeting Adjuster Calculation for All Clinical IV. Advancing Health Information Exchange High-Cost Rural ESRD Facilities Measures for the PY 2017 ESRD QIP and V. Collection of Information Requirements e. Proposed Refinement of the Case-Mix Future Payment Years VI. Response to Comments Adjustments for Pediatric Patients 2. Proposal to Reinstate Qualifying Patient VII. Economic Analyses f. Proposed Refinement Payment Attestations for the ICH CAHPS Clinical A. Regulatory Impact Analysis Multipliers Measure 1. Introduction i. Proposed Adult Case-Mix and Facility- F. Proposed Requirements for the PY 2018 2. Statement of Need Level Payment Adjustments ESRD QIP 3. Overall Impact ii. Proposed Pediatric Case-Mix Payment 1. Estimated Performance Standards, B. Detailed Economic Analysis Adjustments Achievement Thresholds, and 1. CY 2016 End-Stage Renal Disease 2. Proposed CY 2016 ESRD PPS Update Benchmarks for the Clinical Measures Prospective Payment System a. ESRD Bundled Market Basket Finalized for the PY 2018 ESRD QIP a. Effects on ESRD Facilities i. Overview and Background 2. Proposed Modification to Scoring b. Effects on Other Providers ii. Proposed Market Basket Update Increase Facility Performance on the Pain c. Effects on the Medicare Program Factor and Labor-Related Share for ESRD Assessment and Follow-Up Reporting d. Effects on Medicare Beneficiaries Facilities for CY 2016 Measure e. Alternatives Considered VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37810 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 1. CY 2016 End-Stage Renal Disease ICD–10–CM International Classification of I. Executive Summary 2. CY End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Disease, 10th Revision, Clinical Incentive Program Modification A. Purpose C. Accounting Statement ICH CAHPS In-Center Hemodialysis 1. End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis Providers and Systems Prospective Payment System (PPS) X. Federalism Analysis IGI IHS Global Insight On January 1, 2011, we implemented XI. Congressional Review Act IIC Inflation-indexed charge the ESRD PPS, a case-mix adjusted XII. Files Available to the Public via the IPPS Inpatient Prospective Payment System bundled prospective payment system Internet IUR Inter-unit reliability for renal dialysis services furnished by Regulations Text KDIGO Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes ESRD facilities. This rule proposes to Acronyms KDOQI Kidney Disease Outcome Quality update and make revisions to the End- Because of the many terms to which Initiative Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) prospective we refer by acronym in this proposed Kt/V A measure of dialysis adequacy where payment system (PPS) for calendar year rule, we are listing the acronyms used K is dialyzer clearance, t is dialysis time, (CY) 2016. Section 1881(b)(14) of the and V is total body water volume Social Security Act (the Act), as added and their corresponding meanings in LDO Large Dialysis Organization alphabetical order below: by section 153(b) of the Medicare MAC Medicare Administrative Contractor Improvements for Patients and MAP Medicare Allowable Payment ABLE The Achieving a Better Life Providers Act of 2008 (MIPPA) (Pub. L. Experience Act of 2014 MCP Monthly Capitation Payment AHRQ Agency for Healthcare Research and MIPPA Medicare Improvements for Patients 110–275), and section 1881(b)(14)(F) of Quality and Providers Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110– the Act, as added by section 153(b) of AMCC Automated Multi-Channel 275) MIPPA and amended by section 3401(h) Chemistry MMA Medicare Prescription Drug, of the Affordable Care Act Public Law ANOVA Analysis of Variance Improvement and Modernization Act of 111–148), established that beginning CY ARM Adjusted Ranking Metric 2003 2012, and each subsequent year, the ASP Average Sales Price MMEA Medicare and Medicaid Extenders Secretary shall annually increase ATRA The American Taxpayer Relief Act of Act of 2010 Pub. L. 111–309 payment amounts by an ESRD market 2012 MFP Multifactor Productivity BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis NHSN National Healthcare Safety Network basket increase factor, reduced by the BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics NQF National Quality Forum productivity adjustment described in BMI Body Mass Index NQS National Quality Strategy section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act. BSA Body Surface Area MFP Multifactor Productivity Section 632 of the American Taxpayer BSI Bloodstream Infection MIPPA Medicare Improvements for Patients Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) (Pub. L No. CB Consolidated Billing and Providers Act of 2008 112–240) included several provisions CBSA Core based statistical area MLR Minimum Lifetime Requirement that apply to the ESRD PPS. Section CCN CMS Certification Number MSA Metropolitan statistical areas 632(a) of ATRA added section CDC Centers for Disease Control and NAMES National Association of Medical 1881(b)(14)(I) to the Act, which required Prevention Equipment Suppliers the Secretary of the Department of CKD Chronic Kidney Disease NHSN National Healthcare Safety Network CLABSI Central Line Access Bloodstream NQF National Quality Forum Health and Human Services (the Infections NQS National Quality Strategy Secretary), by comparing per patient CFR Code of Federal Regulations OBRA Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act utilization data from 2007 with such CIP Core Indicators Project OMB Office of Management and Budget data from 2011, to reduce the single CMS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid PAMA Protecting Access to Medicare Act of payment amount to reflect the Services 2014 Secretary’s utilization of ESRD-related CPM Clinical Performance Measure PC Product category drugs and biologicals. We finalized the CPT Current Procedural Terminology PD Peritoneal Dialysis amount of the drug utilization CROWNWeb Consolidated Renal PEN Parenteral and Enteral nutrition adjustment pursuant to this section in Operations in a Web-Enabled Network PFS Physician Fee Schedule CY Calendar Year PPI Producer Price Index the CY 2014 ESRD PPS final rule with DFC Dialysis Facility Compare PPS Prospective Payment System a 3- to 4-year transition (78 FR 72161 DFR Dialysis Facility Report PSR Performance Score Report through 72170). Section 632(b) of ATRA ESA Erythropoiesis stimulating agent PY Payment Year prohibited the Secretary from paying for ESRD End-Stage Renal Disease QIP Quality Incentive Program oral-only ESRD-related drugs and ESRDB End-Stage Renal Disease bundled RCE Reasonable Compensation Equivalent biologicals under the ESRD PPS before ESRD PPS End-Stage Renal Disease REMIS Renal Management Information January 1, 2016. Section 632(c) of ATRA Prospective Payment System System requires the Secretary, by no later than ESRD QIP End-Stage Renal Disease Quality RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act January 1, 2016, to analyze the case mix Incentive Program SBA Small Business Administration FDA Food and Drug Administration SFA Small Facility Adjuster payment adjustments under section HCP Healthcare Personnel SIMS Standard Information Management 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) of the Act and make HD Hemodialysis System appropriate revisions to those HHD Home Hemodialysis SRR Standardized Readmission Ratio adjustments. HAIs Healthcare-Acquired Infections SSA Social Security Administration On April 1, 2014, the Congress HCPCS Healthcare Common Procedure STrR Standardized Transfusion Ratio enacted the Protecting Access to Coding System The Act Social Security Act Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA) (Pub. L. HCFA Health Care Financing The Affordable Care Act The Patient 113–93). Section 217 of PAMA includes Administration Protection and Affordable Care Act several provisions that apply to the HHS Department of Health and Human The Secretary Secretary of the Department Services of Health and Human Services ESRD PPS. Specifically, sections ICD International Classification of Diseases TPS Total Performance Score 217(b)(1) and (2) of PAMA amend ICD–9–CM International Classification of URR Urea reduction ratio sections 1881(b)(14)(F) and (I) of the Disease, 9th Revision, Clinical VAT Vascular Access Type Act. We interpreted the amendments to Modification VBP Value Based Purchasing sections 1881(b)(14)(F) and (I) as VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37811 replacing the drug utilization analysis. In particular, we are proposing The 1 percent target for outlier adjustment that was finalized in the CY new patient and facility-level payments was not achieved in CY 2014. 2014 ESRD PPS final rule with specific adjustment factors. We are also We believe using CY 2014 claims data provisions that dictate the market basket proposing to add an adjustment for rural to update the outlier MAP and fixed update for CY 2015 (0.0 percent) and ESRD facilities. Finally, we are dollar loss amounts for CY 2016 will how it will be reduced in CYs 2016 proposing to revise the geographic increase payments for ESRD through 2018. Section 217(a)(1) of proximity eligibility criterion for the beneficiaries requiring higher resource PAMA amended section 632(b)(1) of low-volume payment adjustment utilization in accordance with a 1 ATRA to provide that the Secretary may (LVPA) and to remove grandfathering percent outlier percentage. not pay for oral-only drugs and from the criteria for the adjustment. biologicals used for the treatment of • Drug designation process: In 2. ESRD QIP ESRD under the ESRD PPS prior to accordance with section 217(c) of This rule proposes to set forth January 1, 2024. Section 217(c) of PAMA, we are proposing a drug requirements for the ESRD QIP, PAMA provides that, as part of the CY designation process for determining including for payment years (PYs) 2017, 2016 ESRD PPS rulemaking, the when: (1) a product would no longer be 2018 and 2019. Secretary shall establish a process for (1) considered an oral-only drug and (2) determining when a product is no including new injectable and • PY 2019 Measure Set: For PY 2019 longer an oral-only drug; and (2) intravenous renal dialysis service drugs and future payment years, we are including new injectable and and biologicals in the bundled payment proposing to remove four clinical under the ESRD PPS. measures—(1) Hemodialysis Adequacy: intravenous products into the ESRD PPS • bundled payment. Update to the ESRD PPS base rate Minimum delivered hemodialysis dose; On December 19, 2014, the President for CY 2016: The proposed CY 2016 (2) Peritoneal Dialysis Adequacy: signed the Stephen Beck, Jr., Achieving ESRD PPS base rate is $230.20. This Delivered dose above minimum; (3) a Better Life Experience Act of 2014 amount reflects a reduced market basket Pediatric Hemodialysis Adequacy: (ABLE) (Pub. L. 113–295). Section 204 increase as required by section minimum spKt/V; and (4) Pediatric of ABLE amended section 632(b)(1) of 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I) (0.15 percent), Peritoneal Dialysis Adequacy—on the ATRA, as amended by section 217(a)(1) application of the wage index budget- grounds that a more broadly applicable neutrality adjustment factor (1.000332), of PAMA, to provide that payment for measure for the topic has become and a refinement budget-neutrality oral-only renal dialysis services cannot available. We are proposing to replace adjustment factor (0.959703), so that be made under the ESRD PPS bundled these measures with a single payment prior to January 1, 2025. total projected PPS payments in CY 2016 are equal to what the payments comprehensive Dialysis Adequacy 2. End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) would have been in CY 2016 had we not clinical measure. Additionally, we are Quality Incentive Program (QIP) implemented the refinement. The proposing to adopt two new reporting proposed CY 2016 ESRD PPS base rate measures: (1) The Ultrafiltration Rate This rule also proposes to set forth × × reporting measure and (2) the Full- requirements for the ESRD QIP, is $230.20 ($239.43 1.0015 1.000332 x 0.959703 = $230.20). Season Influenza Vaccination reporting including for payment years (PYs) 2017, • measure. 2018, and 2019. The program is Annual update to the wage index • authorized under section 1881(h) of the and wage index floor: We adjust wage Reinstating the In-Center Social Security Act (the Act). The ESRD indices on an annual basis using the Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of QIP is the most recent step in fostering most current hospital wage data and the Healthcare Providers (ICH CAHPS) latest core-based statistical area (CBSA) improved patient outcomes by Attestation: Beginning with PY 2017, we delineations to account for differing establishing incentives for dialysis are proposing to reinstate the ICH wage levels in areas in which ESRD facilities to meet or exceed performance CAHPS attestation in Consolidated facilities are located. For CY 2016, we standards established by CMS. Renal Operations in a Web-Enabled are not proposing any changes to the Network (CROWNWeb) previously B. Summary of the Major Provisions application of the wage index floor and adopted in the CY 2014 ESRD PPS final we propose to continue to apply the 1. ESRD PPS rule (78 FR 72220 through 72222) using current wage index floor (0.400) to areas the eligibility criteria finalized in the CY • ESRD PPS refinement: In with wage index values below the floor. 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66169). accordance with section 632(c) of • Update to the outlier policy: This would allow facilities to attest in ATRA, we analyzed the case mix Consistent with our proposal to CROWNWeb that they did not treat payment adjustments under the ESRD annually update the outlier policy using enough eligible patients during the PPS using more recent data. We are the most current data, we are proposing eligibility period to receive a score on proposing to revise the adjustments by to update the outlier services fixed the ICH CAHPS measure and thereby changing the adjustment payment dollar loss amounts for adult and amounts based on our updated pediatric patients and Medicare avoid receiving a score for this measure. regression analysis using CYs 2012 and Allowable Payments (MAPs) for adult • Revising the Small Facility 2013 ESRD claims and cost report data patients for CY 2016 using 2014 claims Adjuster: Beginning with the PY 2017 and proposing to remove two data. Based on the use of more current ESRD QIP, we are proposing to revise comorbidity payment adjustments data, the fixed-dollar loss amount for the Small Facility Adjuster (SFA). We (bacterial pneumonia and monoclonal pediatric beneficiaries would decrease have developed an equation for gammopathy). Because we conducted an from $54.35 to $49.99 and the MAP determining the SFA that does not rely updated regression analysis to enable us amount would decrease from $43.57 to upon a pooled within-facility standard to analyze and revise the case-mix $37.82, as compared to CY 2015 values. error, but nonetheless preserves the payment adjustments, we are also For adult beneficiaries, the fixed-dollar intent of the adjuster to include as many proposing revisions to the other ESRD loss amount would decrease from facilities in the ESRD QIP as possible PPS payment adjustments and a new $86.19 to $85.66 and the MAP amount while ensuring that the measure scores adjustment based on that regression would decrease from $51.29 to $48.15. are reliable. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37812 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules C. Summary of Costs and Benefits II. Calendar Year (CY) 2016 End-Stage several provisions that apply to the Renal Disease (ESRD) Prospective ESRD PPS. Specifically, sections In section VII of this proposed rule, Payment System (PPS) 217(b)(1) and (2) of PAMA amended we set forth a detailed analysis of the sections 1881(b)(14)(F) and (I) of the Act A. Background impacts that the proposed changes and replaced the drug utilization would have on affected entities and 1. Statutory Background adjustment that was finalized in the CY beneficiaries. The impacts include the On January 1, 2011, we implemented 2014 ESRD PPS final rule (78 FR 72161 following: the End-stage renal disease (ESRD) through 72170) with specific provisions that dictated the market basket update 1. Impacts of the Proposed ESRD PPS Prospective Payment System (PPS), a case-mix adjusted bundled PPS for renal for CY 2015 (0.0 percent) and how the market basket should be reduced in CYs The impact chart in section VII.B.1.a dialysis services furnished by ESRD) 2016 through CY 2018. of this proposed rule displays the facilities based on the requirements of Section 217(a)(1) of PAMA amended estimated change in payments to ESRD section 1881(b)(14) of the Social facilities in CY 2016 compared to section 632(b)(1) of ATRA to provide Security Act (the Act), as added by that the Secretary may not pay for oral- estimated payments in CY 2015. The section 153(b) of the Medicare overall impact of the CY 2016 changes only ESRD-related drugs under the Improvements for Patients and ESRD PPS prior to January 1, 2024. is projected to be a 0.3 percent increase Providers Act of 2008 (MIPPA) (Pub. L. in payments. Hospital-based ESRD Section 217(a)(2) further amended 110–275). Section 1881(b)(14)(F) of the section 632(b)(1) of ATRA by requiring facilities have an estimated 0.5 percent Act, as added by section 153(b) of that in establishing payment for oral- increase in payments compared with MIPPA and amended by section 3401(h) only drugs under the ESRD PPS, we freestanding facilities with an estimated of the Patient Protection and Affordable must use data from the most recent year 0.2 percent increase. Care Act (the Affordable Care Act) (Pub. available. Section 217(c) of PAMA We estimate that the aggregate ESRD L. 111–148), established that beginning provided that as part of the CY 2016 PPS expenditures would increase by calendar year (CY) 2012, and each ESRD PPS rulemaking, the Secretary approximately $20 million from CY subsequent year, the Secretary of the shall establish a process for (1) 2015 to CY 2016. This reflects a $10 Department of Health and Human determining when a product is no million increase from the payment rate Services (the Secretary) shall annually longer an oral-only drug; and (2) update and a $10 million increase due increase payment amounts by an ESRD including new injectable and to the updates to the outlier threshold market basket increase factor, reduced intravenous products into the ESRD PPS amounts. As a result of the projected 0.3 by the productivity adjustment bundled payment. percent overall payment increase, we described in section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) Finally, section 212 of PAMA estimate that there will be an increase of the Act. provided that the Secretary may not in beneficiary co-insurance payments of Section 632 of the American Taxpayer adopt the International Classification of 0.3 percent in CY 2016, which translates Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) (Pub. L. 112– Disease 10th Revision, Clinical to approximately $10 million. 240) included several provisions that Modification (ICD–10–CM) code sets apply to the ESRD PPS. Section 632(a) prior to October 1, 2015. HHS published 2. Impacts of the Proposed ESRD QIP of ATRA added section 1881(b)(14)(I) to a final rule on August 4, 2014 that the Act, which required the Secretary, adopted October 1, 2015 as the new The overall economic impact of the by comparing per patient utilization ICD–10–CM compliance date, and ESRD QIP is an estimated $11.8 million data from 2007 with such data from required the use of International in PY 2018 and $14.6 million in PY 2012, to reduce the single payment for Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, 2019. In PY 2018, we expect the costs renal dialysis services furnished on or Clinical Modification (ICD–9–CM) associated with the collection of after January 1, 2014 to reflect the through September 30, 2015 (79 FR information requirements for the data Secretary’s estimate of the change in the 45128). validation studies to be approximately utilization of ESRD-related drugs and On December 19, 2014, the President $21 thousand for all ESRD facilities, biologicals (excluding oral-only ESRD- signed the Stephen Beck, Jr., Achieving totaling an overall impact of related drugs). Consistent with this a Better Life Experience Act of 2014 approximately $11.8 million as a result requirement, in the CY 2014 ESRD PPS (ABLE) (Pub. L. 113–295). Section 204 1 of the PY 2018 ESRD QIP. In PY 2019, final rule we finalized $29.93 as the of ABLE amended section 632(b)(1) of we expect the total payment reductions total drug utilization reduction and ATRA, as amended by section 217(a)(1) to be approximately $3.8 million, and finalized a policy to implement the of PAMA, to provide that payment for the costs associated with the collection amount over a 3- to 4-year transition oral-only renal dialysis services cannot of information requirements for the period (78 FR 72161 through 72170). be made under the ESRD PPS bundled proposed Ultrafiltration Rate and Full- Section 632(b) of ATRA prohibited payment prior to January 1, 2025. Season Influenza Vaccination reporting the Secretary from paying for oral-only measures to be approximately $10.7 ESRD-related drugs and biologicals 2. System for Payment of Renal Dialysis million for all ESRD facilities. under the ESRD PPS prior to January 1, Services The ESRD QIP will continue to 2016. And section 632(c) of ATRA Under the ESRD PPS, a single, per- incentivize facilities to provide high- requires the Secretary, by no later than treatment payment is made to an ESRD quality care to beneficiaries. January 1, 2016, to analyze the case-mix facility for all of the renal dialysis payment adjustments under section services defined in section 1 We note that the aggregate impact of the PY 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) of the Act and make 1881(b)(14)(B) of the Act and furnished 2018 ESRD QIP was included in the CY 2015 ESRD appropriate revisions to those to individuals for the treatment of ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66256 through 66258). The adjustments. in the ESRD facility or in a patient’s previously finalized aggregate impact of $11.8 On April 1, 2014, the Congress home. We have codified our definitions million reflects the PY 2018 estimated payment reductions and the collection of information enacted the Protecting Access to of renal dialysis services at 42 CFR requirements for the NHSN Healthcare Personnel Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA) (Pub. L. 413.171 and our other payment policies Influenza Vaccination reporting measure. 113–93). Section 217 of PAMA included are included in regulations at 42 CFR VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37813 subpart H. The ESRD PPS base rate is services. This amount reflected a 0.0 index floor value to 0.40, as finalized in adjusted for characteristics of both adult percent update to the payment rate as our CY 2014 ESRD PPS final rule (78 FR and pediatric patients and account for required by section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i) of 72173 through 72174). patient case-mix variability. The adult the Act, as amended by section 217(b)(2) • Timing of the Implementation of case-mix adjusters include five of PAMA, and the application of the ICD–10. Section 212 of PAMA provides categories of age, body surface area wage index budget-neutrality that the Secretary may not adopt ICD– (BSA), low body mass index (BMI), adjustment factor of 1.001729. 10–CM prior to October 1, 2015. HHS onset of dialysis, six co-morbidity • Rebasing and revision of the end- published a final rule on August 4, 2014 categories, and pediatric patient-level stage renal disease bundled market that adopted October 1, 2015 as the new adjusters consisting of two age basket. For CY 2015, we rebased and ICD–10–CM compliance date, and categories and dialysis modalities (42 revised the end-stage renal disease required the use of International CFR 413.235(a) and(b)). bundled (ESRDB) market basket, which Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, In addition, the ESRD PPS provides entailed an update to the base year of Clinical Modification (ICD–9–CM) for two facility-level adjustments. The the ESRDB market basket from 2008 to through September 30, 2015 (79 FR first payment adjustment accounts for 2012. The base year update resulted in 45128). We finalized a policy that the ESRD facilities furnishing a low volume a shift in relative costs from prescription ESRD PPS will continue to use ICD–9– of dialysis treatments (42 CFR 413.232). drugs to compensation. Additionally, CM through September 30, 2015, and The second adjustment reflects we changed the price measure for will require the use of ICD–10–CM differences in area wage levels pharmaceuticals from a more general beginning October 1, 2015 for purposes developed from Core Based Statistical index Producer Price Index (PPI) of reporting the co-morbidity payment Areas (CBSAs) (42 CFR 413.231). Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, adjustments. For CY 2015, we corrected The ESRD PPS allows for a training Prescription) to a blend of two indices, several typographical errors and add-on payment adjustment for home (78 percent PPI Biological Products, omissions in the ICD–9–CM to ICD–10– dialysis modalities (42 CFR 413.235(c). Human Use and 22 percent PPI Vitamin, CM crosswalk tables that may be viewed Lastly, the ESRD PPS provides Nutrient, and Hematinic Preparations). in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule at additional payment for high cost The revision also refined the price 79 FR 66155 through 66159. outliers due to unusual variations in the measure used for compensation costs to • Low-Volume Payment Adjustment. type or amount of medically necessary better reflect the occupational mix in We clarified the eligibility criteria for care when applicable (42 CFR 413.237). the ESRD setting. As a result of the the low-volume payment adjustment 3. Updates to the ESRD PPS update to the cost weights from 2008 to (LVPA) and amended the supporting 2012, the labor-related share increased regulations in the Code of Federal Updates and policy changes to the by about 9 percent. Regulations (CFR). ESRD PPS are proposed and finalized • Labor-Related Share. As a result of • Payment for Oral-only Drugs under annually in the Federal Register. The the ESRDB market basket rebasing and the ESRD PPS. Section 217(a)(1) of CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule was revision, described above, the CY 2015 PAMA amended section 632(b)(1) of published on August 12, 2010 in the labor-related share was finalized at ATRA to provide that the Secretary may Federal Register (75 FR 49030 through 50.673 percent. This change to the not implement the policy under section 49214). That rule implemented the labor-related share had a significant 42 CFR 413.174(f)(6) (relating to oral- ESRD PPS beginning on January 1, 2011 impact on payments for certain ESRD only ESRD-related drugs in the ESRD in accordance with section 1881(b)(14) facilities located in low wage areas. prospective payment system), prior to of the Act, as added by section 153(b) Therefore, we implemented the labor- January 1, 2024. Accordingly, we of MIPPA, over a 4-year transition related share of 50.673 with a 2-year amended the dates in 42 CFR period. Since the implementation of the transition for all facilities. The labor- 413.174(f)(6) and 42 CFR ESRD PPS we have published annual related share for CY 2015 was 46.205. 413.237(a)(1)(iv) from January 1, 2016 to rules to make routine updates, policy • Outlier Policy. For CY 2015, we January 1, 2024. changes, and clarifications. used CY 2013 claims data to update the On November 6, 2014, we published outlier services’ fixed-dollar loss and B. Provisions of the Proposed Rule in the Federal Register a final rule (79 Medicare Allowable Payment (MAP) 1. Analysis and Proposed Revision of FR 66120 through 66265) titled, ‘‘End- amounts. As a result, we updated the the Payment Adjustments under the Stage Renal Disease Prospective fixed-dollar loss amount for pediatric ESRD PPS Payment System, Quality Incentive patients from $54.01 to $54.35, and Program, and Durable Medical increased the MAP amount from $40.49 a. Development and Implementation of Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and to $43.57. For adult patients, we the ESRD PPS Payment Adjustments Supplies’’ (hereinafter referred to as the updated the fixed-dollar loss amount Section 153(b) of MIPPA amended CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule). In that from $98.67 to $86.19 and increased the section 1881(b) of the Act to require the final rule, we made a number of routine MAP amount from $50.25 to $51.29. Secretary to implement the ESRD PPS updates to the ESRD PPS for CY 2015, • Wage Index. We adjusted wage effective January 1, 2011. Section completed a rebasing and revision of the indices using the most current hospital 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) requires the ESRD PPS ESRD bundled market basket, wage data available for the areas in to include a payment adjustment based implemented a 2-year transition for the which ESRD facilities are located. For on case mix that may take into account revised labor-related share and a 2-year CY 2015, we implemented the new core- patient weight, body mass index (BMI), transition of the new Core-Based based statistical area (CBSA) comorbidities, length of time on Statistical Area (CBSA) delineations, delineations, as described in the dialysis, age race, ethnicity, and other and made policy changes and February 28, 2013 OMB Bulletin No. appropriate factors. Section clarifications. Specifically, in that rule, 13–01, for all ESRD facilities with a 2- 1881(b)(14)(D)(ii) through (iv) provide we finalized the following: year transition (79 FR 66136 through that the ESRD PPS must also include an • Update to the ESRD PPS base rate 66142). In addition, we continued our outlier payment adjustment and a low for CY 2015. An ESRD PPS base rate of policy for the gradual phase-out of the volume payment adjustment, and may $239.43 per treatment for renal dialysis wage index floor and reduced the wage include such other payment VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37814 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules adjustments as the Secretary determines we have updated the two-equation training expenses, as well as all costs appropriate. methodology using CY 2012 and 2013 incurred by ESRD facilities for home In response to the MIPPA Medicare cost report and claims data. dialysis patients. amendments to section 1881(b), we These are the latest available cost The resulting cost per treatment was published our proposed ESRD PPS reports and claims given the time adjusted to eliminate the effects of design and implementation strategy in necessary for the preparation of this varying wage levels among the areas in the Federal Register on September 29, proposed rule. The decision to use those which ESRD facilities are located using 2009 (74 FR 49922). We received over 2 years for this proposed rule is because the ESRD PPS CY 2015 wage indices 1400 comments from dialysis facilities, 2011 was the first year under the new and the new CBSA delineations which Medicare beneficiaries, physician bundled payment system. In addition, were discussed in the CY 2015 ESRD groups, and other stakeholders in the FDA ‘‘black box’’ warning for PPS final rule, as well as the estimated response to our proposals. In Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents labor-related share of costs from the consideration of these comments we (ESA) was issued during 2011. These composite rate market basket. This was finalized the case mix and facility-level two factors may have been associated done so that the relationship of the adjustments for the ESRD PPS in our CY with changing practice patterns since studied variables on dialysis facility 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR 49030). 2011. Updating the regression analysis costs would not be confounded by For a complete discussion of public using the most recent claims and cost differences in wage levels. comments and our finalized payment report data allows the proposed case- The proportion of composite rate policies for the ESRD PPS, we refer the mix adjustment model to reflect practice costs determined to be labor-related reader to the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final patterns that have prevailed under the (53.711 percent of each ESRD facility’s rule (75 FR 49030 through 49214). incentives of the expanded bundled composite rate cost per treatment) was payment system. divided by the ESRD wage index to b. Regression Model Used To Develop In this rule we propose to reduce the control for area wage differences. No Payment Adjustment Factors number of comorbidities to which floor or ceiling was imposed on the i. Regression Analysis payment adjusters apply and add an wage index values used to deflate the composite rate costs per treatment in In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule adjustment for rural facilities. Our rationale for proposing to eliminate two order to give the full effect to the (75 FR 49083), we discuss the two- removal of actual differences in area equation methodology used to develop of the comorbidities for which we will make payment adjustments is discussed wage levels from the data. We applied the adjustment factors that would be a natural log transformation to the wage- applied to the base rate to calculate each in section II.B.1.c.i.4 of this proposed rule. The measures of resource use, deflated composite rate costs per patient’s case-mix adjusted payment per treatment to better satisfy the statistical treatment. The two-equation approach specified as the dependent variables for developing the payment model in each assumptions of the regression model, used to develop the ESRD PPS included and to be consistent with existing a facility-based regression model for of the two equations, are also explained below. methods of adjusting for case-mix, in services historically paid for under the which a multiplicative payment adjuster composite rate as indicated in ESRD ii. Dependent Variables is applied for each case-mix variable. facility cost reports, and a patient- As with other health care cost data, month-level regression model for (1) Average Cost per Treatment for Composite Rate Services the cost distribution for resource/ services historically billed separately. dialyzing composite rate services was The models used for the 2011 final rule For purposes of this proposed rule, skewed (due to a relatively small were based on 3 years of data (CY 2006 we measured resource use, including fraction of observations accounting for a through 2008). time on a dialysis machine for the disproportionate fraction of costs). Cost Section 632(c) of the American maintenance dialysis services included per treatment values which were Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) in the current bundle of composite rate determined to be unusually high or low (Pub. L. 11–240) requires the Secretary, services, using only ESRD facility data in accordance with predetermined by not later than January 1, 2016, to obtained from the Medicare cost reports statistical criteria were excluded from conduct an analysis of the case mix for independent ESRD facilities and further analysis. (For an explanation of payment adjustments being used under hospital-based ESRD facilities. The the statistical outer fence methodology section 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) of the Act and average composite rate cost per used to identify unusually high and low to make appropriate revisions to such treatment for each ESRD facility was composite rate costs per treatment, see case mix payment adjustments. While calculated by dividing the total reported pages 45 through 48 of the Secretary’s section 632(c) of ATRA only requires us allowable costs for composite rate February 2008 Report to Congress to analyze and make appropriate services for cost reporting periods (RTC), A Design for a Bundled End revisions to the case-mix payment ending in CYs 2012 and 2013 Stage Renal Disease Prospective adjustments, we believe that because we (Worksheet B, column 13A, lines 8–17 Payment System. This document is are performing a regression analysis that on CMS–265–11; Worksheet I–2, available on the CMS Web site at the updates all of the payment multipliers column 11, lines 2–11 on CMS–2552– following link: http://www.cms.gov/ with updated data we should also 10) by the total number of dialysis Medicare/End-Stage-Renal-Disease/ update the low-volume payment treatments (Worksheet C, column 1, ESRDGeneralInformation/downloads/ adjustment. Also, as discussed in lines 8–17 on CMS 265–11; Worksheet ESRDReportToCongress.pdf. section II.B.1.d.iii, we analyzed rural I–4, column 1, lines 1–10 on CMS– areas as a payment variable in our 2552–10). CAPD and CCPD patient (2) Average Medicare Allowable regression analysis and are proposing to weeks were multiplied by 3 to obtain Payment (MAP) for Previously implement a new adjustment for this the number of HD-equivalent Separately Billable Services facility characteristic. treatments. We note that our For purposes of this proposed rule, For purposes of analyzing and computation of the total composite rate resource use for separately billable proposing revisions to the payment costs included in this per treatment items and services used for the adjusters included in this proposed rule, calculation includes costs incurred for treatment of ESRD was measured at the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37815 patient-level using the utilization data other independent variables included in FR 49089). In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS on the Medicare claims by quarter for the payment model, particularly the final rule, we responded to these CYs 2012 and 2013 and average sales onset of dialysis within 4-months comments by noting that we included prices plus 6 percent of the drug or variable. an age adjustment for patients 80 years biological, if applicable, for each of age or older, but that advanced age c. Analysis and Revision of the Payment quarter. This time period corresponded and frailty did not result in the Adjustments to the most recent 2 years of Medicare identification of additional age groups cost report data that were available to As required by section 632(c) of for the application of case-mix measure resource use for composite rate ATRA, we have analyzed and are adjustments based on age. In addition, services, such as time dialyzing. proposing revisions to the following we noted that the analysis did not Measures of resource use included the case mix payment adjustments. As identify a separate variable for patient following separately billable services: explained above, because we are frailty, as this would be very difficult to injectable drugs billed by ESRD conducting a regression analysis of all of quantify. facilities, including ESAs; laboratory the costs associated with furnishing The analysis we conducted to services provided to ESRD patients, renal dialysis services, we are also determine whether to revise the case billed by freestanding laboratory proposing revisions to the facility-level mix payment variable of patient age suppliers and ordered by physicians adjustment for low-volume facilities. demonstrates the same U-shaped who receive monthly capitation relationship between facility costs and i. Adult Case-Mix Payment Adjustments payments for treating ESRD patients, or patient age as the analysis we conducted billed by ESRD facilities; and other (1) Patient Age when the ESRD PPS was implemented, services billed by ESRD facilities. Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) of the Act however, the reference group has iii. Independent Variables requires that the ESRD PPS include a changed to age group 70 to 79, and we note significantly higher costs for older Two types of independent or payment adjustment based on case mix that may take into account a patient’s patients. We believe that the regression predictor variables were included in the analysis we performed on CY 2012 composite rate and separately billable age. In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR 49088), we noted that the basic through 2013 Medicare cost reports and regression equations—case-mix claims has appropriately recognized payment variables and control variables. case-mix adjusted composite payment system in effect from CYs 2005 through increased facility costs when caring for Case-mix payment variables were patients 80 years old or older, and that included as factors that may be used to 2010 included payment adjustments for age based on five age groups. Our this adjustment accounts for increased adjust payments in either the composite frailty in the aged. The CY 2016 rate or in the separately billable analysis for the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule demonstrated a significant proposed payment multipliers equation. Control variables, which presented below in Table 1 and in Table generally represent characteristics of relationship between composite rate and separately billable costs and patient age, 4 in section II.B.1.f.i of this proposed ESRD facilities such as size, type of rule are reflective of the regression ownership, facility type (whether with a U-shaped relationship between age and cost where the youngest and analysis based upon CY 2012–2013 hospital-based or independent), were Medicare cost reports and claims data. specifically included to obtain more oldest age groups showed the highest accurate estimates of the payment costs. As a result of this analysis, we TABLE 1—CY 2016 PROPOSED impact of the potential payment established five age groups and variables in each equation. In the identified the payment multipliers PAYMENT MULTIPLIERS FOR AGE absence of using control variables in through regression analysis. We established age group 60 to 69 as the Current pay- Proposed pay- each regression equation, the Age ment multi- ment multi- relationship between the payment reference group (the group with the pliers pliers variables and measures of resource use lowest cost per treatment) and the may be biased because of correlations payment multipliers reflect the increase 18–44 ...... 1.171 1.257 between facility and patient in facility costs for each age group 45–59 ...... 1.013 1.068 characteristics. compared to the reference age group. 60–69 ...... 1.000 1.070 We proposed and finalized payment 70–79 ...... 1.011 1.000 iv. Control Variables adjustment multipliers for five age 80+ ...... 1.016 1.109 Several control variables were groups; ages 18 to 44, 45 to 59, 60 to 69, included in the regression analysis. 70 to 79, and 80 and older. We also (2) Body Surface Area (BSA) and Body They were—(1) renal dialysis facility finalized pediatric payment adjustments Mass Index (BMI) type (hospital-based versus independent for age, which are discussed in section Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) of the Act facility); (2) facility size (4,000 dialysis II.B.1.e of this proposed rule. requires that the ESRD PPS include a treatments or fewer, but not eligible for Commenters and stakeholders were payment adjustment based on case mix the low volume payment adjustment, largely supportive of a case-mix that may take into account patient 4,000 to 4,999, 5,000 to 9999, and adjustment for age when the ESRD PPS weight, body mass index (BMI), and 10,000 or more dialysis treatments); (3) was implemented. We noted in our CY other appropriate factors. Through the type of ownership (independent, large 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR 49088) use of claims data, we evaluated the dialysis organization, regional chain, that several commenters stated that age patient characteristics of height and unknown); (4) calendar year (2012 and is an objective and easily collected weight and established two 2013); and (5) home dialysis training variable, demonstrably related to cost, measurements for body size when the treatments, in which the proportion of and that continuing to collect age data ESRD PPS was implemented: body training treatments furnished by each would not be burdensome or require surface area (BSA) and BMI. In our dialysis facility is specified. The use of systems changes. In addition, a few analysis for the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final training treatments as a control was commenters requested that CMS rule, we found that the BSA of larger done in order to remove any consider an additional adjustment for patients and low BMI (<18.5 kg/m2) for confounding cost effects of training on patient frailty and/or advanced age (75 malnourished patients were VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37816 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules independent variables in the regression In developing the BSA payment the payment adjustment when the ESRD analysis that predicted variations in adjustment under the ESRD PPS, we PPS was implemented in CY 2011. payments for renal dialysis services and explored several options for setting the Based upon the regression analysis for as such we finalized two separate reference values for the BSA (74 FR CY 2016 using the DuBois and DuBois payment adjustments for body size in 49951). We examined the distributions formula for computing a patient’s BSA our CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR for both the midpoint of the BSA and and the updated Medicare national 49089 through 49090). the count of dialysis patients by age, average BSA of 1.90m2, we propose that Commenters were supportive of BSA body surface and low BMI. Based on the BSA payment adjustment would be and BMI payment adjustments, noting that analysis, in our CY 2012 ESRD PPS 1.032 and the BSA payment adjustment that body size was a payment final rule (76 FR 70244) we set the would be based on the following adjustment under the composite rate reference point at a BSA of 1.87 which formula: payment system, and that ESRD is the Medicare ESRD patient national 1.032((Patient’s BSA- 1.90)/0.1). average BSA. Setting the reference point facilities would be able to capture this Low-Body Mass Index (BMI) information on the claim form without at the average BSA reflects the any additional burden. A few relationship of a specific patient’s BSA The basic case-mix adjusted commenters expressed concern to the average BSA of all ESRD patients. composite payment system in effect regarding pre- versus post-dialysis As a result, some payment adjusters from CYs 2005 through 2010 and the weight. In response to these comments would be greater than 1.0 and some current ESRD PPS include a payment we clarified that a patient’s weight would be less than 1.0. In this way, we adjustment for low BMI. In order to be should be taken after the last dialysis were able to minimize the magnitude of consistent with other Department of treatment of the month, as directed in the budget neutrality offset to the ESRD Health and Human Services the Medicare Claims Processing Manual, PPS base rate. (For more information on components (that is, Centers for Disease Pub. 100–04, Chapter 8, Section 50.3. this discussion, we refer readers to the Control and Prevention and National Institutes for Health), we defined low For this proposed rule, we analyzed CY 2005 Physician Fee Schedule final BMI as less than 18.5 kg/m2. The both BSA and low BMI (<18.5kg/m2) rule (69 FR 66239, 66328 through regression indicated that patients who individually as part of the regression 66329) and the CY 2011 ESRD PPS are underweight consume more analysis and found that both body size proposed rule (74 FR 49951)). The BSA resources than other patients. The measures are strong predictors of factor is defined as an exponent equal to the value of the patient’s BSA minus current payment adjustment for low variation in payments for ESRD BMI under the ESRD PPS is 1.025. patients. the reference BSA of 1.87 divided by 0.1. Based on the regression analysis Body Surface Area (BSA) In the CY 2012 ESRD PPS final rule conducted for this proposed rule, we (76 FR 70245) and the CY 2013 ESRD continue to find low BMI to be a strong Since CY 2005, Medicare payment for PPS proposed rule (77 FR 40957), we predictor of cost variation among ESRD renal dialysis services has included a stated our intent to review claims data patients. The payment adjustment payment adjustment for BSA. The from CY 2012 and every 5 years would be 1.017 as indicated in Table 4 current payment adjustment under the thereafter to determine if any in section II.B.1.f.i of this proposed rule, ESRD PPS is l.020, which implies a 2.0 reflective of the regression analysis 2 adjustment to the national average BSA percent elevated cost for every 0.l m of Medicare ESRD beneficiaries is based upon CY 2012–2013 Medicare increase in BSA compared to the required. Although the CY 2012 claims cost report and claims data. national average BSA of ESRD patients. showed an increase in the national (3) Onset of Dialysis The increased costs suggest that there average BSA, we did not implement an are longer treatment times and update in the CY 2013 ESRD PPS rule. Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) of the Act additional resources for larger patients. Rather, in light of the requirement in required the ESRD PPS to include a Including the BSA variable improved section 632(c) of ATRA that we analyze payment adjustment based on case-mix the model’s ability to predict ESRD and make appropriate revisions to the that may take into account a patient’s facility costs compared to using BMI or ESRD PPS case mix adjustments for CY length of time on dialysis. For the CY weight alone. 2016, we decided to incorporate the 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS proposed new national average BSA into the 499090), we analyzed the length of time rule (74 FR 49951), we discussed how overall refinement of our payment beneficiaries have been receiving we adopted the DuBois and DuBois adjustments that we are making as a dialysis and found that patients who are formula to establish an ESRD patient’s result of that requirement. in their first 4 months of dialysis have BSA because this formula was the most In accordance with our commitment higher costs and noted that there was a widely known and accepted. That is, a to update the Medicare national average drop in the separately billable payment patient’s BSA equals their Weight 0.425 BSA and because of the statutory amounts after the first 4 months of * Height 0.725* 0.007184, where weight requirement to analyze and make dialysis. Based upon this analysis, we is in kilograms and height is in appropriate revisions to the case-mix proposed and finalized the definition of centimeters. (DuBois D. and DuBois, EF. payment adjustments for CY 2016, we onset of dialysis as beginning on the ‘‘A Formula to Estimate the are proposing to update the BSA first date of reported dialysis on CMS Approximate Surface Area if Height and Medicare national average from 1.87m2 Form 2728 through the first 4 months a Weight be Known’’: Arch. Int. Med. to 1.90 m2 for CY 2016 to reflect the new patient is receiving dialysis. We 1916 17:863–71.) Once the patient’s Medicare ESRD national average BSA. finalized a 1.510 onset of dialysis BSA is determined, the payment The average is based on an analysis of payment adjustment for both home and methodology compares the patient’s the patient height and weight in-facility patients (75 FR 49092). In BSA with the national average BSA of information reported on ESRD facility addition, we acknowledged that there ESRD beneficiaries and computes the claims in CY 2013. We note that this may be patients whose first 4 months of patient-level payment adjustment using average is an increase of 1.6 percent dialysis occur when they are in the the average cost increase for changes in over the Medicare ESRD national coordination of benefits period and not BSA (per 0.1m2). average BSA of 1.87m2 used to compute yet eligible for the Medicare ESRD VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37817 benefit. We explained that in these deciding which categories would be TABLE 2—ACUTE COMORBIDITY CAT- circumstances, no onset of dialysis recognized for the payment adjustment. EGORIES RECOGNIZED FOR A PAY- adjustment would be made (75 FR As discussed in the CY 2011 ESRD PPS MENT ADJUSTMENT UNDER THE 49090). final rule (75 FR 49095) we further ESRD PPS Most commenters supported evaluated the comorbidity categories inclusion of an onset of dialysis patient- with regard to—(1) inability to create Current Proposed level adjustment and noted that the Acute comor- accurate clinical definitions; (2) bidity category payment payment higher costs for new patients are due to potential for adverse incentives multiplier multiplier the stabilization of the health status of regarding care; and (3) potential for the patient and dialysis training. Pericarditis ...... 1.114 1.040 ESRD facilities to directly influence the Bacterial Pneu- Because the Medicare onset of dialysis prevalence of the comorbidity either by payment adjustment reflects the costs monia ...... 1.135 ...... altering dialysis care, diagnostic testing Gastrointestinal associated with all of the renal dialysis patterns, or liberalizing the diagnostic Tract Bleeding services furnished to a Medicare criteria. As a result of this evaluation, w/Hemorrhage 1.183 1.082 beneficiary in the first 4 months of we finalized 6 comorbid patient dialysis, additional payment conditions eligible for additional Analysis of CYs 2012 and 2013 claims adjustments are not made for payment under the ESRD PPS (75 FR data for the regression analysis comorbidities or training during the 49099 through 49100): pericarditis, continues to demonstrate significant months in which the onset of dialysis bacterial pneumonia, gastrointestinal facility resources when furnishing payment adjustment is made. We tract bleeding with hemorrhage, dialysis services to ESRD patients with discussed and finalized this payment hereditary hemolytic or sickle cell these acute comorbidities. However, in adjustment in the CY 2011 ESRD PPS anemias, myelodysplastic syndrome, accordance with section 632(c) of ATRA final rule (75 FR 49092 through 49094) and in response to stakeholders’ public Based on the regression analysis and monoclonal gammopathy. comments and requests for the conducted for this proposed rule, we Many stakeholders have criticized the elimination of all of the comorbid find that the onset of dialysis continues comorbidity payment adjustments payment adjustments, we have to be a strong predictor of cost variation available under the ESRD PPS. Through compared the frequency of how often among ESRD patients. The updated industry public comments and these conditions were indicated on the payment adjustment would be 1.327 as stakeholder meetings we have become facility monthly bill type with how indicated in Table 4 in section II.B.1.f.i aware of the documentation burden often a corroborating claim in another of this proposed rule. placed upon facilities in their effort to Medicare setting is identified in a 4- obtain discharge information from (4) Comorbidities month look back period. Of the three hospitals or other providers or acute comorbidity categories, we were Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(i) of the Act diagnostic information from physicians unable to corroborate the diagnoses of requires that the ESRD PPS include a and other practitioners necessary to bacterial pneumonia on ESRD facility payment adjustment based on case-mix substantiate the comorbidity on the claims with the presence of a diagnosis that may take into account patient facility claim form. Public comments on claims from another Medicare setting comorbidities. In our CY 2011 ESRD have suggested that we remove all PPS proposed and final rules (74 FR because of significant under-reporting of comorbidity payment adjustments from bacterial pneumonia in these settings. 49952 through 49961 and 75 FR 49094 the payment system and return any In order for the bacterial pneumonia through 49108, respectively), we allocated monies to the base rate. Other described the proposed and finalized comorbid payment adjustment to apply, commenters have indicated that patient we require three specific sources of comorbidity payment adjustors under privacy laws have also limited the the ESRD PPS. Our analysis found that documentation: An X-ray, a sputum ability of facilities to obtain the culture, and a provider assessment. certain comorbidity categories are diagnosis documentation necessary in predictors of variation in costs for ESRD Since 2011, facilities have expressed order to append the appropriate patients and, as such, we proposed the concern regarding these documentation International Classification of Diseases following comorbidity categories as requirements. Specifically, facilities cite code on the claim form. payment adjustors: cardiac arrest; a ‘documentation burden’ in that they pericarditis; alcohol or drug Acute Comorbidity Categories are unable to obtain hospital or other dependence; positive HIV status or discharge information for the patients in AIDS; gastrointestinal tract bleeding; There are three acute comorbidity their care, and are therefore unable to cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin categories (pericarditis, bacterial submit the diagnosis on the claim form cancer); septicemia/shock; bacterial pneumonia, and gastrointestinal tract necessary to receive a payment pneumonia and other pneumonias/ bleeding with hemorrhage) finalized in adjustment. In addition, stakeholders opportunistic infections; monoclonal the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR have indicated that our requirements are gammopathy; myelodysplastic 49100) due to predicted short term out of step with treatment protocols syndrome; hereditary hemolytic or increased facility costs when furnishing where many physicians and Medicare sickle cell anemias; and hepatitis B (74 dialysis services. Specifically, the costs providers will diagnose bacterial FR 49954). were identified with increased pneumonia simply by patient While all of the proposed comorbidity utilization of ESAs and other services. assessment and would not consider the categories demonstrated a statistically The payment adjustments are applied to X-ray or the sputum culture necessary to significant relationship for additional the ESRD PPS base rate for 4 months their diagnosis. cost in the payment model, the various following an appropriate diagnosis Because in the opinion of issues and concerns raised in the public reported on the facility monthly claim. stakeholders the ESRD PPS comorbidity comments regarding the proposed In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule we payment adjustments often go unpaid, categories caused us to do further finalized payment variables as indicated facilities have encouraged CMS to evaluations. Specifically, we created in Table 2 below, effective January 1, eliminate these adjustments through the exclusion criteria that assisted in 2011. authority granted in section 632(c) of VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37818 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules ATRA. However, we find that all of the on facility claims and that we are unable syndrome, and monoclonal acute comorbid payment adjustors to confirm a positive diagnosis without gammopathy), which were finalized as continue to be strong predictors of cost the additional burden of an X-ray or payment adjustors in the CY 2011 ESRD variation among ESRD patients based on sputum culture. PPS final rule (75 FR 49100) due to a the regression analysis conducted for Based upon the regression analysis of demonstrated prediction of increased this proposed rule. Accordingly, we CY 2012 through 2013 Medicare claims facility costs when furnishing dialysis continue to believe it is appropriate to and cost report data, where services. In addition, these conditions apply a comorbidity payment comorbidities are measured only on 72x have demonstrated a persistent effect on adjustment for the acute comorbidities claims, the updated payment costs over time; that is, once the of pericarditis and gastrointestinal tract adjustment for pericarditis would be condition is diagnosed for a patient, the bleeding with hemorrhage. In 1.040 and the adjustment for condition is likely to persist. For this consideration of stakeholder concerns gastrointestinal tract bleeding with reason, the payment adjustments are about the burden associated with hemorrhage would be 1.082 as indicated paid continuously when an appropriate meeting the documentation in Table 4 in section II.B.1.f.i of this diagnosis code is reported on the requirements for bacterial pneumonia, proposed rule. however, we are proposing to eliminate facility’s monthly claim. In the CY 2011 the case-mix payment adjustment for Chronic Comorbidity Categories ESRD PPS final rule, we finalized the comorbidity category of bacterial There are three chronic comorbidity payment variables as indicated in Table pneumonia beginning in CY 2016. We categories (hereditary hemolytic and 3 below for chronic comorbidities, find that the condition is underreported sickle cell anemias, myelodysplastic effective January 1, 2011. TABLE 3—CHRONIC COMORBIDITY CATEGORIES RECOGNIZED FOR A PAYMENT ADJUSTMENT UNDER THE ESRD PPS Current pay- Proposed pay- Chronic comorbidity category ment multiplier ment multiplier Hereditary Hemolytic or Sickle Cell Anemias ...... 1.072 1.192 Myelodysplastic Syndrome ...... 1.099 1.095 Monoclonal Gammopathy ...... 1.024 — Analysis of CY 2012 through 2013 CMS has historically required the beginning in CY 2016. We no longer claims and cost report data for the bone marrow biopsy for confirmation of believe that it is appropriate to require purposes of regression analysis has a diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy the patient to submit to an invasive and continued to demonstrate that because often it is a laboratory-defined painful procedure in order to make a significant facility resources are used disorder, where the disease has no payment adjustment to their ESRD when furnishing dialysis services to symptoms but where the patient is facility. Based upon the regression ESRD patients with these chronic identified to be at considerable risk for analysis of CY 2012 through 2013 ESRD comorbidities. However, in accordance the development of multiple myeloma. facility claims and cost report data, the with section 632(c) of ATRA and in Because many ESRD patients suffer updated payment adjustment for response to stakeholders’ public from anemic conditions due to their hereditary hemolytic and sickle cell comments and requests for the dialysis, they can test false positive for anemias would be 1.192 and for elimination of all of the comorbid monoclonal gammopathy. We myelodysplastic syndrome the payment payment adjustments, we compared the considered modifying our adjustment would be 1.095 as indicated frequency of how often these conditions documentation policies for requiring the in Table 4 in section II.B.1.f.i of this were reported on the facility monthly bone marrow biopsy when making the proposed rule. These adjustment bill type with how often a corroborating payment adjustment. However, we are amounts reflect the regression analysis claim is reported in another Medicare concerned that we will be unable to based upon CY 2012 and 2013 Medicare setting in a 12-month look back period. confirm the diagnosis without a bone claims data. This analysis demonstrated significant marrow test. d. Proposed Refinement of Facility- differences in the reporting of Based on the regression analysis Level Adjustments monoclonal gammopathy by ESRD conducted for this proposed rule, using facilities and in other treatment settings. CY 2013 ESRD PPS claims and cost i. Low-Volume Payment Adjustment In order for the monoclonal report data, we find that all of the Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(iii) of the Act gammopathy comorbid payment chronic comorbid payment adjustors requires a payment adjustment that adjustment to apply, Medicare requires continue to be strong predictors of cost reflects the extent to which costs a positive serum test and a bone marrow variation among ESRD patients and incurred by low-volume facilities (as biopsy test. We believe that billing accordingly, we will continue to make defined by the Secretary) in furnishing inconsistency may result from poor a payment adjustment for the chronic renal dialysis services exceed the costs compliance with these payment policy comorbid conditions of hereditary incurred by other facilities in furnishing guidelines. We believe that some hemolytic and sickle cell anemias and such services, and for payment for renal facilities may report the diagnosis based myelodysplastic syndrome. However, in dialysis services furnished on or after upon only the positive serum test, and consideration of stakeholders concerns January 1, 2011, and before January 1, forgo the bone marrow biopsy, while about the excessive burden of meeting 2014, such payment adjustment shall other facilities may view the bone the documentation requirements for not be less than 10 percent. As required marrow biopsy as excessive for what is monoclonal gammopathy, we are by this provision, the ESRD PPS often an asymptomatic condition and proposing to eliminate the case mix provides a facility-level payment therefore forgo the payment adjustment payment adjustment for the comorbid adjustment to ESRD facilities that meet all together. condition of monoclonal gammopathy the definition of a low-volume facility. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37819 A background discussion on the low- payment year. Under 42 CFR 413.232(c), the data when they would exceed 12- volume payment adjustment (LVPA) for purposes of determining the number consecutive months to determine the and a proposal regarding the LVPA of treatments furnished by the ESRD total treatments furnished for a full cost eligibility criteria is provided below. facility, the number of treatments reporting period as if there had not been The current amount of the LVPA is considered furnished by the ESRD a CHOW. 18.9 percent. In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS facility equals the aggregate number of In order to receive the LVPA under final rule (75 FR 49125), we indicated treatments furnished by the ESRD the ESRD PPS, an ESRD facility must that this increase to the base rate is an facility and the number of treatments submit a written attestation statement to appropriate adjustment that will furnished by other ESRD facilities that its MAC confirming that it meets all of encourage small facilities to continue to are both under common ownership and the requirements specified at 42 CFR provide access to care. With regard to 25 road miles or less from the ESRD 413.232 and qualifies as a low-volume the magnitude of the payment facility in question. Our regulation at 42 ESRD facility. In the CY 2012 ESRD PPS adjustment for low-volume facilities, we CFR 413.232(d) exempts facilities that final rule (76 FR 70236), we finalized a stated that it is more appropriate to use were in existence and Medicare- yearly November 1 deadline for the regression-driven adjustment rather certified prior to January 1, 2011 from attestation submission and we revised than the 10 percent minimum the 25-mile geographic proximity the regulation at § 413.232(f) to reflect adjustment mentioned in the statute criterion, thereby grandfathering them this date. We noted that this timeframe because it is based on empirical into the LVPA. provides 60 days for a MAC to verify evidence and allows us to implement a For purposes of determining that an ESRD facility meets the LVPA payment adjustment that is a more eligibility for the LVPA, ‘‘treatments’’ eligibility criteria. In the CY 2015 ESRD accurate depiction of higher costs. means total hemodialysis (HD) PPS final rule (79 FR 66153 through For this proposed rule, we analyzed equivalent treatments (Medicare and 66154), we amended § 413.232(f) to those ESRD facilities that met the non-Medicare). For peritoneal dialysis accommodate the timing of the policy definition of a low-volume facility as (PD) patients, one week of PD is clarifications finalized for that rule. specified in 42 CFR 413.232(b) as part considered equivalent to 3 HD Specifically, we extended the deadline of the regression analysis. We found that treatments. In the CY 2012 ESRD PPS for the CY 2015 LVPA attestations until the cost per treatment for these facilities final rule (76 FR 70236), we clarified December 31, 2014 to allow ESRD is still high compared to other facilities. that we base eligibility on the three facilities time to assess their eligibility With regard to the magnitude of the years preceding the payment year and based on the policy clarifications for payment adjustment for low-volume those years are based on cost reporting prior years under the ESRD PPS and facilities, we continue to believe that it periods. We further clarified that the apply for the LVPA for CY 2015. Further is appropriate to use the regression- ESRD facility’s cost reports for the information regarding the driven adjustment because it is based on periods ending in the three years administration of the LVPA is provided empirical evidence and allows us to preceding the payment year must report in the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual, implement a payment adjustment that is costs for 12-consecutive months (76 FR CMS Pub. 100–02, Chapter 11, section a more accurate depiction of higher 70237). 60.B.1. In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule costs. The regression analysis indicates (2) The United States Government a payment multiplier of 1.239 percent as (79 FR 66152 through 66153), we clarified that hospital-based ESRD Accountability Office Study on the indicated in Table 4 in section II.B.1.f.i facilities’ eligibility for the LVPA should LVPA of this proposed rule. Accordingly, we be determined at an individual facility In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule propose a new LVPA adjustment factor level and their total treatment counts (79 FR 66151 through 66152), we of 23.9 percent for CY 2016 and future should not be aggregated with other discussed the study that the United years. ESRD facilities that are affiliated with States Government Accountability ii. CY 2016 Proposals for the Low- the hospital unless the affiliated Office (the GAO) completed on the Volume Payment Adjustment (LVPA) facilities are commonly owned and LVPA. We also provided a summary of the GAO’s main findings and (1) Background within 25 miles. Therefore, the MAC can consider other supporting data in recommendations. We stated that the As required by section addition to the total treatments reported GAO found that many of the facilities 1881(b)(14)(D)(iii) of the Act, the ESRD in each of the 12-consecutive month eligible for the LVPA were located near PPS provides a facility-level payment cost reports, such as the individual other facilities, indicating that they may adjustment of 18.9 percent to ESRD facility’s total treatment counts, to verify not have been necessary to ensure facilities that meet the definition of a the number of treatments that were sufficient access to dialysis care. They low-volume facility. Under 42 CFR furnished by the individual hospital- also identified certain facilities with 413.232(b), a low-volume facility is an based facility that is seeking the relatively low volume that were not ESRD facility that, based on the adjustment. eligible for the LVPA, but had above- documentation submitted pursuant to In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule average costs and appeared to be 42 CFR 413.232(h): (1) Furnished less (79 FR 66153), with regards to the cost necessary for ensuring access to care. than 4,000 treatments in each of the 3 reporting periods used for eligibility, we Lastly, the GAO stated the design of the cost reporting years (based on as-filed or clarified that when there is a change of LVPA provides facilities with an final settled 12-consecutive month cost ownership that does not result in a new adverse incentive to restrict their service reports, whichever is most recent) Medicare Provider Transaction Access provision to avoid reaching the 4,000 preceding the payment year; and (2) Has Number but creates two non-standard treatment threshold. not opened, closed, or received a new cost reporting periods (that is, periods In the conclusion of their study, the provider number due to a change in that are shorter or longer than 12 GAO provided the Congress with the ownership in the 3 cost reporting years months) the MAC is either to add the following recommendations: 1) To more (based on as-filed or final settled 12- two non-standard cost reporting periods effectively target facilities necessary for consecutive month cost reports, together where combined they would ensuring access to care, the whichever is most recent) preceding the equal 12-consecutive months or prorate Administrator of CMS should consider VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37820 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules restricting the LVPA to low-volume facility-level adjustments and address volume facility, beginning in CY 2016, facilities that are isolated; 2) To reduce necessary LVPA policy changes when the number of treatments considered the incentive for facilities to restrict we would use updated data in a furnished by any ESRD facility their service provision to avoid reaching regression analysis similar to the regardless of when it came into the LVPA treatment threshold, the analysis that is discussed in the CY existence and was Medicare certified Administrator of CMS should consider 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR 49083). would be equal to the aggregate number revisions such as changing the LVPA to For CY 2016, because we are refining of treatments actually furnished by the a tiered adjustment; 3) To ensure that the ESRD PPS as discussed in section ESRD facility and the number of future LVPA payments are made only to II.B.1.a of this proposed rule, we treatments furnished by other ESRD eligible facilities and to rectify past reviewed the LVPA eligibility criteria facilities that are both: (i) Under overpayments, the Administrator of and are proposing changes that we common ownership with; and (ii) 5 road CMS should take the following four believe address the GAO miles or less from the ESRD facility in actions: (i) Require Medicare contractors recommendation to effectively target the question. The proposed 5 road mile to promptly recoup 2011 LVPA LVPA to ESRD facilities necessary for geographic proximity mileage criterion payments that were made in error; (ii) ensuring access to care. is discussed below. We propose to investigate any errors that contributed to (4) Elimination of the Grandfathering amend the regulation text by removing eligible facilities not consistently Provision paragraph (d) in 42 CFR 413.232 to receiving the 2011 LVPA and ensure reflect that the geographic proximity that such errors are corrected; (iii) take In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule provision described in paragraph (c) and steps to ensure that CMS regulations (75 FR 49118 through 49119), we discussed below is applicable to any and guidance regarding the LVPA are expressed concern about potential ESRD facility that is Medicare certified clear, timely, and effectively misuse of the LVPA. Specifically, our to furnish outpatient maintenance disseminated to both dialysis facilities concern was that the LVPA could dialysis. We are soliciting comment on and Medicare contractors; and (iv) incentivize dialysis companies to the proposed change to remove the improve the timeliness and efficacy of establish small ESRD facilities in close grandfathering provision by deleting CMS’s monitoring regarding the extent geographic proximity to other ESRD paragraph (d) from our regulation at 42 to which Medicare contractors are facilities in order to obtain the LVPA, CFR 413.232. determining LVPA eligibility correctly thereby leading to unnecessary (5) Geographic Proximity Mileage and promptly re-determining eligibility inefficiencies. To address this concern, Criterion when all necessary data become we finalized that for the purposes of available. determining the number of treatments In GAO’s report, they stated that the As we explained in the CY 2015 ESRD under the definition of a low-volume LVPA did not effectively target low- PPS final rule (79 FR 66152), we facility, the number of treatments volume facilities that had high costs and concurred with the need to ensure that considered furnished by the ESRD appeared necessary for ensuring access the LVPA is targeted effectively at low- facility would be equal to the aggregate to care. The GAO stated that nearly 30 volume high-cost facilities in areas number of treatments furnished by the percent of LVPA-eligible facilities were where beneficiaries may lack dialysis ESRD facility and other ESRD facilities located within 1 mile of another facility care options. We also agreed to take that are both: (i) Under common in 2011, and about 54 percent were action to ensure appropriate payment is ownership with; and (ii) 25 road miles within 5 miles, which indicated to them made in the following ways: 1) or less from the ESRD facility in that these facilities might not have been evaluating our policy guidance and question. However, we finalized the necessary for ensuring access to care. contractor instructions to ensure grandfathering of those commonly Furthermore, the GAO indicated that in appropriate application of the LVPA; 2) owned ESRD facilities that were many cases, the LVPA-eligible facilities using multiple methods of certified for Medicare participation on were located near high-volume communication to MACs and ESRD or before December 31, 2010, thereby facilities. The GAO explained in the facilities to deliver clear and timely exempting them from the geographic report that providers that furnish a low guidance; and 3) improving our proximity restriction. volume of services may incur higher monitoring of MACs and considering We established the grandfathering costs of care because they cannot measures that can provide specific policy in 2011 in an effort to support achieve the economies of scale that are expectations. low-volume facilities and avoid possible for larger providers. They also disruptions in access to essential renal stated that low-volume providers in (3) Addressing GAO’s dialysis services while the ESRD PPS areas where other care options are Recommendations was being implemented. However, now limited may warrant higher payments As discussed above, in the CY 2015 that the ESRD PPS transition is over and because, if Medicare’s payment methods ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66152), we facilities have adjusted to the ESRD PPS did not account for these providers’ made two clarifications of the LVPA payments and incentives, we believe it higher cost of care, beneficiary access to eligibility criteria that were responsive is appropriate to eliminate the care could be reduced if these providers to stakeholder concerns and GAO’s grandfathering provision. Because we were unable to continue operating. They concern that the LVPA should are doing a refinement of the payment further explained that in contrast, low- effectively target low-volume, high-cost adjustments under the ESRD PPS for CY volume providers that are in close facilities. However, we explained that 2016, the timing is appropriate for proximity to other providers may not we did not make changes to the eliminating the grandfathering policy so warrant an adjustment because adjustment factor or significant changes that this change can be assessed along beneficiaries have other care options to the eligibility criteria because of the with other proposed changes to the nearby. interaction of the LVPA with other ESRD PPS resulting from the regression We agree with the GAO’s assertion payment adjustments under the ESRD analysis. that it may not be appropriate to provide PPS. Instead, we stated that in We are proposing that for the additional payment to an ESRD facility accordance with section 632(c) of purposes of determining the number of that is located in close proximity to ATRA, for CY 2016 we would assess treatments under the definition of a low- another ESRD facility when the facilities VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37821 are commonly owned. The purpose of miles, and 20 road miles in order to not propose a facility-level adjustment the LVPA is to recognize high cost, low- determine a mileage criterion that based on rural location and we invited volume facilities that are unable to protected rural facilities and supporting public comments on our proposal. achieve the economies of scale that are access to renal dialysis services in rural In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule possible for larger providers such as areas. We believe that ESRD facilities (75 FR 49125 through 49126), we large dialysis organizations (LDO) and located in rural areas are necessary for addressed commenters’ concerns medium dialysis organizations (MDO). access to care and we would not want regarding not having a facility-level In addition, we note that under the to limit LVPA eligibility for rural adjustment based on rural location. current LVPA eligibility criteria, providers. Some of the commenters provided an approximately half of low-volume Based on this analysis, we are explanation of the unique situations that facilities are LDO and MDO facilities proposing to reduce the geographic exist for rural areas and the associated that have the support of their parent proximity criterion from 25 road miles costs. Specifically, the commenters companies in controlling their cost of to 5 road miles because our analysis identified several factors that contribute care. showed that no rural facilities would to higher costs including higher We analyzed the ESRD facilities lose LVPA eligibility due to the recruitment costs to secure qualified receiving payment under Medicare for proposed 5 road mile geographic staff; a limited ability to offset costs furnishing renal dialysis services in CY proximity criterion. This policy would through economies of scale; and 2013 for purposes of simulating discourage ESRD facilities from decreased negotiating power in different eligibility scenarios for the inefficiently operating two ESRD contractual arrangements for LVPA. The CY 2013 claims and cost facilities within close proximity of each medications, laboratory services, and report data is the best data available. other. This policy would also allow equipment maintenance. The The CY 2014 cost reports will not be ESRD facilities that are commonly commenters were concerned about a available until later this year. We owned to be considered individually negative impact on beneficiary access to simulated the MAC’s verification when they are more than 5 miles from care that may result from insufficient process in order to determine LVPA another facility that is under common payment to cover these costs. In eligibility. Our analysis considered the ownership. We propose to amend the addition, the commenters further noted treatment counts on cost reporting regulation text by revising paragraph that rural ESRD facilities have lower periods ending in 2010 through 2012, (c)(2) in 42 CFR 413.232 to reflect the revenues because they serve a smaller the corresponding CY 2013 LVPA change in the mileage for the geographic volume of patients of which a larger eligibility criteria defined at 42 CFR proximity provision. We are soliciting proportion are indigent and lack 413.232, and the location of low-volume comment on the proposed change to 42 insurance, and a smaller proportion facilities to assess the impact of various CFR 413.232(c)(2). We note that our have higher paying private insurance. potential geographic proximity criteria. analysis indicated that approximately In response to the comments Because we used the CY 2013 claims 30 facilities that are part of LDOs and and attestations, our analysis may not discussed above, we indicated that MDOs would lose the LVPA due to the according to our impact analysis for the match the facilities currently receiving 5 mile proximity change and the the LVPA because we are unable to CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule, rural elimination of grandfathering which facilities, as a group, were projected to analyze 2014 cost reports of LVPA caused many facilities to exceed 4000 facilities at this time. However, this receive less of a reduction in payments treatments. For this reason, we are as a result of implementation of the analysis allowed us to test various considering whether a transition would geographic proximity mileage amounts ESRD PPS than urban facilities and be appropriate and are requesting public many other subgroups of ESRD facilities to determine whether facilities eligible comments. for the LVPA in 2013 would continue to and, therefore, we did not implement a be eligible for the LVPA as well as iii. Geographic Payment Adjustment for facility-level payment adjustment that is allowing us to determine the existence ESRD Facilities Located in Rural Areas based on rural location. However, we stated our intention to monitor how of any other ESRD facilities in those (1) Background areas. rural ESRD facilities fared under the Initially, we applied the low-volume Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(iv)(III) of the ESRD PPS and consider other options if eligibility criteria (without Act provides that the ESRD PPS may access to renal dialysis services in rural grandfathering) and the current 25 road include such payment adjustments as areas is compromised under the ESRD mile criterion and categorized facilities the Secretary determines appropriate, PPS. such as a payment adjustment for ESRD by urban/rural location, type of (2) Determining a Facility-Level facilities located in rural areas. ownership, and other factors, and Payment Adjustment for ESRD Facilities Accordingly, in the CY 2011 ESRD PPS determined that out of the total of 434 Located in Rural Areas Beginning in CY proposed rule we analyzed rural status low-volume facilities, 38 percent of 2016 LVPA facilities would lose low-volume as part of the regression analysis used to status, including 19 percent in rural develop the payment adjustments under Since implementing the ESRD PPS, areas. For those determined to meet the the ESRD PPS. In the CY 2011 ESRD we have heard from industry LVPA criteria, we also assessed the PPS proposed rule (74 FR 49978), we stakeholders that rural areas continue to extent to which there were other ESRD discuss our analysis of rural status as have the unique difficulties described facilities (in the same chain or other part of the regression analysis and above when furnishing renal dialysis chain), located within 5 road miles and explained that to decrease distortion services that cause low to negative 10 road miles from the LVPA facilities. among independent variables, rural Medicare margins. Because we are Based on our concern that too many facilities were considered control committed to promoting beneficiary rural and independent facilities would variables rather than payment variables. access to renal dialysis services, lose low-volume status based on the 25 We indicated that based on our impact especially in rural areas, we analyzed road mile geographic proximity analysis, rural facilities would be rural location as a payment variable in criterion, we then analyzed 1 road mile, adequately reimbursed under the the regression analysis conducted for 5 road miles, 10 road miles, 15 road proposed ESRD PPS. Therefore, we did this proposed rule. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37822 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules Including rural areas as a payment rural areas; 3) the adequacy of payments magnitude of special rural payment variable in the regression analysis to providers of services and suppliers adjustments should be empirically showed that this facility characteristic that furnish items and services in rural justified—that is, the payments should was a significant predictor of higher areas; and 4) the quality of care increase to the extent that factors costs among ESRD facilities. furnished in rural areas. The report beyond the providers’ control increase Accordingly, we propose a payment required by section 3127(b) of the their costs; and 3) rural payment multiplier of 1.008 as indicated in Table Affordable Care Act was published in adjustments should be designed in ways 4 in section II.B.1.f.i of this proposed the MedPAC June 2012 Report to that encourage cost control on the part rule. This adjustment would be applied Congress: Medicare and the Health Care of providers. to the ESRD PPS base rate for all ESRD Delivery System (hereinafter referred to We were interested in the information facilities that are located in a rural area. as June 2012 Report to Congress), which that MedPAC provided in their report In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 is available at http://medpac.gov/- regarding services furnished to FR 49126), we finalized the definition of documents-/reports. In addition to the Medicare beneficiaries in rural areas. rural areas in 42 CFR 413.231(b)(2) as findings presented on each of the four We believe that the adjustment that we any area outside an urban area. We topics, this report presented a set of proposed in this rule, which we arrived define urban area in 42 CFR principles designed to guide at through a regression analysis, is 413.231(b)(1) as a Metropolitan expectations and policies with respect consistent with principle two above, Statistical Area or a Metropolitan to rural access, quality, and payments which states that the magnitude of division (in the case where Metropolitan for all sectors, which can be used to special rural payment adjustments Statistical Area is divided into guide Medicare payment policy. For should be empirically justified. We Metropolitan Divisions). We propose to purposes of this proposed rule, we were considered alternatives to deriving the add a new § 413.233 to provide that the most interested in the principles of adjustment from the regression analysis base rate will be adjusted for facilities payment adequacy and special in an effort to increase the value of the that are located in rural areas, as defined payments to rural providers. adjustment. For example, we could in § 413.231(b)(2). The rural facility In the June 2012 Report to Congress, establish a larger adjustment outside of adjustment would also apply in MedPAC explained that providers in the regression and offset it by a situations where a facility is eligible to rural areas often have a low volume of reduction to the base rate. We also receive the low-volume payment patients and in some cases, this lack of considered analyzing different subsets adjustment. In other words, a facility scale increases costs and puts the of rural areas and designating those could be eligible to receive both the provider at risk of closure. MedPAC areas as the payment variable in our rural and low-volume payment stated that to maintain access in these model. Because we were able to adjustments. Low-volume and rural cases, Medicare may need to make determine through the regression areas are two independent variables in higher payments to low-volume analysis that rural location is a predictor the regression analysis. We believe that providers that cannot achieve the of cost variation among ESRD facilities, the low-volume variable measures costs economies of scale available to urban we are planning to analyze the facilities facilities incur as a result of furnishing providers. However, they explained that that are located in rural areas to see if a small number of treatments whereas low volume alone is not a sufficient there are subsets of rural providers that the rural area variable measures the measure to assess whether higher experience higher costs. We are also costs associated with locality. The payments are warranted and that planning to explore potential policies to regression analysis indicated that being Medicare should not pay higher rates to target areas that are isolated or identify in a rural area—regardless of treatments two competing low-volume providers in where there is a need for health care furnished—explains an increase in costs close proximity. They stated that these services, such as, for example, the for furnishing dialysis compared to payments may deter small neighboring frontier counties (that is, counties with urban areas. Since low-volume and rural providers from consolidating care in one a population density of six or fewer areas are independent variables in the facility, which results in poorly targeted people per square mile) and we would regression we believe that a low-volume payments and can contribute to poorer also consider the use of Health facility located in a rural area would be outcomes for the types of care where Professional Shortage Area (HPSA) eligible for both adjustments because there is a volume–outcome relationship. designations managed by the Health measure. We believe that while the MedPAC further explained that to target Resources and Services Administration magnitude of the payment multiplier is special payments when warranted, (HRSA). Information regarding HPSAs small, rural facilities would still benefit Medicare should direct these payments can be found on the HRSA Web from the adjustment and, therefore, we to providers that are uniquely essential site:http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/shortage/ propose a 1.008 facility-level payment for maintaining access to care in a given hpsas/designationcriteria/. multiplier under the ESRD PPS for rural community. The payments need to be We believe that this type of analysis areas. We solicit comment on this structured in a way that encourages would be consistent with the June 2012 proposal. efficient delivery of healthcare services. Report to Congress’s principle that MedPAC presented three principles special payments should target the low- (3) Further Investigation Into Targeting guiding special payments that will volume facilities that are isolated. We High-Cost Rural ESRD Facilities allow beneficiaries’ needs to be met are soliciting comments on establishing Section 3127 of the Patient Protection efficiently: 1) Payments should be a larger payment adjustment outside of and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (the targeted toward low-volume isolated the regression analysis. We note that Affordable Care Act) required that the providers—that is, providers that have such an adjustment would need to be Medicare Payment Advisory low patient volume and are at a distance offset by a further reduction to the base Commission (MedPAC) study and report from other providers. Distance is rate. For example, we could compare to Congress on: 1) Adjustments in required because supporting two the average cost per treatment reported payments to providers of services and neighboring providers who both struggle on the cost report of ESRD facilities suppliers that furnish items and services with low-volume can discourage located in rural areas with ESRD in rural areas; 2) access by Medicare mergers that could lead to lower cost facilities located in urban areas and beneficiaries’ to items and services in and higher quality care; 2) the develop a methodology to derive the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37823 magnitude of the adjustment. In services and separately billable (SB) average payment multiplier for adult addition, we are soliciting comments on items in CY 2007 based on the 872 patients (1.1151), WCR (0.798) and WSB targeting subsets of rural areas for pediatric dialysis patients reflected in (0.202) are the proportion of MAP for purposes of using those facilities located the data. CR and SB services, respectively, among in those areas for analysis as payment We indicated in the CY 2011 ESRD pediatric patients, and MultSB variables in the regression analysis used PPS final rule (75 FR 49131 through represents the SB model multipliers. We to develop the payment multipliers for 49134), that the average CY 2007 MAP are using updated values for P, C, WCR, the refinement for CY 2016. for composite rate services for pediatric and WSB along with the updated SB e. Proposed Refinement of the Case-Mix dialysis patients was $216.46, compared multipliers to calculate the updated EB Adjustments for Pediatric Patients to$156.12 for adult patients. The multipliers. The overall difference in difference in composite rate payment is the CY 2013 MAP between adult and Section 1881(b)(14)(A)(i) of the Act reflected in the overall adjustment for pediatric dialysis patients was requires the Secretary to implement a pediatric patients as calculated using computed at 8.2 percent (P = $283.42/ payment system under which a single the variables of (1) age less than 13 $ 261.91= 1.082). The regression payment is made for renal dialysis years, or 13 through 17 years; (2) analysis for a new pediatric payment services. This provision does not dialysis modality PD or HD. While the model for Medicare pediatric ESRD distinguish between services furnished composite rate Medicare Allowable patients for CY 2016 will use the same to adult and pediatric patients. Payment (MAP) for pediatric patients methodology that was used for the CY Therefore, we developed a methodology 2011 ESRD PPS final rule, except for the that used the ESRD PPS base rate for was higher than that for adult patients pediatric patients and finalized ($216.46 versus $156.12), the separately use of more recent data years (2012 pediatric payment adjusters in our CY billable MAP was lower for pediatric through 2013) and in the method of 2011 ESRD PPS final rule at 75 FR patients ($48.09versus $83.27), in CY obtaining payment data. Specifically, 49131 through 49134. Specifically, the 2007. There are fewer separately billable we used the projected total expanded methodology for calculating the items in the pediatric model, largely bundle MAP based on 2013 claims to pediatric payment adjusters reflects case because of the predominance of the PD calculate the ratio of pediatric total mix adjustments for age and modality. modality for younger patients and the MAP per session to adult total MAP per We noted in our CY 2011 ESRD PPS smaller body size of pediatric patients. session. The projected MAP was final rule that the payment adjustments The overall difference in the CY 2007 calculated by pricing out utilization of applicable to composite rate services for MAP between adult and pediatric SBs based on line items in the claims, pediatric patients were obtained from dialysis patients was computed at 10.5 rather than using actual payments from the facility level model of composite percent or $216.46 + $48.09 = $264.55 the claims as in the pre-2011 data. rate costs for patients less than 18 years and $156.12 + $83.27 = $239.39. These adjustment factors reflect a of age and yielded a regression-based $264.55/$239.39 = 1.105. proposed 8.21 percent increase to multiplier of 1.199. However, based For purposes of regression analysis, account for the overall difference in upon public comments received we are not proposing any changes to the average payments per treatment for expressing concern that the payment formula used to establish the pediatric pediatric patients. The proposed multiplier was inadequate for pediatric payment multipliers and will continue updated pediatric SB and EB multipliers care, we revised our methodology and to apply the computations of MultEB= P are shown below in Table 5. we finalized pediatric payment * C * (WCR + WSB * MultSB), where f. Proposed Refinement Payment adjusters that reflected the overall P is the ratio of the average MAP per Multipliers difference in average payments per session for pediatric patients to the treatment between pediatric and adult average MAP per session for adult i. Proposed Adult Case-Mix and dialysis patients for composite rate (CR) patients as shown below, C is the Facility-Level Payment Adjustments TABLE 4—CY 2016 PROPOSED ADULT CASE–MIX AND FACILITY–LEVEL PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS PY2011 Final Rule (based on PY2016 NPRM (based on 2012–2013 data) 2006–2008 data) Composite % of Medicare rate multipliers % of Medicare Expanded dialysis treat- based on Separately Expanded dialysis treat- bundle pay- ments on av- Freestanding billable multi- bundle pay- ments on av- ment multiplier erage and Hospital- pliers ment multiplier erage based facilities Age: 18–44 ...... 13.5 1.171 12.8 1.308 1.044 1.257 45–59 ...... 26.8 1.013 27.8 1.084 1.000 1.068 60–69 ...... 23.8 1.000 25.8 1.086 1.005 1.070 70–79 ...... 22.9 1.011 21.1 1.000 1.000 1.000 80+ ...... 13.0 1.016 12.4 1.145 0.961 1.109 Body surface area (per 0.1 m2)3 ...... 1.020 ...... 1.039 1.000 1.032 Underweight (BMI < 18.5) ...... 4.0 1.025 3.3 1.000 1.090 1.017 Time since onset of renal dialysis < 4 months ...... 4.8 1.510 4.0 1.307 1.409 1.327 Facility low volume status ...... 1.8 1.189 1.7 1.368 0.955 1.239 Comorbidities: 4 Pericarditis (acute)...... 0.4 1.114 0.1 1.000 1.209 1.040 Gastro-intestinal tract bleeding (acute) ...... 1.1 1.183 0.5 1.000 1.426 1.082 Bacterial pneumonia (acute) ...... 2.0 1.135 ...... VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37824 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules TABLE 4—CY 2016 PROPOSED ADULT CASE–MIX AND FACILITY–LEVEL PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS—Continued PY2011 Final Rule (based on PY2016 NPRM (based on 2012–2013 data) 2006–2008 data) Composite % of Medicare rate multipliers % of Medicare Expanded dialysis treat- based on Separately Expanded dialysis treat- bundle pay- ments on av- Freestanding billable multi- bundle pay- ments on av- ment multiplier erage and Hospital- pliers ment multiplier erage based facilities Hereditary hemolytic or sickle cell anemia (chronic)...... 2.0 1.072 0.1 1.000 1.999 1.192 Myelodysplastic syndrome (chronic) 1.6 1.099 0.3 1.000 1.494 1.095 Monoclonal gammopathy (chronic) .. 1.2 1.024 ...... Rural ...... — — 15.0 1.015 0.978 1.008 ii. Proposed Pediatric Case-Mix Payment Adjustments TABLE 5—CY 2016 PROPOSED PEDIATRIC CASE-MIX PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS Patient characteristics PY 2011 Final rule (based on PY 2016 NPRM (based on 2012 and 2013 data) 2006–2008 data) Cell Separately Expanded Age Modality Payment multi- Population % billable multi- bundle pay- Population % plier plier ment multiplier 1 ...... <13 PD...... 20.58 1.033 27.62 0.410 1.063 2 ...... <13 HD...... 16.57 1.219 19.23 1.406 1.306 3 ...... 13–17 PD...... 18.20 1.067 20.19 0.569 1.102 4 ...... 13–17 HD...... 44.66 1.277 32.96 1.494 1.327 2. Proposed CY 2016 ESRD PPS Update point for 2018.. Accordingly, for CY share based on the best available data. a. ESRD Bundled Market Basket 2016, we will reduce the proposed Consistent with historical practice, we amount of the market basket percentage estimate the ESRDB market basket i. Overview and Background increase factor by 1.25 percent as update based on IHS Global Insight In accordance with section required by section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I) (IGI), Inc.’s forecast using the most 1881(b)(14)(F)(i) of the Act, as added by of the Act, and will further reduce it by recently available data. IGI is a section 153(b) of MIPPA and amended the productivity adjustment. nationally recognized economic and by section 3401(h) of the Affordable ii. Proposed Market Basket Update financial forecasting firm that contracts Care Act, beginning in 2012, the ESRD Increase Factor and Labor-Related Share with CMS to forecast the components of payment amounts are required to be for ESRD Facilities for CY 2016 the market baskets. annually increased by an ESRD market Using this methodology and the IGI As required under section basket increase factor that is reduced by forecast for the first quarter of 2015 of 1881(b)(14)(F)(i) of the Act, CMS the productivity adjustment described the CY 2012-based ESRDB market developed an all-inclusive ESRDB input in section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the basket (with historical data through the price index (75 FR 49151 through Act. The application of the productivity fourth quarter of 2014), and consistent 49162) and subsequently revised and adjustment may result in the increase with our historical practice of rebased the ESRDB input price index in factor being less than 0.0 for a year and estimating market basket increases may result in payment rates for a year the CY 2015 ESRD final rule (79 FR 66129 through 66136). Although based on the best available data, the being less than the payment rates for the proposed CY 2016 ESRDB market basket preceding year. The statute also ‘‘market basket’’ technically describes increase factor is 2.0 percent. As provides that the market basket increase the mix of goods and services used for required by section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I) factor should reflect the changes over ESRD treatment, this term is also of the Act as amended by section time in the prices of an appropriate mix commonly used to denote the input 217(b)(2) of PAMA, we must reduce the of goods and services used to furnish price index (that is, cost categories, their amount of the market basket increase renal dialysis services. respective weights, and price proxies factor by 1.25 percent, resulting in a Section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I) of the Act, combined) derived from a market proposed CY 2016 ESRDB market basket as added by section 217(b)(2)(A) of basket. Accordingly, the term ‘‘ESRDB percentage increase factor of 0.75 PAMA, provides that in order to market basket,’’ as used in this percent. accomplish the purposes of document, refers to the ESRDB input subparagraph (I) with respect to 2016, price index. For the CY 2016 ESRD payment 2017, and 2018, after determining the We propose to use the CY 2012-based update, we propose to continue using a market basket percentage increase factor ESRDB market basket as finalized and labor-related share of 50.673 percent for for each of 2016, 2017, and 2018, the described in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS the ESRD PPS payment, which was Secretary shall reduce such increase final rule (79 FR 66129 through 66136) finalized in the CY 2015 ESRD final rule factor by 1.25 percentage points for each to compute the CY 2016 ESRDB market (79 FR 66136) but was applied in CY of 2016 and 2017 and by 1 percentage basket increase factor and labor-related 2015 using a 2-year transition. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37825 iii. Proposed Productivity Adjustment Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/ be appropriate. In the CY 2011 ESRD Under section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i) of the Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/ PPS final rule (75 FR 49117), we Act, as amended by section 3401(h) of MedicareProgramRatesStats/ finalized the use of the Office of the Affordable Care Act, for CY 2012 MarketBasketResearch.html. Although Management and Budget’s (OMB) Core- and each subsequent year, the ESRD we discuss the IGI changes to the MFP Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs)-based market basket percentage increase factor proxy series in this proposed rule, in the geographic area designations to define shall be reduced by the productivity future, when IGI makes changes to the urban and rural areas and their adjustment described in section MFP methodology, we will announce corresponding wage index values. For CY 2016, we would continue to 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act. The them on our Web site rather than in the use the same methodology as finalized statute defines the productivity annual rulemaking. in the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 adjustment as equal to the 10-year Using IGI’s first quarter 2015 forecast, FR 49117) for determining the wage moving average of changes in annual the MFP adjustment for CY 2016 (the indices for ESRD facilities. Specifically, economy-wide private nonfarm business 10-year moving average of MFP for the period ending CY 2016) is projected to we are updating the wage indices for CY MFP (as projected by the Secretary for 2016 to account for updated wage levels the 10-year period ending with the be 0.6 percent. We invite public comment on these proposals. in areas in which ESRD facilities are applicable fiscal year, year, cost located. We use the most recent pre- reporting period, or other annual iv. Calculation of the ESRDB Market floor, pre-reclassified hospital wage data period) (the ‘‘MFP adjustment’’). The Basket Update, Adjusted for Multifactor collected annually under the inpatient Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is the Productivity for CY 2016 prospective payment system. The ESRD agency that publishes the official Under section 1881(b)(14)(F) of the PPS wage index values are calculated measure of private nonfarm business without regard to geographic MFP. Please see http://www.bls.gov/mfp Act, beginning in CY 2012, ESRD PPS payment amounts shall be annually reclassifications authorized under to obtain the BLS historical published section 1886(d)(8) and (d)(10) of the Act MFP data. increased by an ESRD market basket percentage increase factor reduced by and utilize pre-floor hospital data that MFP is derived by subtracting the are unadjusted for occupational mix. contribution of labor and capital input the productivity adjustment. For CY 2016, section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I) of the The proposed CY 2016 wage index growth from output growth. The values for urban areas are listed in projections of the components of MFP Act, as amended by section 217(b)(2)(A)(ii) of PAMA, requires the Addendum A (Wage Indices for Urban are currently produced by IGI, a Areas) and the proposed CY 2016 wage nationally recognized economic Secretary to implement a 1.25 percentage point reduction to the index values for rural areas are listed in forecasting firm with which CMS Addendum B (Wage Indices for Rural contracts to forecast the components of ESRDB market basket increase factor in addition to the productivity adjustment. Areas). Addenda A and B are located on the market basket and MFP. As the CMS Web site athttp:// described in the CY 2012 ESRD PPS As a result of these provisions, the proposed CY 2016 ESRD market basket www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee- final rule (76 FR 40503 through 40504), for-Service-Payment/ESRDpayment/ to generate a forecast of MFP, IGI increase is 0.15 percent. The proposed ESRDB market basket percentage End-Stage-Renal-Disease-ESRD- replicates the MFP measure calculated Payment-Regulations-and-Notices.html. by the BLS using a series of proxy increase factor for CY 2016 is 2.0 percent, which is based on the 1st In the CY 2011 and CY 2012 ESRD variables derived from IGI’s U.S. PPS final rules (75 FR 49116 through macroeconomic models. In the CY 2012 quarter 2015 forecast of the CY 2012- based ESRDB market basket. This 49117 and 76 FR 70239 through 70241, ESRD PPS final rule, we identified each respectively), we also discussed and market basket percentage is then of the major MFP component series finalized the methodologies we use to reduced by the 1.25 percent, as required employed by the BLS to measure MFP calculate wage index values for ESRD by the section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I). The as well as provided the corresponding facilities that are located in urban and market basket percentage increase is concepts determined to be the best rural areas where there is no hospital then further reduced by the MFP available proxies for the BLS series. data. For urban areas with no hospital adjustment (the 10-year moving average Beginning with the CY 2016 data, we compute the average wage of MFP for the period ending CY 2016) rulemaking cycle, the MFP adjustment index value of all urban areas within the of 0.6 percent, which is also based on is calculated using a revised series State and use that value as the wage IGI’s 1st quarter 2015 forecast. As is our developed by IGI to proxy the aggregate index. For rural areas with no hospital capital inputs. Specifically, IGI has general practice, if more recent data is data, we compute the wage index using replaced the Real Effective Capital Stock subsequently available (for example, a the average wage index values from all used for Full Employment GDP with a more recent estimate of the market contiguous CBSAs to represent a forecast of BLS aggregate capital inputs basket or MFP adjustment), we will use reasonable proxy for that rural area. recently developed by IGI using a such data to determine the CY 2016 For CY 2016, we are applying this regression model. This series provides a market basket update and MFP criteria to American Samoa and the better fit to the BLS capital inputs, as adjustment in the CY 2016 ESRD PPS Northern Mariana Islands, where we measured by the differences between final rule. apply the wage index for Guam as the actual BLS capital input growth b. The Proposed CY 2016 ESRD PPS established in the CY 2014 ESRD PPS rates and the estimated model growth Wage Indices final rule (78 FR 72172) (0.9611), and rates over the historical time period. Hinesville-Fort Stewart, Georgia, where Therefore, we are using IGI’s most i. Annual Update of the Wage Index we apply the statewide urban average recent forecast of the BLS capital inputs Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(iv)(II) of the based on the average of all urban areas series in the MFP calculations beginning Act provides that the ESRD PPS may within the state (78 FR 72173) (0.8699). with the CY 2016 rulemaking cycle. A include a geographic wage index We note that if hospital data becomes complete description of the MFP payment adjustment, such as the index available for these areas, we will use projection methodology is available on referred to in section 1881(b)(12)(D) of that data for the appropriate CBSAs our Web site at http://www.cms.gov/ the Act, as the Secretary determines to instead of the proxy. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37826 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules A wage index floor value has been index values. This bulletin, as well as February 28, 2013 OMB Bulletin No. used in lieu of the calculated wage subsequent bulletins, is available online 13–01, beginning with the CY 2015 index values below the floor in making at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ ESRD PPS wage index. payment for renal dialysis services bulletins_index2003-2005. In order to implement these changes under the ESRD PPS. In the CY 2011 OMB publishes bulletins regarding for the ESRD PPS, we identified the new ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR 49116 CBSA changes, including changes to labor market area delineation for each through 49117), we finalized that we CBSA numbers and titles. In accordance county and facility in the country and would continue to reduce the wage with our established methodology, we determined that there would be new index floor by 0.05 for each of the have historically adopted via CBSAs, urban counties that would remaining years of the ESRD PPS rulemaking CBSA changes that are become rural, rural counties that would transition. In the CY 2012 ESRD PPS published in the latest OMB bulletin. become urban, and existing CBSAs that final rule (76 FR 70241), we finalized On February 28, 2013, OMB issued would be split apart. In the CY 2015 the 0.05 reduction to the wage index OMB Bulletin No. 13–01, which final rule (79 FR 66137 and 66138), we floor for CYs 2012 and 2013, resulting established revised delineations for provided tables that showed the CBSA in a wage index floor of 0.5500 and Metropolitan Statistical Areas, delineations and wage index values for 0.5000, respectively. We continued to Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and CY 2014 and the CY 2015 CBSA apply and to reduce the wage index Combined Statistical Areas, and delineations, wage index values, and the floor by 0.05 in the CY 2013 ESRD PPS provided guidance on the use of the percentage change in these values for final rule (77 FR 67459 through 67461). delineations of these statistical areas. A those counties that changed from rural Although our intention initially was to copy of this bulletin may be obtained at to urban, from urban to rural, and from provide a wage index floor only through http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/ one urban area to another and also the 4-year transition to 100 percent default/files/omb/bulletins/2013/b-13- showed the changes to the statewide implementation of the ERSD PPS (75 FR 01.pdf. According to OMB, ‘‘[t]his rural wage index. 49116 through 49117; 76 FR 70240 bulletin provides the delineations of all While we believe that the new CBSA through 70241), in the CY 2014 ESRD Metropolitan Statistical Areas, delineations result in wage index values PPS final rule (78 FR 72173), we Metropolitan Divisions, Micropolitan that are more representative of the continued to apply the wage index floor Statistical Areas, Combined Statistical actual costs of labor in a given area, we and continued to reduce the floor by Areas, and New England City and Town recognized that use of the new CBSA 0.05 per year for CY 2014 and for CY Areas in the United States and Puerto delineations results in reduced 2015. Rico based on the standards published payments to some facilities. For this For CY 2016, we are proposing to on June 28, 2010, in the Federal reason, we implemented the new CBSA continue to apply the CY 2015 wage Register (75 FR 37246 through 37252) delineations using a 2-year transition index floor, that is, 0.4000, to areas with and Census Bureau data.’’ In the CY with a 50/50 blended wage index value wage index values below the floor but 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 40226) for all facilities in CY 2015 and 100 we are not proposing to reduce the wage and this proposed rule, when percent of the wage index based on the index floor for CY 2016. Our review of referencing the new OMB geographic new CBSA delineations in CY 2016. the wage indices show that CBSAs in boundaries of statistical areas, we use Therefore, for CY 2016, we are Puerto Rico continue to be the only the term ‘‘delineations’’ rather than the completing the transition and will apply areas with wage index values that term ‘‘definitions’’ that we have used in 100 percent of the wage index based on would benefit from a wage index floor the past, consistent with OMB’s use of the new CBSA delineations and the because they are so low. Therefore, we the terms (75 FR 37249). Because the most recent hospital wage data. believe that we need more time to study bulletin was not issued until February A facility’s wage index is applied to the wage indices that are reported for 28, 2013, with supporting data not the labor-related share of the ESRD PPS Puerto Rico to assess the available until later, and because the base rate. In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS appropriateness of discontinuing the changes made by the bulletin and their final rule (75 FR 49117), we finalized a wage index floor and leave it at 0.4000. ramifications needed to be extensively policy to use the labor-related share of Because the wage index floor is only reviewed and verified, we were unable 41.737 percent for the ESRD PPS which applicable to a small number of CBSAs, to undertake such a lengthy process was based on the ESRDB market basket the impact to the base rate through the before publication of the FY 2014 IPPS/ finalized in that rule. In the CY 2015 wage index budget neutrality factor LTCH PPS proposed rule and, thus, did ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66136), we would be insignificant. To the extent not implement changes to the hospital finalized a new labor-related share of other geographical areas fall below the wage index for FY 2014 based on these 50.673 percent, which was based on the floor in CY 2016 or beyond, we believe new CBSA delineations. rebased and revised ESRDB market they should have the benefit of the Likewise, for the same reasons, the CY basket finalized in that rule, and 0.4000 wage index floor as well. We will 2014 ESRD PPS wage index (based upon transitioned the new labor-related share continue to review wage index values the pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital over a 2-year period. For CY 2015, the and the appropriateness of a wage index wage data, which is unadjusted for labor-related share is based 50 percent floor in the future. occupational mix) also did not reflect on the old labor-related share and 50 the new CBSA delineations. In the FY percent on the new labor-related share, ii. Implementation of New Labor Market 2015 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule, we and the labor-related share in CY 2016 Delineations implemented the new CBSA is based 100 percent on the new labor- As noted earlier in this section, in the delineations as described in the related share. CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR February 28, 2013 OMB Bulletin No. 49117), we finalized for the ESRD PPS 13–01, beginning with the FY 2015 IPPS c. CY 2016 Update to the Outlier Policy the use of the CBSA-based geographic wage index (79 FR 49951 through Section 1881(b)(14)(D)(ii) of the Act area designations described in OMB 49963). Similarly, in the CY 2015 ESRD requires that the ESRD PPS include a bulletin 03–04, issued June 6, 2003 as PPS final rule (79 FR 66137 through payment adjustment for high cost the basis for revising the urban and rural 66142), we implemented the new CBSA outliers due to unusual variations in the areas and their corresponding wage delineations as described in the type or amount of medically necessary VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37827 care, including variability in the amount we use administrative issuance and and pediatric patients (75 FR 49140). As of erythropoiesis stimulating agents guidance to continually update the renal we explained in the CY 2011 ESRD PPS (ESAs) necessary for anemia dialysis service items available for final rule (75 FR 49138 through 49139), management. Some examples of the outlier payment via our quarterly the predicted outlier services MAP patient conditions that may be reflective update CMS Change Requests, when amounts for a patient are determined by of higher facility costs when furnishing applicable. We use this separate multiplying the adjusted average outlier dialysis care would be frailty, obesity, guidance to identify renal dialysis services MAP amount by the product of comorbidities such as cancer, and service drugs which were or would have the patient-specific case-mix adjusters possibly race and gender. The ESRD been covered under Part D for outlier applicable using the outlier services PPS recognizes high cost patients, and eligibility purposes and in order to payment multipliers developed from the we have codified the outlier policy in provide unit prices for calculating regression analysis to compute the our regulations at 42 CFR 413.237, imputed outlier services. In addition, payment adjustments. which provide that ESRD outlier we also identify through our monitoring For the CY 2016 outlier policy, we services are the following items and efforts items and services that are either would use the existing methodology for services that are included in the ESRD incorrectly being identified as eligible determining outlier payments by PPS bundle: (i) ESRD-related drugs and outlier services or any new items and applying outlier services payment biologicals that were or would have services that may require an update to multipliers that resulted from the been, prior to January 1, 2011, the list of renal dialysis items and updated regression analyses performed separately billable under Medicare Part services that qualify as outlier services, for this proposed rule. The updated B; (ii) ESRD-related laboratory tests that which are made through administrative outlier services payment multipliers are were or would have been, prior to issuances. represented by the updated separately January 1, 2011, separately billable Our regulations at 42 CFR 413.237 billable payment multipliers presented specify the methodology used to under Medicare Part B; (iii) medical/ in Table 4 for patients age 18 years and calculate outlier payments. An ESRD surgical supplies, including syringes, older and in Table 5 for patients age <18 facility is eligible for an outlier payment used to administer ESRD-related drugs, years. We used these updated outlier if its actual or imputed MAP amount per that were or would have been, prior to services payment multipliers to treatment for ESRD outlier services January 1, 2011, separately billable calculate the predicted outlier service exceeds a threshold. The MAP amount under Medicare Part B; and (iv) renal MAP amounts and projected outlier represents the average incurred amount dialysis service drugs that were or payments for CY 2016. per treatment for services that were or would have been, prior to January 1, For CY 2016, we propose that the 2011, covered under Medicare Part D, would have been considered separately billable services prior to January 1, outlier services MAP amounts and excluding oral-only drugs used in the fixed-dollar loss amounts would be treatment of ESRD. 2011. The threshold is equal to the ESRD facility’s predicted ESRD outlier derived from claims data from CY 2014. In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule services MAP amount per treatment Because we believe that any (75 FR 49142), we stated that for (which is case-mix adjusted) plus the adjustments made to the MAP amounts purposes of determining whether an fixed-dollar loss amount. In accordance under the ESRD PPS should be based ESRD facility would be eligible for an with § 413.237(c) of the regulations, upon the most recent data year available outlier payment, it would be necessary facilities are paid 80 percent of the per in order to best predict any future for the facility to identify the actual treatment amount by which the imputed outlier payments, we propose the outlier ESRD outlier services furnished to the MAP amount for outlier services (that is, thresholds for CY 2016 would be based patient by line item on the monthly the actual incurred amount) exceeds on utilization of renal dialysis items and claim. Renal dialysis drugs, laboratory this threshold. ESRD facilities are services furnished under the ESRD PPS tests, and medical/surgical supplies that eligible to receive outlier payments for in CY 2014. We recognize that the are recognized as outlier services were treating both adult and pediatric utilization of ESAs and other outlier originally specified in Attachment 3 of dialysis patients. services have continued to decline Change Request 7064, Transmittal 2033 In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule, under the ESRD PPS, and that we have issued August 20, 2010, rescinded and using 2007 data, we established the lowered the MAP amounts and fixed- replaced by Transmittal 2094, dated outlier percentage at 1.0 percent of total dollar loss amounts every year under November 17, 2010. Transmittal 2094 payments (75 FR 49142 through 49143). the ESRD PPS. However, we believe for identified additional drugs and We also established the fixed-dollar loss the first time since the implementation laboratory tests that may also be eligible amounts that are added to the predicted of the ESRD PPS that data for CY 2014 for ESRD outlier payment. Transmittal outlier services MAP amounts. The is reflective of relatively stable ESA use. 2094 was rescinded and replaced by outlier services MAP amounts and We have included Table 6 (Total Transmittal 2134, dated January 14, fixed-dollar loss amounts are different Medicare ESA Utilization in the ESRD 2011, which was issued to correct the for adult and pediatric patients due to Population) below to demonstrate the subject on the Transmittal page and differences in the utilization of leveling off of the decline in ESA made no other changes. Furthermore, separately billable services among adult utilization. TABLE 6—TOTAL MEDICARE ESA UTILIZATION IN THE ESRD POPULATION 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 1 Total ESA Utilization Epogen (×100,000) ...... 2,083,893 2,075,217 1,655,778 1,319,383 1,262,186 1,143,405 Darbepoetin (×100,000) ...... 533 496 379 280 242 291 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37828 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules TABLE 6—TOTAL MEDICARE ESA UTILIZATION IN THE ESRD POPULATION—Continued 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 1 ESA Utilization per Session Epogen ...... 5,404 5,171 3,995 3,078 2,895 2,858 Darbepoetin ...... 1.38 1.24 0.91 0.65 0.55 0.73 1 2014 based on December 2014 claims. i. CY 2016 Update to the Outlier amounts and fixed-dollar loss amounts services MAP amounts and fixed-dollar Services MAP Amounts and Fixed- to reflect the utilization of outlier loss amounts used for the outlier policy Dollar Loss Amounts services reported on 2014 claims. For in CY 2015 with the updated proposed this proposed rule, the outlier services estimates for this rule. The estimates for For CY 2016, we are not proposing MAP amounts and fixed dollar loss the proposed CY 2016 outlier policy, any change to the methodology used to amounts were updated using the 2014 which are included in Column II of compute the MAP or fixed-dollar loss claims from the March 2015 claims file. Table 7, were inflation adjusted to amounts. Rather, we will continue to The impact of this update is shown in reflect projected 2016 prices for outlier update the outlier services MAP Table 7, which compares the outlier services. TABLE 7—OUTLIER POLICY: IMPACT OF USING UPDATED DATA TO DEFINE THE OUTLIER POLICY Column I Column II Final outlier policy for CY 2015 Proposed outlier policy for CY (based on 2013 data price in- 2016 (based on 2014 data flated to 2015) * price inflated to 2016) * Age Age Age Age < 18 >= 18 < 18 >= 18 Average outlier services MAP amount per treatment ...... $39.89 $52.98 $38.87 $50.20 Adjustments: Standardization for outlier services ...... 1.1145 0.9878 0.9929 0.9788 MIPPA reduction ...... 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adjusted average outlier services MAP amount ...... 43.57 51.29 37.82 48.15 Fixed-dollar loss amount that is added to the predicted MAP to determine the outlier threshold ...... 54.35 86.19 49.99 85.66 Patient months qualifying for outlier payment ...... 6.3% 6.3% 7.7% 6.4% As demonstrated in Table 7, the ii. Outlier Policy Percentage outlier payments, but would increase estimated fixed-dollar loss amount per payments to ESRD facilities for treatment that determines the CY 2016 In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule beneficiaries with renal dialysis items outlier threshold amount for adults (75 FR 49081), in accordance with 42 and services that are eligible for outlier (Column II; $85.66) is slightly lower CFR 413.220(b)(4), we reduced the per payments. Therefore, beneficiary co- than that used for the CY 2015 outlier treatment base rate by 1 percent to insurance obligations would also account for the proportion of the policy (Column I; $86.19). The lower increase for renal dialysis services estimated total payments under the threshold is accompanied by a decline eligible for outlier payments. ESRD PPS that are outlier payments. in the adjusted average MAP for outlier Based on the 2014 claims, outlier We note that many industry services from $51.29 to $48.15. For payments represented approximately stakeholder associations and renal pediatric patients, the fixed dollar loss 0.9 percent of total payments, slightly facilities have expressed amount also fell, from $54.35 to $49.99. below the 1 percent target due to small disappointment that the outlier target Likewise, the adjusted average MAP for declines in the use of outlier services. percentage has not been achieved under outlier services fell from $43.57 to Recalibration of the thresholds using the ESRD PPS and have asked that CMS $37.82. 2014 data is expected to result in eliminate the outlier policy. With regard We estimate that the percentage of aggregate outlier payments close to the to the suggestion that we eliminate the patient months qualifying for outlier 1 percent target in CY 2016. We believe outlier adjustment altogether, we note payments in CY 2016 will be 6.4 percent the update to the outlier MAP and fixed- that, under section 1881(b)(14)(D)(ii) of for adult patients and 7.7 percent for dollar loss amounts for CY 2016 will the Act, the ESRD PPS must include a pediatric patients, based on the 2014 increase payments for ESRD payment adjustment for high cost claims data. The pediatric outlier MAP beneficiaries requiring higher resource outliers due to unusual variations in the and fixed-dollar loss amounts continue utilization and move us closer to type or amount of medically necessary care, including variations in the amount to be lower for pediatric patients than meeting our 1 percent outlier policy. We of erythropoiesis stimulating agents adults due to the continued lower use note that recalibration of the fixed- dollar loss amounts in this proposed necessary for anemia management. We of outlier services (primarily reflecting rule would result in no change in believe that the ESRD PPS is required to lower use of ESAs and other injectable payments to ESRD facilities for include an outlier adjustment in order drugs). beneficiaries with renal dialysis items to comply with section and services that are not eligible for 1881(b)(14)(D)(ii) of the Act. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37829 In addition, we believe that the ESRD services and drugs and biologicals on proposing any changes to the PPS base rate captures the cost for the the monthly claim form in sections methodology used to calculate this average renal patient, and to the extent II.C.1 and II.C.2 of this proposed rule, factor which is described in detail in CY data analysis continues to show that respectively. 2014 ESRD PPS final rule (78 FR 72174). certain patients, including certain racial The CY 2016 proposed wage index d. Annual Updates and Policy Changes and ethnic groups, receive more ESAs budget-neutrality adjustment factor is than the average patient, we believe an to the CY 2016 ESRD PPS 1.000332. outlier policy, even a small one, is an i. ESRD PPS Base Rate Refinement Budget-Neutrality Adjustment Factor: In order to important payment adjustment to In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule implement the refinement in a budget- provide under the ESRD PPS. We are (75 FR 49071 through 49083), we neutral manner, we are proposing to not proposing to modify the 1 percent discussed the implementation of the adjust the ESRD PPS base rate by a outlier percentage for CY 2016 because ESRD PPS per treatment base rate that budget-neutrality adjustment factor so we believe that the regression analysis is codified in the Medicare regulations that total projected PPS payments in CY continues to demonstrate high cost at § 413.220 and § 413.230. The CY 2011 2016 are equal to what the payments patients and that the proposed ESRD PPS final rule also provides a would have been in CY 2016 had we not elimination of the comorbidity detailed discussion of the methodology categories of bacterial pneumonia and implemented the refinement. In CY used to calculate the ESRD PPS base monoclonal gammopathy and other 2011, we standardized the base rate to rate and the computation of factors used regression updates would assist account for the overall effects of the to adjust the ESRD PPS base rate, outlier facilities in receiving outlier payments ESRD PPS adjustment factors by making payments, and geographic wage budget in CY 2016 that are 1 percent of total a 5.93 percent reduction to the base rate. neutrality in accordance with sections ESRD PPS payments. To account for the overall effects of the We understand the industry’s 1881(b)(14)(D)(ii) and 1881(b)(14)(A)(ii) refinement, we are proposing a 4 frustration that payments under the of the Act, respectively. Specifically, the percent reduction (that is, a factor of outlier policy have not reached 1 ESRD PPS base rate was developed from 0.959703) to the ESRD PPS base rate to percent of total ESRD PPS payments CY 2007 claims, that is, the lowest per account for the additional dollars paid since the implementation of the patient utilization year as required by to facilities through the payment payment system. As we explained in the section 1881(b)(14)(A)(ii) of the Act, adjustments. While the per treatment CY 2014 ESRD PPS final rule (78 FR updated to CY 2011, and represented base rate would be reduced, we believe 72165), each year we simulate payments the average per treatment MAP for renal that this refinement improves payment under the ESRD PPS in order to set the dialysis services. The payment system is accuracy and we would expect outlier fixed-dollar loss and MAP updated annually by the ESRDB market payments to be better targeted to those amounts for adult and pediatric patients basket less productivity adjustment characteristics that increase costs for to try to achieve the 1 percent outlier which is discussed in section II.B.2.a.iv facilities. Notably, a significant portion policy. We would not increase the base of this proposed rule. of impact of the adjusters on the base rate to account for years where outlier ii. Annual Payment Rate Update for CY rate arises from changes in the age payments were less than 1 percent of 2016 adjustments. total ESRD PPS payments, nor would In summary, we are proposing a CY we reduce the base rate if the outlier We are proposing an ESRD PPS base 2016 ESRD PPS base rate of $230.20. payments exceed 1 percent of total rate for CY 2016 of $230.20. This update This reflects a market basket increase of ESRD PPS payments. reflects several factors, described in 0.15 percent, the CY 2016 wage index We believe the 1 percent outlier more detail below. budget-neutrality adjustment factor of percentage has not been reached under Market Basket Increase: Section 1.000332, and the refinement budget- the payment system due to the 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I) of the Act provides neutrality adjustment of 0.959703. significant drop, over 25 percent, in the that, beginning in 2012, the ESRD PPS utilization of high cost drugs such as payment amounts are required to be 3. Section 217(c) of PAMA and the Epogen since the implementation of the annually increased by the ESRD market ESRD PPS Drug Designation Process payment system. However, we have basket percentage increase factor. The As part of the CY 2016 ESRD PPS learned in our discussions with ESRD latest CY 2016 projection for the ESRDB rulemaking, section 217(c) of PAMA facilities that many facilities are not market basket is 2.0 percent. In CY requires the Secretary to implement a willing to report outlier services on the 2016, this amount must be reduced by drug designation process for— ESRD facility monthly claim form as 1.25 percentage points as required by (1) Determining when a product is no they do not believe that they will reach section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I), as amended longer an oral-only drug; and the outlier threshold. We issued sub- by section 217(b)(2)(A) of PAMA, which (2) Including new injectable and regulatory guidance for CY 2015 that is calculated as 2.0¥1.25 = 0.75. This intravenous products into the bundled instructs ESRD facilities to include all amount is then further reduced by the payment under such system. composite rate drugs and biologicals productivity adjustment described in In accordance with section 217(c) of furnished to the beneficiary on the section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act as PAMA, we are proposing a process that monthly claim form (Change Request required by section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(II) would allow us to recognize when an 8978, issued December 2, 2014). In CY of the Act. The proposed multi-factor oral-only renal dialysis service drug or 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66149 productivity adjustment for CY 2016 is biological is no longer oral only and to through 66150), we discussed the drug 0.6, thus yielding a proposed update to include new injectable and intravenous categories that we consider to be used the base rate of 0.15 percent for CY 2016 products into the ESRD PPS bundled for the treatment of ESRD with the (0.75¥0.6 = 0.15 percent). payment, and, when appropriate, to expectation that all of those drugs and Wage Index Budget-Neutrality modify the ESRD PPS payment amount biologicals would be reported on the Adjustment Factor: We compute a wage to reflect the costs of furnishing a new claim. In addition to this guidance, we index budget-neutrality adjustment injectable or intravenous renal dialysis also have included a clarification for factor that is applied to the ESRD PPS service drug or biological that is not how facilities are to report laboratory base rate. For CY 2016, we are not bundled in the ESRD PPS payment VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37830 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules amount. We believe that this process, b. Background explained that to identify drugs and which we refer to as the drug Section 1881(b)(14)(A)(i) of the Act biologicals that are used for the designation process under the ESRD requires the Secretary to implement the treatment of ESRD and that therefore PPS, would provide a systematic ESRD PPS, under which a single meet the definition of renal dialysis method for including new injectable payment is made to a provider of services that would be included in the and intravenous drugs and biologicals services or a renal dialysis facility for ESRD PPS base rate, we performed an that are designated as renal dialysis renal dialysis services in lieu of any extensive analysis of Medicare services in the ESRD PPS bundled other payment. The renal dialysis payments for Part B drugs and payment. services that are included in the ESRD biologicals billed on ESRD claims and PPS bundle are described in section said that we evaluated each drug and a. Stakeholder Comments From the CY biological to identify its category by 2015 ESRD PPS Proposed and Final 1881(b)(14)(B) of the Act and include: (i) Items and services included in the indication or mode of action. We also Rules explained that categorizing drugs and composite rate for renal dialysis services biologicals on the basis of drug action In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS proposed as of December 31, 2010; (ii) would allow us to determine which rule (79 FR 40235), we sought erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) categories (and therefore, the drugs and stakeholder comments on the potential and any oral form of such agents that are biologicals within the categories) would components of a drug designation furnished to individuals for the be considered used for the treatment of process. While we did not directly treatment of ESRD; (iii) other drugs and address these comments in our CY 2015 ESRD (75 FR 49047). biologicals that are furnished to Using this approach, in our CY 2011 final rule, we committed to considering individuals for the treatment of ESRD the comments in formulating our drug ESRD PPS final rule we established and for which payment was made categories of drugs and biologicals that designation process proposal in CY separately under Title XVIII of the Act, 2016. We were encouraged by the are not considered used for the and any oral equivalent form of such treatment of ESRD (75 FR 49049– consensus among stakeholders drug or biological; and (iv) diagnostic regarding the significant and 49050), categories that are always laboratory tests and other items and considered used for the treatment of fundamental elements of a drug services not described in clause (i) that designation process and the ESRD (75 FR 49050), and categories of are furnished to individuals for the drugs that may be used for the treatment recommendation that CMS rely upon treatment of ESRD. the rulemaking process when of ESRD but are also commonly used to We implemented the ESRD PPS in our treat other conditions (75 FR 49051). considering any change to the ESRD CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR PPS to account for new injectable and Those drugs and biologicals that were 49030 through 49214) and codified our identified as not used for the treatment intravenous drugs or biologicals. We definition of renal dialysis services at 42 contemplated these comments in the of ESRD were not considered renal CFR 413.171. In addition to former dialysis services and therefore these development of the drug designation composite rate items and services and drugs were not included in computing process proposed below. ESAs, we defined renal dialysis services the base rate. The categories of drugs We note that commenters largely at 42 CFR 413.171(3) as including other and biologicals that are always emphasized the additional costs drugs and biologicals that are furnished considered used for the treatment of associated with furnishing new to individuals for the treatment of ESRD ESRD were identified as access injectable and intravenous renal dialysis and for which payment was (prior to management, anemia management, anti- services and encouraged CMS to use the January 1, 2011) made separately under infectives (specifically vancomycin and most recent year of data for pricing and Title XVIII of the Act (including drugs daptomycin used to treat access site utilization when adding new injectable and biologicals with only an oral form). infections) bone and mineral drugs and biologicals to the bundled In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 metabolism, and cellular management payment. Specifically, an industry FR 49037 through 49053), we discussed (75 FR 49050). We note that we removed association and many of its members the other drugs and biologicals anti-infectives from the list of categories offered a 7-principle drug designation referenced at 42 CFR 413.171(3) and of drugs and biologicals that are process that included: finalized how they were included in the included in the ESRD PPS base rate and • A clear definition of what drugs and ESRD PPS. We explained that we not separately payable in the CY 2015 biologicals are in the ESRD PPS. interpreted clause (iii) as encompassing ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66149– • A criterion related to the frequency not only injectable drugs and biologicals 66150). The current categories of drugs with which a drug or biological may be (other than ESAs) used for the treatment that are included in the ESRD PPS base used. of ESRD, but also all non-injectable rate and that may be used for the • A criterion for determining when drugs furnished under Title XVIII of the treatment of ESRD but are also drugs or biologicals are equivalent or Act (75 FR 49039). Under this commonly used to treat other conditions interchangeable with existing products interpretation, the ‘‘any oral equivalent are antiemetics, anti-infectives, that are already in the bundle. form of such drug or biological’’ antipruritics, anxiolytics, drugs used for language pertains to the oral versions of • Reliance upon rulemaking excess fluid management, drugs used for injectable drugs other than ESAs. In whenever making changes to the fluid and electrolyte management addition, as we discuss in section II.B.4 bundle. including volume expanders, and pain • of this proposed rule (75 FR 49040), we management (analgesics) (79 FR 66150). A transition for adding new drugs concluded that, to the extent oral-only In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule and biologicals to the ESRD bundle. drugs and biologicals that are used for (75 FR 49050) we explained that for • Tracking of costs of new drugs and the treatment of ESRD do not fall within those categories of drugs and biologicals biologicals before adding them to the clause (iii) of the statutory definition of that are always considered used for the ESRD bundle. renal dialysis services, such drugs treatment of ESRD we used the • An increase in the bundled rate to would fall under clause (iv). payments for the drugs included in the cover the costs of providing such drugs In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule category in computing the ESRD PPS and biologicals. (75 FR 49044 through 49053) we base rate, that is, the injectable forms VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37831 (previously covered under Part B) and We emphasized that any drug or categories. We propose to define this oral or other forms of administration biological furnished for the purpose of term in 42 CFR 413.234(a) later in this (covered under Part D). For purposes of access management, anemia discussion. Since the ESRD PPS CY the inclusion of payments related to the management, vascular access or 2011 final rule was published, the base oral or other forms of administration for peritonitis, cellular management and rate has been updated by the ESRDB those drugs that are always considered bone and mineral metabolism will be market basket, discussed in section used for the treatment of ESRD, we considered a renal dialysis service II.B.2.a of this proposed rule, which stated that based on our determination under the ESRD PPS and will not be reflects changes in the drug price at the time of the final rule, there were eligible for separate payment. We also indices. In addition, we have designated oral or other forms of injectable drugs noted that any ESRD drugs or several new drugs and biologicals as only for the bone and mineral biologicals developed in the future that renal dialysis services because they fit metabolism and cellular management are administered by a route of within the functional categories categories. Therefore, we included the administration other than injection or captured in the base rate and no payments under Part D for oral vitamin oral would be considered renal dialysis adjustment to the base rate was made. D (calcitrol, doxercalcitrol and services and would be in the ESRD PPS We are proposing that this approach of paracalcitrol) and oral levocarnitine in bundled base rate. We also stated that considering drugs and biologicals as our computation of the base rate (75 FR any drug or biological used as a included in the ESRD PPS base rate if 49042). substitute for a drug or biological that they fit within one of our functional Regarding why we chose to identify was included in the ESRD PPS bundled categories would continue as part of the ESRD drugs and biologicals by category base rate would also be a renal dialysis drug designation process described rather than in a specific list, in response service and would not be eligible for below. to a commenter’s request to provide a separate payment (75 FR 49050). In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule c. Proposed Drug Designation Process specific list of ESRD-only drugs, we (75 FR 49050 through 49051) we explained that using categories of drugs i. Inclusion of New Injectable and explained that for categories of drugs and biologicals allows us to respond to Intravenous Products in the ESRD PPS and biologicals that may be used for the changes in drug therapies over time Bundled Payment treatment of ESRD but are also based upon many factors including new commonly used to treat other In accordance with section 217(c)(2) developments, evidence-based conditions, we used the payments made of PAMA, we propose to include new medicine, and patient outcomes (75 FR under Part B in 2007 for these drugs in injectable and intravenous products in 49050). By categorizing drugs and computing the ESRD PPS base rate, the ESRD PPS bundled payment by first biologicals based on drug action, we can which only included payments made for determining whether the new injectable account for other drugs and biologicals the injectable forms of the drugs. We or intravenous products are reflected that may be used for those same actions excluded the Part D payments for the currently in the ESRD PPS. We propose in the future under the ESRD PPS. We oral (or other form of administration) to make this determination by assessing further explained that, while we have substitutes for the drugs and biological whether the product can be used to treat included drugs and biologicals used in described above because they were not or manage a condition for which there 2007 in the final ESRD base rate, we furnished or billed by ESRD facilities or is an ESRD PPS functional category. recognize that these may change. furnished in conjunction with dialysis Under our proposed regulation at 42 Because there are many drugs and treatments (75 FR 49051). For those CFR 413.234(b)(1), if the new injectable biologicals that have many uses and reasons, we presumed that these drugs or intravenous product can be used to because new drugs and biologicals are and biologicals that were paid under treat or manage a condition for which being developed, we stated that we did Part D were prescribed for reasons other there is an ESRD PPS functional not believe that a drug-specific list than for the treatment of ESRD. category, the new injectable or would be beneficial (75 FR 49050). However, we noted that if these drugs intravenous product would be Rather than specifying the specific and biologicals currently paid under considered reflected in the ESRD PPS drugs and biologicals used for the Part D are furnished by an ESRD facility bundled payment and no separate treatment of ESRD, we identified drugs for the treatment of ESRD, they would payment would be available. and biologicals based on the mechanism be considered renal dialysis services Specifically, any new drug, biosimilar, of action. We stated that we did not and we would not provide separate or biologic that fits into one of the ESRD finalize a specific list of the drugs and payment. functional categories would be biologicals because we did not want to In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule considered to be included in the ESRD inadvertently exclude drugs that may be (75 FR 49075), we included in Table 19 PPS. These drugs and biologicals would substitutes for drugs identified and we the Medicare allowable payments for all count toward the calculation of an wanted the ability to reflect new drugs of the components of the ESRD PPS base outlier payment. In the calculation of and biologicals as they become rate for CY 2007 inflated to CY 2009, the outlier payment we price drugs available. We did, however, provide a including payments for drugs and using the ASP payment methodology, list of the specific Part B drugs and biologicals and the amount each which is currently ASP+6 percent. biologicals that were included in the contributed to the base rate, except for If, however, the new injectable or proposed and final ESRD PPS base rate the oral-only renal dialysis drugs where intravenous product is used to treat or in Table C in the Appendix of the CY payment under the ESRD PPS has been manage a condition for which there is 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR 49205 delayed. We grouped the injectable and not an ESRD PPS functional category, through 49209) and a list of the former intravenous drugs and biologicals by the new injectable or intravenous Part D drugs that were bundled in the action, specifically, into functional product would not be considered ESRD PPS in Table C in the Appendix categories. In past rules we have included in the ESRD PPS bundled of the final rule (75 FR 49210). This list referred to these categories as drug payment, and we propose to take the is located at the following address: categories but we believe the term following steps as described in our http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010- functional categories is more precise proposed regulation at § 413.234(b)(2): 08-12/pdf/2010-18466.pdf. and better reflects how we use the (i) Revise an existing ESRD PPS VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37832 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules functional category or add a new ESRD Act or section 351 of the Public Health standardized processes. A change PPS functional category for the Service Act, commercially available, request would be issued to include new condition that the new injectable or assigned a Healthcare Common drugs added to the functional categories. intravenous product is used to treat or Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) We propose to define ESRD PPS manage; (ii) pay for the new injectable code, and designated by CMS as a renal functional category at § 413.234(a) as a or intravenous product using the dialysis service under § 413.171. distinct grouping of drugs and transitional drug add-on payment Following FDA approval, injectable or biologicals, as determined by CMS, adjustment discussed in section intravenous drugs then go through a II.B.3.c.ii below; and (iii) add the new process to establish a billing code, whose end action effect is the treatment injectable or intravenous product to the specifically a HCPCS code. Information or management of a condition or ESRD PPS bundled payment following regarding the HCPCS process is conditions associated with ESRD. We payment of the transitional drug add-on available on the CMS Web site at would codify this definition in payment adjustment. http://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding/ regulation text to formalize the For purposes of the drug designation MedHCPCSGenInfo/Application_Form_ approach we adopted in CY 2011 process, we propose to define a new and_Instructions.html. We would because the drug designation process is injectable or intravenous product in our designate injectable and intravenous dependent on the functional categories. regulation at § 413.234(a) as an products as renal dialysis services under As discussed above, we have injectable or intravenous product that is the ESRD PPS by analyzing the FDA established 12 functional categories that approved by the Food and Drug labeling information, the HCPCS are used to treat conditions associated Administration (FDA) under section 505 application information, and studies with ESRD, which are displayed in of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic submitted as part of these two Table 8 below. TABLE 8—ESRD PPS FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES Category Rationale for association Access Management ...... Drugs used to ensure access by removing clots from grafts, reverse anticoagulation if too much medication is given, and provide anesthetic for access placement. Anemia Management ...... Drugs used to stimulate red blood cell production and/or treat or prevent anemia. This category includes ESAs as well as iron. Bone and Mineral Metabolism ...... Drugs used to prevent/treat bone disease secondary to dialysis. This category includes phosphate binders and calcimimetics. Cellular Management ...... Drugs used for deficiencies of naturally occurring substances needed for cellular management. This cat- egory includes levocarnitine. Antiemetic ...... Used to prevent or treat nausea and vomiting secondary to dialysis. Excludes antiemetics used in conjunc- tion with chemotherapy as these are covered under a separate benefit category. Anti-infectives ...... Used to treat infections. May include antibacterial and antifungal drugs. Antipruritic ...... Drugs in this classification have multiple clinical indications and are included for their action to treat itching secondary to dialysis. Anxiolytic ...... Drugs in this classification have multiple actions but are included for the treatment of restless leg syn- drome secondary to dialysis. Excess Fluid Management ...... Drug/fluids used to treat fluid excess/overload. Fluid and Electrolyte Management Intravenous drugs/fluids used to treat fluid and electrolyte needs. Including Volume Expanders. Pain Management ...... Drugs used to treat graft site pain and to treat pain medication overdose. We propose to determine whether a we propose to pay for the new injectable also allows 1 year for payment of the new injectable or intravenous product or intravenous product using a adjustment before the beginning of a falls into one of our existing functional transitional drug add-on payment rulemaking cycle in which we could categories by assessing whether the adjustment under the authority of propose to add the drug to the bundled product is used to treat or manage the section 1881(b)(14)(D)(iv) of the Act. payment. For these reasons, we believe condition for which we have created a The transitional drug add-on payment 2 years is the minimum amount of time category. We believe that this approach adjustment would be based on the ASP necessary to pay the adjustment. The to determining whether a new drug falls pricing methodology and would be paid proposed regulation text for the into one of our existing drug categories until we have collected sufficient claims transitional drug add-on payment is consistent with the policy we data for rate setting for the new adjustment is at § 413.234(c). finalized in the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final injectable or intravenous product, but We believe paying a transitional drug rule (75 FR 49047 through 49052). not for less than 2 years. We believe that add-on payment adjustment for new ii. Transitional Drug Add-On Payment a 2-year timeframe is necessary for injectable and intravenous products will Adjustment adequate data collection, rate-setting allow us to analyze price and utilization and regulation development. Two years data for both the injectable and, if We anticipate that there may be new is necessary for rulemaking purposes applicable, any oral or other forms of drugs that do not fall within the existing because it is a year-long process that the drug in order to pay for the drugs ESRD PPS functional categories and involves developing policies based on under the ESRD PPS. We propose that therefore, are not reflected in the ESRD data, proposing those policies, allowing when a facility furnishes the new PPS payment amount. Where a new for public comment, finalizing the injectable drug they would report the injectable or intravenous product is proposed rule, and allowing for a period drug to Medicare on the monthly facility used to treat or manage a condition for of time before the rule becomes bill and would append a CMS payment which there is not a functional category, effective. The minimum 2-year period modifier that would instruct our claims VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37833 processing systems to include a injectable equivalent or other form of propose that we would develop a payment amount that equals the Part B administration. We propose to define computation for the inclusion of the oral drug payment amount, which is derived the term oral-only drug as part of our and non-oral forms of the phosphate using the ASP methodology. We believe drug designation process in our binder or calcimimetic so that the drug that this payment approach is consistent regulations at 42 CFR 413.234(a). For CY could be appropriately reflected in the with the policy we finalized in the CY 2016, and in accordance with Section ESRD PPS base rate. We would not take 2013 ESRD PPS final rule (77 FR 67463) 217(c)(1) of PAMA, we propose that an this approach for any subsequent drugs which states that we will use the ASP oral-only drug would no longer be that are approved by the FDA and fall methodology, including any considered oral-only if an injectable or within the bone and mineral modifications finalized in the Physician other form of administration of the oral- metabolism functional category (or any Fee Schedule (PFS) final rules, to only drug is approved by the FDA. We other functional categories) because we compute outlier MAP amounts, the drug propose to codify this process in our did not delay payment for any other add-on (formerly paid under the regulations at 42 CFR 413.234(d). drugs or biologicals for which we had composite rate and no longer paid as We note that the FDA has well 2007 utilization data when the ESRD part of the ESRD PPS), and any other defined standards for identifying all PPS was implemented in CY 2011 and, policy that requires the use of payment drug dosages and forms of therefore, we believe the other amounts for drugs and biologicals that administration that are approved for use functional categories appropriately would be separately paid absent the in the United States and this list may be reflect renal dialysis service drugs and ESRD PPS. We would issue sub- viewed at www.FDA.gov/ biologicals. regulatory billing and payment guidance developmentapprovalprocess.gov. 4. Delay of Payment for Oral-Only Renal along with the payment modifier in In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS proposed Dialysis Services conjunction with our final rule and final rules (74 FR 49929 and 75 FR guidance. Under our proposed 49038), we noted that the only oral-only As we discussed in the CY 2014 ESRD regulations at § 413.234(c), following drugs and biologicals that we identified PPS final rule (78 FR 72185 through payment of the transitional drug add-on were phosphate binders and 72186) and again in the CY 2015 ESRD payment adjustment, we would propose calcimimetics, which fall into the bone PPS final rule (79 FR 66147 through to modify the ESRD PPS base rate, if and mineral metabolism category. We 66148), section 1881(b)(14)(A)(i) of the appropriate, to account for the new defined these oral-only drugs as renal Act requires the Secretary to implement injectable or intravenous product. dialysis services in our regulations at a payment system under which a single We note that outlier payments would § 413.171 (75 FR 49044), we delayed the payment is made to a provider of not be available for new injectable or Medicare Part B payment for these oral- services or a renal dialysis facility for intravenous products during the time in only drugs until CY 2014 at renal dialysis services in lieu of any which these products are paid for using § 413.174(f)(6) and continued to pay for other payment. Section 1881(b)(14)(B) of the new transitional drug add-on them under Medicare Part D. If the Act defines renal dialysis services, payment adjustment. While a new injectable or intravenous forms of and subclause (iii) of such section states injectable drug or biological being paid phosphate binders or calcimimetics are that these services include other drugs under the transitional drug-add would approved by the FDA, under our and biologicals that are furnished to otherwise be considered an outlier proposed drug designation process at individuals for the treatment of ESRD service because the drug or biological § 413.234(b)(1), these drugs would be and for which payment was made would have been considered separately considered reflected in the ESRD PPS separately under this title, and any oral billable prior to the implementation of bundled payment because these drugs equivalent form of such drug or the ESRD PPS, we do not believe that it are included in an existing functional biological. would be appropriate to include the category so no additional payment We interpreted this provision as payment amount for the new drug or would be available for inclusion of these including not only injectable drugs and biological in the outlier calculation drugs. biologicals used for the treatment of during this interim transition period. However, we are proposing that we ESRD (other than ESAs and any oral This is because during the interim would not apply this process to form of ESAs, which are included under period we would be making a payment injectable or intravenous forms of clause (ii) of section 1881(b)(14)(B) of for the specific drug in addition to the phosphate binders and calcimimetics the Act), but also all oral drugs and base rate, whereas outlier services have when they are approved because biologicals used for the treatment of been incorporated into the base rate. For payment for the oral forms of these ESRD and furnished under title XVIII of example, we have included the MAP drugs was delayed. As we discussed the Act. We also concluded that, to the amount for EPO in the base rate and it above, we determined in CY 2011 that extent oral-only drugs or biologicals qualifies as an outlier. However, when both classes of drugs (phosphate binders used for the treatment of ESRD do not the product is reflected in the base rate and calcimimetics) were furnished for fall within clause (iii) of section after payment of the transitional drug the treatment of ESRD and are therefore 1881(b)(14)(B), such drugs or biologicals add-on payment adjustment, it would be renal dialysis services. In addition, we would fall under clause (iv) of such considered eligible for outlier payments had utilization data for both classes of section, and constitute other items and discussed in section II.B.2.c of this rule. drugs because the oral versions existed services used for the treatment of ESRD at that time. However, for reasons that are not described in clause (i) of iii. Determination of When an Oral-Only discussed in the CY 2011 ESRD PPS section 1881(b)(14)(B). Renal Dialysis Service Drug is no Longer final rule (75 FR 49043 through 49044), We finalized and promulgated the Oral-Only we chose to delay their inclusion in the payment policies for oral-only renal Section 217(c)(1) of PAMA requires us payment amount. We propose that when dialysis service drugs or biologicals in to adopt a process for determining when a non-oral version of a phosphate binder the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR oral-only drugs are no longer oral-only. or calcimimetic is approved by the FDA, 49038 through 49053), where we In our CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule (75 we would include the oral and any non- defined renal dialysis services at 42 CFR FR 49038 through 49039), we described oral version of the drug in the ESRD PPS 413.171 as including other drugs and oral-only drugs as those that have no bundled payment. Specifically, we biologicals that are furnished to VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37834 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules individuals for the treatment of ESRD We also changed the date in Services, 2723—Responsibility of and for which payment was made § 413.237(a)(1)(iv) regarding outlier Intermediaries, we explain that the separately prior to January 1, 2011 payments for oral-only renal dialysis intermediary reviews facility cost under Title XVIII of the Act, including service drugs made under the ESRD PPS reports to ensure that the compensation drugs and biologicals with only an oral from January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2024. paid to medical directors does not form. Although we included oral-only On December 19, 2014, section 204 of exceed the RCE limit. The RCE limit for renal dialysis service drugs and ABLE was enacted, which delays the a board-certified physician of internal biologicals in the definition of renal inclusion of renal dialysis service oral- medicine has been updated over the dialysis services in the CY 2011 ESRD only drugs and biologicals under the interim years. The most recent update to PPS final rule (75 FR 49044), we also ESRD PPS until 2025. It amended the RCE limit was finalized in the FY finalized a policy to delay payment for section 632(b)(1) of ATRA, as amended 2015 IPPS final rule published on these drugs under the PPS until January by section 217(a)(1) of PAMA by August 22, 2014 (79 FR 50157 through 1, 2014 in the same rule. We stated that striking ‘‘2024’’ and inserting ‘‘2025.’’ 50162). In that rule, CMS finalized an there were certain advantages to As we did in the CY 2014 ESRD PPS RCE limit of $197,500 per year delaying the implementation of final rule (78 FR 72186) and the CY beginning in CY 2015 for a board- payment for oral-only drugs and 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66148) certified physician of internal medicine. biologicals, including allowing ESRD referenced above, we are proposing to The requirements for medical facilities additional time to make implement this delay by modifying the directors of ESRD facilities are operational changes and logistical effective date for providing payment for discussed in the Conditions for arrangements in order to furnish oral- oral-only renal dialysis service drugs Coverage for ESRD facilities, which only renal dialysis service drugs and and biologicals under the ESRD PPS at were updated in 2008 to reflect biologicals to their patients. 42 CFR 413.174(f)(6) from January 1, advances in dialysis technology and Accordingly, we codified the delay in 2024 to January 1, 2025. We also are standard care practices since the payment for oral-only renal dialysis proposing to change the date in requirements were last revised in their service drugs and biologicals at 42 CFR § 413.237(a)(1)(iv) regarding outlier entirety in 1976. Conditions for 413.174(f)(6), and provided that payments for oral-only renal dialysis Coverage for ESRD Facilities, (73 FR payment to an ESRD facility for renal service drugs made under the ESRD PPS 20470) April 15, 2008). With the update dialysis service drugs and biologicals from January 1, 2024 to January 1, 2025. to the Conditions for Coverage, all with only an oral form is incorporated We continue to believe that oral-only Medicare-certified ESRD facilities are into the PPS payment rates effective renal dialysis service drugs and required to have a medical director who January 1, 2014. biologicals are an essential part of the is responsible for the delivery of patient On January 3, 2013, ATRA was ESRD PPS bundle and should be paid care and outcomes in the facility as enacted. Section 632(b) of ATRA for under the ESRD PPS. codified in 42 CFR part 494 (Conditions precluded the Secretary from for Coverage for End-Stage Renal 5. Reporting Medical Director Fees on implementing the policy under 42 CFR Disease Facilities). We discuss the ESRD Facility Cost Reports 413.176(f)(6) relating to oral-only renal qualifications of an ESRD facility dialysis service drugs and biologicals In the 1980s, following audits by the medical director in 42 CFR 494.140(a) prior to January 1, 2016. Accordingly, in Office of the Inspector General and the (Standard: Medical director), where we the CY 2014 ESRD PPS final rule (78 FR Medicare administrative contractors require that a medical director must be 72185 through 72186), we delayed (MACs) that revealed instances in which a board-certified physician in internal payment for oral-only renal dialysis independent facilities compensated medicine or pediatrics by a professional service drugs and biologicals under the their medical directors and board and have completed a board- ESRD PPS until January 1, 2016. We administrators excessively, CMS set approved training program in implemented this delay by revising the limits for reasonable compensation nephrology with at least 12 months of effective date at § 413.174(f)(6) for when reporting medical director fees on experience providing care to patients providing payment for oral-only renal ESRD facility cost reports. End-Stage receiving dialysis, but if such a dialysis service drugs under the ESRD Renal Disease Program; Prospective physician is not available, another PPS from January 1, 2014 to January 1, Reimbursement for Dialysis Services physician may direct the facility, subject 2016. In addition, we changed the date and Approval of Special Purpose Renal to the approval of the Secretary. We when oral-only renal dialysis service Dialysis Facilities, 48 FR 21254, 21261 recognize that the RCE limit of $197,500 drugs and biologicals would be eligible through 21262 (May 11, 1983); End- per year for a board-certified physician for outlier services under the outlier Stage Renal Disease Program: Composite of internal medicine may be less than policy described in § 413.237(a)(1)(iv) Rates and Methodology for Determining the expense a facility incurs if they from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2016. the Rates, 51 FR 29404, 29407 (Aug. 15, employ a board-certified nephrologist as On April 1, 2014, PAMA was enacted. 1986). In Transmittal 12, issued in July their medical director. Section 217(a)(1) of PAMA amended 1989, of the Provider Reimbursement We also appreciate that the reasonable section 632(b)(1) of ATRA, which now Manual Part I, Chapter 27, titled, compensation limits are generally used precludes the Secretary from ‘‘Reimbursement for ESRD and when determining payment for implementing the policy under 42 CFR Transplant Services’’, CMS adopted a providers that are reimbursed on a 413.174(f)(6) relating to oral-only renal policy for reporting allowable reasonable cost basis; they typically are dialysis service drugs and biologicals compensation for physician owners and not used in prospective payment prior to January 1, 2024. We medical directors of ESRD facilities and systems, like the ESRD PPS, that update implemented this delay in the CY 2015 set a limit at the Reasonable payment rates using market basket ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66262) by Compensation Equivalent (RCE) limit of methodologies. We believe that the modifying the effective date for the specialty of internal medicine for a application of the RCE limit is no longer providing payment for oral-only renal metropolitan area of greater than one relevant now that 100 percent of ESRD dialysis service drugs and biologicals million people. In the Provider facilities are paid under the ESRD PPS under the ESRD PPS at § 413.174(f)(6) Reimbursement Manual Part I, Chapter beginning in CY 2014. Therefore, from January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2024. 27—Outpatient Maintenance Dialysis beginning in CY 2016 we propose to VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37835 eliminate the RCE limit for reporting an services paid on the 72X claim 49213). We acknowledged in that rule ESRD facility’s medical director fees on furnished in CY 2007) and laboratory that the list of laboratory tests displayed ESRD facility cost reports. We note that tests that were ordered by Monthly in Table F is not an all-inclusive list and the elimination of the RCE limit does Capitation Payment (MCP) practitioners we recognized that there are other not supersede or alter in any way the that were separately billed by laboratory tests that may be furnished reporting guidance furnished in the independent labs in CY 2007. for the treatment of ESRD (75 FR 49169). Provider Reimbursement Manual, Part Through the comments we received We stated in the Medicare Benefit 2, Chapter 42, sections 4210, 4210.1 and on the CY 2011 ESRD PPS proposed Policy Manual, Pub. 100–02, Chapter 4210.2. In addition, we will continue to rule, we learned that holding the ESRD 11—End-Stage Renal Disease, Section apply the ESRD facility-specific policy facilities responsible for any laboratory 20.2 Laboratory Services, that the under which the time spent by a test that is furnished in the ESRD determination of whether a laboratory physician in an ESRD facility on facility or ordered by an MCP could test is ESRD-related is a clinical administrative duties is limited to 25 have unintended consequences to decision for the ESRD patient’s ordering percent per facility unless patients (75 FR 49054). In particular, practitioner. If a laboratory test is documentation is furnished supporting commenters noted that in many ordered for the treatment of ESRD, then the claim. In addition, if an individual instances the MCP physician is the the laboratory test is not paid separately. provides services to more than one ESRD patient’s primary care physician Due to the commenters’ concerns that dialysis facility, the individual’s time and often orders laboratory tests that are ESRD beneficiaries should be able to must be prorated among the different unrelated to the patient’s ESRD. These have blood drawn for non-ESRD-related facilities and may not exceed 100 commenters raised concerns that laboratory tests in the ESRD facility, we percent. requiring ESRD facilities to pay for these created a methodology for allowing tests would result in large numbers of ESRD facilities to receive separate C. Clarifications Regarding the ESRD tests that are unrelated to ESRD being payment when a laboratory service is PPS included in the ESRD bundle. We furnished for reasons other than for the 1. Laboratory Renal Dialysis Services agreed with commenters that it would treatment of ESRD (75 FR 49054). We be in the best interest of the created CB requirements using a Section 1881(b)(14)(B)(iv) of the Act beneficiaries for an ESRD facility to modifier to allow independent labs or requires diagnostic laboratory tests not draw blood for laboratory tests that are ESRD facilities (with the appropriate included under the composite payment not for the treatment of ESRD during the clinical laboratory certification in rate (that is, laboratory services dialysis session. accordance with the Clinical Laboratory separately paid prior to January 1, 2011) Commenters also requested that we Improvement Amendments), to receive to be included as part of the ESRD PPS produce a list of the ESRD-related separate payment. This modifier, which payment bundle. In the CY 2011 ESRD laboratory tests that are included in the is called the AY modifier, serves as an PPS final rule (75 FR 49053), we defined ESRD PPS bundle (75 FR 49054). We attestation that the item or service is renal dialysis services at 42 CFR received several laboratory service lists medically necessary for the patient but 413.171 to include items and services from the commenters that they is not being used for the treatment of included in the composite payment rate considered to be generally furnished for ESRD. for renal dialysis services as of the treatment of ESRD. While there was Following publication of the CY 2011 December 31, 2010 and diagnostic agreement for many of the laboratory ESRD PPS final rule, we received laboratory tests and other items and services, the lists were inconsistent and numerous inquiries regarding Table F services not included in the composite lacked stakeholder consensus. When (75 FR 49213). Stakeholders have rate that are furnished to individuals for Medicare provides a payment for a communicated to us that having a list of the treatment of ESRD. The composite benefit that is based on a bundle of laboratory services that is not all- payment rate covered routine items and items and services, CMS establishes inclusive is confusing because there is services furnished to ESRD beneficiaries claims processing edits that prevent no definitive guidance on which for outpatient maintenance dialysis, payment in other settings for items and laboratory tests are included in, and including some laboratory tests. We services that are identified as being excluded from, the ESRD PPS. They finalized a policy to include in the accounted for in the bundled payment. further stated that leaving the definition of laboratory tests under 42 Therefore, we needed to develop a list determination of when a laboratory test CFR 413.171(4) those laboratory tests of ESRD-related laboratory tests to is ordered for the treatment of ESRD to that were separately billed by ESRD implement claims processing edits that the practitioner creates inconsistent facilities as of December 31, 2010 and prevent payment in other settings for billing practices and potential overuse laboratory tests ordered by a physician items and services that are identified as of the AY modifier. Stakeholders stated who receives monthly capitation renal dialysis services to ensure that that practitioners can have different payments (MCPs) for treating ESRD payment is not made to independent positions on when a laboratory test is patients that were separately billed by laboratories for ESRD-related laboratory being ordered for the treatment of ESRD. independent laboratories (75 FR 49055). tests. Under the ESRD PPS we call these For example, some practitioners may We determined the average Medicare edits consolidated billing (CB) believe that laboratory tests ordered Allowable Payment (MAP) amount was requirements. We performed a clinical commonly for diabetes could be $8.40, as listed on Table 19 titled, review of the lists provided by the considered as for the treatment of ESRD ‘‘Average Medicare Allowable Payments industry and all of the laboratory tests because in certain situations a patient’s for composite rate and separately reported in the claims data to determine ESRD is a macro vascular complication billable services, 2007, with adjustment which laboratory tests are routinely of the diabetes. Commenters believe for price inflation to 2009’’ (75 FR furnished to ESRD beneficiaries for the these varying perspectives among 49075). This amount included the treatment of ESRD. Our clinical review practitioners can translate into laboratory tests that were already resulted in Table F in the Addendum of inconsistent billing practices. included under the composite rate, as the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule as the Stakeholders have also expressed well as laboratory tests billed separately list of laboratory tests that are subject to concern about potential overuse of the by ESRD facilities (that is, all laboratory the ESRD PPS CB requirements (75 FR AY modifier because they are aware that VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37836 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules CMS monitors the claims data for trends laboratory services included in the TABLE 9—LABORATORY SERVICES and behaviors. The industry’s position current list generally are not furnished SUBJECT TO ESRD CONSOLIDATED is that if there is a laboratory service for ESRD treatment. BILLING—Continued that is subject to the CB requirements, In the context of this clarification, we it is because CMS has determined that are proposing to remove the lipid panel CPT/ test to be routinely furnished for the from the CB list. As we stated in the CY Short description HCPCS treatment of ESRD and if certain tests 2013 ESRD PPS final rule (77 FR 67470), are frequently reported with the AY it was our understanding that the lipid Assay of parathormone ...... 83970 modifier, then those laboratories or panel was routinely used for the Assay alkaline phosphatase ..... 84075 Assay of phosphorus ...... 84100 ESRD facilities could appear to be treatment of ESRD. We explained that Assay of serum potassium ...... 84132 inappropriately billing Medicare. because some forms of dialysis, Assay of prealbumin ...... 84134 While we recognize stakeholders’ particularly peritoneal dialysis, are Assay of protein, serum ...... 84155 concerns, for CY 2016, we are reiterating associated with increased cholesterol Assay of protein by other our policy that any laboratory test and triglyceride levels, a lipid profile source ...... 84157 furnished to an ESRD beneficiary for the laboratory test to assess these levels Assay of serum sodium ...... 84295 treatment of ESRD is considered to be a would be considered furnished for the Assay of transferrin ...... 84466 renal dialysis service and is not payable treatment of ESRD. However, since the Assay of urea nitrogen ...... 84520 outside of the ESRD PPS. We continue Assay of urine/urea-n ...... 84540 CY 2013 final rule was published we Urea-N clearance test ...... 84545 to believe that it is necessary to use a have learned from stakeholders that the Hematocrit ...... 85014 list of laboratory services that are lipid panel is mostly used to monitor Hemoglobin ...... 85018 routinely furnished for the treatment of cardiac conditions and is not routinely Complete (cbc), automated ESRD for enforcing the CB furnished for the treatment of ESRD. We (HgB, Hct, RBC, WBC, and requirements. In addition, we continue believe that the proposal to remove the Platelet count) and auto- to believe it is convenient for ESRD lipid panel is consistent with the mated differential WBC count 85025 beneficiaries to have their blood drawn clarification provided in this rule that Complete (cbc), automated at the time of dialysis for laboratory laboratory services included in Table 9 (HgB, Hct, RBC, WBC, and Platelet count) ...... 85027 testing for reasons other than for the and subject to ESRD consolidated treatment of ESRD. Automated rbc count ...... 85041 billing are those that are routinely Manual reticulocyte count ...... 85044 We have included appropriate furnished for the treatment of ESRD but Automated reticulocyte count ... 85045 payments into the base rate to account that may occasionally be used to treat Reticyte/hgb concentrate ...... 85046 for any laboratory test that a practitioner non-ESRD-related conditions. In Automated leukocyte count ...... 85048 determines to be used for the treatment contrast, the lipid profile laboratory test Hep b core antibody, total ...... 86704 of ESRD. It is important that medical is not routinely used for the treatment Hep b core antibody, igm ...... 86705 necessity be the reason for how items of ESRD. We solicit comment on this Hep b surface antibody ...... 86706 Blood culture for bacteria ...... 87040 and services are reported to Medicare. proposal. When services are reported Culture, bacteria, other ...... 87070 appropriately, payments are made Culture bacteri aerobic othr ...... 87071 TABLE 9—LABORATORY SERVICES Culture bacteria anaerobic ...... 87073 appropriately out of the Trust Fund and SUBJECT TO ESRD CONSOLIDATED Cultr bacteria, except blood ..... 87075 ESRD beneficiaries are not unfairly BILLING Culture anaerobe ident, each ... 87076 inconvenienced by constraints placed Culture aerobic identify ...... 87077 upon them because a certain laboratory CPT/ Culture screen only ...... 87081 test is or is not included in the ESRD Short description HCPCS Hepatitis b surface ag, eia ...... 87340 PPS. Therefore, in order to maintain CBC/diff wbc w/o platelet ...... G0306 practitioner flexibility for ordering tests Basic Metabolic Panel (Cal- CBC without platelet ...... G0307 believed medically necessary for the cium, ionized) ...... 80047 treatment of ESRD, and have those tests Basic Metabolic Panel (Cal- Although we are not proposing to included and paid under the ESRD PPS, cium, total) ...... 80048 change our policy related to payment for we are not proposing a specific list of Electrolyte Panel ...... 80051 ESRD-related laboratory services under Comprehensive Metabolic laboratory services that are always the ESRD PPS, we are clarifying that to Panel ...... 80053 the extent a laboratory test is performed considered furnished for the treatment Lipid Panel ...... 80061 of ESRD. Renal Function Panel ...... 80069 to monitor the levels or effects of any of We are, however, soliciting comment Hepatic Function Panel ...... 80076 the drugs that we have specifically on the current list of laboratory services Assay of serum albumin ...... 82040 excluded from the ESRD PPS, these tests that is used for the ESRD PPS CB Assay of aluminum ...... 82108 would be separately billable. In the CY requirements to determine if there is Vitamin d, 25 hydroxy ...... 82306 2011 ESRD PPS final rule, we discuss consensus among stakeholders Assay of calcium ...... 82310 when certain drugs and biologicals regarding whether the list includes Assay of calcium, Ionized ...... 82330 would not be considered for the Assay, blood carbon dioxide .... 82374 those laboratory tests that are routinely Assay of carnitine ...... 82379 treatment of ESRD. Specifically, Table furnished for the treatment of ESRD. Assay of blood chloride ...... 82435 10, which appeared as Table 3—ESRD Table 9 is the list of laboratory tests that Assay of creatinine ...... 82565 Drug Category Excluded from the Final is used for the CB requirements. We Assay of urine creatinine ...... 82570 ESRD PPS Base Rate in the CY 2011 agree with the stakeholders that there Creatinine clearance test ...... 82575 ESRD PPS final rule (75 FR 49049), lists can be different interpretations among Vitamin B–12 ...... 82607 the drug categories that were excluded practitioners as to what is considered to Vit d 1, 25-dihydroxy ...... 82652 from the ESRD PPS and the rationale for Assay of erythropoietin ...... 82668 their exclusion. Laboratory services that be furnished for the treatment of ESRD Assay of ferritin ...... 82728 and that there can be some views that Blood folic acid serum ...... 82746 are furnished to monitor the medication are more conservative than others. Assay of iron ...... 83540 levels or effects of drugs and biologicals Stakeholder comments will assist us in Iron binding test ...... 83550 that fall in those categories would not be determining whether any of the Assay of magnesium ...... 83735 considered to be furnished for the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37837 treatment of ESRD. We are soliciting comment on this clarification. TABLE 10—ESRD DRUG CATEGORIES EXCLUDED FROM THE FINAL ESRD PPS BASE RATE Drug category Rationale for exclusion Anticoagulant ...... Drugs labeled for non-renal dialysis conditions and not for vascular access. Antidiuretic ...... Used to prevent fluid loss. Antiepileptic ...... Used to prevent seizures. Anti-inflammatory ...... May be used to treat kidney disease (glomerulonephritis) and other inflammatory conditions. Antipsychotic ...... Used to treat psychosis. Antiviral ...... Used to treat viral conditions such as shingles. Cancer management ...... Includes oral, parenteral and infusions. Cancer drugs are covered under a separate benefit category. Cardiac management ...... Drugs that manage blood pressure and cardiac conditions. Cartilage ...... Used to replace synovial fluid in a joint space. Coagulants ...... Drugs that cause blood to clot after anti-coagulant overdose or factor VII deficiency. Cytoprotective agents ...... Used after chemotherapy treatment. Endocrine/metabolic management ...... Used for endocrine/metabolic disorders such as thyroid or endocrine deficiency, hypoglycemia, and hyperglycemia. Erectile dysfunction management ...... Androgens were used prior to the development of ESAs for anemia management and currently are not recommended practice. Also used for hypogonadism and erectile dysfunction. Gastrointestinal management ...... Used to treat gastrointestinal conditions such as ulcers and gallbladder disease. Immune system management ...... Anti-rejection drugs covered under a separate benefit category. Migraine management ...... Used to treat migraine headaches and symptoms. Musculoskeletal management ...... Used to treat muscular disorders such as prevent muscle spasms, relax muscles, improve muscle tone as in myasthenia gravis, relax muscles for intubation and induce uterine con- tractions. Pharmacy handling for oral anti-cancer, anti- Not a function performed by an ESRD facility. emetics and immunosuppressant drugs. Pulmonary system management ...... Used for respiratory/lung conditions such as opening airways and newborn apnea. Radiopharmaceutical procedures ...... Includes contrasts and procedure preparation. Unclassified drugs ...... Should only be used for drugs that do not have a HCPCS code and therefore cannot be iden- tified. Vaccines ...... Covered under a separate benefit category. 2. Renal Dialysis Service Drugs and may be used for dialysis and non- the utilization of renal dialysis drugs Biologicals dialysis purposes (75 FR 49051). These and biologicals under Part B and Part D. include: Antiemetics, anti-infectives, a. 2014 Part D Call Letter Follow-up b. Oral or Other Forms of Renal Dialysis anti-pruritics, anxiolytics, drugs used Injectable Drugs and Biologicals Last year, we received public for excess fluid management, drugs used comments that expressed concern that for fluid and electrolyte management The ESRD PPS includes certain drugs the 2014 Part D Call Letter provision for including volume expanders, and drugs and biologicals that were previously prior authorization for drug categories used for pain management (analgesics). paid under Part D. Oral or other forms that may be used for ESRD as well as We indicated in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS of injectable drugs and biologicals used other conditions resulted in Part D plan final rule (79 FR 66151) that we were for the treatment of ESRD, for example, sponsors’ inappropriately refusing to considering various alternatives for vitamin D analogs, levocarnitine, cover oral drugs that are not renal dealing with this issue, as it has always antibiotics or any other oral or other dialysis services. Specifically, they been our intention to eliminate or form of a renal dialysis injectable drug noted that beneficiaries had difficulties minimize disruptions or delays in ESRD or biological are also included in the obtaining necessary medications such as beneficiaries receiving essential ESRD PPS and may not be separately oral antibiotics prescribed for medications and that we planned to paid. These drugs are included in the pneumonia and that the 2014 Part D issue further guidance to address the ESRD PPS payment because the Call Letter provision led to confusion issue. payments made for both the injectable for Part D plan sponsors and delays in In the Health Plan Management and oral forms were included in the beneficiaries obtaining essential System memo issued on November 14, ESRD PPS base rate. As discussed in medications at the pharmacy. 2014, we encouraged sponsors to section II.B.4 of this proposed rule, In response to the comments, we remove the beneficiary-level prior implementation of oral-only drugs used explained that the guidance in the 2014 authorization (PA) edits on these drugs. in the treatment of ESRD (that is, drugs Part D Call Letter was issued in When claims are submitted to Part D for with no injectable equivalent) under the response to increases in billing under drugs in the seven categories, we expect ESRD PPS payment has been delayed Part D for drugs that may be prescribed that they are not being used for the until 2025. for renal dialysis services but may also treatment of ESRD and, therefore, may In the CY 2011 ESRD PPS final rule be prescribed for other conditions. The be coverable under Part D. We also (75 FR 49172), we stated that ESRD guidance strongly encouraged Part D expect that Medicare ESRD facilities facilities are required to record the sponsors to place beneficiary-level prior will continue to provide all of the quantity of oral medications provided authorization edits on all drugs in the medications used for the treatment of for the monthly billing period. In seven categories identified in the CY ESRD, including drugs in the seven addition, ESRD facilities would submit 2011 ESRD PPS final rule as drugs that categories. We will continue to monitor claims for oral drugs only after having VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37838 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules received an invoice of payment. We would appear on the May claim for a must be reported by ESRD facilities and indicated that we would address quantity of 90 (30 days × 3 pills per day). the units reported on the monthly claim recording of drugs on an ESRD claim in Prescriptions for a 3 month supply of the must reflect the amount expected to be future guidance. We included this drug would never be reported on a single taken during that month. The facilities requirement because renal dialysis claim. Only the amount expected to be taken during the month would be reported on that should use the best information they drugs and biologicals that were paid month’s claim. have in determining the amount separately prior to the ESRD PPS, as expected to be taken in a given month, In February 2015, we were informed many of these oral medications were, including fill information from the by one of the large dialysis are eligible outlier items and services. If pharmacy and the patient’s plan of care. organizations that they, and many other an ESRD facility were to report a 90-day Any billing system changes to effectuate ESRD chain organizations, are out of supply of a drug on a monthly claim, this change must be made as soon as the claim could receive an outlier compliance with the requirement that only the quantity of the drug expected possible as this requirement has been in payment erroneously. effect since the ESRD PPS began in On June 7, 2013, we issued an update to be taken during the claim billing 2011. We are analyzing ESRD facility to the Medicare Benefits Policy Manual, period should be indicated on the ESRD claims data to determine the extent of Pub. 100–02, Chapter 11 to reflect monthly claim. They indicated that the reporting error and may take implementation of the ESRD PPS in some facilities are incorrectly reporting Change Request 8261. In section 20.3.C units that reflect a 60-day or 90-day additional actions in the future. of the updated Medicare Benefits Policy prescription while other facilities are c. Reporting of Composite Rate Drugs Manual, we stated that for ESRD-related not reporting the oral drugs prescribed. oral or other forms of drugs that are The reason given for these reporting As we indicated in the Medicare filled at the pharmacy for home use, errors is the lack of prescription Claims Processing Manual, Pub. 100–04, ESRD facilities should report one line processing information. Specifically, Chapter 8, section 50.3, as revised by item per prescription, but only for the while the facilities know when the Change Request 8978, issued December quantity of the drug expected to be pharmacy fills the prescription, they do 2, 2014, in an effort to enhance the taken during the claim billing period. not know when the patient picks up the ESRD claims data for possible future Example: A prescription for oral vitamin drug from the pharmacy and begins to refinements to the ESRD PPS, CMS D was ordered for one pill to be taken 3 times take the drug. announced that ESRD facilities should daily for a period of 45 days. The patient Due to this confusion and lack of begin reporting composite rate drugs on began taking the medication on April 15, compliance, we are reiterating our their monthly claims. Specifically, 2011. On the April claim, the ESRD facility would report the appropriate National Drug current policy that all renal dialysis ESRD facilities should only report the Code (NDC) code for the drug with the service drugs and biologicals prescribed composite rate drugs identified on the quantity 45 (15 days × 3 pills per day). The for ESRD patients, including the oral consolidated billing drug list and remaining pills which would be taken in May forms of renal dialysis injectable drugs, provided below in Table 11. TABLE 11—COMPOSITE RATE DRUGS AND BIOLOGICALS Composite Rate Drugs and Biologicals .... A4802 INJ PROTAMINE SULFATE J0670 INJ MEPIVACAINE HYDROCHLORIDE J1200 INJ DIPHENHYDRAMINE HCL J1205 INJ CHLOROTHIAZIDE SODIUM J1240 INJ DIMENHYDRINATE J1940 INJ FUROSEMIDE J2001 INJ LIDOCAINE HCL FOR INTRAVENOUS INFUSION, 10 MG J2150 INJ MANNITOL J2720 INJ PROTAMINE SULFATE J2795 INJ ROPIVACAINE HYDROCHLORIDE J3410 INJ HYDROXYZINE HCL J3480 INJ. POTASSIUM CHLORIDE, PER 2 MEQ. Q0163 DIPHENHYDRAMINE HYDROCHLORIDE The ESRD PPS payment policy component of the Medicare ESRD with respect to a year; (4) developing a remains the same for composite rate payment system. The ESRD Quality methodology for assessing the total drugs, therefore, no separate payment is Incentive Program (QIP) is the most performance of each facility based on made and these drugs will not be recent step in fostering improved the performance standards with respect designated as eligible outlier services. patient outcomes by establishing to the measures for a performance This information will provide CMS with incentives for dialysis facilities to meet period; and (5) applying an appropriate the full scope of renal dialysis services or exceed performance standards payment reduction to facilities that do which may better target outlier services established by CMS. The ESRD QIP is not meet or exceed the established Total to the most costly patients. authorized by section 1881(h) of the Performance Score (TPS). This proposed Social Security Act (the Act), which was rule discusses each of these elements III. End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) added by section 153(c) of the Medicare and our proposals for their application Quality Incentive Program (QIP) for Improvements for Patients and to PY 2019 and future years of the ESRD Payment Year (PY) 2019 Providers Act (MIPPA). QIP. A. Background Section 1881(h) of the Act requires the Secretary to establish an ESRD QIP B. Clarification of ESRD QIP For more than 30 years, monitoring by (1) selecting measures; (2) Terminology: ‘‘CMS Certification the quality of care provided by dialysis establishing the performance standards Number (CCN) Open Date’’ facilities to patients with end-stage renal that apply to the individual measures; Some stakeholders have expressed disease (ESRD) has been an important (3) specifying a performance period confusion about the use of the term VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37839 ‘‘CMS Certification Number (CCN) Open frequently prescribed for those patients on the QualityNet Web site Date’’ under the ESRD QIP (for example, who develop hypercalcemia secondary (www.qualitynet.org). see 79 FR 66186). We interpret this term to tertiary hyperparathyroidism, in We welcome recommendations from to mean the ‘‘Medicare effective date’’ order to most easily control the patients’ the public on technical updates to ESRD under 42 CFR 489.13, which governs serum calcium levels. Because QIP measures. We will consider the when the facility can begin to receive hypercalcemia is a condition that is appropriateness of all Medicare reimbursement for ESRD frequently treated with calcimimetics, recommendations, notify those who services under the ESRD PPS. Thus, a and because calcimimetics are oral-only submit recommendations as to whether facility is eligible, with respect to a drugs, we believe that the current we accept the recommendation, and particular payment year, to receive Hypercalcemia clinical measure (NQF incorporate accepted recommendations scores on individual measures and #1454) meets the requirement that the in a future release of the CMS ESRD participate in general in the ESRD QIP ESRD QIP measure set include for 2016 Measure Manual. At present, we intend based on the facility’s CCN Open Date and subsequent years measures that are to use JIRA, a web-based collaboration (i.e., Medicare effective date). specific to the conditions treated with platform maintained by the Office of the oral-only drugs. National Coordinator for Health C. Proposal To Use the Hypercalcemia We acknowledge that the Measure as a Measure Specific to the Information Technology, to receive, Hypercalcemia clinical measure is not consider, and respond to Conditions Treated With Oral-Only an outcome-based measure, and we Drugs recommendations for non-substantive have considered the possibility of measure changes. Further information Section 217(d) of The Protecting adopting outcome-based measures that about how to use the JIRA tool to make Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA) are specific to the conditions treated such recommendations will be (Pub. L. 113–93), enacted on April 1, with oral-only drugs. However, we are published in an upcoming CROWN 2014, amends section 1881(h)(2) of the currently not aware of any outcome- Memo and will be posted to http:// Act to require the Secretary to adopt based measures that would satisfy this www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- measures in the ESRD QIP (outcomes requirement. We welcome comments on Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- based, to the extent feasible) that are whether such outcome-based measures Instruments/ESRDQIP/index.html. specific to the conditions treated with are either ready for implementation now oral-only drugs for 2016 and subsequent or are being developed, and we intend E. Proposed Revision to the years. We stated in the CY 2015 ESRD to consider the feasibility of developing Requirements for the PY 2017 ESRD QIP PPS final rule (79 FR 66168–69) that we such a measure in the future. 1. Proposal To Modify the Small Facility believed the Hypercalcemia clinical We seek comments on this proposal. Adjuster Calculation for All Clinical measure, which was adopted beginning D. Sub-Regulatory Measure Measures Beginning With the PY 2017 with the PY 2016 program meets this Maintenance in the ESRD QIP ESRD QIP new statutory requirement; nevertheless, we also recognized that, In the CY 2013 ESRD PPS final rule, In the CY 2013 ESRD PPS final rule consistent with PAMA, we could adopt we finalized our policy to use a sub- we adopted a scoring adjustment for measures as late as for CY 2016, which regulatory process to make non- facilities with relatively small numbers would be included in the PY 2018 ESRD substantive updates to measures (77 FR of patients, called the small facility QIP. We also stated that we would take 67477). We currently make available the adjuster, which aims to ensure that any into account comments on whether the technical specifications for ESRD QIP error in measure rates due to a small Hypercalcemia clinical measure can be measures at http://www.cms.gov/ number of cases will not adversely appropriately characterized as a Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient- affect facility payment (77 FR 67511). measure specific to the conditions Assessment-Instruments/ESRDQIP/061_ Since we first implemented the treated with oral-only drugs. TechnicalSpecifications.html but are in methodology to implement the small Although section 1881(h)(2)(E)(i) does the process of drafting a CMS ESRD facility adjuster, we have encountered not define the term ‘‘oral-only drugs,’’ Measures Manual which will include two issues related to basing the we have previously interpreted that not only the ESRD QIP measure adjustment on the within-facility term to mean ‘‘drugs for which there is specifications, but also technical standard error. First, facility scores for no injectable equivalent or other form of information on quality indicators that some of the outcome measures adopted administration’’ (75 FR 49038). We have facilities report for other CMS ESRD in the ESRD QIP, such as the National also previously identified calcimimetics programs. We expect to release the first Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) and phosphate binders as two types of version of the CMS ESRD Measures Bloodstream Infection (BSI) clinical ‘‘oral-only drugs’’ (75 FR 49044). Manual in the near future at the measure, do not approximate a normal We are currently aware of three following web address: http:// or ‘‘bell-shaped’’ distribution. In such conditions that are treated with www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- cases, the within-facility standard error calcimimetics and phosphate binders: Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- does not necessarily capture the spread Secondary Hyperparathyroidism, Instruments/ESRDQIP/index.html. The of the data as it would if facility scores Tertiary Hyperparathyroidism, and manual will be released before the were normally distributed. Second, Hypercalcemia. Hypercalcemia is a beginning of the applicable performance facilities and other stakeholders have condition that results when the entry of period, preferably at least 6 months in commented that it is difficult for them calcium into the blood exceeds the advance. We believe that this update to independently calculate pooled excretion of calcium into the urine or frequency will be sufficient to provide within-facility standard errors because deposition in bone; the condition may facilities with information needed to doing so requires data for all patient- be caused by a number of other incorporate these updates into their months across all facilities, which conditions, including ESRD data collection activities. We note makes the small facility adjuster hyperparathyroidism. Although that this policy is consistent with our unnecessarily opaque. For these multiple treatment options are available policy for updating the CMS National reasons, we have developed an equation for patients with early forms of Hospital Inpatient Quality Measures for determining the small facility hypercalcemia, calcimimetics are Specifications Manual, which is posted adjuster that does not rely upon a VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37840 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules within-facility standard error, but • For the standardized ratio nonetheless preserves the intent of the measures, such as the SRR and STrR adjuster to include as many facilities in where ni is the number of patients ( or clinical measures, the national mean the ESRP QIP as possible while ensuring other appropriate unit) at the ith facility measure rate (that is, P) is set to 1. that the measure scores are reliable. and C is the upper thresholds of eligible We note that the equation ti = wi * pi patients (or other appropriate unit) a + (1¥wi) * P is designed to ‘‘shrink’’ the Therefore, beginning with the PY facility needs to have in order to be 2017 ESRD QIP, we propose to use the facility mean toward the national mean, considered for a small facility and that wi reflects the degree of following methodology to determine the adjustment. This calculation will confidence in the estimation of the small facility adjustment: produce the facility’s weighting facility mean, because it depends on • For the ith facility, suppose the coefficient for a given clinical measure, facility size. Some research has shown facility’s original measure rate is pi and wi, which provides a metric for that this type of ‘‘shrinkage estimator’’ the number of patients (or other unit assessing the uncertainty due to small equation gives a small mean squared used to establish data minimums for the facility sizes. • error (that is, the combination of bias measure. For example, index discharges For measures where higher scores and variance) if the national mean truly for the Standardized Readmission Ratio are better (for example, the Vascular reflects the performance of a small th Access Type (VAT): Fistula clinical clinical measure) at the i facility is ni. facility, which was the intention of the measure and the Dialysis Adequacy • equation.2 Where the number of eligible clinical measures), a small facility’s patients (or other appropriate unit) To assess the impact of the proposed adjusted performance rates (ti) will be small facility adjuster, we conducted an needed to receive a score on a measure pegged to the national mean impact analysis of this proposed is L and the upper threshold for performance rate (P) as follows: methodology on individual measure applying the small facility adjuster is C, Æ If pi TABLE 12—IMPACT OF PROPOSED SMALL FACILITY ADJUSTER ON INDIVIDUAL MEASURE SCORES, USING THE FINAL DATASET FOR THE PY 2015 ESRD QIP National # facilities mean in the # facilities # facilities # facilities received performance receiving # facilities with score change due with higher with lower Measure SFA in PY period SFA under to new SFA method N score under score under 2015 (CY 2013) new method (% out of scored facilities) new SFA new SFA (%) method method Hgb≥12 ...... 1,253 0.4 63 32 out of 5,513 (0.6%) ...... 32 0 Fistula ...... 938 64.1 391 341 out of 5,547 (6.1%) ...... 66 275 Catheter ...... 826 11.7 352 301 out of 5,562 (5.4%) ...... 65 236 HD Kt/V ...... 588 91.1 173 248 out of 5,641 (4.4%) ...... 22 226 Ped HD Kt/V ...... 11 80.1 1 8 out of 11 (72.7%) ...... 0 8 PD Kt/V ...... 787 76.4 192 400 out of 1,203 (33.3%) ...... 62 338 TPS ...... 513 out of 5,650 (9.1%) ...... 96 417 Reduction ...... 43 out of 5,650 (0.8%) ...... 23 20 As the results in Table 12 indicate, the national mean do not receive an the 43 facilities that received a different fewer facilities received an adjustment adjustment. However, those facilities payment reduction under the proposed under the proposed small facility that did receive an adjustment generally small facility adjuster, 23 (53 percent) adjuster methodology, because small received a larger adjustment under the received a lower payment reduction. facilities with performance rates above proposed methodology. For example, of 2 Efron B, Morris C. Empirical Bayes on vector Improved estimation of the Poisson parameter. Combining Poisson means. Communications in observations: An extension of Stein’s method. Statistica, anno LIII n.2, 268–286, 1993. Ahmed SE. Statistics: Theory and Methods, 20, 771–789, 1991. Biometrika, 59(2):335–347. Ahmed SE, Khan SM. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP01JY15.012 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37841 We also assessed the impact of the found at http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/ facility adjuster to the distribution of proposed small facility adjuster on the Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- payment reductions using the proposed distribution of payment reductions, Instruments/ESRDQIP/061_Technical small facility adjuster. For the purposes using the final dataset used to calculate Specifications.html. Table 13 below of this analysis and for all of the PY 2015 ESRD QIP payment reductions. compares the distribution of payment measures, L was set to 11 and C was set The full results of this analysis can be reductions using the existing small to 26. TABLE 13—COMPARISON OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF PAYMENT REDUCTIONS DETERMINED WITH THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED SMALL FACILITY ADJUSTER, USING THE FINAL DATASET FOR THE PY 2015 ESRD QIP Payment reduction distribution in PY 2015 using the existing SFA Estimated payment reduction distribution in PY 2015 using the new SFA Payment reduction Number of Percent of Payment Percent of (%) facilities facilities reduction Number of facilities (%) (%) facilities (%) 0.0 ...... 5,307 93.93 0.0 5,296 93.73 0.5 ...... 242 4.28 0.5 255 4.51 1.0 ...... 41 0.73 1.0 45 0.80 1.5 ...... 23 0.41 1.5 26 0.46 2.0 ...... 378 0.65 2.0 28 0.50 Note: This table excludes 488 facilities that did not receive a score because they did not have enough data to receive a TPS. These results suggest that a similar reliable data sources for determining rule (79 FR 66169 through 66170). number of facilities would receive a some of the patient-level exclusions. For Accordingly, facilities seeking to avoid payment reduction under the proposed example, we have been unable to locate scoring on the ICH CAHPS measure due small facility adjuster methodology. A a reliable data source for determining to ineligibility must attest in total of 343 (6.1 percent) facilities would whether a patient is receiving hospice CROWNWeb by January 31 of the year receive a payment reduction with the care or is residing in an institution such immediately following the performance existing small facility adjuster; under as a prison or a jail. period (for example, January 31, 2017, the proposed small facility adjuster Although some facilities may be for the PY 2018 ESRD QIP) that they did methodology, a total of 354 (6.3 percent) experiencing issues related to the not treat enough eligible patients during facilities would have received a attestation process (for example, during the eligibility period to receive a score payment reduction. Based on the results the preview period, we have on the ICH CAHPS measure. Facilities of these analyses, we believe that the encountered numerous instances where that submit attestations regarding the proposed small facility adjuster does not facilities have either attested number of eligible patients treated at the systematically alter the distribution of inappropriately or have failed to attest facility during the eligibility period by measure scores, TPSs, and payment in a timely fashion), we believe that the applicable deadline will not receive reductions, as compared to the existing facilities are generally able to determine a score on the ICH CAHPS clinical whether their patients meet one or more small facility adjuster. Coupled with the measure for that program year. Facilities of the exclusion criteria for the measure. benefits of removing the within-facility that do not submit such attestations will For this reason, we believe that having standard error variable from the existing be eligible to receive a score on the facilities attest that they are ineligible adjuster (discussed above), this leads us measure. However, even if a facility is for the measure will result in more to believe that the benefits of the eligible to receive a score on the accurate measure scores, as compared to proposed adjuster outweigh the benefits measure because it has treated at least of the existing adjuster. We therefore using unreliable data sources to determine whether facilities treated the 30 survey-eligible patients during the propose to modify the methodology for eligibility period (defined as the determining the small facility requisite number of eligible patients calendar year before the performance adjustment as explained above. during the eligibility period, (defined as period), the facility will still not receive We seek comments on this proposal. the calendar year immediately preceding the performance period). a score on the measure if it cannot 2. Proposal To Reinstate Qualifying Because we have no reason to believe collect at least 30 survey completes Patient Attestations for the ICH CAHPS that reliable data sources for some of the during the performance period. Facility Clinical Measure patient-level exclusions for the ICH attestations are limited to the number of In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, CAHPS clinical measure will become eligible patients treated at the facility we finalized our proposal to remove the available in the near term, and because during the eligibility period, and are not case minimum attestation for the ICH the PY 2017 ICH CAHPS reporting intended to capture the number of CAHPS reporting measure due to measure and the PY 2018 ICH CAHPS completed surveys at a facility during facility confusion regarding the clinical measure employ the same the performance period. The ESRD QIP attestation process (79 FR 66185). We exclusion criteria, we propose to system will determine how many further finalized that we would reinstate the attestation process we completed surveys a facility received determine facility eligibility for the ICH previously adopted in the CY 2014 during the performance period. We are CAHPS reporting measure based on ESRD PPS final rule (78 FR 72220 not proposing to change any of the other available data submitted via through 72222) beginning with the PY data minimum requirements for the PY CROWNWeb, Medicare claims, and 2017 program year. However, we are 2017 ICH CAHPS reporting measure, or other CMS administrative data sources. now proposing to have facilities attest for the ICH CAHPS clinical measure in Following the publication of that rule on the basis of the eligibility criteria PY 2018 and future payment years. To we have determined that we do not have finalized in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final reduce confusion, we will release a VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37842 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules CROWN Memo detailing how facilities data from CY 2014 and the first portion through December 2014. For the SRR are expected to attest. of CY 2015, in the CY 2016 ESRD PPS and STrR clinical measures, this data We seek comments on this proposal. final rule (79 FR 66209). At this time, comes from the period of January we do not have the necessary data to through December 2013. In Table 14, we F. Proposed Requirements for the PY assign numerical values to the proposed have provided the estimated numerical 2018 ESRD QIP performance standards, achievement values for all of the finalized PY 2018 1. Estimated Performance Standards, thresholds, and benchmarks because we ESRD QIP clinical measures, except the Achievement Thresholds, and do not yet have complete data from CY ICH CAHPS clinical measure, because Benchmarks for the Clinical Measures 2014. Nevertheless, we are able to the performance standards for that Finalized for the PY 2018 ESRD QIP estimate these numerical values based measure will be calculated using CY on the most recent data available. For 2015 data. We will publish updated In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, the Vascular Access Type and values for the clinical measures, using we stated that we would publish values Hypercalcemia clinical measures, this data from the first part of CY 2015, in for the PY 2018 clinical measures, using data comes from the period of January the CY 2016 ESRD PPS final rule. TABLE 14—ESTIMATED NUMERICAL VALUES FOR THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE PY 2018 ESRD QIP CLINICAL MEASURES USING THE MOST RECENTLY AVAILABLE DATA Measure Achievement threshold Benchmark Performance standard Vascular Access Type:. % Fistula ...... 53.52% ...... 79.67% ...... 66.02%. % Catheter ...... 17.44% ...... 2.73% ...... 9.24%. Kt/V. Adult Hemodialysis ...... 89.83% ...... 98.22% ...... 95.07%. Adult Peritoneal Dialysis ...... 74.68% ...... 96.50% ...... 88.67%. Pediatric Hemodialysis ...... 50.00% ...... 96.90% ...... 89.45%. Pediatric Peritoneal Dialysis ...... 43.22% ...... 88.39% ...... 72.60%. Hypercalcemia ...... 3.86% ...... 0.00% ...... 1.13%. NHSN Bloodstream Infection SIR ...... 1.811 ...... 0 ...... 0.861. Standardized Readmission Ratio ...... 1.261 ...... 0.649 ...... 0.998. Standardized Transfusion Ratio ...... 1.488 ...... 0.451 ...... 0.915. ICH CAHPS ...... 50th percentile of eligible 15th percentile of eligible 90th percentile of eligible facilities’ performance facilities’ performance facilities’ performance during CY 2015. during CY 2015. during CY 2015. We believe that the ESRD QIP should standard, achievement threshold, and/or for scoring facility performance on the not have lower performance standards benchmark for that measure. Pain Assessment and Follow-Up than in previous years. Accordingly, if We seek comments on this proposal. reporting measure under the PY 2018 the final numerical value for a 2. Proposed Modification to Scoring ESRD QIP (79 FR 66211): performance standard, achievement Facility Performance on the Pain threshold, and/or benchmark is worse Assessment and Follow-Up Reporting than it was for that measure in the PY Measure 2017 ESRD QIP, then we propose to In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, substitute the PY 2017 performance we finalized the following calculation We have since determined that this treats no eligible patients in one of the application of the ESRD QIP scoring calculation may unduly penalize two six-month periods, then that methodology results in an appropriate facilities that treat no eligible patients in facility’s score will be based solely on distribution of payment reductions one of the two six-month periods the percentage of eligible patients across facilities, such that facilities evaluated under this measure; under treated in the other six-month period for achieving the lowest TPSs receive the this calculation, those facilities would whom the facility reports one of six largest payment reductions. In the CY have a ‘‘0’’ for the applicable period’s conditions. 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, we finalized data, in effect giving the facility half of We seek comments on this proposal. our proposal for calculating the its score on the remaining six-month minimum TPS for PY 2018 and future 3. Proposed Payment Reductions for the period as a measure score. In order to payment years (79 FR 66221 through PY 2018 ESRD QIP avoid such an undue impact on facility 66222). Under our current policy, a scores, we propose that, beginning with Section 1881(h)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act facility will not receive a payment the PY 2018 ESRD QIP, if a facility requires the Secretary to ensure that the reduction if it achieves a minimum TPS VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP01JY15.013 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37843 that is equal to or greater than the total establish a numerical value for the intend to consider whether payment of the points it would have received if: performance standard through the reductions under the ESRD QIP should (i) It performs at the performance rulemaking process before the beginning be based, in part, on whether a facility standard for each clinical measure; and of the PY 2018 performance period. We has met our standards for data (ii) it receives the number of points for are proposing that a facility failing to validation. each reporting measure that corresponds meet the minimum TPS, as established In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, to the 50th percentile of facility in the CY 2016 ESRD PPS final rule, we also finalized that there will be a performance on each of the PY 2016 will receive a payment reduction based feasibility study for validating data reporting measures (79 FR 66221). We on the estimated TPS ranges indicated reported to CDC’s NHSN Dialysis Event are proposing to clarify how we will in Table 15 below. Module for the NHSN Bloodstream account for measures in the minimum Infection clinical measure. Healthcare- TPS when we lack the baseline data TABLE 15—ESTIMATED PAYMENT RE- Acquired Infections (HAI) are relatively necessary to calculate a numerical DUCTION SCALE FOR PY 2018 rare, and we finalized that the feasibility performance standard before the BASED ON THE MOST RECENTLY study would target records with a higher beginning of the performance period AVAILABLE DATA FROM CY 2014 probability of including a dialysis event, (per criterion (i) above), because we because this would enrich the inadvertently omitted this detail in the Total performance score Reduction validation sample while reducing the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule. % burden on facilities. For PY 2018, we Specifically, we propose, for the PY propose to use the same methodology 100–39 ...... 0.0 2018 ESRD QIP, to add the following that was discussed in the CY 2015 ESRD criterion previously adopted for the PY 38–29 ...... 0.5 28–19 ...... 1.0 QIP final rule (79 FR 66187). This 2017 program (79 FR 66187): ‘‘it methodology resembles the received zero points for each clinical 18–9 ...... 1.5 8–0 ...... 2.0 methodology we use in the Hospital measure that does not have a numerical Inpatient Quality Reporting Program to value for the performance standard We seek comments on these validate the central line-associated established through rulemaking before proposals. bloodstream infection measure, the the beginning of the PY 2018 catheter-associated urinary tract performance period.’’ Under this 4. Data Validation infection measure, and the surgical site proposal, for PY 2018, a facility will not One of the critical elements of the infection measure (77 FR 53539 through receive a payment reduction if it ESRD QIP’s success is ensuring that the 53553). For the PY 2018 ESRD QIP, we achieves a minimum TPS that is equal data submitted to calculate measure propose to randomly select nine to or greater than the total of the points scores and TPSs are accurate. We began facilities to participate in the feasibility it would have received if: (i) It performs a pilot data-validation program in CY study for data reported in CY 2016. A at the performance standard for each 2013 for the ESRD QIP, and procured CMS contractor will send these facilities clinical measure; (ii) it received zero the services of a data-validation quarterly requests for lists of candidate points for each clinical measure that contractor that was tasked with does not have a numerical value for the dialysis events (for example, all positive validating a national sample of facilities’ performance standard established blood cultures drawn from its patients records as reported to CROWNWeb. For through rulemaking before the during the quarter, including any validation of CY 2014 data, our first beginning of the PY 2018 performance positive blood cultures that were period; and (iii) it receives the number priority was to develop a methodology collected from the facility’s patients on of points for each reporting measure that for validating data submitted to the day of, or the day following, their corresponds to the 50th percentile of CROWNWeb under the pilot data- admission to a hospital). Facilities will facility performance on each of the PY validation program. That methodology have 60 days to respond to quarterly 2016 reporting measures. was fully developed and adopted requests for lists of positive blood We were unable to calculate a through the rulemaking process. For the cultures and other candidate events. A minimum TPS for PY 2018 in the CY PY 2016 ESRD QIP (78 FR 72223 CMS contractor will then determine 2015 ESRD PPS final rule because we through 72224), we finalized a when a positive blood culture or other were not yet able to calculate the requirement to sample approximately 10 ‘‘candidate dialysis event’’ is performance standards for each of the records from 300 randomly selected appropriate for further validation. With clinical measures. We therefore stated facilities; these facilities had 60 days to input from CDC, the CMS contractor that we would publish the minimum comply once they received requests for will utilize a methodology for TPS for the PY 2018 ESRD QIP in the records. We continued this pilot for the identifying and requesting the candidate CY 2016 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR PY 2017 ESRD QIP, and propose to dialysis events other than positive blood 66222). continue doing so for the PY 2018 ESRD cultures. The contractor will analyze the Based on the estimated performance QIP. Under this continued validation records of patients who had candidate standards listed above, we estimate that study, we will sample the same number events in order to determine whether a facility must meet or exceed a of records (approximately 10 per the facility reported dialysis events for minimum TPS of 39 for PY 2018. For all facility) from the same number of those patients in accordance with the of the clinical measures except the SRR, facilities (that is, 300) during CY 2016. NHSN Dialysis Event Protocol. If the STrR, and ICH CAHPS clinical If a facility is randomly selected to contractor determines that additional measures, these data come from CY participate in the pilot validation study medical records are needed from a 2014. The data for the SRR and STrR but does not provide us with the facility to validate whether the facility clinical measures come from CY 2013 requisite medical records within 60 accurately reported the dialysis events, Medicare claims. For the ICH CAHPS days of receiving a request, then we then the contractor will send a request clinical measure, we set the propose to deduct 10 points from the for additional information to the facility, performance standard to zero for the facility’s TPS. Once we have developed and the facility will have 60 days from purposes of determining this minimum and adopted a methodology for the date of the letter to respond to the TPS, because we are not able to validating the CROWNWeb data, we request. Overall, we estimate that, on VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37844 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules average, quarterly lists will include two ESRD facilities is so high and unvarying adopted a policy under which we could positive blood cultures per facility, but that meaningful distinctions in retain an otherwise topped-out measure we recognize these estimates may vary improvements or performance can no if we determined that its continued considerably from facility to facility. If longer be made (in other words, the inclusion in the ESRD QIP measure a facility is randomly selected to measure is topped-out); (2) performance would address the unique needs of a participate in the feasibility study but or improvement on a measure does not specific subset of the ESRD population does not provide CMS with the requisite result in better or the intended patient (79 FR 66172 through 66174). lists of positive blood cultures or the outcomes; (3) a measure no longer aligns Subsequent to the publication of the requisite medical records within 60 with current clinical guidelines or CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, we days of receiving a request, then we practice; (4) a more broadly applicable evaluated the finalized PY 2018 ESRD proposed to deduct 10 points from the (across settings, populations, or QIP measures against all of these facility’s TPS. conditions) measure for the topic criteria. We determined that none of We seek comments on these becomes available; (5) a measure that is these measures met criterion (1), (2), (3), proposals. more proximal in time to desired patient (5), (6), or (7). As part of this evaluation G. Proposed Requirements for the PY outcomes for the particular topic for criterion one, we performed a 2019 ESRD QIP becomes available; (6) a measure that is statistical analysis of the PY 2018 more strongly associated with desired measures to determine whether any 1. Proposed Replacement of the Four patient outcomes for the particular topic measures were ‘‘topped out.’’ The full Measures Currently in the Dialysis becomes available; or (7) collection or results of this analysis can be found at Adequacy Clinical Measure Topic public reporting of a measure leads to http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- Beginning With the PY 2019 Program negative or unintended consequences Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- Year (77 FR 67475). In the CY 2015 ESRD Instruments/ESRDQIP/061_Technical We consider a quality measure for PPS final rule, we adopted statistical Specifications.html and a summary of removal or replacement if: (1) Measure criteria for determining whether a our topped-out analysis results appears performance among the majority of clinical measure is topped out, and also in Table 16 below. TABLE 16—PY 2018 CLINICAL MEASURES USING CROWNWEB AND MEDICARE CLAIMS DATA Statistically indis- Measure N 75th percentile 90th percentile Std. Error tinguishable Truncated CV TCV < 0.10 Adult HD Kt/V ...... 5822 97.0 98.3 0.09 No ...... 0.03 ...... Yes. Pediatric HD Kt/V 7 94 .4 96.9 13.4 Yes ...... 0.23 ...... No. Adult PD Kt/V ...... 1287 94 .4 97.1 0.45 No ...... 0.10 ...... No. Pediatric PD Kt/V 3 88 .4 88.4 13.9 Yes ...... N/A1 ...... N/A.1 VAT: Fistula2 ...... 5763 73 .3 79.7 0 .15 No ...... 0.14 ...... No. VAT: Catheter3 ..... 5744 5 .4 2.7 0 .10 No ...... <0.01 ...... Yes. Hypercalcemia2 .... 6042 0.33 0.0 0 .03 No ...... <0.01 ...... Yes. 1 Insufficient data 2 Medicare claims data from CY 2014 were used in these calculations. 3 CROWNWeb data from CY 2014 was used in this calculation. As the information presented in Table spKt/V; and (4) Pediatric Peritoneal ESRD QIP. The measure assesses the 16 indicates, none of these clinical Dialysis Adequacy—with a single more adequacy of dialysis using the same measures are currently topped-out in broadly applicable measure for the thresholds applied to those patients by the ESRD QIP. We note that only three topic. The new measure, Delivered Dose the existing dialysis adequacy measures, facilities had 11 or more qualifying of Dialysis above Minimum—Composite as described below. For these reasons, patients for the Pediatric Peritoneal Score clinical measure (‘‘Dialysis we believe the new dialysis adequacy Dialysis Adequacy clinical measure, Adequacy clinical measure’’) (Measure measure meets criterion four above. We resulting in insufficient data available to Applications Partnership #X3717), is a therefore propose to remove the four calculate a truncated coefficient of single comprehensive measure of individual measures within the Kt/V variation. However, because the dialysis adequacy assessing the Dialysis Adequacy Measure Topic, as Pediatric Peritoneal Dialysis Adequacy percentage of all patient-months, for well as the measure topic itself, and to clinical measure addresses the unique both pediatric and adult patients, whose replace those measures with a single needs of the pediatric population, we average delivered dose of dialysis Dialysis Adequacy clinical measure are not proposing to remove the (either hemodialysis or peritoneal beginning with the PY 2019 ESRD QIP. measure at this time. Accordingly, we dialysis) met the specified Kt/V However, if based on public comments, are not proposing to remove any of these threshold during the performance we do not finalize our proposal to adopt measures from the ESRD QIP. period. As discussed in more detail the Dialysis Adequacy clinical measure, Beginning with the PY 2019 ESRD below, this measure’s specifications then we would not finalize this proposal QIP, we are proposing to replace the allow the measure to capture a greater to remove these measures and the four measures in the Kt/V Dialysis number of patients, particularly Dialysis Adequacy measure topic. Adequacy measure topic—(1) pediatric hemodialysis and peritoneal We seek comments on this proposal. Hemodialysis Adequacy: Minimum dialysis patients, than the four delivered hemodialysis dose; (2) individual dialysis adequacy measures, Peritoneal Dialysis Adequacy: Delivered and will result in a larger and broader dose above minimum; (3) Pediatric collection of data from patients whose Hemodialysis Adequacy: Minimum dialysis adequacy is assessed under the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37845 2. Proposed Measures for the PY 2019 continue using measures unless we Delivered dose above minimum; (3) ESRD QIP propose to remove or replace them, (77 Pediatric Hemodialysis Adequacy: a. PY 2018 Measures Continuing for PY FR 67477), we will continue to use 12 Minimum spKt/V; and (4) Pediatric 2019 and Future Payment Years of these measures in the PY 2019 ESRD Peritoneal Dialysis Adequacy—and QIP. As noted above, we are proposing replace them with a single, We previously finalized 16 measures to remove four of these clinical comprehensive clinical measure in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule for measures—(1) Hemodialysis Adequacy: covering the patient populations the PY 2018 ESRD QIP, and these measures are summarized in Table 17 Minimum delivered hemodialysis dose; previously captured by these four below. In accordance with our policy to (2) Peritoneal Dialysis Adequacy: individual clinical measures. TABLE 17—PY 2018 ESRD QIP MEASURES BEING CONTINUED IN PY 2019 NQF # Measure title and description 0257 ...... Vascular Access Type: AV Fistula, a clinical measure Percentage of patient-months on hemodialysis during the last hemodialysis treatment of the month using an autogenous AV fistula with two needles. 0256 ...... Vascular Access Type: Catheter ≥ 90 days, a clinical measure Percentage of patient-months for patients on hemodialysis during the last hemodialysis treatment of month with a catheter continuously for 90 days or longer prior to the last hemodialysis session. N/A1 ...... National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Bloodstream Infection in Hemodialysis Patients, a clinical measure Number of hemodialysis outpatients with positive blood cultures per 100 hemodialysis patient-months. 1454 ...... Hypercalcemia, a clinical measure Proportion of patient-months with 3-month rolling average of total uncorrected serum calcium greater than 10.2 mg/dL. N/A ...... Standardized Readmission Ratio, a clinical measure Standardized hospital readmissions ratio of the number of observed unplanned readmissions to the number of expected unplanned readmissions. N/A ...... Standardized Transfusion Ratio, a clinical measure Risk-adjusted standardized transfusion ratio for all adult Medicare patients. 0258 ...... In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH CAHPS) Survey Administra- tion, a clinical measure Facility administers, using a third-party CMS-approved vendor, the ICH CAHPS survey in accordance with survey speci- fications and submits survey results to CMS. N/A2 ...... Mineral Metabolism Reporting, a reporting measure Number of months for which facility reports serum phosphorus or serum plasma for each Medicare patient. N/A ...... Anemia Management Reporting, a reporting measure Number of months for which facility reports ESA dosage (as applicable) and hemoglobin/hematocrit for each Medicare pa- tient. N/A3 ...... Pain Assessment and Follow-Up, a reporting measure Facility reports in CROWNWeb one of six conditions for each qualifying patient once before August 1 of the performance period and once before February 1 of the year following the performance period. N/A4 ...... Clinical Depression Screening and Follow-Up, a reporting measure Facility reports in CROWNWeb one of six conditions for each qualifying patient once before February 1 of the year fol- lowing the performance period. N/A5 ...... NHSN Healthcare Personnel Influenza Vaccination, a reporting measure Facility submits Healthcare Personnel Influenza Vaccination Summary Report to CDC’s NHSN system, according to the specifications of the Healthcare Personnel Safety Component Protocol, by May 15 of the performance period. 1 We note that this measure is based upon a current NQF-endorsed bloodstream infection measure (NQF#1460). 2 We note that this measure is based upon a current NQF-endorsed serum phosphorus measure (NQF #0255). 3 We note that this measure is based upon a current NQF-endorsed pain assessment and follow-up measure (NQF #0420). 4 We note that this measure is based upon a current NQF-endorsed clinical depression screening and follow-up measure (NQF #0418). 5 We note that this measure is based upon an NQF-endorsed HCP influenza vaccination measure (NQF #0431). b. Proposed New Dialysis Adequacy Hemodialysis Adequacy clinical proposed Dialysis Adequacy clinical Clinical Measure Beginning With the PY measure, the specifications for these measure in its 2015 Pre-Rulemaking 2019 ESRD QIP measures still result in the exclusion of Report, noting that this measure meets some patients from the measures. For critical program objectives to include Section 1881(h)(2)(A)(i) of the Act example, the Pediatric Hemodialysis more outcome measures and measures states that the ESRD QIP measure set Adequacy clinical measure’s applicable to the pediatric population in must include measures on ‘‘dialysis specifications have limited the number the set.3 adequacy.’’ Kt/V is a widely accepted of pediatric patients included in the The Dialysis Adequacy clinical measure of dialysis adequacy in the ESRD QIP because very few facilities (10 measure assesses the percentage of all ESRD community. It is a measure of facilities, based on CY 2013 data) were patient-months for both adult and small solute (urea) removal from the eligible to receive a score on the pediatric patients whose average body, is relatively simple to measure measure. We are therefore proposing to delivered dose of dialysis (either and report, and is associated with adopt a single comprehensive Dialysis hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis) met survival among dialysis patients. While Adequacy clinical measure under the the specified threshold during the the current dialysis adequacy measures authority of section 1881(h)(2)(A)(i) of performance period. A primary have allowed us to capture a greater the Act. difference between the single proportion of the ESRD population than The Measure Applications previously accounted for under the URR Partnership conditionally supported the 3 https://www.qualityforum.org/map/ VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37846 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules comprehensive Dialysis Adequacy month level, based on the patient’s age, measures that have been endorsed or clinical measure and the four previously treatment modality type, whether a adopted by a consensus organization finalized dialysis adequacy clinical patient has been on dialysis for 90 days identified by the Secretary.’’ We have measures is how facility eligibility for or more, and the number of given due consideration to endorsed the measure is determined. Under the hemodialysis treatments the patient measures, as well as those adopted by four previously finalized dialysis receives per week. All eligible patient- a consensus organization. Because no adequacy clinical measures, facility months at a facility would be counted NQF-endorsed measures or measures eligibility was determined based on the toward the denominator. Eligible patient adopted by a consensus organization on number of qualifying patients treated for months where the patient met the ultrafiltration rates currently exist, we each individual measure (for example, specific dialysis adequacy threshold are proposing to adopt the the number of qualifying adult would be counted toward the Ultrafiltration Rate reporting measure hemodialysis patients for the numerator. Technical specifications for under the authority of section Hemodialysis Adequacy: Minimum the Dialysis Adequacy clinical measure 1881(h)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act. Delivered Hemodialysis Dose clinical can be found at http://www.cms.gov/ Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient- We are proposing to adopt a measure measure). As a result, a facility had to that is based on Measure Applications treat at least 11 qualifying patients for Assessment-Instruments/ESRDQIP/061_ Partnership #XAHMH, ‘‘Ultrafiltration each of these measures in order to TechnicalSpecifications.html. Rate Greater than 13 ml/kg/hr’’ receive a score on that measure. By We seek comments on our proposal to (‘‘Ultrafiltration Rate measure’’). This contrast, a facility’s eligibility to receive adopt this measure beginning with the measure assesses the percentage of a score on the proposed Dialysis PY 2019 ESRD QIP. patient-months for patients with an Adequacy clinical measure, which c. Proposed New Reporting Measures ultrafiltration rate greater than 13 ml/kg/ includes both adults and children, and Beginning With the PY 2019 ESRD QIP hr. The Measure Applications both hemodialysis and peritoneal Partnership expressed conditional dialysis modalities, is determined based i. Proposed Ultrafiltration Rate support for the Ultrafiltration Rate on the total number of qualifying Reporting Measure measure, noting it would ‘‘consider the patients treated at a facility. As a result, The ultrafiltration rate measures the a facility that would not be eligible to rapidity with which fluid (ml) is measure for inclusion in the program receive a score on one or more of our removed at dialysis per unit (kg) body once it has been reviewed for current dialysis adequacy clinical weight in unit (hour) time. A patient’s endorsement.’’ The measure upon measures because it did not meet the ultrafiltration rate is under the control which our proposed measure is based is case minimum for one or more of those of the dialysis facility and is monitored currently under review for endorsement measures would be eligible to receive a throughout a patient’s hemodialysis by NQF; however, we believe the score on the proposed dialysis adequacy session. Studies suggest that higher measure is ready for adoption because it measure if it had at least 11 total ultrafiltration rates are associated with has been fully tested for reliability and qualifying patients, defined as adults higher mortality and higher odds of an addresses a critical aspect of patients’ and pediatric patients receiving either ‘‘unstable’’ dialysis session,4 and that clinical care not currently addressed by hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. rapid rates of fluid removal during the ESRD QIP measure set. Therefore, we anticipate that adopting dialysis can precipitate events such as For PY 2019 and future payment the single comprehensive Dialysis intradialytic hypotension, subclinical years, we propose that facilities must Adequacy clinical measure will allow yet significantly decreased organ report an ultrafiltration rate for each us to evaluate the care provided to a perfusion, and in some cases myocardial qualifying patient at least once per greater proportion of ESRD patients, damage and heart failure. month in CROWNWeb. Qualifying particularly pediatric ESRD patients. Section 1881(h)(2)(A)(iv) gives the patients for this proposed measure are We are proposing that patients’ Secretary authority to adopt other defined as patients 18 years of age or dialysis adequacy would be assessed measures for the ESRD QIP that cover a older, on hemodialysis, and who are based on the following Kt/V thresholds wide variety of topics. Section assigned to the same facility for at least previously assessed under the 1881(h)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act states that the full calendar month (for example, if individual dialysis adequacy clinical ‘‘In the case of a specified area or a patient is admitted to a facility during measures: medical topic determined appropriate the middle of a month, the facility will • For hemodialysis patients, all ages: by the Secretary for which a feasible and not be required to report for that patient spKt/V ≥ 1.2 (calculated from the last practical measure has not been endorsed for that month). We further propose that measurement of the month) by the entity with a contract under facilities will be granted a one month • For pediatric (age < 18 years) section 1890(a) of Act [in this case period following the calendar month to peritoneal dialysis patients: Kt/V urea > NQF], the Secretary may specify a enter this data. For example, we would 1.8 (dialytic + residual, measured measure that is not so endorsed so long require a facility to report ultrafiltration within the past six months) as due consideration is given to rates for January 2017 on or before • For adult (age > 18 years) peritoneal February 28, 2017. Facilities would be dialysis patients: Kt/V urea > 1.7 4 Flythe SE., Kimmel SE., Brunelli SM. Rapid scored on whether they successfully fluid removal during dialysis is associated with report the required data within the (dialytic + residual, measured within cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Kidney the past four months) International (2011) Jan; 79(2):250–7. Flythe JE, timeframe provided, not on the values These thresholds reflect the best Curhan GC, Brunelli SM. Disentangling the reported. Technical specifications for evidence-based minimum threshold for ultrafiltration rate—mortality association: The the Ultrafiltration Rate reporting respective roles of session length and weight gain. measure can be found at http:// adequate dialysis for the described Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Jul;8(7):1151–61. patient groups and are consistent with Movilli, E et al. ‘‘Association between high www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- ultrafiltration rates and mortality in uraemic Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- dialysis adequacy measures previously _ implemented in the QIP. Patient patients on regular hemodialysis. A 5-year Instruments/ESRDQIP/061 Technical prospective observational multicenter study.’’ Specifications.html. eligibility for inclusion in the measure Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 22.12(2007): would be determined on a patient- 3547–3552. We seek comments on this proposal. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37847 ii. Proposed Full-Season Influenza which will in turn improve patient appropriate by the Secretary for which Vaccination Reporting Measure health and well-being. a feasible and practical measure has not According to the Centers for Disease We are proposing to use a measure been endorsed by the entity with a Control and Prevention (CDC), seasonal that is based on ‘‘ESRD Vaccination— contract under section 1890(a) of the influenza, which occurs between Full-Season Influenza Vaccination’’ Act [in this case NQF], the Secretary October and March/April of the (Measure Applications Partnership may specify a measure that is not so #XDEFM). This measure assesses the endorsed as long as due consideration is following year, is associated with ≥ approximately 20,000 deaths 5 and percentage of ESRD patients 6 months given to measures that have been 6 of age on October 1 and on chronic endorsed or adopted by a consensus 226,000 hospitalizations annually. ≥ While overall rates of influenza dialysis 30 days in a facility at any organization identified by the infection are highest among children, point between October 1 and March 31 Secretary.’’ Because we have given due rates of serious illness and mortality are who either (1) received an influenza consideration to endorsed measures, as highest among adults aged 65 years or vaccination; (2) were offered but well as those adopted by a consensus declined the vaccination; or (3) were older, children aged two or younger, organization, and determined it is not determined to have a medical and immunocompromised patients such practical or feasible to adopt those contraindication. The Measure as patients with ESRD. Observational measures in the ESRD QIP, we are Applications Partnership conditionally data have found associations between proposing to adopt the Full-Season supported the use of the ESRD influenza vaccination and reduced Influenza Vaccination reporting Vaccination—Full-Season Influenza mortality and hospitalization in this measure under the authority of section Vaccination measure in the ESRD QIP in patient population. Specifically, 1881(h)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act. its January 2014 Pre-Rulemaking Report multiple studies have found that For PY 2019 and future payment because ‘‘influenza vaccination is very vaccinated patients have significantly years, we propose that facilities must important for dialysis patients.’’ lower odds of all-cause mortality and report one of the following conditions in Nevertheless, the Measure Applications modestly lower odds of all-cause CROWNWeb once per performance Partnership declined to give the period, for each qualifying patient hospitalization compared to measure full support because it was not unvaccinated patients.7 However, (defined below): sure that the measure was more suitable 1. If the patient received an influenza influenza vaccination rates in the ESRD to drive improvement than NQF #0226: population have historically been lower vaccination: ‘‘Influenza Immunization in the ESRD a. Influenza Vaccination Date than the Healthy People 2020 goal of 70 Population (Facility Level)’’. We have b. Where Influenza Vaccination percent of both pediatric and adult reviewed the measure specifications for Received: (1) Documented at facility; (2) populations in the United States,8 with NQF #0226 and determined that it is not Documented outside facility; or (3) recent reports from the U.S. Renal Data appropriate to use as the basis for a Patient self-reported outside facility System and Dialysis Facility Reports reporting measure because the 2. If the patient did not receive an showing vaccination rates of 67 percent denominator statement of NQF #0226 influenza vaccination: and 68 percent, respectively, among excludes all patients for whom data a. Reason: ESRD patients for the 2011–2012 during the flu season is incomplete, i. Already vaccinated this flu season 9 season. Based on these findings, we potentially excluding patients who died ii. Medical Reason: Allergic or believe that encouraging closer from influenza, but might not have died adverse reaction evaluation of patients’ influenza if they had received an influenza iii. Other medical reason vaccination status in the dialysis facility vaccination. We therefore believe it is iv. Declined will increase the number of patients more appropriate to adopt a reporting v. Other reason with ESRD who receive an influenza measure based on the ESRD We note that while facilities are vaccination and increase influenza Vaccination—Full-Season Influenza expected to retain patient influenza vaccination rates in this population, Vaccination measure (Measure immunization documentation for their Applications Partnership #XDEFM) own records, facilities are not required 5 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention because this measure includes patients to supply this documentation to CMS (CDC). Estimates of Deaths Associated with under the Full-Season Influenza Seasonal Influenza—United States, 1976–2007. who died from influenza, but might not MMWR (2010) 59:33. Available at: http:// have died if they had received an Vaccination reporting measure. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ influenza vaccination, and we believe it For this measure, a qualifying patient mm5933a1.htm. is important to include such patients in would be defined as a patient aged six 6 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention an influenza immunization clinical months or older as of October 1 who has (CDC). Prevention and Control of Influenza with been on chronic dialysis for 30 or more Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory measure for the ESRD QIP, should we Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). propose to adopt such a measure in the days in a facility at any point between MMWR2010a;59(RR–8):1–62. future. October 1 and March 31. This measure 7 Bond TC, Spaulding AC, Krisher J, et al. For these reasons, we are proposing to would include in-center hemodialysis, Mortality of dialysis patients according to influenza adopt a reporting measure based on peritoneal dialysis, and home dialysis and pneumococcal vaccination status. Am J Kidney patients. This proposed measure would Dis. 2012;60:959–65; Gilbertson DT, Unruh M, ‘‘ESRD Vaccination—Full-Season McBean AM, et al. Influenza vaccine delivery and Influenza Vaccination’’ (‘‘Full-Season capture the same data described in effectiveness in end-stage renal disease. Kidney Int. Influenza Vaccination reporting ‘‘ESRD Vaccination—Full-Season 2003;63:738–43. measure’’) so that we can collect data Influenza Vaccination’’, but we would 8 http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics- that we can use in the future to calculate require that facilities report the data on objectives/topic/immunization-and-infectious- diseases/objectives (Healthy People 2020 IID–12.11 both achievement and improvement or before May 15 following the and IID–12.12). scores, should we propose to adopt a performance period for that year. We 9 US Renal Data System, USRDS 2014 Annual clinical version of this measure in future believe this reporting deadline will Data Report: An overview of the epidemiology of rulemaking. ensure that facilities have sufficient kidney disease in the United States. National time to collect and enter data for all Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes Section 1881(h)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD, states that ‘‘In the case of a specified qualifying patients following the 2014. area or medical topic determined influenza season, and aligns this VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37848 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules reporting effort with that of the NHSN a. Proposed Performance Standards, For the Ultrafiltration Rate reporting Healthcare Personnel Influenza Achievement Thresholds, and measure, we propose to set the Vaccination reporting measure finalized Benchmarks for the Clinical Measures in performance standard as successfully in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP reporting an ultrafiltration rate for each PY 2018 (79 FR 66206 through 66208). For the same reasons stated in the CY qualifying patient in CROWNWeb on a Second, we are proposing to score 2013 ESRD PPS final rule (77 FR 67500 monthly basis, for each month of the facilities based on whether they through 76502), we are proposing for PY reporting period. successfully report the data, and not 2019 to set the performance standards, For the Full-Season Influenza based on the measure results. Technical achievement thresholds, and Vaccination reporting measure, we specifications for the Full-Season benchmarks for the clinical measures at propose to set the performance standard Influenza Vaccination reporting the 50th, 15th, and 90th percentile, as successfully reporting one of the measure can be found at http:// respectively, of national performance in above-listed vaccination statuses for www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- CY 2015, because this will give us each qualifying patient in CROWNWeb Initiatives-Patient-Assessment- enough time to calculate and assign on or before May 15th of the Instruments/ESRDQIP/061_ numerical values to the proposed performance period. TechnicalSpecifications.html. performance standards for the PY 2019 We seek comments on these program prior to the beginning of the proposals. We seek comments on this proposal. performance period. We continue to 5. Proposal for Scoring the PY 2019 3. Proposed Performance Period for the believe these standards will provide an ESRD QIP PY 2019 ESRD QIP incentive for facilities to continuously improve their performance, while not a. Scoring Facility Performance on Section 1881(h)(4)(D) of the Act reducing incentives to facilities that Clinical Measures Based on requires the Secretary to establish the score at or above the national Achievement performance period with respect to a performance rate for the clinical In the CY 2014 ESRD PPS Final Rule, payment year, and that the performance measures. we finalized a policy for scoring period occur prior to the beginning of We seek comments on these performance on clinical measures based such year. We are proposing to establish proposals. on achievement (78 FR 72215). Under CY 2017 as the performance period for b. Estimated Performance Standards, this methodology, facilities receive the PY 2019 ESRD QIP for all but the Achievement Thresholds, and points along an achievement range influenza vaccination measures because Benchmarks for the Clinical Measures based on their performance during the it is consistent with the performance Proposed for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP performance period for each measure, period we have historically used for which we define as a scale between the At this time, we do not have the these measures and accounts for achievement threshold and the necessary data to assign numerical seasonal variations that might affect a benchmark. In determining a facility’s values to the proposed performance facility’s measure score. We are standards for the clinical measures, achievement score for each clinical proposing that the performance period because we do not yet have data from measure under the PY 2019 ESRD QIP, for both the NHSN Healthcare Personnel CY 2015 or the first portion of CY 2016. we propose to continue using this Influenza Vaccination reporting We will publish values for the clinical methodology for all clinical measures measure and the proposed Full-Season measures, using data from CY 2015 and except the ICH CAHPS clinical measure. Influenza Vaccination reporting the first portion of CY 2016, in the CY The facility’s achievement score would measure will be from October 1, 2016 2017 ESRD PPS final rule. be calculated by comparing its through March 31, 2017, because this performance on the measure during CY period spans the length of the 2016– c. Proposed Performance Standards for 2017 (the proposed performance period) 2017 influenza season. the PY 2019 Reporting Measures to the achievement threshold and We seek comments on these In the CY 2014 ESRD PPS Final Rule, benchmark (the 15th and 90th proposals. we finalized performance standards for percentiles of national performance on the Anemia Management and Mineral the measure in CY 2015). 4. Proposed Performance Standards, Metabolism reporting measures (78 FR We seek comment on this proposal. Achievement Thresholds, and 72213). In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS Final b. Scoring Facility Performance on Benchmarks for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP Rule, we finalized our proposal to Clinical Measures Based on modify the measure specifications for Improvement Section 1881(h)(4)(A) of the Act the Mineral Metabolism reporting provides that ‘‘the Secretary shall measure to allow facilities to report In the CY 2014 ESRD PPS Final Rule, establish performance standards with either serum phosphorus data or plasma we finalized a policy for scoring respect to measures selected . . . for a phosphorus data for the Mineral performance on clinical measures based performance period with respect to a Metabolism reporting measure (79 FR on improvement (78 FR 72215 through year.’’ Section 1881(h)(4)(B) of the Act 66191). We are not proposing any 72216). In determining a facility’s further provides that the ‘‘performance changes to these policies for the PY improvement score for each measure standards . . . shall include levels of 2019 ESRD QIP. under the PY 2019 ESRD QIP, we achievement and improvement, as In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS Final Rule, propose to continue using this determined appropriate by the we finalized performance standards for methodology for all clinical measures Secretary.’’ We use the performance the Screening for Clinical Depression except the ICH CAHPS clinical measure. standards to establish the minimum and Follow-Up, Pain Assessment and Under this methodology, facilities score a facility must achieve to avoid a Follow-Up, and NHSN Healthcare receive points along an improvement Medicare payment reduction. We use Provider Influenza Vaccination range, defined as a scale running achievement thresholds and reporting measures (79 FR 66209). We between the improvement threshold and benchmarks to calculate scores on the are not proposing any changes to these the benchmark. We propose to define clinical measures. policies. the improvement threshold as the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37849 facility’s performance on the measure and the resulting scores on each of the Management and Mineral Metabolism during CY 2016. The facility’s composite measures and global ratings reporting measures in the ESRD QIP (77 improvement score would be calculated will be averaged together to yield an FR 67506). We are not proposing any by comparing its performance on the overall score on the ICH CAHPS clinical changes to these policies for the PY measure during CY 2017 (the proposed measure. For PY 2019, the facility’s 2019 ESRD QIP. performance period) to the achievement score would be calculated In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, improvement threshold and benchmark. by comparing where its performance on We seek comment on this proposal. each of the three composite measures we finalized policies for scoring and three global ratings during CY 2017 performance on the Clinical Depression c. Scoring the ICH CAHPS Clinical Screening and Follow-Up, Pain Measure falls relative to the achievement threshold and benchmark for that Assessment and Follow-Up, and NHSN In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, measure and rating based on CY 2015 Healthcare Provider Influenza we finalized a policy for scoring data. The facility’s improvement score Vaccination reporting measures (79 FR performance on the ICH CAHPS clinical would be calculated by comparing its 66210 through 66211). We are not measure based on both achievement and performance on each of the three proposing any changes to these policies. improvement (79 FR 66209 through composite measures and three global With respect to the Ultrafiltration Rate 66210). Under this methodology, ratings during CY 2017 to its reporting measure, we are proposing to facilities will receive an achievement performance rates on these items during score and an improvement score for score facilities with a CCN Open Date CY 2016. before July 1, 2017 using the same each of the three composite measures We seek comments on this proposal. and three global ratings in the ICH formula previously finalized for the CAHPS survey instrument. A facility’s d. Proposal for Calculating Facility Mineral Metabolism and Anemia ICH CAHPS score will be based on the Performance on Reporting Measures Management reporting measures (77 FR higher of the facility’s achievement or In the CY 2013 ESRD PPS final rule, 67506): improvement score for each of the we finalized policies for scoring composite measures and global ratings, performance on the Anemia As with the Anemia Management and With respect to the Full-Season of eligible patients for which the facility Mineral Metabolism reporting measures, Influenza Immunization reporting successfully submits one of the we would round the result of this measure, we are proposing to score vaccination status indicators listed formula (with half rounded up) to facilities with a CCN Open Date before above by the May 15, 2017 deadline generate a measure score from 0–10. January 1, 2017 based on the proportion using the following formula: We seek comments on these consideration: (1) The number of the other measures in the Clinical Care proposals. measures and measure topics in a subdomain (79 FR 66214). Beginning in proposed subdomain; (2) how much 6. Weighting the Clinical Measure PY 2019, we are proposing to remove experience facilities have had with the Domain and Total Performance Score the Dialysis Adequacy measure topic measures; and (3) how well the and replace it with the Dialysis i. Proposal for Weighting the Clinical measures align with CMS’ highest Adequacy clinical measure. Because Measure Domain for PY 2019 priorities for quality improvement for this proposed measure is a composite of In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, patients with ESRD. the measures previously included in the we finalized policies regarding the In the same rule, we finalized the Dialysis Adequacy measure topic, with criteria we would use to assign weights Dialysis Adequacy measure topic and the same Kt/V thresholds currently used to measures in a facility’s Clinical Vascular Access Type measure topic’s for those measures, we believe that Measure Domain score (79 FR 66214 weights for PY 2018 at 18 percent of a facilities are already familiar with the through 66216). Specifically, we stated facility’s Clinical Measure Domain score concepts underlying this proposed that in deciding how to weight measures because facilities have substantially measure and that the measure should be and measure topics within the Clinical more experience with the Dialysis weighted at 18 percent of a facility’s Measure Domain, we would take into Adequacy measure topic as compared to Clinical Measure Domain score. We are VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 EP01JY15.015 EP01JY15.014 37850 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules not proposing any further changes to the previously finalized weights are aligned following weighting system in Table 18 weighting for the remaining clinical with the criteria used to establish below for calculating a facility’s Clinical measures and measure topics within the measure and measure topic weights. For Measure Domain score beginning in PY Clinical Measure Domain because the these reasons, we propose to use the 2019. TABLE 18—PROPOSED CLINICAL MEASURE DOMAIN WEIGHTING FOR THE PY 2019 ESRD QIP Measure weight in the Clinical Measure Measures/measure topics by subdomain Domain score (%) Safety Subdomain ...... 20 NHSN Bloodstream Infection measure ...... 20 Patient and Family Engagement/Care Coordination Subdomain ...... 30 ICH CAHPS measure ...... 20 SRR measure ...... 10 Clinical Care Subdomain ...... 50 STrR measure ...... 7 Dialysis Adequacy measure ...... 18 Vascular Access Type measure topic ...... 18 Hypercalcemia measure ...... 7 We seek comments on this proposal a score on the SRR clinical measure and which a facility is open on the first day for weighting a facility’s Clinical 10 patient-years at risk to be eligible to of the month after the facility’s CCN Measure Domain score. receive a score on the STrR clinical Open Date. Only facilities with a CCN measure. In order to receive a score on Open Date before July 1, 2017 would be ii. Weighting the Total Performance the ICH CAHPS clinical measure, a eligible to be scored on the Anemia Score facility must have treated at least 30 Management, Mineral Metabolism, Pain We continue to believe that while the survey-eligible patients during the Assessment and Follow-Up, Clinical reporting measures are valuable, the eligibility period and receive 30 Depression Screening and Follow-Up clinical measures evaluate actual patient completed surveys during the reporting measures, and only facilities care and therefore justify a higher performance period. We are not with a CCN Open Date before January 1, combined weight (78 FR 72217). We are proposing to change these minimum 2017 would be eligible to be scored on therefore not proposing to change our data policies for the measures that we the NHSN Bloodstream Infection policy, finalized in the CY 2015 ESRD have proposed to continue including in clinical measure, ICH CAHPS clinical PPS final rule (79 FR 66219), under the PY 2019 ESRD QIP measure set. measure, and NHSN Healthcare which clinical measures will be For the proposed Dialysis Adequacy Personnel (HCP) Influenza Vaccination weighted as finalized for the Clinical clinical measure, we propose that reporting measure. Consistent with our Domain score, and the Clinical Domain facilities with at least 11 qualifying policy regarding the NHSN HCP score will comprise 90 percent of a patients will receive a score on the Influenza Vaccination reporting facility’s TPS, with the reporting measure. We believe that maintaining a measure, we propose that facilities with measures weighted equally to form the case minimum of 11 for this measure a CCN Open Date after January 1, 2017 remaining 10 percent of a facility’s TPS. adequately addresses both the privacy would not be eligible to receive a score We are also not proposing any changes and reliability concerns previously on the Full-Season Influenza to the policy that facilities must be discussed in the CY 2013 ESRD PPS Vaccination reporting measure because eligible to receive a score on at least one final rule (77 FR 67510 through 67512), these facilities might have difficulty reporting measure and at least one and aligns with the case minimum reporting the data by the proposed clinical measure to be eligible to receive policy for the previously finalized reporting deadline of May 15, 2017. We a TPS, or the policy that a facility’s TPS clinical process measures. further propose that, consistent with our will be rounded to the nearest integer, For the proposed Ultrafiltration Rate CCN Open Date policy for other with half of an integer being rounded reporting measures, facilities with a up. and Full-Season Influenza reporting measures, we also propose that facilities CCN Open Date after July 1, 2017, 7. Proposed Minimum Data for Scoring with at least 11 qualifying patients will would not be eligible to receive a score Measures for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP receive a score on the measure. We on the Ultrafiltration Rate reporting Our policy is to score facilities on believe that setting the case minimum at measure because of the difficulties these clinical and reporting measures for 11 for these reporting measures strikes facilities may face in meeting the which they have a minimum number of the appropriate balance between the requirements of this measure due to the qualifying patients during the need to maximize data collection and short period of time left in the performance period. With the exception the need to not unduly burden or performance period. of the Standardized Readmission Ratio, penalize small facilities. We further We seek comments on these Standardized Transfusion Ratio, and believe that setting the case minimum at proposals. ICH CAHPS clinical measures, a facility 11 is appropriate because this aligns Table 19 displays the proposed must treat at least 11 qualifying cases with case minimum policy for the vast patient minimum requirements for each during the performance period in order majority of the reporting measures in of the measures, as well as the proposed to be scored on a clinical or reporting the ESRD QIP. CCN Open Dates after which a facility measure. A facility must have at least 11 Under our current policy, we begin would not be eligible to receive a score index discharges to be eligible to receive counting the number of months for on a reporting measure. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37851 TABLE 19—PROPOSED MINIMUM DATA RREQUIREMENTS FOR THE PY 2019 ESRD QIP Measure Minimum data requirements CCN open date Small facility adjuster Dialysis Adequacy (Clinical) ...... 11 qualifying patients ...... N/A ...... 11–25 qualifying patients. Vascular Access Type: Catheter 11 qualifying patients ...... N/A ...... 11–25 qualifying patients. (Clinical). Vascular Access Type: Fistula 11 qualifying patients ...... N/A ...... 11–25 qualifying patients. (Clinical). Hypercalcemia (Clinical) ...... 11 qualifying patients ...... N/A ...... 11–25 qualifying patients. NHSN Bloodstream Infection (Clin- 11 qualifying patients ...... Before January 1, 2017 ...... 11–25 qualifying patients. ical). SRR (Clinical) ...... 11 index discharges ...... N/A ...... 11–41 index discharges. STrR (Clinical) ...... 10 patient-years at risk ...... N/A ...... 10—21 patient-years at risk. ICH CAHPS (Clinical) ...... Facilities with 30 or more survey- Before January 1, 2017 ...... N/A. eligible patients during the cal- endar year preceding the per- formance period must submit survey results. Facilities will not receive a score if they do not obtain a total of at least 30 completed surveys during the performance period. Anemia Management (Reporting) .. 11 qualifying patients ...... Before July 1, 2017 ...... N/A. Mineral Metabolism (Reporting) ..... 11 qualifying patients ...... Before July 1, 2017 ...... N/A. Depression Screening and Follow- 11 qualifying patients ...... Before July 1, 2017 ...... N/A. Up (Reporting). Pain Assessment and Follow-Up 11 qualifying patients ...... Before July 1, 2017 ...... N/A. (Reporting). NHSN HCP Influenza Vaccination N/A ...... Before January 1, 2017 ...... N/A. (Reporting). Ultrafiltration Rate (Reporting) ...... 11 qualifying patients ...... Before July 1, 2017 ...... N/A. Full-Season Influenza Vaccination 11 qualifying patients ...... Before January 1, 2017 ...... N/A. (Reporting). 8. Proposed Payment Reductions for the data required to calculate a performance Because we are not yet able to PY 2019 ESRD QIP standard before the beginning of the calculate the performance standards for Section 1881(h)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act performance period, we will propose a each of the clinical measures, we are requires the Secretary to ensure that the criterion accounting for that measure in also not able to calculate a proposed application of the scoring methodology the minimum TPS for the applicable minimum TPS at this time. We will results in an appropriate distribution of payment year at that time. publish the minimum TPS, based on payment reductions across facilities, The PY 2017 program is the most data from CY 2015 and the first part of such that facilities achieving the lowest recent year for which we will have CY 2016, in the CY 2017 ESRD PPS final TPSs receive the largest payment calculated final measure scores before rule. reductions. We propose that, for the PY the beginning of the proposed We seek comments on this proposal. performance period for PY 2019 (that is, 2019 ESRD QIP, a facility will not H. Future Achievement Threshold CY 2017). Because we have not yet receive a payment reduction if it Policy Under Consideration achieves a minimum TPS that is equal calculated final measure scores, we are to or greater than the total of the points unable to determine the 50th percentile Under our current methodology, we it would have received if: of facility performance on the PY 2017 set performance standards, achievement • It performed at the performance reporting measures. We will publish thresholds, and benchmarks for the standard for each clinical measure; and that value in the CY 2017 ESRD PPS clinical measures at the 50th, 15th, and • It received the number of points final rule once we have calculated final 90th percentiles, respectively, of for each reporting measure that measure scores for the PY 2017 national performance on the measure corresponds to the 50th percentile of program. during the baseline period (77 FR 67500 facility performance on each of the PY Section 1881(h)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act through 67502). As we continue to 2017 reporting measures. We recognize requires that facilities achieving the refine ESRD QIP’s policies, we are that we are not proposing a policy lowest TPSs receive the largest payment evaluating different methods of ensuring regarding the inclusion of measures for reductions. In the CY 2014 ESRD PPS that facilities strive for continuous which we are not able to establish a final rule (78 FR 72223 through 72224), improvement in their delivery of care to numerical value for the performance we finalized a payment reduction scale patients with ESRD. For future standard through the rulemaking for PY 2016 and future payment years: rulemaking, we are considering process before the beginning of the for every 10 points a facility falls below increasing the achievement threshold performance period in the PY 2019 the minimum TPS, the facility would from the 15th percentile to the 25th minimum TPS. We have not proposed receive an additional 0.5 percent percentile of national performance such a policy because no measures in reduction on its ESRD PPS payments for during the baseline period. We believe the proposed PY 2019 measure set meet PY 2016 and future payment years, with this increase in the achievement this criterion. However, should we a maximum reduction of 2.0 percent. threshold will add additional incentives choose to adopt a clinical measure in We are not proposing any changes to for facilities to improve performance, future rulemaking without the baseline this policy for the PY 2019 ESRD QIP. thereby improving patient outcomes and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37852 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules quality of care. We have analyzed the sites/default/files/nationwide- V. Collection of Information impact of this policy change on facility interoperability-roadmap-draft-version- Requirements payment reductions using the same data 1.0.pdf) which describes barriers to A. Legislative Requirement for used to calculate the PY 2018 minimum interoperability across the current Solicitation of Comments TPS. The full results of this analysis can health IT landscape, the desired future be found at http://www.cms.gov/ state that the industry believes will be Under the Paperwork Reduction Act Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient- necessary to enable a learning health of 1995, we are required to provide 60- Assessment-Instruments/ESRDQIP/061_ system, and a suggested path for moving day notice in the Federal Register and TechnicalSpecifications.html. from the current state to the desired solicit public comment before a We invite comment on this policy that future state. In the near term, the draft collection of information requirement is we are considering for adoption in the Roadmap focuses on actions that will submitted to the Office of Management ESRD QIP in the future. enable a majority of individuals and and Budget (OMB) for review and I. Monitoring Access to Dialysis providers across the care continuum to approval. Facilities send, receive, find and use a common In order to fairly evaluate whether an set of electronic clinical information at information collection requirement In the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule, the nationwide level by the end of 2017. should be approved by OMB, section we finalized our commitment to Moreover, the vision described in the 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork conduct a study to determine the impact draft Roadmap significantly expands the Reduction Act of 1995 requires that we of adopting the Standardized types of electronic health information, solicit comment on the following issues: Readmission Ratio (SRR) and information sources and information • The need for the information Standardized Transfusion Ratio clinical users well beyond clinical information collection and its usefulness in carrying measures on access to care, and stated derived from electronic health records out the proper functions of our agency. that we would make further details (EHRs). This shared strategy is intended • The accuracy of our estimate of the about the study and its methodology to reflect important actions that both information collection burden. available to the public for review (79 FR public and private sector stakeholders • The quality, utility, and clarity of 66189). We intend to publish the can take to enable nationwide the information to be collected. methodology for this study in the interoperability of electronic health • Recommendations to minimize the second half of the year, and encourage information such as: (1) Establishing a information collection burden on the all interested parties to review this coordinated governance framework and affected public, including automated methodology and submit any comments process for nationwide health IT collection techniques. using the process outlined on the Web interoperability; (2) improving technical page. standards and implementation guidance B. Requirements in Regulation Text IV. Advancing Health Information for sharing and using a common clinical In sections II.B.1.d.ii, II.B.1.d.iii, Exchange data set; (3) enhancing incentives for II.B.3, and II.B.4 of this proposed rule, sharing electronic health information we are proposing changes to regulatory HHS has a number of initiatives according to common technical text for the ESRD PPS in CY 2016. designed to improve health and health standards, starting with a common However, the changes that are being care quality through the adoption of clinical data set; and (4) clarifying proposed do not impose any new health information technology and privacy and security requirements that information collection requirements. nationwide health information enable interoperability. exchange. As discussed in the August In addition, ONC has released the C. Additional Information Collection 2013 Statement ‘‘Principles and draft version of the 2015 Interoperability Requirements Strategies for Accelerating Health Standards Advisory (available at http:// This proposed rule does not impose Information Exchange’’ (available at www.healthit.gov/standards-advisory), any new information collection http://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/ which provides a list of the best _ requirements in the regulation text, as files/acceleratinghieprinciples available standards and implementation specified above. However, this proposed strategy.pdf), HHS believes that all specifications to enable priority health rule does make reference to several individuals, their families, their information exchange functions. associated information collections that healthcare and social service providers, Providers, payers, and vendors are are not discussed in the regulation text and payers should have consistent and encouraged to take these ‘‘best available contained in this document. The timely access to health information in a standards’’ into account as they following is a discussion of these standardized format that can be securely implement interoperable health information collections. exchanged between the patient, information exchange across the providers, and others involved in the continuum of care. 1. ESRD QIP individual’s care. Health IT that We encourage stakeholders to utilize a. Wage Estimates facilitates the secure, efficient and health information exchange and effective sharing and use of health- certified health IT to effectively and In previous rulemaking, we used the related information when and where it efficiently help providers improve mean hourly wage of a registered nurse is needed is an important tool for internal care delivery practices, support as the basis of the wage estimates for all settings across the continuum of care, management of care across the collection of information calculations in including ESRD facilities. continuum, enable the reporting of the ESRD QIP (for example, 77 FR The Office of the National electronically specified clinical quality 67521). However, we believe that Coordinator for Health Information measures, and improve efficiencies and reporting data for the ESRD QIP Technology (ONC) has released a reduce unnecessary costs. As adoption measures can be accomplished by other document entitled ‘‘Connecting Health of certified health IT increases and administrative staff within the dialysis and Care for the Nation: A Shared interoperability standards continue to facility. The Bureau of Labor Statistiscs Nationwide Interoperability Roadmap mature, HHS will seek to reinforce (the Bureau) is ‘‘the principal Federal Draft Version 1.0 (draft Roadmap) standards through relevant policies and agency responsible for measuring labor (available at http://www.healthit.gov/ programs. market activity, working conditions, and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37853 price changes in the economy.’’ 10 c. Data Validation Requirements for the d. Proposed Ultrafiltration Rate Acting as an independent agency, the PY 2018 ESRD QIP Reporting Measure Bureau provides objective information Section III.F.4 in this proposed rule We proposed to include, beginning not only for the government, but also for with the PY 2019 ESRD QIP, a reporting outlines our data validation proposals the public. The Bureau’s National measure requiring facilities to report in for PY 2018. Specifically, we propose to Occupational Employment and Wage CROWNWeb an ultrafiltration rate at randomly sample records from 300 Estimate describes Medical Records and least once per month for each qualifying Health Information Technicians as those facilities as part of our continuing pilot patient. We estimate the burden responsible for organizing and managing data-validation program. Each sampled 11 associated with this measure to be the health information data. Therefore, we facility would be required to produce time and effort necessary for facilities to believe it is reasonable assume these approximately 10 records, and the collect and submit the information individuals would be tasked with sampled facilities will be reimbursed by required for the ultrafiltration rate submitting measure data to CROWNWeb our validation contractor for the costs reporting measure. We estimated that rather than a Registered Nurse, whose associated with copying and mailing the approximately 6,264 facilities will treat duties are centered on providing and requested records. The burden 773,737 ESRD patients nationwide in coordinating care for patients.12 The associated with these validation PY 2019. The ultrafiltration rate mean hourly wage of a Medical Records requirements is the time and effort reporting measure has 12 elements per and Health Information Technician is necessary to submit the requested patient per year, and we estimate it will $18.68 per hour.13 Under OMB Circular take facilities approximately 0.042 76–A, in calculating direct labor, records to a CMS contractor. We hours (2.5 minutes) to submit data for agencies should not only include estimate that it will take each facility each qualifying patient each month. salaries and wages, but also ‘‘other approximately 2.5 hours to comply with entitlements’’ such as fringe benefits.14 this requirement. If 300 facilities are Therefore, the estimated total annual This Circular provides that the civilian asked to submit records, we estimate burden associated with reporting this position full fringe benefit cost factor is that the total combined annual burden measure in PY 2019 is approximately for these facilities will be 750 hours 389,963 hours (773,737 ESRD patients 36.25 percent. Therefore, using these × × assumptions, we estimate an hourly (300 facilities × 2.5 hours). Since we nationwide 12 data elements/year labor cost of $25.45 as the basis of the anticipate that Medical Records and 0.042 hours per element), or 62 hours wage estimates for all collection of Health Information Technicians or per facility. We anticipate that Medical information calculations in the ESRD similar administrative staff would Records and Health Information Technicians or similar administrative QIP. submit this data, we estimate that the staff will be responsible for this aggregate cost of the CROWNWeb data b. Changes in Time Required To Submit reporting. We therefore believe the cost Data Based on Proposed Reporting validation would be $19,088 (750 hours × for all ESRD facilities to comply with Requirements $25.45/hour) total or $64 ($19,088/300 the reporting requirements associated facilities) per facility in the sample. The In previous rulemaking, we estimated with the ultrafiltration rate reporting burden associated with these that data entry associated with the ESRD measure would be approximately QIP took approximately 5 minutes per requirements is captured in an $9,924,558 (389,963 × $25.45/hour), or data element to complete (for example, information collection request currently $1,584 per facility. The burden 77 FR 67521). However, a large number available for review and comment, OMB associated with these requirements is of facilities now submit data using the control number 0938–NEW. captured in an information collection batch submission process, which allows Under the proposed continuation of request currently available for review facilities to submit data extracted from the feasibility study for validating data and comment, OMB control number their internal Electronic Health Records reported to the NHSN Dialysis Event 0938—NEW. (EHRs) directly to CROWNWeb. Because Module, we propose to randomly select e. Proposed Full-Season Influenza the batch submission process can be nine facilities to provide CMS with a Vaccination Reporting Measure automated with very little human quarterly list of all positive blood intervention, we believe the overall time cultures drawn from their patients We proposed to include, beginning required to submit measure data using during the quarter, including any with the PY 2019 ESRD QIP, a measure requiring facilities to report patient CROWNWeb is substantially less than positive blood cultures collected on the influenza vaccination status annually previously estimated. We are therefore day of, or the day following, a facility using the CROWNWeb system. We revising our estimate to be 2.5 minutes patient’s admission to a hospital. A estimate the burden associated with this per data element submitted, a change of CMS contractor will review the lists to ¥ measure to be the time and effort 2.5 minutes, which takes into account determine if dialysis events for the the small percentage of data that is necessary for facilities to collect and patients in question were accurately submit the information required for this manually reported, as well as the reported to the NHSN Dialysis Event human interventions required to modify measure. We estimated that Module. If we determine that additional approximately 6,264 facilities will treat batch submission files such that they medical records are needed to validate meet CROWNWeb’s internal data 773,737 ESRD patients nationwide in dialysis events, facilities will be validation requirements. PY 2019. The Full-Season Influenza required to provide those records within Vaccination reporting measure has just 60 days of a request for this information. 10 http://www.bls.gov/bls/infohome.htm. 1 element per patient per year, and we 11 http://www.bls/gov/ooh/healthcare/medical- We estimate fewer than ten respondents estimate it will take facilities records-and-health-information-technicians.htm. in a 12-month period; therefore, in approximately 0.042 hours, or 2.5 12 http://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/registered- accordance with the implementing minutes, to submit this data for each nurses.htm. regulations of the PRA at 44 U.S.C. patient on an annual basis. Therefore, 13 http://www,bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/medical- records-and-health-information-technicians.html. 3502(3)(A)(i), the burden associated the estimated total annual burden 14 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_ with the aforementioned requirements associated with reporting this measure a076_a76_incl_tech_correction. is exempt. in PY 2019 is approximately 32,497 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37854 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules hours (737,773 ESRD patients economy, productivity, competition, addition, proposing requirements for the nationwide × 1 element/year × 0.042 jobs, the environment, public health or PY 2019 ESRD QIP provides facilities hours/element), or 5 hours per facility. safety, or state, local or tribal with more time to review and fully Again, we anticipate that Medical governments or communities (also understand new measures before their Records and Health Information referred to as economically significant); implementation in the ESRD QIP. Technicians or similar administrative (2) creating a serious inconsistency or staff will be responsible for this otherwise interfering with an action 3. Overall Impact reporting. In total, we stated that we taken or planned by another agency; (3) We estimate that the proposed believe the cost for all ESRD facilities to materially altering the budgetary revisions to the ESRD PPS will result in comply with the reporting requirements impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, an increase of approximately $20 associated with the Full-Season or loan programs or the rights and million in payments to ESRD facilities Influenza Vaccination reporting obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) in CY 2016, which includes the amount measure would be approximately raising novel legal or policy issues associated with updates to outlier $827,049 (32,497 hours × $25.45/hour), arising out of legal mandates, the threshold amounts, updates to the wage or $132 per facility. The burden President’s priorities, or the principles index, changes in the CBSA associated with these requirements is set forth in the Executive Order. delineations, changes in the labor- captured in an information collection A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) related share, and changes involved request currently available for review must be prepared for major rules with with the refinement. and comment, OMB control number economically significant effects ($100 For PY 2018, we anticipate that the 0938—NEW. million or more in any 1 year). This rule new burdens associated with the is not economically significant within VI. Response to Comments collection of information requirements the meaning of section 3(f)(1) of the will be approximately $19 thousand, Because of the large number of public Executive Order, since it does not meet totaling an overall impact of comments we normally receive on the $100 million threshold. However, approximately $11.8 million as a result Federal Register documents, we are not OMB has determined that the actions of the PY 2018 ESRD QIP.15 For PY able to acknowledge or respond to them are significant within the meaning of 2019, we estimate that the proposed individually. We will consider all section 3(f)(4) of the Executive Order. requirements related to the ESRD QIP comments we receive by the date and Therefore, OMB has reviewed these will cost approximately $10.7 million time specified in the DATES section of proposed regulations, and the dollars, and the payment reductions this preamble, and, when we proceed Departments have provided the will result in a total impact of with a subsequent document, we will following assessment of their impact. approximately $3.8 million across all respond to the comments in the We solicit comments on the regulatory facilities, resulting in a total impact preamble to that document. impact analysis provided. from the proposed ESRD QIP of VII. Economic Analyses 2. Statement of Need approximately $14.6 million. A. Regulatory Impact Analysis This rule proposes a number of B. Detailed Economic Analysis routine updates and several policy 1. CY 2016 End-Stage Renal Disease 1. Introduction changes to the ESRD PPS in CY 2016. Prospective Payment System We have examined the impacts of this The proposed routine updates include rule as required by Executive Order the CY 2016 wage index values, the a. Effects on ESRD Facilities 12866 on Regulatory Planning and wage index budget-neutrality To understand the impact of the Review (September 30, 1993), Executive adjustment factor, and outlier payment changes affecting payments to different Order 13563 on Improving Regulation threshold amounts. Other proposed categories of ESRD facilities, it is and Regulatory Review (January 18, policy changes include implementation necessary to compare estimated 2011), the Regulatory Flexibility Act of section 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I), as payments in CY 2015 to estimated (RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96– amended by section 217(b)(2) of PAMA, payments in CY 2016. To estimate the 354), section 1102(b) of the Social which requires a 1.25 percent decrease impact among various types of ESRD Security Act, section 202 of the to the payment update as discussed in facilities, it is imperative that the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 section II.B.2.a.iv of this rule, the delay estimates of payments in CY 2015 and (March 22, 1995; Pub. L. 104–4), in payment for oral-only drugs under CY 2016 contain similar inputs. Executive Order 13132 on Federalism the ESRD PPS until January 1, 2025 as Therefore, we simulated payments only (August 4, 1999) and the Congressional required by section 204 of ABLE, the for those ESRD facilities for which we Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2). implementation of a geographic facility are able to calculate both current Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 adjustment paid to rural facilities, and payments and new payments. direct agencies to assess all costs and the updated payment multipliers based For this proposed rule, we used the benefits of available regulatory upon the regression analysis discussed December 2014 update of CY 2014 alternatives and, if regulation is in section II.B.1 of this proposed rule. National Claims History file as a basis necessary, to select regulatory Failure to publish this proposed rule for Medicare dialysis treatments and approaches that maximize net benefits would result in ESRD facilities not payments under the ESRD PPS. We (including potential economic, receiving appropriate payments in CY updated the 2014 claims to 2015 and environmental, public health and safety 2016. 2016 using various updates. The effects, distributive impacts, and This rule proposes to implement equity). Section 3(f) of Executive Order requirements for the ESRD QIP, 15 We note that the aggregate impact of the PY 12866 defines a ‘‘significant regulatory including a proposal to adopt a measure 2018 ESRD QIP was included in the CY 2015 ESRD action’’ as an action that is likely to set for the PY 2019 program, as directed PPS final rule (79 FR 66256 through 66258). The result in a rule: (1) Having an annual by section 1881(h) of the Act. Failure to previously finalized aggregate impact of $11.8 million reflects the PY 2018 estimated payment effect on the economy of $100 million propose requirements for the PY 2019 reductions and the collection of information or more in any 1 year, or adversely and ESRD QIP would prevent continuation requirements for the NHSN Healthcare Personnel materially affecting a sector of the of the ESRD QIP beyond PY 2018. In Influenza Vaccination reporting measure. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37855 updates to the ESRD PPS base rate are proposed rule. Table 20 shows the payments compared to estimated described in section II.B.2 of this impact of the estimated CY 2016 ESRD payments to ESRD facilities in CY 2015. TABLE 20—IMPACT OF PROPOSED CHANGES IN PAYMENTS TO ESRD FACILITIES FOR CY 2016 PROPOSED RULE Effect of Effect of total 2016 Effect of 2016 Effect of 2016 pro- proposed Effect of changes in wage 2016 posed re- changes Number of Number of 2016 indexes, CBSA changes in finement (refinement Facility type facilities treatments changes in (per- payment changes to and routine (in millions) outlier policy cent)designations rate update payment updates to (percent) and labor share (percent) rate the payment (percent) (percent) rate) (percent) A B C D E F G All Facilities...... 6,264 40.0 0.1 0.0 0.15 0.0 0.3 Type: Freestanding ...... 5,812 37.7 0.1 0.0 0.15 0.0 0.2 Hospital based ...... 452 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.16 0.1 0.5 Ownership Type: Large dialysis organization ...... 4,380 28.5 0.1 ¥0.1 0.15 0.1 0.3 Regional chain ...... 926 6.0 0.1 0.2 0.15 ¥0.3 0.2 Independent ...... 584 3.6 0.1 0.1 0.15 ¥0.1 0.2 Hospital based 1 ...... 374 1.9 0.1 0.0 0.16 0.4 0.7 Geographic Location: Rural ...... 1,239 5.9 0.1 ¥1.2 0.15 1.0 0.0 Urban ...... 5,025 34.1 0.1 0.2 0.15 ¥0.2 0.3 Census Region: East North Central ...... 1,036 5.8 0.1 ¥0.3 0.15 0.2 0.1 East South Central ...... 518 3.0 0.1 ¥1.2 0.15 0.7 ¥0.2 Middle Atlantic ...... 680 4.9 0.1 0.9 0.15 ¥0.3 0.8 Mountain ...... 359 2.0 0.1 ¥0.1 0.15 ¥0.1 0.1 New England ...... 182 1.3 0.1 1.1 0.15 ¥0.6 0.7 Pacific 2 ...... 760 5.6 0.1 1.4 0.15 ¥0.8 0.8 Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands ...... 47 0.3 0.1 ¥4.0 0.15 ¥0.2 ¥3.9 South Atlantic ...... 1,386 9.3 0.1 ¥0.4 0.15 0.3 0.2 West North Central ...... 455 2.1 0.1 ¥0.6 0.15 0.4 0.0 West South Central ...... 841 5.8 0.1 ¥0.7 0.15 0.2 ¥0.2 Facility Size: Less than 4,000 treatments 3 ...... 1,305 3.5 0.1 ¥0.3 0.15 0.4 0.3 4,000 to 9,999 treatments ...... 2,239 10.8 0.1 ¥0.3 0.15 0.1 0.1 10,000 or more treatments ...... 2,514 25.3 0.1 0.2 0.15 ¥0.1 0.3 Unknown ...... 206 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.15 ¥0.2 0.1 Percentage of Pediatric Patients: Less than 2% ...... 6,156 39.6 0.1 0.0 0.15 0.0 0.3 Between 2% and 19% ...... 42 0.4 0.1 ¥0.1 0.15 0.4 0.5 Between 20% and 49% ...... 14 0.0 0.1 ¥0.2 0.15 0.4 0.4 More than 50% ...... 52 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.15 0.5 0.7 1 Includes hospital-based ESRD facilities not reported to have large dialysis organization or regional chain ownership. 2 Includes Facilities located in Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands. 3 Of the 1,305 Facilities with less than 4,000 treatments, only 385 qualify for the low-volume adjustment. The low-volume adjustment is mandated by Congress, and is not applied to pediatric patients. The impact to these Low volume Facilities is a 7.0 percent increase in payments. NOTE: Totals do not necessarily equal the sum of rounded parts, as percentages are multiplicative, not additive. Column A of the impact table Facilities located in the census region of Column F shows the effect of the indicates the number of ESRD facilities Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands ESRD PPS refinement as discussed in for each impact category and column B would receive a 4.0 percent decrease in section II.B.1. While the overall indicates the number of dialysis estimated payments in CY 2016. Since estimated impact of the refinement is treatments (in millions). The overall most of the facilities in this category are 0.0 percent, the impact by categories effect of the proposed changes to the located in Puerto Rico, the decrease is ranges from a 0.8 percent decrease to a outlier payment policy described in primarily due to the change in the labor- 1.0 percent increase. section II.B.2.c of this proposed rule is related share. The other categories of Column G reflects the overall impact shown in column C. For CY 2016, the types of facilities in the impact table (that is, the effects of the proposed impact on all ESRD facilities as a result show changes in estimated payments outlier policy changes, the proposed of the changes to the outlier payment ranging from a 1.2 percent decrease to wage index, the effect of the change in policy will be a 0.1 percent increase in a 1.4 percent increase due to these CBSA delineations, the effect of the estimated payments. Nearly all ESRD proposed updates. change in the labor-related share, the facilities are anticipated to experience a Column E shows the effect of the effect of the payment rate update, and positive effect in their estimated CY ESRD PPS payment rate update of 0.15 the effect of the refinement). We expect 2016 payments as a result of the percent, which reflects the proposed that overall ESRD facilities will proposed outlier policy changes. ESRDB market basket percentage experience a 0.3 percent increase in Column D shows the effect of the increase factor for CY 2016 of 2.0 estimated payments in 2016. ESRD proposed CY 2016 wage indices, and the percent, the 1.25 percent reduction as facilities in Puerto Rico and the Virgin final year of the transitions for the required by the section Islands are expected to receive a 3.9 implementation of both the new CBSA 1881(b)(14)(F)(i)(I) of the Act, and the percent decrease in their estimated delineations and the labor-related share. MFP adjustment of 0.6 percent. payments in CY 2016. This larger VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37856 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules decrease is primarily due to the negative 0.3 percent in CY 2016, which translates road miles from one another. We impact of the change in the labor-related to approximately $10 million. considered proposing a geographic share. The other categories of types of proximity criterion of 10 road miles; e. Alternatives Considered facilities in the impact table show however, this approach negatively impacts ranging from a decrease of 0.2 1. CY 2016 ESRD PPS impacted rural facilities which are percent to an increase of 0.8 percent in In section II.B.1.c.i of this proposed important to ensure access of essential their 2016 estimated payments. rule, we propose updated payment renal dialysis services. b. Effects on Other Providers multipliers for five age groups resulting 2. End-Stage Renal Disease Quality from our regression analysis. In section Incentive Program Under the ESRD PPS, Medicare pays II.B.2.d.ii, we propose a regression ESRD facilities a single bundled budget-neutrality adjustment to account a. Effects of the PY 2019 ESRD QIP payment for renal dialysis services, for the overall effects of the refinement. The ESRD QIP provisions are which may have been separately paid to We are proposing a 4 percent reduction intended to prevent possible reductions other providers, (for example, (that is, a factor of 0.959703) to the in the quality of ESRD dialysis facility laboratories, durable medical equipment ESRD PPS base rate to account for the services provided to beneficiaries as a suppliers, and pharmacies) by Medicare additional dollars paid to facilities result of payment changes under the prior to the implementation of the ESRD through the payment adjustments and ESRD PPS. The methodology that we are PPS. Therefore, in CY 2016, we estimate indicate that a significant portion of proposing to use to determine a that the proposed ESRD PPS will have additional impact of the adjusters on the facility’s TPS for PY 2019 is described zero impact on these other providers. base rate arises from changes in the age in section III.G.9 of this proposed rule. adjustments. To mitigate some of the c. Effects on the Medicare Program Any reductions in ESRD PPS payments reduction, we considered reducing the as a result of a facility’s performance number of age categories to three and We estimate that Medicare spending under the PY 2019 ESRD QIP would providing a payment adjustment for (total Medicare program payments) for affect the facility’s reimbursement rates only those patients in the youngest (18– ESRD facilities in CY 2016 will be in CY 2019. 44) and oldest (80+) age groups. We did approximately $8.7 billion. This not adopt this approach because while We estimate that, of the total number estimate takes into account a projected it would reduce the impact of the age of dialysis facilities (including those not increase in fee-for-service Medicare adjustments on the base rate, it would receiving a TPS), approximately 8 dialysis beneficiary enrollment of 1.5 also significantly reduce the explanatory percent or 495 of the facilities would percent in CY 2016. power of the system and reduce likely receive a payment reduction in d. Effects on Medicare Beneficiaries payments to facilities with patients who PY 2019. Facilities that do not receive are between the ages of 44 through 79, a TPS are not eligible for a payment Under the ESRD PPS, beneficiaries are that is, approximately 75 percent of reduction. responsible for paying 20 percent of the patients. In conducting our impact assessment, ESRD PPS payment amount. As a result Also, in section II.B.1.d.ii of this we have assumed that there will be an of the projected 0.3 percent overall proposed rule, we are proposing to initial count of 6,264 dialysis facilities increase in the proposed ESRD PPS modify the eligibility criteria for the paid under the ESRD PPS. Table 21 payment amounts in CY 2016, we low-volume payment adjustment by shows the overall estimated distribution estimate that there will be an increase excluding facilities of common of payment reductions resulting from in beneficiary co-insurance payments of ownership that are located within 5 the PY 2019 ESRD QIP. TABLE 21—ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF PY 2019 ESRD QIP PAYMENT REDUCTIONS Cumulative Cumulative Percentage reduction Frequency Percent frequency percent 0 ...... 5509 91.76 5509 91.76 0.5 ...... 430 7.16 5939 98.92 1 ...... 41 0.68 5980 99.60 1.5 ...... 18 0.30 5998 99.90 2 ...... 6 0.10 6004 100.00 Note:This table excludes 260 facilities that we estimate will not receive a payment reduction because they will not report enough data to re- ceive a Total Performance Score. To estimate whether or not a facility achievement and improvement on available data from CROWNWeb and would receive a payment reduction in several measures we have previously Medicare claims. Measures used for the PY 2019, we scored each facility on finalized and for which there were simulation are shown in Table 22. TABLE 22—DATA USED TO ESTIMATE PY 2019 ESRD QIP PAYMENT REDUCTIONS Period of time used to calculate achievement thresholds, Measure performance standards, benchmarks, and improvement Performance Period thresholds Vascular Access Type: % Fistula ...... Jan 2013—Dec 2013 ...... Jan 2014—Dec 2014. % Catheter ...... Jan 2013—Dec 2013 ...... Jan 2014—Dec 2014. Dialysis Adequacy ...... Jan 2013—June 2013 ...... July 2013—Dec 2013. Hypercalcemia ...... Jan 2013—Dec 2013 ...... Jan 2014—Dec 2014. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37857 TABLE 22—DATA USED TO ESTIMATE PY 2019 ESRD QIP PAYMENT REDUCTIONS—Continued Period of time used to calculate achievement thresholds, Measure performance standards, benchmarks, and improvement Performance Period thresholds SRR ...... Jan 2012– Dec 2012 ...... Jan 2013—Dec 2013. STrR ...... Jan 2012– Dec 2012 ...... Jan 2013—Dec 2013. Clinical measure topic areas with less 2014 by the facility’s estimated payment million ($10,751,607 + $3,859,742 = than 11 cases for a facility were not reduction percentage expected under $14,611,249) in PY 2019, as a result of included in that facility’s Total the ESRD QIP, yielding a total payment the PY 2019 ESRD QIP. Performance Score. Each facility’s Total reduction amount for each facility: Table 23 below shows the estimated Performance Score was compared to the (Total ESRD payment in January 2014 impact of the finalized ESRD QIP estimated minimum Total Performance through December 2014 times the payment reductions to all ESRD Score and the payment reduction table estimated payment reduction facilities for PY 2019. The table found in section III.G.9 of this proposed percentage). For PY 2014, the total estimates the distribution of ESRD rule. Facility reporting measure scores payment reduction for the 495 facilities facilities by facility size (both among were estimated using available data estimated to receive a reduction is facilities considered to be small entities from CY 2014. Facilities were required approximately $3.85 million and by number of treatments per to have a score on at least one clinical ($3,859,742). Further, we estimate that facility), geography (both urban/rural and one reporting measure in order to the total costs associated with the and by region), and by facility type receive a Total Performance Score. collection of information requirements (hospital based/freestanding facilities). To estimate the total payment for PY 2019 described in section III.C.1 Given that the time periods used for reductions in PY 2019 for each facility of this proposed rule would be these calculations will differ from those resulting from this proposed rule, we approximately $10.7 million for all we are proposing to use for the PY 2019 multiplied the total Medicare payments ESRD facilities. As a result, we estimate ESRD QIP, the actual impact of the PY to the facility during the one year period that ESRD facilities will experience an 2019 ESRD QIP may vary significantly between January 2014 and December aggregate impact of approximately $14.6 from the values provided here. TABLE 23—IMPACT OF PROPOSED QIP PAYMENT REDUCTIONS TO ESRD FACILITIES IN PY 2019 Number of Payment reduction Number of Number of Number of facilities expected (percent change in facilities treatments 2013 facilities with QIP to receive a total ESRD (in millions) score payment reduction payments) All Facilities ...... 6,264 40.0 6,004 495 ¥0.04 Facility Type: Freestanding ...... 5,812 37.7 5,614 464 ¥0.04 Hospital-based ...... 452 2.3 390 31 ¥0.06 Ownership Type: Large Dialysis ...... 4,380 28.5 4,259 356 ¥0.04 Regional Chain ...... 926 6.0 888 55 ¥0.03 Independent ...... 584 3.6 538 56 ¥0.07 Hospital-based (non-chain) ...... 374 1.9 319 28 ¥0.07 Facility Size: Large Entities ...... 5,306 34.5 5,147 411 ¥0.04 Small Entities 1 ...... 958 5.5 857 84 ¥0.07 Rural Status: (1) Yes ...... 1,332 6.5 1,257 66 ¥0.03 (2) No ...... 4,932 33.5 4,747 429 ¥0.05 Census Region: Northeast ...... 861 6.2 825 50 ¥0.03 Midwest ...... 1,490 7.9 1,386 112 ¥0.05 South ...... 2,744 18.1 2,655 243 ¥0.05 West ...... 1,112 7.5 1,085 77 ¥0.04 US Territories 2 ...... 57 0.4 53 13 ¥0.16 Census Division: East North Central ...... 1,036 5.8 962 86 ¥0.05 East South Central ...... 518 3.0 500 48 ¥0.06 Middle Atlantic ...... 680 4.9 658 43 ¥0.03 Mountain ...... 359 2.0 348 25 ¥0.04 New England ...... 182 1.3 167 7 ¥0.02 Pacific ...... 760 5.6 744 53 ¥0.04 South Atlantic ...... 1,386 9.3 1,337 143 ¥0.06 West North Central ...... 455 2.1 424 26 ¥0.03 West South Central ...... 841 5.8 818 52 ¥0.03 US Territories2 ...... 47 0.3 46 12 ¥0.17 Facility Size (# of total treatments): Less than 4,000 treatments ...... 1,305 3.5 1,185 109 ¥0.07 4,000–9,999 treatments ...... 2,239 10.8 2,211 166 ¥0.04 VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:04 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37858 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules TABLE 23—IMPACT OF PROPOSED QIP PAYMENT REDUCTIONS TO ESRD FACILITIES IN PY 2019— Continued Number of facili- Number of Number of ties Payment reduction Number of treatments 2013 facilities with QIP expected to re- (percent change in facilities (in millions) score ceive a payment total ESRD reduction payments) Over 10,000 treatments ...... 2,514 25.3 2,491 203 ¥0.04 Unknown ...... 206 0.3 117 17 ¥0.11 1 Small Entities include hospital-based and satellite facilities and non-chain facilities based on DFC self-reported status. 2 Includes Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands. 3 Based on claims and CROWNWeb data through December 2014. b. Alternatives Considered Justification Form explains will be facilities are already familiar with the collected via CROWNWeb (MAP use and functionality of CROWNWeb In section III.G.2.c.ii of this proposed #XDEFM). Because the measure because they are using it to report data rule, we are proposing to adopt the Full- specifications reviewed by the Measures for other measures in the ESRD QIP, and Season Influenza Vaccination reporting Application Partnership do not include we believe that familiarity with measure. Under this proposed measure, NHSN as a data source for this measure, CROWNWeb will reduce the burden of data on patient immunization status we have decided not to propose to use reporting data for the Full Season would be entered into CROWNWeb for the NHSN system to collect patient-level Influenza reporting measure. each qualifying patient treated at the influenza vaccination data for this C. Accounting Statement facility during the performance period. measure at this time. We considered proposing to collect We ultimately decided to have As required by OMB Circular A–4 patient immunization data using the facilities report data for this measure in (available at http:// CDC’s Surveillance for Dialysis Patient CROWNWeb rather than using an www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_ Influenza Vaccination module within alternative data source, for two main a004_a-4), in Table 24 below, we have the NHSN; however, the proposed reasons. First, the data elements needed prepared an accounting statement measure’s data sources are for this measure have already been showing the classification of the administrative claims and ‘‘electronic developed in CROWNWeb and will transfers and costs associated with the clinical data’’ which the Measure appear in a new release soon. Second, various provisions of this proposed rule. TABLE 24—ACCOUNTING STATEMENT: CLASSIFICATION OF ESTIMATED TRANSFERS AND COSTS/SAVINGS ESRD PPS for CY 2016 Category Transfers Annualized Monetized Transfers ...... $20 million. From Whom to Whom ...... Federal government to ESRD providers. Category Transfers Increased Beneficiary Co-insurance Payments ...... $ 10 million. From Whom to Whom ...... Beneficiaries to ESRD providers. ESRD QIP for PY 2018 16 Category Transfers Annualized Monetized Transfers ...... $¥11.6 million. Category Costs Annualized Monetized ESRD Provider Costs ...... $19 thousand. ESRD QIP for PY 2019 Category Transfers Annualized Monetized Transfers ...... $¥3.8 million. From Whom to Whom ...... Federal government to ESRD providers. Category Costs Annualized Monetized ESRD Provider Costs ...... $10.7 million. 16 We note that the aggregate impact of the PY 2018 ESRD QIP was included in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66256 through 66258). The values presented here capture those previously finalized impacts plus the collection of information requirements related for PY 2018 presented in this notice of proposed rulemaking. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37859 VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act We estimate that of the 495 ESRD also requires that agencies assess Analysis facilities expected to receive a payment anticipated costs and benefits before reduction in the PY 2019 ESRD QIP, 84 issuing any rule whose mandates The Regulatory Flexibility Act are ESRD small entity facilities. We require spending in any 1 year of $100 (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96–354) present these findings in Table 21 million in 1995 dollars, updated (RFA) requires agencies to analyze (‘‘Estimated Distribution of PY 2019 annually for inflation. In 2015, that is options for regulatory relief of small ESRD QIP Payment Reductions’’) and approximately $144 million. This entities, if a rule has a significant impact Table 23 (‘‘Impact of Proposed QIP proposed rule does not include any on a substantial number of small Payment Reductions to ESRD Facilities mandates that would impose spending entities. For purposes of the RFA, small for PY 2019’’) above. We estimate that costs on State, local, or Tribal entities include small businesses, the payment reductions will average governments in the aggregate, or by the nonprofit organizations, and small approximately $7,797 per facility across private sector, of $141 million. governmental jurisdictions. the 495 facilities receiving a payment Approximately 15 percent of ESRD reduction, and $7,509 for each small X. Federalism Analysis dialysis facilities are considered small entity facility. Using our estimates of Executive Order 13132 on Federalism entities according to the Small Business facility performance, we also estimated (August 4, 1999) establishes certain Administration’s (SBA) size standards, the impact of payment reductions on requirements that an agency must meet which classifies small businesses as ESRD small entity facilities by when it promulgates a proposed rule those dialysis facilities having total comparing the total estimated payment (and subsequent final rule) that imposes revenues of less than $38.5 million in reductions for 958 small entity facilities substantial direct requirement costs on any 1 year. Individuals and States are with the aggregate ESRD payments to all State and local governments, preempts not included in the definitions of a small entity facilities. We estimate that State law, or otherwise has Federalism small entity. For more information on there are a total of 958 small entity implications. We have reviewed this SBA’s size standards, see the Small facilities, and that the aggregate ESRD proposed rule under the threshold Business Administration’s Web site at PPS payments to these facilities would criteria of Executive Order 13132, http://www.sba.gov/content/small- decrease 0.07 percent in PY 2019. Federalism, and have determined that it business-size-standards (Kidney Therefore, the Secretary has will not have substantial direct effects Dialysis Centers are listed as 621492 determined that this proposed rule on the rights, roles, and responsibilities with a size standard of $38.5 million). would not have a significant economic of States, local or Tribal governments. We do not believe ESRD facilities are impact on a substantial number of small operated by small government entities entities. We solicit comment on the RFA XI. Congressional Review Act such as counties or towns with analysis provided. This proposed rule is subject to the In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act populations of 50,000 or less, and Congressional Review Act provisions of requires us to prepare a regulatory therefore, they are not enumerated or the Small Business Regulatory impact analysis if a rule may have a included in this estimated RFA analysis. Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 significant impact on the operations of Individuals and States are not included U.S.C. 801 et seq.) and has been a substantial number of small rural in the definition of a small entity. transmitted to the Congress and the hospitals. Any such regulatory impact For purposes of the RFA, we estimate analysis must conform to the provisions Comptroller General for review. that approximately 15 percent of ESRD of section 603 of the RFA. For purposes In accordance with the provisions of facilities are small entities as that term of section 1102(b) of the Act, we define Executive Order 12866, this proposed is used in the RFA (which includes a small rural hospital as a hospital that rule was reviewed by the Office of small businesses, nonprofit is located outside of a metropolitan Management and Budget. organizations, and small governmental statistical area and has fewer than 100 jurisdictions). This amount is based on XII. Files Available to the Public via the beds. We do not believe this proposed Internet the number of ESRD facilities shown in rule will have a significant impact on the ownership category in Table 20. operations of a substantial number of The Addenda for the annual ESRD Using the definitions in this ownership small rural hospitals because most PPS proposed and final rulemakings category, we consider the 584 facilities dialysis facilities are freestanding. will no longer appear in the Federal that are independent and the 374 While there are 139 rural hospital-based Register. Instead, the Addenda will be facilities that are shown as hospital- dialysis facilities, we do not know how available only through the Internet and based to be small entities. The ESRD many of them are based at hospitals is posted on the CMS Web site at facilities that are owned and operated with fewer than 100 beds. However, http://www.cms.gov/ESRDPayment/ by LDOs and regional chains would overall, the 139 rural hospital-based PAY/list.asp In addition to the have total revenues of more than $38.5 dialysis facilities will experience an Addenda, limited data set (LDS) files are million in any year when the total estimated 0.1 percent decrease in available for purchase at http:// revenues for all locations are combined payments. As a result, this proposed www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data- for each business (individual LDO or rule is not estimated to have a and-Systems/Files-for-Order/ regional chain), and are not, therefore, significant impact on small rural LimitedDataSets/ included as small entities. hospitals. Therefore, the Secretary has EndStageRenalDiseaseSystemFile.html. For the ESRD PPS updates proposed determined that this proposed rule Readers who experience any problems in this rule, a hospital-based ESRD would not have a significant impact on accessing the Addenda or LDS files, facility (as defined by ownership type) the operations of a substantial number should contact Michelle Cruse at (410) is estimated to receive a 0.7 percent of small rural hospitals. 786–7540. increase in payments for CY 2016. An List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 413 independent facility (as defined by IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ownership type) is also estimated to Analysis Health facilities, Kidney diseases, receive a 0.2 percent increase in Section 202 of the Unfunded Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping payments for CY 2016. Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requirements. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 37860 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules For the reasons set forth in the § 413.232 Low-volume adjustment. intravenous product is used to treat or preamble, the Centers for Medicare & * * * * * manage; Medicaid Services proposes to amend (c) * * * (ii) The new injectable or intravenous 42 CFR chapter IV as follows: (2) 5 miles or less from the ESRD product is paid for using the transitional facility in question. drug add-on payment adjustment PART 413—PRINCIPLES OF * * * * * described in paragraph (c) of this REASONABLE COST ■ 4. Add § 413.233 to read as follows: section; and REIMBURSEMENT; PAYMENT FOR (iii) The new injectable or intravenous END–STAGE RENAL DISEASE § 413.233 Rural facility adjustment. product is added to the ESRD PPS SERVICES; OPTIONAL CMS adjusts the base rate for facilities bundled payment following payment of PROSPECTIVELY DETERMINED in rural areas, as defined in the transitional drug add-on payment PAYMENT RATES FOR SKILLED § 413.231(b)(2). adjustment. NURSING FACILITIES ■ 5. Add § 413.234 to read as follows: (c) Transitional drug add-on payment adjustment. (1) A new injectable or ■ 1. The authority citation for part 413 § 413.234. Drug designation process. intravenous product that is not is revised to read as follows: (a) Definitions. For purposes of this considered included in the ESRD PPS Authority: Secs. 1102, 1812(d), 1814(b), section, the following definitions apply: base rate is paid for using a transitional 1815, 1833(a), (i), and (n), 1861(v), 1871, ESRD PPS functional category. A drug add-on payment adjustment, 1881, 1883 and 1886 of the Social Security distinct grouping of drugs or biologicals, which is based on ASP pricing Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 1395d(d), 1395f(b), as determined by CMS, whose end methodology. 1395g, 1395l(a), (i), and (n), 1395x(v), action effect is the treatment or (2) The transitional drug add-on 1395hh, 1395rr, 1395tt, and 1395ww); and management of a condition or payment adjustment is paid until sec. 124 of Pub.L. 106–113 (113 Stat. 1501A– conditions associated with ESRD. 332), sec. 3201 of Pub. L. 112–96 (126 Stat. sufficient claims data for rate setting 156), sec. 632 of Pub. L. 112–240 (126 Stat. New injectable or intravenous analysis for the new injectable or 2354), sec. 217 of Pub. L. 113–93, and sec. product. An injectable or intravenous intravenous product is available, but not 204 of Pub. L. 113–295. product that is approved by the Food for less than two years. and Drug Administration under section ■ 2. Section 413.174 is amended by (3) Following payment of the 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and revising paragraph (f)(6) to read as transitional drug add-on payment Cosmetic Act or section 351 of the follows: adjustment the ESRD PPS base rate will Public Health Service Act, commercially be modified, if appropriate, to account § 413.174 Prospective rates for hospital available, assigned a Healthcare for the new injectable or intravenous based and independent ESRD facilities. Common Procedure Coding System product in the ESRD PPS bundled * * * * * code, and designated by CMS as a renal payment. (f) * * * dialysis service under § 413.171. (d) An oral-only drug is no longer (6) Effective January 1, 2025, payment Oral-only drug. A drug or biological considered oral-only if an injectable or to an ESRD facility for renal dialysis with no injectable equivalent or other other form of administration of the oral- service drugs and biologicals with only form of administration other than an only drug is approved by the Food and an oral form furnished to ESRD patients oral form. Drug Administration. is incorporated within the prospective (b) Effective January 1, 2016, new ■ 6. Section 413.237 is amended by payment system rates established by injectable or intravenous products are revising paragraph (a)(1)(iv) to read as CMS in § 413.230 and separate payment included in the ESRD PPS bundled follows: will no longer be provided. payment using the following drug § 413.237 Outliers ■ 3. Section 413.232 is amended by— designation process— (1) If the new injectable or (a) * * * ■ A. Revising paragraph (c)(2). intravenous product is used to treat or (1) * * * ■ B. Removing paragraph (d). manage a condition for which there is (iv) Renal dialysis services drugs that ■ C. Redesignating paragraphs (e), (f), (g) an ESRD PPS functional category, the were or would have been, prior to and (h) as paragraphs (d), (e), (f) and (g) new injectable or intravenous product is January 1, 2011, covered under respectively. considered included in the ESRD PPS Medicare Part D, including ESRD- ■ D. In newly redesignated paragraph bundled payment and no separate related oral-only drugs effective January (e), the reference ‘‘paragraph (g)’’ is payment is available. 1, 2025. removed and the reference ‘‘paragraph (2) If the new injectable or * * * * * (f)’’ is added in its place. intravenous product is used to treat or Dated: June 23, 2015. ■ E. In newly redesignated paragraph (g) manage a condition for which there is introductory text, the reference not an ESRD PPS functional category, Andrew M. Slavitt, ‘‘paragraph (f)’’ is removed and the the new injectable or intravenous Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare reference ‘‘paragraph (e)’’ is added in its product is not considered included in & Medicaid Services. place. the ESRD PPS bundled payment and the Approved: June 24, 2015. ■ F. In newly redesignated paragraph following steps occur: Sylvia M. Burwell, (g)(1), the reference ‘‘paragraph (f)’’ is (i) An existing ESRD PPS functional Secretary, Department of Health and Human removed and the reference ‘‘paragraph category is revised or a new ESRD PPS Services. (e)’’ is added in its place. functional category is added for the [FR Doc. 2015–16074 Filed 6–26–15; 04:15 pm] The revision reads as follows: condition that the new injectable or BILLING CODE 4120–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYP3.SGM 01JYP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Vol. 80 Wednesday, No. 126 July 1, 2015 Part IV Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs 25 CFR Part 83 Federal Acknowledgment of American Indian Tribes; Final Rule VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37862 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR a. Proposed Elimination of Current 3. Timelines—Petitioner Response to ‘‘Criterion (a)’’ and Requirement for Comments Prior to PF Bureau of Indian Affairs External Observer as an Independent 4. Timelines—Issuance of a PF Criterion 5. Timelines—Comment Period on PF 25 CFR Part 83 b. Proposed Criterion (a), Requiring 6. Timelines—Period for Petitioner’s Narrative of Pre-1900 Existence Response to Comments on a Positive PF [156A2100DD/AAKC001030/ 3. Criterion (e) (Descent) 7. Timelines—Petitioner Response to A0A501010.999900 253G] a. Requirement for 80 percent Descent Comments and/or Election of Hearing b. Descent as a Race-Based Criterion 8. Timelines—Issuance of FD RIN 1076–AF18 c. Defining ‘‘historical’’ to be 1900 or G. Hearings earlier 1. Deleting the IBIA Reconsideration Federal Acknowledgment of American d. Evidence in Support of Descent Process, and Adding a Hearing on the PF Indian Tribes e. Review of Descent 2. Opportunity for Third Parties to Request 4. 1934 Starting Date for Evaluating Criteria a Hearing and Intervene in Hearings AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, (b) (Community) and (c) (Political 3. Hearing Process Timelines Interior. Influence/Authority) 4. Scope of Record ACTION: Final rule. 5. State Reservations and U.S.-Held Land 5. Presiding Judge Over Hearings in Criteria (b) and (c) 6. Conduct of the Hearing SUMMARY: This rule revises regulations 6. Criterion (b) (Community) 7. Miscellaneous Hearing Process governing the process and criteria by a. Using 30 percent as a Baseline Comments which the Secretary acknowledges an b. Allowing Sampling for Criterion (b) H. Previous Federal Acknowledgment c. Deletion of ‘‘Significant’’ in Criterion (b) I. Automatic Disclosure of Documents Indian tribe. The revisions seek to make d. Marriages/Endogamy as Evidence of the process and criteria more J. Elimination of Enrollment Limitations Community K. Purpose (Proposed 83.2) transparent, promote consistent e. Indian Schools as Evidence of L. Definitions implementation, and increase timeliness Community 1. ‘‘Historical’’ and efficiency, while maintaining the f. Language as Evidence of Community 2. ‘‘Indigenous’’ integrity and substantive rigor of the g. Nomenclature as Evidence of 3. ‘‘Tribe’’ process. For decades, the current Community 4. Other Definitions process has been criticized as ‘‘broken’’ h. Other Evidence of Community IV. Legislative Authority and in need of reform. Specifically, the 7. Criterion (c) (Political Influence/ V. Procedural Requirements Authority) A. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. process has been criticized as too slow a. Bilateral Political Relationship (a petition can take decades to be 12866 and 13563) b. ‘‘Show a continuous line of entity B. Regulatory Flexibility Act decided), expensive, burdensome, leaders and a means of selection or C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement inefficient, intrusive, less than acquiescence by a majority of the entity’s Fairness Act transparent and unpredictable. This rule members’’ D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act reforms the process by, among other c. Evidence E. Takings (E.O. 12630) things, institutionalizing a phased 8. ‘‘Substantially Continuous Basis, F. Federalism (E.O. 13132) review that allows for faster decisions; Without Substantial Interruption’’ G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) reducing the documentary burden while 9. Criterion (f) (Unique Membership) H. Consultation with Indian Tribes (E.O. a. Criterion (f), In General 13175) maintaining the existing rigor of the b. Deletion of previous rule’s provision process; allowing for a hearing on a I. Paperwork Reduction Act prohibiting members from maintaining a J. National Environmental Policy Act negative proposed finding to promote ‘‘bilateral political relationship’’ with the K. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. transparency and integrity; enhancing federally recognized tribe 13211) notice to tribes and local governments c. Exception for Members of Petitioners and enhancing transparency by posting Who Filed Prior to 2010 I. Executive Summary of Rule all publicly available petition 10. Criterion (g) (Termination) This rule updates Part 83 to improve documents on the Department’s Web 11. Splinter Groups the processing of petitions for Federal site; establishing the Assistant B. Re-Petitioning C. Standard of Proof acknowledgment of Indian tribes, with Secretary’s final determination as final D. Third-Party Participation in the an aim of making the process more for the Department to promote Acknowledgment Process transparent, promoting fairness and efficiency; and codifying and improving 1. Who Receives Notice of the Receipt of consistent implementation, and upon past Departmental implementation the Petition increasing timeliness and efficiency, of standards, where appropriate, to 2. Deletion of Interested Party Status while maintaining the integrity and ensure consistency, transparency, 3. Comment Periods substantive rigor of the process. Primary predictability and fairness. E. Process—Approach revisions to the process would: 1. Letter of Intent DATES: • Increase timeliness and efficiency This rule is effective July 31, 2. Phased Review 2015. 3. Technical Assistance by providing for a two-phased review of petitions that establishes certain criteria FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 4. Providing Petitioner With Opportunities as threshold criteria, potentially Elizabeth Appel, Director, Office of to Respond resulting in the issuance of proposed Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative 5. Suspensions (proposed 83.31) and Withdrawals (proposed 83.30) findings and final determinations earlier Action—Indian Affairs, (202) 273–4680; 6. Decision-Maker in the process and thereby expediting [email protected]. 7. Automatic Final Determination negative decisions (e.g., if a petitioner’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 8 Prioritizing Reviews membership does not consist of I. Executive Summary of Rule 9. Proceeding under the New or Old individuals who descend from a II. History and Development of the Rule Version of the Regulations historical Indian tribe); III. Comments on the Proposed Rule and the 10. Precedent and Other Comments • Department’s Responses F. Petitioning Process Timelines Increase timeliness and efficiency A. Criteria 1. Timelines—Overall while maintaining the substantive rigor 1. Criteria, Generally 2. Timelines—Notice of Receipt of and integrity of the process by providing 2. Criterion (a) Documented Petition a uniform start date of 1900 for criteria VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37863 (a) Identification, (b) Community and (c) • One instance is that the final rule continuous identification as an Indian Political Influence/Authority; retains the current criterion (a), entity. In other words, the time since • Promote fairness and consistent requiring identification of the petitioner 1900 has been shown to be an effective implementation by providing that if a as an Indian entity, but does not limit and reliable demonstration for historical prior decision finding evidence or the evidence in support of this criterion times for criterion (a). Starting the methodology was sufficient to satisfy to observations by those external to the evaluation of the community and any particular criterion, the Department petitioner. In other words, the final rule political authority criteria will promote will find that evidence or methodology allows the Department to accept any uniformity for criteria (a), (b) and (c). sufficient to satisfy the criterion for a and all evidence, such as the Relying upon 1900 as the starting year present petitioner; petitioner’s own contemporaneous to satisfy the community and political • Promote transparency by providing records, as evidence that the petitioner authority criteria will reduce the that the Office of Federal has been an Indian entity since 1900. documentary burden on petitioners and • Acknowledgment (OFA), rather than the The other instance in which the the administrative burden on the Assistant Secretary, will issue the criteria is changed is in the review of Department, and avoid potential proposed finding (PF); the number of marriages in support of problems with locating historical • Promote fairness, objectivity, criterion (b) (community)—past records, all while maintaining the transparency and consistent Departmental practice has been to count integrity and rigor of the process. implementation by offering petitioners the number of marriages within a Second, the final rule defines who receive a negative PF the petitioner; this rule instead provides ‘‘historical’’ as prior to 1900. Using pre- opportunity for a hearing, in which that the Department count the number 1900 for the end date of ‘‘historical’’ and third parties may intervene, to address of petitioner members who are married 1900 for the start date for analysis of their objections to the PF before an to others in the petitioning group. community and political influence/ The final rule differs from the administrative law judge (ALJ) who will authority allows for a rigorous and proposed rule in a number of important then provide a recommended decision seamless examination of each petitioner, respects. First, the final rule does not to the Assistant Secretary; requiring evidence of descent from a adopt the proposed evaluation start date • Promote transparency by requiring historical Indian tribe that existed prior for criteria (b) (Community) and (c) to 1900 and requiring an evaluation of all publicly available documents (Political Authority) of 1934. See the identification, community, and political relating to a petition be posted on the response to comments below. Rather, influence/authority for more than a Department’s Web site and providing the final rule starts this evaluation at century from 1900 to the present. The broader notice to local governments; 1900. The Department does not classify final rule also retains the current • Promote fairness, transparency and the start date change, from 1789 or the requirement that a criterion be met efficiency by providing that the time of first sustained contact to 1900, ‘‘without substantial interruption.’’ The Assistant Secretary will review the PF as a substantive change to the existing final rule does not incorporate the and the record, including an ALJ’s criteria because: (1) 1900 is squarely proposed definition of this phrase, recommended decision, and issue a during a particularly difficult Federal instead allowing for the Department’s final determination that is final for the policy era for tribes—there were strong continued interpretation consistent with Department, such that any challenges to forces encouraging allotment of Indian any past positive finding on a criterion the final determination would be lands and assimilation of Indian people made as part of, or incorporated in, a pursued in United States District Court and the federal government discouraged final agency decision. Consistent with rather than in an administrative forum; tribes from maintaining community and the Department’s previous final and political authority during that time • decisions, documentary gaps longer Promote efficiency by eliminating period; (2) depending on the history of than 10 years may be justified in certain the process before the Interior Board of an area, first sustained contact for some historical situations and context. Indian Appeals (IBIA) providing for petitioners was as late as the mid-1800s; Third, the final rule maintains the limited reconsideration of final (3) the regulations currently provide for current standard of proof as ‘‘reasonable determinations. a 1900 start date for criterion (a) and likelihood’’ without the proposed This rule clarifies the criteria by utilization of that start date for over 20 incorporation of judicial explanations of codifying past Departmental practice in years has demonstrated that the date the phrase. implementing the criteria. An maintains the rigor of the criteria; (4) Fourth, the final rule does not overriding purpose for codification is to records are generally more available incorporate the proposal for limited re- address assertions of arbitrariness and beginning in 1900, making the lack petitioning, as explained in the response ensure consistency. If methodology or thereof more compelling too; and (5) a to comments below. evidence was sufficient to satisfy a consistent start date will apply the same To encourage conciseness, which particular criterion in a decision for a documentary burden to every petitioner improves transparency and facilitates previous petitioner, such evidence or uniformly across the country. Further, public understanding of our decisions, methodology is sufficient to satisfy the based on its experience in nearly 40 the revisions provide that the particular criterion for a current years of implementing the regulations, Department will strive to abide by page petitioner. This clarification ensures every group that has proven its limits for the proposed finding and final that a criterion is not applied in a existence from 1900 forward has determination. To ensure transparency, manner that raises the bar for each successfully proven its existence prior the revisions require the Department to subsequent petitioner. Evidence or to that time as well, making 1900 to the make available on the Internet the methodology that was sufficient to present a reliable proxy for all of history narrative of the petition, other parts of satisfy a criterion at any point since but at less expense. Further, in 1994 the the petition, comments or materials 1978 remains sufficient to satisfy the Department implemented 1900 as a start submitted by third parties to OFA criterion today. date for evaluation of criterion (a) to relating to the documented petition, and The rule does not substantively reduce the documentary burden of this any letter, proposed finding, change the Part 83 criteria, except in criterion while retaining the recommended decision, and final two instances. requirement for substantially determination issued by the Department VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37864 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations that the Department is publicly resolved since this process began, only written comments as well as comments releasing in accordance with Federal 17 petitions have been approved for received at consultation sessions and law. This rule also comprehensively acknowledgment and 34 have been public meetings, the Department revises part 83 to comply with plain denied. Far more tribes have been developed and published a proposed language standards, using a question- recognized by Congress during this time rule. See 79 FR 30766 (May 29, 2014). and-answer format. period, and Congress unquestionably has the power, in the first instance, to III. Comments on the Proposed Rule II. History and Development of the Rule speak for the United States on and the Department’s Responses For many years, the process for recognition of groups as Indian tribes. The proposed rule was published on acknowledgment of American Indian Some think that the acknowledgment May 29, 2014. See 79 FR 30766. In and Alaska Native tribes has been process is strongly related to gaming. response to requests, the Department criticized as broken. Since the The facts do not bear this out. Many of then extended the initial comment establishment of the Part 83 process, the petitioning groups came forward a deadline of August 1, 2014, to multiple Congressional hearings have long time ago. As the late Senator Daniel September 30, 2014. See 79 FR 44149. been held to address its failings. Some K. Inouye observed, if gaming were the Throughout July 2014, the Department members of Congress, such as Chairman driving force, ‘‘we would have to held public meetings and separate John Barrasso of the Senate Committee attribute to many of the petitioning consultation sessions with federally on Indian Affairs, have stated that the tribal groups a clairvoyance that they recognized Indian tribes at regional process simply takes too long. S. Hrg. knew that one day in the distant future locations across the country. In response 112–684 (July 12, 2012). Previous Chairs there was going to be a Supreme Court to requests for additional meetings and of the Senate Committee on Indian decision and thereafter the Congress consultations, the Department added Affairs, such as Byron Dorgan, have was going to enact a law authorizing two teleconference consultation raised similar critiques. S. Hrg. 110–189 and regulating the conduct of sessions for federally recognized Indian (September 19, 2007). Congressional gaming. . . .’’ S. Hrg 109–91 at 3. Of tribes and two teleconference sessions leaders in the House have raised other the 17 tribes that have been recognized for the public, which were held in concerns. For example, Congressman since this process began 37 years ago, August 2014. During the public Tom Cole has said that the process is only 11 have obtained land in trust, a comment period, the Department ‘‘complex,’’ ‘‘controversial,’’ and process regulated by an additional, received over 330 written comment ‘‘frankly, has not worked well.’’ H. Hrg. separate set of regulations (25 CFR part submissions plus several form letters, No. 110–47 (October 3, 2007). Chairman 151), and only 9 of these currently one of which included hundreds of Don Young has said that ‘‘reforms to engage in Indian gaming. Of course, signatories. expedite the process and to upgrade the Congress has enacted a detailed law Federally recognized tribes from fairness, consistency, and transparency establishing whether trust land is across the country weighed in on the are warranted.’’ H. Hrg. No. 110–47 eligible for gaming. It is set forth in the proposed rule. Tribes such as the Crow (October 3, 2007). Others have Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 Nation, the Stockbridge-Munsee Band of supported the Department’s efforts to (IGRA) and the Department has Mohican Indians, the Seminole Tribe of reform Part 83. For example, Senator promulgated separate regulations Florida, the San Juan Southern Paiute Tim Kaine stated he is ‘‘encouraged by implementing IGRA (25 CFR part 292). Tribe, the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal BIA’s efforts to improve its federal For those 9 tribes that successfully Nation, and the Mashpee Wampanoag recognition process’’ and ‘‘support[s] navigated acknowledgment and Tribe expressed support for the the Department’s efforts to expedite the obtained land in trust, it took, on proposed rule. Other tribes such as the federal recognition process, add average, nearly 10 years after Eastern Band of Cherokee, the transparency, and provide multiple acknowledgment to engage in Indian Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde opportunities for petitioners to engage gaming. Community of Oregon, the Muckleshoot the Department during the decision- The Department sought wide input in Indian Tribe, and the Temecula Band of making process.’’ September 30, 2014, reforming Part 83 and used Luiseno Mission Indians expressed letter from Senator Tim Kaine to extraordinary process. It formed an opposition to and concerns with certain Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs internal workgroup in 2009 to reform proposed changes. Kevin K. Washburn. the process through rulemaking. At a State and local governments also Members of Congress are joined by hearing before the House Subcommittee commented on the proposed rule. States others in criticism of the current on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs in such as Connecticut and numerous regulation. A 2001 GAO Report entitled March of 2013, the Department counties and local governments, such as ‘‘Improvements Needed in Tribal explained the process it would follow in Sonoma County in California, strongly Recognition Process’’ (Nov. 2001), is an pursuing reform and set forth goals. opposed the proposed rule. In contrast, example. The political nature of this After publicly identifying goals of Governor Bullock of Montana strongly work has also drawn scrutiny from the reform of the regulations, the supported the proposed rule. Department’s Office of Inspector Department distributed a ‘‘Discussion The Department reviewed each of the General (‘‘Allegations Involving Draft’’ of revisions to Part 83 in June comments received and has made Irregularities in the Tribal Recognition 2013. In July and August 2013, the several changes to the proposed rule in Process,’’ Report No. 01–I–00329, Feb. Department hosted five consultation response to these comments. The 2002). sessions with federally recognized Despite wide agreement by the public Indian tribes and five public meetings at following is a summary of comments that this process is broken, solutions are various locations across the country. received and the Department’s not obvious because members of the The Department received approximately responses. public have differing perspectives on 350 written comment submissions on A. Criteria the exact nature of the problems. Some the Discussion Draft, which were made reforms are as controversial as the available on its Web site with the 1. Criteria, Generally broken process. Individual decisions are transcripts of each consultation and The criteria in the proposed and final highly contested. Of the 51 petitions public meeting. After considering all rule are set out at § 83.11. Many VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37865 commenters stated that the proposed The proposed rule would have determination on a criterion may be rule would ‘‘weaken’’ the criteria. These provided that the Department will apply evaluated differently in light of commenters stated that the criteria the criteria ‘‘consistently with threshold substantial countervailing evidence would be weakened by: Allowing for a standards utilized to acknowledge other showing significantly different presumption of continuous existence tribes under this part.’’ The final rule at historical facts and circumstances. from 1789/first sustained contact to § 83.10(a)(4) adopts a modified version However, such affirmative significant 1934; weakening listed items of of this provision, to better ensure countervailing evidence does not evidence and adding new, potentially consistency with precedent, which necessarily preclude a positive invalid forms of evidence; increasing expressly provides that if there is a prior determination. It remains the allowable gaps in evidence; and deleting decision finding that evidence or Department’s responsibility to consider the requirement for external methodology was sufficient to satisfy such evidence and provide an identifications. Further, these any particular criterion in a previous explanation of the significant commenters asserted that the changes petition, the Department will find that countervailing evidence when deciding would: Exceed the Department’s evidence or methodology sufficient to whether a criterion has been satisfied. authority; be inconsistent with satisfy the criterion for a present Absent significant affirmative longstanding precedent; redefine tribes petitioner. In other words, a petitioner countervailing evidence, if the evidence as racial, rather than political, entities; today satisfies the standards of evidence or methodology was deemed sufficient allow appropriation of tribes’ identities; or baseline requirements of a criterion if in a previous positive decision on a violate the trust responsibility; and fail that type or amount of evidence was criterion, it will be deemed sufficient for to meet the stated goals for efficiency or sufficient in a previous decision. These all current and future petitioners for that transparency. prior decisions on criteria provide criterion. Commenters also specifically argued examples of how a criterion may be met. The final rule generally does not for and against reliance on different Even decisions finding a criterion was change how different types of evidence types of evidence, including: The met in a final determination that was, are evaluated or weighed, but does add California Indian judgment rolls; oral on the whole, negative, provide certain categories of evidence. In one history; and recognition by courts under examples of how a criterion can be met. instance (criterion (a)), a new category criteria derived from Montoya v. United Decisions finding a criterion was met in of evidence is allowed to address issues States, 180 U.S. 261 (1900). Some positive final determinations are of fairness. In other instances, categories requested the addition of language that especially compelling, however (see of evidence are added to clarify the evaluation of the criteria will be based decisions such as those issued for the Department’s past practice in accepting on the totality of the circumstances and Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and evidence and/or consideration of such evidence (e.g., Indian educational Chippewa Indians, the Jamestown institutions may be evidence of the specific circumstances. Some S’Klallam Tribe, the Tunica-Biloxi commented that while the basic criteria Community criterion; land set aside by Indian Tribe, the Death Valley Timbi- a State for the petitioner or collective have not changed, the criteria are sha Shoshone Tribe, the Poarch Band of continually being reinterpreted in a way ancestors of the petitioner that was Creeks, the San Juan Southern Paiute actively used by the community may be that makes them more onerous. Other Tribe of Arizona, Mohegan Indian Tribe, commenters described the impacts to evidence of Community or Political the Jena Band of Choctaw Indians, etc.). Influence/Authority criteria; and localities and others of weakening the For example, evidence and methodology criteria and argued that the ‘‘broken’’ historian and anthropologist records as found sufficient by the Department to parts of the acknowledgment process evidence of the Descent criterion). satisfy criterion (e) for tribes such as the could be fixed through better staffing These do not reflect substantive changes Poarch Band of Creeks or Death Valley and clearer guidelines, rather than in the criteria and includes evidentiary Timbi-sha Shoshone Tribe is sufficient changing the criteria. categories that might have been Response: In light of comments under these final regulations for any considered previously; this change is expressing concern that the proposed subsequent petitioner. To be sure, some simply meant to be explicit about the rule would weaken the criteria, the final successful petitioners have provided value and relevance of certain evidence. rule minimizes changes to the criteria, more evidence to satisfy a particular The final rule does not incorporate as described below. Instead, and in light criterion than other successful language regarding the totality of the of comments about the increasingly petitioners. However, the fact that a circumstances and evidence because the burdensome application of the criteria, successful petitioner may have vastly rule already provides the parameters it works to ensure consistent application exceeded a baseline threshold of a within which the Department will across time. Given that the criteria have particular criterion does not raise the evaluate the criteria. See § 83.10(b) remained substantively unchanged bar for subsequent petitioners. Section (providing that the Department will since 1978, the amount and type of 83.10(a)(4) ensures that the basic criteria apply the criteria in context with the evidence that was sufficient to satisfy a are not reinterpreted to apply any more history, regional differences, culture, particular criterion in 1980 remains onerously than they have been applied and social organization of the petitioner, sufficient today. Our review of the to a previous petitioner that has etc.). The proposed rule would have Department’s prior decisions confirms satisfied that criterion. provided that the Department will apply that, as a matter of both logic and Obviously, if there is significant the criteria ‘‘consistently with threshold fairness, evidence that has supported actual countervailing evidence with standards utilized to acknowledge other positive findings as to particular criteria regard to a petition that was not present tribes under this part.’’ The final rule in the past should support similar in a previous positive determination on adopts a modified version of this findings for present petitioners. Any a criterion, the Department may provision, to better ensure consistency other petitioning group that meets the consider whether the prior positive with precedent, which states that if same rigorous criteria should be decision provides an appropriate there is a prior decision finding recognized. Petitioning groups ought not precedent. Thus, for example, evidence evidence or methodology to be face criteria that are interpreted more or methodology that seems similar to sufficient to satisfy any particular narrowly. that applied in a prior positive criterion previously, the Department VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37866 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations shall find it sufficient to satisfy the itself as an Indian entity addresses this Commenters also objected to requiring a criterion for a present petitioner. concern. With regard to concerns that a showing of existence at only one point petitioner may have mostly, or even prior to 1900. These commenters found 2. Criterion (a) only, self-identifications rather than the deletion of the requirement for a. Proposed Elimination of Current external identifications, the Department external identification criteria in favor ‘‘Criterion (a)’’ and Requirement for does not find these concerns of a brief narrative showing that the External Observer as an Independent compelling. An entity that descends group existed as a tribe at some point Criterion from a historical tribe and exists ‘‘alarming.’’ The existing criterion (a) required that continuously as a community with Response: As discussed above, the external observers identify the political influence/authority is still a Department has decided to retain the petitioner as an Indian entity; the tribe, regardless of whether records of current criterion (a), with some proposed rule would have eliminated external observers identify the tribe as adjustments, in lieu of the proposed this requirement for evidence of an Indian entity. But the tribe’s criterion (a). See final § 83.11(a). The external observations. Many who continued view of itself as an Indian comments we received on the proposed commented supported the proposed entity is essential. To the extent the criterion (a) expressed concern that the elimination of this requirement as an commenters are concerned that a proposed criterion was not specific independent criterion because outside petitioner could recreate past self- enough, but we received no suggestions assessments of Indian tribes may be identifications, the final criterion (a) for specifications that would address all based on folk beliefs about requires contemporaneous self- commenters’ concerns. In attempting to identifications, just as external ‘‘Indianness.’’ Moreover, it has been identify revisions that would identifications must be said to be unfair to rely on external sufficiently address all commenters’ contemporaneous. identification because tribal groups concerns with the proposed criterion The Department believes that it is (a), the Department determined that the were sometimes forced into hiding to appropriate to retain the 1900 starting avoid persecution by outside groups. current criterion (a) should be retained date for requiring evidence of with a revision to allow for the Commenters noted that external identifications on a substantially identifications have been inaccurate in petitioner’s own records to serve as continuous basis for the reasons stated evidence. the past, as shown by the fact that in the 1994 rulemaking. See 59 FR 9280, outsiders have denied or 9286 (February 25, 1994). While the 3. Criterion (e)—Descent mischaracterized the Indian entity of requirements of this criterion consume a. Requirement for 80 Percent Descent many currently federally recognized both petitioner and Departmental time, tribes. Some commenters pointed out we have determined the final rule We received comments both in that, because no petitioner has been strikes a balance, taking into account the support of and in opposition to the denied solely on this criterion, it is of comments advocating substantial proposed requirement at proposed limited value and yet has consumed changes to or elimination of criterion (a) § 83.11(e) that petitioners show that at considerable petitioner and Department and those comments that advocated no least 80 percent of their membership time and resources. Several other change. descends from a historical tribe. Those commenters opposed eliminating this in support stated that using a criterion, stating that any petitioner that b. Proposed Criterion (a), Requiring quantitative measure is appropriate here truly qualifies as a tribe should be able Narrative of Pre-1900 Existence because petitioners have lists of their to prove external identifications, and Many commenters requested members. Some stated that using 80 that tribal existence should not be based clarification of the proposed criterion (a) percent is appropriate for determining completely on self-assertion and self- at proposed § 83.11(a), specifically Indian ancestry in general, but not for identification or on historical material asking for clarification on what showing a connection to a specific the petitioner developed through its evidence would be sufficient; whether historical tribe because records that own resources. the phrase ‘‘generally identified’’ identify historical tribes do not contain Response: The Department agrees indicates external identifications are censuses of the members. Some with commenters’ concerns regarding still required; whether ‘‘a point in time’’ commenters, including some federally the unfairness of having an independent means any point in time chosen by recognized tribes, strongly opposed any requirement for external identifications. petitioner, or chosen by the Department; percentage less than 100 percent, and The Department also considered other whether 1900 is a general benchmark or opposed using 80 percent because it commenters’ concerns with eliminating definitive date; and what standard the could effectively allow for a petitioner the criterion, which stated that some Department will use to judge this with a membership of 20 percent non- external evidence is appropriate to criterion. Indians. A few commenters stated that avoid a situation where a group relies Some commenters opposed the the percentage requirement should be merely on its own self-assertion that it proposed criterion (a), stating that it less than 80 percent to account for lack is, and has been, an Indian tribe. The does not meet the requirement for of records. final rule retains the current criterion showing continuous political existence Response: The final criterion (e) (a), requiring identifications on a during historical times, that the remains substantively unchanged from substantially continuous basis since ‘‘slightest connection’’ to a historical the current criterion (e). While the final 1900, with an adjustment to accept tribe prior to 1900 and existence of a rule does not include a percentage, this identifications by the petitioner in the contemporary tribal organization would criterion will continue to be applied same manner as we would accept be sufficient under this criterion, and consistently with previous decisions. identifications by external sources. that it does not sufficiently guard Evidence and methodology sufficient in While there may be factors affecting against a petitioner claiming a positive decisions on criterion (e), such how outsiders view an Indian entity, recognized tribe’s identity and history. as Tunica-Biloxi Indian Tribe, Poarch allowing evidence from the Indian These commenters also stated the Band of Creeks, and Death Valley entity itself for a particular time period criterion lends itself to politics-based Timbi-sha Shoshone Tribe, will to demonstrate that the entity identified rather than merits-based decisions. continue to be sufficient to satisfy VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37867 criterion (e) under these final provided consistent with any previous approach codifies past practice. For regulations. The Department aims to positive finding of this criterion. example, in acknowledging the Death maintain consistency in applying the Valley Timbi-Sha Shoshone Band, the d. Evidence in Support of Descent baseline utilized to satisfy the criteria. Department relied on Departmental rolls The 80 percent threshold was not We received several comments either and censuses: intended to be a change in policy; it requesting clarification of the phrase ‘‘most recent evidence’’ in proposed The Timbi-Sha Shoshone Band provided a merely attempted to codify this existing total of three rolls and censuses, the current Departmental practice. Yet a number of criterion (e) or opposing the membership list dated March 1978, and 1933 commenters expressed concern both for requirement to rely on the ‘‘most recent and 1936 censuses prepared by the Bureau of and against codifying this number, so evidence’’ as limiting the Department’s Indian Affairs.... Rolls prepared from the rule does not incorporate the 80 ability to examine or rely on earlier, and 1916 through 1940 by the Bishop and Carson percent threshold. Instead, the criterion more probative, evidence. Commenters agency staffs were also researched, as was the is satisfied if the petitioner provides also stated concerns with the language roll prepared pursuant to the Act of evidence and utilizes methodology stating that rolls prepared by the September 21, 1968, for the distribution of consistent with any previous positive Secretary or at the direction of Congress judgment funds awarded to the Indians of California. All data from these rolls and determination under this criterion. ‘‘satisfy’’ the criterion. Specifically, these commenters stated that that the censuses confirm that virtually all of the b. Descent as a Race-Based Criterion members of the group have or can proposed rule would not allow the conclusively establish Shoshone Indian Some commenters stated that Department to evaluate the reliability of ancestry. We conclude, therefore, that the criterion (e) should be deleted because rolls prepared by the Secretary or at the membership of the Death Valley Timbi-Sha it is race-based, while tribal direction of Congress, and pointed out Shoshone Band of Indians consists of membership is a political classification. that in some cases, such rolls may be individuals who have established Response: The Department recognizes inaccurate or fail to identify tribal descendancy from historical Shoshone bands descent from a political entity (tribe or affiliation. Commenters also had in the Death Valley area which combined and tribes) as a basis from which evaluations suggestions for other categories of functioned as a single autonomous entity, of identification, community, and evidence or requested use of ‘‘best and that the band has met the criterion in 25 political influence/authority under genealogical evidence.’’ We received CFR 54.7(e). criteria (a), (b), and (c) may reveal comments both in support of and Proposed Finding at 6–7. Rather than continuation of that political entity. opposition to using historian and requiring ‘‘best genealogical evidence,’’ Evidence sufficient to satisfy (e) is anthropologist conclusions as evidence which may impose an additional burden utilized as an approximation of tribal of descent. Commenters stated their on the petitioner, the Department will membership before 1900. concerns that affidavits are not reliable continue its long standing practice of for ancestry, unless they are c. Defining ‘‘Historical’’ To Be Before evaluating evidence under the standards contemporaneous records. 1900 established in this regulation. Response: The final rule provides for Criterion (e) also maintains the use of Commenters opposed, and others evaluating the most recent evidence records created by historians and supported, defining ‘‘historical’’ to be prior to 1900. Documents that are anthropologists identifying the tribe in before 1900. Some requested erroneous or fraudulent are not historical times or historians’ and clarification for the beginning date of evidence and thus will not satisfy this anthropologists’ conclusions drawn the ‘‘historical’’ period. Some criterion. The final rule also places great from historical records. This approach is commenters also requested clarification weight on applicable tribal Federal rolls consistent with past practice. For of ‘‘historical tribe’’ to require that the prepared at the direction of Congress or example, in Tunica-Biloxi the tribe functioned autonomously, and to by the Department. Based on the Department relied on the following ensure that a petitioner does not claim Department’s expertise, any historical records to satisfy (e): the same historical tribe as that claimed inaccuracies of such tribal rolls are de by a federally recognized tribe. minimis. Many federally recognized The work of anthropologists in the late Response: The final rule defines 1800’s and early 1900’s and a list prepared tribes rely on tribal Federal rolls as base by a representative of the Bureau in the ‘‘historical’’ to be before 1900, membership rolls and the Department’s 1930’s were used in conjunction with other maintaining the same approach as the approach here regarding such rolls for recorded documents, the 1900 Federal proposed rule but clarifying that the this process is consistent with this tribal Population census, and testimony from a year 1900 is not included in the practice. While no human endeavor is 1915 civil court suit to establish Indian ‘‘historical’’ period. The final rule does perfect, tribal rolls created by the ancestry in the historical tribes. not identify the beginning date for the Department were often prepared in Tunica-Biloxi Proposed Finding at 4. ‘‘historical’’ period, but it necessarily person by a Departmental representative must be some date prior to 1900. The or team to promote accuracy. The final Five sources were available which final rule does not identify the rule clarifies that the roll must have identified current tribal members, their relations, and/or ancestors as Indian: Ruth M. beginning date for the historical period been prepared for a tribe. In contrast, Underhill’s ‘‘Report on a visit to Indian to be 1789 or the period of earliest rolls of the Indians of California for groups in Louisiana, Oct. 15–25, 1938’’(6); sustained non-Indian settlement and/or claims payments would not satisfy James Owen Dorsey’s list of ‘‘Biloxis in governmental presence in the local area, § 83.11(e)(1) because those rolls were Raipides Parish, La.’’ of 1892 and 1893; the whichever is later, because these not prepared for specific tribes, but 1900 Federal Population Census; pre-1900 beginning dates would not achieve any rather descendants from an Indian who church records submitted as genealogical reduction in the documentary or lived in the State on June 1, 1852. If documentation; and, testimony taken in the administrative burden. The term Departmental tribal censuses or rolls are Sesostris Youchican v. Texas and Pacific ‘‘autonomous’’ has been reinserted in not available, the Department will then Railway Company court case in 1915. the definitions and political influence/ look to other documents, as needed. For Tunica Biloxi Genealogical Report at 3. authority criterion to require example, the rolls of the Indians of We have also clarified the existing autonomous functioning since 1900, California may be provided as evidence practice that affidavits must be based on which is satisfied if evidence is to be evaluated under § 83.11(e)(2). This first-hand knowledge. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37868 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations e. Review of Descent comments received, a number of dates 1900 Many commenters suggested tying were suggested for consideration. For example, there are several turning The Department received a number of review of criterion (e) together with the comments relating to 1900 as a start proposed criterion (a), which required a points in Indian policy other than the passage of the IRA. The Department also date. Some of those that commented narrative of existence prior to 1900, to advocating for no change did note that provide context for the historical tribe. considered using 1871 (the end of the treaty-making era), 1880 (Special Census earlier time periods were important for Response: Because the final rule review and that if a change were to be of Indians), or 1887 (passage of the retains an amended version of the made, the Department should begin its General Allotment Act and beginning of current criterion (a), rather than the review at least since 1900. For example, the allotment era), as possible starting proposed criterion (a), these comments the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe expressed dates. We summarize below our are no longer applicable. concern with not evaluating the time response to various start dates proposed 4. 1934 Starting Date for Evaluating period between 1900 and 1925. by commenters during the rulemaking Criteria (b) (Community) and (c) Similarly, on this point, the Suquamish process. (Political Influence/Authority) Tribe stated that ‘‘[t]he position The Department may have received 1934 advanced by the Department and more comments on the proposed implicitly agreed to by Congress is that The Department received a number of starting date for evaluating criterion (b) an applicant must establish proof of a comments supporting the use of 1934 as (community) and criterion (c) (political continuous political existence since at set forth in the proposed rule. Legal influence/authority), at proposed least 1900.’’ The Rural County scholars, a number of federally § 83.11(b) and (c), than any other part of Representatives of California, an the rule. Several supported the recognized tribes, and others provided organization of thirty-four rural counties proposed starting date of 1934, particularly strong comments in support in California comprising nearly half of including renowned legal scholars, the of the Department’s use of 1934. In the the land mass of the state, commented Seminole Tribe of Florida, tribes that nearly 40 years that the Department has that ‘‘at the very least, the standard have successfully completed the utilized the Part 83 process, no should be set at 1900 which is process, and Senator Tim Kaine. Those petitioner has satisfied the seven consistent with other thresholds in the opposed to this starting date, such as the mandatory criteria after 1934, but failed rule and requiring evidence that the Connecticut Congressional delegation the criteria prior to 1934. The start date tribe, at a minimum, pre-dates the and Governor, local governments, and of 1934 is compelling also because Indian Reorganization Act.’’ Similarly, tribes such as the Eastern Band of groups who satisfy these criteria from the Town of Kent advocated for no Cherokee and Muckleshoot Indian 1934 maintained community and change but asserted that ‘‘at a minimum Tribe, generally stated that it cannot be political authority for decades and they should be amended to require the assumed that tribes existed across generations with little external petitioning group to demonstrate that it continuously from first sustained non- incentive, given that the Part 83 process has comprised a distinct community Indian contact or 1789, whichever is did not come into existence until 1978. and exercised political authority from later, to 1934. These commenters stated Indeed, in 1998, the House Committee historical times to the present. With the that beginning evaluation in 1934 would on Resources reported out favorably definitional change of ‘‘historic’’ from ‘‘first sustained contact’’ to ‘‘1900’’ (see significantly weaken the criteria, allow H.R. 1154, which would have utilized proposed Section 83.1), the burden recently formed groups to obtain 1934 as a starting date under the upon petitioning groups will have acknowledgment, and be inconsistent criteria. While the bill did not garner the already been substantially mitigated and with precedent. They also disagreed two-thirds votes required to suspend the with the Department’s basis for using with far less risk that groups who did rules and pass H.R. 1154, bi-partisan not maintain tribal existence prior to 1934, stating that there are several leadership on tribal issues voted in turning points in Indian policy other 1934 will be entitled to recognition as support of suspending the rules and Indian tribes.’’ than passage of the Indian passing the bill, including Reorganization Act (IRA) and that the Representatives Young, Pombo, Kildee, In response to these comments as well IRA had no effect on a tribe’s existence. and Rahall. as based on the Department’s experience Several commenters suggested moving in administering the Part 83 regulations, the 1934 date to 1900 to be consistent While opposition to a start date of the final rule adopts the date of 1900 as with the definition of ‘‘historical.’’ A 1934 is based on a perception that a the starting point for criteria (b) and (c). few commenters advocated for earlier or 1934 start date would significantly As discussed earlier in this preamble, later dates. weaken these two criteria, we note that there are number of factors that support Response: The Department considered 1934 is the year the Indian the use of 1900. As explained in the the full range of comments from those Reorganization Act was passed, which 1994 rulemaking that established a 1900 advocating for no change to those was a turning point in the Federal starting point for criterion (a), use of this advocating for a date later than 1934. Of government’s relationship with Indian date avoids some of the problems with course, as a practical matter, it bears tribes. However, in determining the historical records in earlier periods noting that under the current appropriate date for (b) and (c), the while retaining the requirement for regulations 1789 does not uniformly Department concludes that, to maintain substantially continuous community apply to all petitioners. Depending on public faith in the Part 83 process, 1934 and political influence/authority. The the location of the petitioner, first is not appropriate. Wide opposition to past 20 years has demonstrated that use sustained contact for some petitioners the 1934 date suggests that some people of 1900 for criterion (a) has maintained may be the mid-1800’s. Of course, if the would question the rigor and integrity of the substantive rigor of the process and Petitioner demonstrates previous the Department’s conclusions if the using 1900 for (b) and (c) will provide unambiguous Federal acknowledgment, Department required less than a uniformity for these three criteria and to the review period for (b) and (c) can be century’s review of these two particular all petitioners regardless of where they well after 1934. In considering the criteria. are located. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37869 1900 is also squarely during the adjustment of the review period for that reliance on States’ determinations allotment and assimilation period of these two criteria. is improper, that Cohen looked to federal policy that was particularly Based on public input and collective rights as reflective of a difficult for tribal governments. Indeed, expressions of concern, the Department Federal relationship after already leading up to 1900 the United States has focused at this time on consistency determining that a tribe exists, and that continued to engage in military conflict with other parts of Part 83, reducing the the provision is discriminatory to with tribes in tragedies such as the documentary burden, and improving Connecticut. Wounded Knee Massacre of 1890 and document availability for the new A few commenters suggested limiting the 1898 Battle of Sugar Point. Simply starting date and, as such, the final rule this provision to when the State agrees put, there was little benefit and some relies on 1900 as a starting point for the reservation does, in fact, risk to openly functioning as a tribal criteria (b) (community) and (c) demonstrate community and political community and government in 1900. (political influence/authority). See final authority, or the petitioner demonstrates Under this final rule, petitioners will § 83.11(b) and (c). It is the Department’s it has maintained on the reservation need to provide evidence of community intention to preserve the rigor and rates or patterns of social interaction and political authority beginning in integrity of the process and the public’s that exist broadly among members of the 1900. If evidence is not available trust in the legitimacy of tribes that have entity and shared or cooperative labor or beginning in 1900, a petitioner may successfully navigated the rigorous other economic activity among submit evidence that pre-dates 1900. standards in Part 83. Using 1900 as a members. The Department further notes that starting date will accomplish the goals Commenters also requested numerous Congressional bills, from time to time, of consistency and efficiency while clarifications, including but not limited have utilized a starting date for preserving substantive rigor by requiring to, whether ‘‘collective ancestors’’ evaluation of criteria (b) and (c) to begin well over a 100-year period of requires holding land for a group rather in 1900. For example, in 2004 under the documentation. than individuals, whether the petitioner leadership of Senate Indian Affairs 5. State Reservations and U.S.-Held must have had authority over the land, Committee Chairman Ben Nighthorse Land in Criteria (b) and (c) and whether public domain and Campbell, the Senate Committee on The proposed rule stated that a individual allotments are included. Indian Affairs reported S. 297 favorably petitioner would satisfy criterion (b) Other commenters requested various out of the Committee. S. 297 provided (community) and criterion (c) (political items of evidence be added as a third for a start date of 1900. influence/authority) if it maintained a category that would satisfy criteria (b) 1887 State reservation since 1934 or if the and (c), including individual allotments, United States held land for the establishment of Indian schools, and While the Department received very petitioner at any time since 1934. See participation in treaty negotiations or few suggestions for 1887, many of the proposed § 83.11(b)(3) and (c)(3). land and water claims litigation before comments asserted that the Department Commenters in support of this provision the Indian Claims Commission. should utilize a starting date when there stated that it is consistent with Felix Response: The final rule does not was widespread discrimination for Cohen’s thinking in the mid-1930’s that adopt the approach in the proposed rule being a tribe or Indian. The Eastern a reservation or Federal land holding is that a State reservation held Band of Cherokee expressed strong a formalization of collective rights in continuously since 1934 or Federal land opposition to any change from 1789 or Indian land and results in cultural held for a group at any point after 1934 time of first non-Indian contact to the continuation of the tribe. Commenters satisfies (b) and (c). However, tribes present, stating: opposed this provision for several with State reservations will most likely It makes no sense to use the date of passage reasons. Among them were that the have additional evidence of political of the IRA as the starting point for showing existence of a reservation or Federal- influence/authority, as well as continuous tribal existence. Rather, a year held land is not a proxy for community community. We note that under the pre-dating the enactment of the policy of and political influence/authority. States regulations, evidence that the group has allotment (1887) and assimilation aimed at may establish reservations for reasons been treated by the Federal Government destroying tribal governments would be more unrelated to the tribe’s community or as having collective rights in tribal lands appropriate. political influence/authority (e.g., (i.e., the United States held land for the Eastern Band of Cherokee Nation tourism, parks) and, at most, the fact benefit of the group) or in funds Comments at 5. Utilization of 1900 as a that land was put aside for the group demonstrates previous Federal start date is responsive to this comment. could be evidence of the group’s acknowledgment. This evidence has 1900 is within a period of time when existence at that point in time only, but been added to the list of evidence federal policy in favor of allotment and is not evidence of the group’s continued supporting previous Federal assimilation was explicitly aimed at existence without additional evidence, acknowledgment in final § 83.12(a). destroying tribal governments. as the petitioner may not have been However, under no circumstance may a active in maintaining the reservation. petitioner claim a current federally First Sustained Contact or 1789 These commenters further stated that, recognized tribe’s reservation as land The Department considered the even where members live on the that the United States set aside for the comments advocating for no change reserved or set-aside land, that fact does petitioner. Similarly, for purposes of from a starting date of first sustained not provide evidence of an this section, land set aside by the United non-Indian contact or 1789, but organizational structure. Commenters States refers to those lands set aside by determined that the efficiency gains were concerned that under the proposed the Department of the Interior for a from shortening the evaluation period, provisions, descendants of a tribe for group. Any such lands set aside by and factors gleaned from the which a reservation was established, but another federal agency will need to Department’s vast expertise and which ceased operating as a tribe, could continue to be evaluated on a case-by- experience in determining whether to be acknowledged, or that several case basis to determine whether such set acknowledge tribes both prior to and different petitioners may claim the same aside demonstrates previous Federal under the Part 83 regulations, merit reservation. Commenters also asserted acknowledgment. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37870 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations The Department has decided that suggested eliminating the criterion discrimination or other social State reservations, unlike federally-held entirely. distinctions by non-members. This land that demonstrates previous Federal Response: The final rule requires the commenter also commented on the acknowledgment, may generate petitioner to constitute a distinct percentages for definitively showing evidence of community and political community, and provides that the marriage, distinct cultural patterns, etc., influence/authority, but are not petitioner may demonstrate this and suggested it be made clear that determinative for these two criteria. As criterion by showing evidence that a these percentages do not imply that the late Chairman Inouye explained, ‘‘significant and meaningful portion’’ of something close to those percentages is [s]hould the fact that a State has recognized its members constituted a community. needed to establish community absent a tribe for over 200 years be a factor for See final § 83.11(b)(1). While the such a definitive showing. consideration in the acknowledgment proposed rule included a specific Response: The Department has process? I would say definitely yes. How percentage in an attempt to set an determined that it is appropriate to could it be otherwise? Don’t most, if not all, objective standard, in reality, the qualify the evidence with the term of our States want the Federal Government to number of members who must ‘‘significant’’ in these circumstances recognize the official actions of a State constitute a community depends on the because the evidence needs to be Government, when most of our States want historical circumstances faced by the probative of the criterion. Further, an the Federal Government to defer to the sovereign decisions and actions of those petitioner. In practice, there is a range alternative option, a definitive States over the course of their history? I think in which the Department has identified percentage, would be inappropriate the answer to that question would be whether the petitioner’s members are a without a baseline membership list for decidedly in the affirmative. distinct community. As described each period in time (which may not be S. Hrg. 109–91 (2005). There may be a above, those previous determinations available). Because the introductory multitude of circumstances in which a serve as precedent. The rule continues paragraph requires a showing that a State establishes a reservation. to provide that a petitioner ‘‘significant and meaningful’’ portion of Nevertheless, a State reservation may demonstrates both distinct community the petitioner’s members constituted a generate documents or evidence used to and political influence/authority if the distinct community, insertion of the satisfy the categories of evidence petitioner provides evidence that 50 term ‘‘significant’’ for each item of identified in criteria (b) (community) or percent or more of its members satisfy evidence listed is not necessary. See (c) (political influence/authority). See the factors in § 83.11(b)(2). final § 83.11(b). final § 83.11(b)(1)(ix) and (c)(1)(vii). b. Allowing Sampling for Criterion (b) d. Marriages/Endogamy as Evidence of 6. Criterion (b) (Community) Some commenters opposed specifying Community statistically significant sampling as a Several commenters requested a. Using 30 Percent as a Baseline method of demonstrating community clarification of the provisions allowing The current criterion (b) requires a because it is only one of many methods, for marriages to be considered evidence ‘‘predominant portion of the petitioning could be easily manipulated, and has of community, specifically requesting group’’ to comprise a community. The never before been used for criterion (b). that the Department count marriages by proposed rule would provide that the One commenter stated that they individual petitioner member rather petitioner must constitute a community appreciate the clarification that the than by marriage (e.g., if a petitioner has (deleting the phrase ‘‘predominant Department may utilize this method in 100 members and 60 marry within the portion’’), and would provide that the evaluating criterion (b). One commenter petitioner, that should count as 60 petitioner demonstrates the criterion by recommended multi-sampling for use marriages, rather than 30). A few showing two or more forms of evidence on populations with over 10,000 commenters stated that marriages that at least 30 percent of its members members on their current rolls. should not be considered. constituted a community. See proposed Response: There may be Response: The Department has, in § 83.11(b). Several commenters opposed circumstances in which sampling is past practice, counted marriages by this change, saying that it lowers the appropriate. For this reason, the final marriage, but commenters support the requirement for showing a distinct rule retains the proposed allowance for alternative approach—counting by community and defies logic that a group sampling. The final rule adds that the individual petitioner member. Given could be a community when 70 percent sampling must be ‘‘reliable’’ to address that scholarship supports either do not interact. These commenters concerns that sampling could be easily approach, the Department has stated that relying on the voting manipulated; ‘‘reliable’’ is intended to determined in its final rule to change its requirements under the IRA as a basis reflect that the sample must abide by approach to specify counting by for choosing the 30 percent figure is professional sampling methodologies. individual petitioner member, rather misplaced because the IRA was not a See final § 83.11(b). than by marriage. The final rule also measurement of social interaction, and includes the term ‘‘patterns,’’ in c. Deletion of ‘‘Significant’’ in Criterion voting occurred after the Department addition to the existing term ‘‘rates,’’ in (b) already determined the group was a reference to marriages and informal tribe; these commenters also noted that A few commenters said the social interactions, to capture that the adoption of the IRA required a majority evidentiary requirements for paragraph Department’s past practice of looking at vote. Some commenters pointed out that (b)(1) are weakened because the either rates or patterns as indications of no definitive percentage is appropriate proposed rule deleted the word community. See final § 83.11(b)(1). because it would require identification ‘‘significant’’ which qualified some of of all the members at various times, the items of evidence listed (e.g., social e. Indian Schools as Evidence of which may not be possible. relationships, marriages, informal social Community A few commenters supported the interactions). One commenter supported Several commenters stated their proposed change and agreed with the the removal of the ‘‘significant’’ support of the proposal to include as Department’s rationale. A few suggested qualifier and further recommended evidence of community that children of lowering the percentage further to removing the qualifier ‘‘strong’’ from petitioner’s members from a geographic account for historical realities. One § 83.11(b)(1)(v), discussing patterns of area were placed in Indian boarding VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37871 schools or other Indian educational a continuous fashion in proving Indian and whether enrollment evidence is institutions. See proposed identity and continuous community. required for each year. A commenter § 83.11(b)(1)(ix). Several commenters Response: The Department agrees that stated that review of this criterion opposed this proposal on the basis that: language is an important indication of should account for the history of racial (1) Relying on Indian educational community and is often a binding force prejudices, which often caused people institutions conflicts with past in a community. The regulations to self-identify in various ways. Departmental determinations; (2) continue to list ‘‘language’’ as evidence Response: The replacement of ‘‘most attendance of children from a of community, and continue to provide of’’ with ‘‘at least 50 percent’’ is not a ‘‘geographic area’’ is not evidence of a that if at least 50 percent of the significant change to the social community corresponding to a specific petitioner’s members maintain distinct institution evidence. The percentage is tribe because many children were cultural patterns such as language, the included for petitioners’ guidance as a placed in schools based on blood petitioner satisfies criterion (b) more definitive threshold than ‘‘most quantum rather than tribal affiliation (community). No change to the rule is of.’’ No change is required in response and non-Indian children often attended needed in response to this comment. to comments opposing reliance on Indian schools. One commenter noted See final § 83.11(b)(1)(vii), (2)(iii). members residing in a ‘‘geographical that this provision is essentially a third- g. Nomenclature as Evidence of area’’ because this evidence is merely party identification of whether someone Community one of several items of evidence is a tribal member and, as such, should petitioners may offer; those who do not be deleted. Several commenters requested reside in a geographical area are not clarification that historical references Some commenters requested penalized. The provision in § 83.10 that used to identify the petitioner should clarifications that the rule must require the Department will review each not weigh negatively against Indian petition in context with the history, that agency records refer to the identity if they racially misidentify, community in describing actions to regional differences, culture, and social disparage, and/or deprecate the organization of the petitioner, addresses place children in schools or that the petitioner. Several commenters school had been established exclusively the remaining comments on criterion endorsed the proposed provision (b). for education of Indian children from recognizing that names or petitioner’s community. A few identifications by outside entities may 7. Criterion (c)(Political Influence/ comments advocated allowing as change over time. Authority) evidence of community any records that Response: The Department does not a. Bilateral Political Relationship show that children from a specifically weigh references negatively against identified Indian community were sent Indian identity if they racially A few commenters requested to public schools with Federal funds. misidentify, disparage, or deprecate the clarification in the rule that no bilateral One commenter requested that this item petitioner; rather, the Department may political relationship is now required of evidence alone suffice for the purpose rely upon these references to prove a and/or that language from the proposed of determining criterion (e) (descent). distinct community. This reflects the rule preamble (at 79 FR 30769, stating Response: In response to commenters’ way the Department has reviewed that political influence or authority does concerns that placement in an Indian historical references identifying not mean that petitioner’s members boarding school or other Indian petitioners in past decisions. must have actively participated in the educational institution may not political process or mechanism), be necessarily reflect a distinct community, h. Other Evidence of Community inserted into the rule. Several the final rule clarifies that the Under proposed § 83.11(b)(2)(iv), commenters stated that the requirement Department relies upon this evidence to community may be shown by evidence for bilateral political relationships the extent that other supporting of distinct community social should be retained in practice and made documentation, pieced together with the institutions encompassing at least 50 explicit in the rule because it has always school evidence, shows the existence of percent of the members. The phrase ‘‘at been a fundamental part of the a community. See final § 83.11(b)(1)(ix). least 50 percent’’ was substituted for the Department’s evaluation of criterion (c), This codifies how the Department word ‘‘most’’ in the current version. is required by Federal court decisions, currently examines school evidence. In Commenters opposed replacing ‘‘most’’ and prevents a finding of political the past, the Department has issued with ‘‘at least 50 percent’’ as no longer influence/authority if petitioners have decisions relying upon boarding school strong enough to demonstrate self-appointed leaders without records as evidence of community community by itself without further followers. because there was corroborating evidence. Others opposed relying on Response: The comments revealed evidence to support that the school members residing in a ‘‘geographical different understandings of the meaning records were indicative of a community, area’’ as evidence under proposed of the term ‘‘bilateral political while in others, the Department found § 83.11(b)(2)(i) because some currently relationship.’’ The Department has that boarding school records were not recognized tribes that are landless could required, as part of a showing of sufficient because there was no not meet this requirement and such political influence/authority, that there corroborating evidence to indicate a evidence does not account for active be some activity between tribal leaders community. The Department has armed service members. Some opposed and membership regarding issues that concluded that boarding school records the criterion in general as archaic in the petitioner’s membership considers can be highly relevant when light of the assimilation of American important. The Department has not corroborated by other evidence. Indians since 1830. Some commenters required a formal political organization stated that flexibility should be allowed or that a certain percentage of members f. Language as Evidence of Community for California tribes, who were vote. Indeed, the percentage of citizens Several commenters stated that identified collectively as ‘‘Mission who vote in Federal, State, tribal and greater evidentiary weight should be Indians’’ rather than a specific tribe. A local elections can be quite small. given to communities that have few commenters also requested Accordingly, comments to change the maintained their indigenous language in clarifications of ‘‘social relationship,’’ regulations and require ‘‘bilateral VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37872 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations political relationship’’ in (c) are not c. Evidence requested that the Department examine adopted. The petitioner may satisfy (c) Some commenters requested adding gaps in the context of the totality of the with evidence of activity between tribal references to attorney contracts, claims circumstances on a case-by-case basis. leaders and membership regarding filings and other court cases as evidence Finally, others such as Connecticut issues that the petitioner’s membership of political influence or authority. Attorney General George Jepsen considers important. A petitioner will Response: The items of evidence commented that evidentiary gaps satisfy (c) in this final rule if it provides listed in criterion (c)(1) are examples, should continue to be evaluated on a similar evidence or methodology as was and are not exhaustive. See final case-by-case basis. deemed sufficient by the Department in § 83.11(c)(1)(i)–(viii). Actions by a Response: The Department has a previous decision on this criterion. petitioner’s leaders with regard to decided not to change the definition set Nor is it necessary to reinsert this attorney contracts, claims filings, and forth in the previous rule. The previous phrase into criterion (f) (at § 83.11(f)) other court cases may provide evidence rule allows some evidentiary gaps because this criterion already requires, of political influence/authority. The because evidentiary material may not be available for certain periods of time, where membership is composed final rule also clarifies that a formal even though a petitioner has principally of members of a federally ‘‘government-to-government’’ continuously existed. Instead, the final recognized tribe, that the petitioner relationship is not required between the rule expressly provides that evidence or function as a separate politically federally recognized tribe and petitioner, as long as a ‘‘significant’’ methodology that was sufficient to autonomous community under criteria satisfy any particular criterion (b) and (c). relationship is present. See final § 83.11(c)(1)(vi). previously will be sufficient to satisfy b. ‘‘Show a Continuous Line of Entity the criterion for a present petitioner. Leaders and a Means of Selection or 8. ‘‘Substantially Continuous Basis, Likewise, any gaps in evidence that Acquiescence by a Majority of the Without Substantial Interruption’’ were allowable to satisfy any particular Entity’s Members’’ The proposed rule would have criterion previously will be allowable to defined ‘‘substantial interruption’’ to satisfy the criterion for a present The proposed criterion (c) adds to the mean a gap of 20 years or less, unless petitioner. A petitioner under these list of evidence (of which petitioner a 20-year or longer gap is reasonable rules will satisfy a criterion if that type must provide two or more items), that given the history and petitioner’s or amount of evidence was sufficient for the petitioner has a ‘‘continuous line of circumstances. See proposed a positive decision on that criterion (see, entity leaders and a means of selection § 83.10(b)(5). Some commenters pointed e.g., determination in decisions such as or acquiescence by a majority of the out the typographical error, that this the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and entity’s members.’’ See proposed should have defined ‘‘without Chippewa Indians, the Jamestown § 83.7(c)(1)(viii). A few commenters substantial interruption.’’ Several S’Klallam Tribe, the Tunica-Biloxi opposed this proposed language stating commenters supported the proposal Indian Tribe, the Death Valley Timbi- that this requirement is less stringent because it would add clarity and, when sha Shoshone Tribe, the Poarch Band of than the requirement for having leaders there is evidence before and after such Creeks, the San Juan Southern Paiute and followers interact politically on gaps, would add fairness. Two Tribe of Arizona, the Jena Band of issues of mutual importance. commenters said 20 years is too short, Choctaws, and the Mohegan Tribe of Commenters were also concerned that if because it is less than one generation Indians of Connecticut). Many previous ‘‘continuous’’ is interpreted to allow for and may not account for the affirmative Federal acknowledgment decisions had a 20-year gap in this context, a measures taken to eradicate tribes. gaps of evidence and a one-size-fits-all approach will not reflect the unique significant time gap would be allowed Several commenters said 20 years is histories of petitioners and the regions for this item of evidence. A few too long, stating that it is ‘‘patently in which they reside. The Department commenters that supported this item of unreasonable’’ to allow 20-year or recognizes that there are circumstances evidence stated that it should reflect longer gaps in evidence when the in which gaps considerably longer than that a majority of adult members need proposed baseline requires only 80 years (evaluating from 1934 forward), as 10 years may be appropriate. For to select or acquiesce, as children have example, some petitioners may have no role in the selection. opposed to the 200+ years under the current regulations. Some interpreted gaps in documentation of political Response: The Department has the provision to allow acknowledgment activity and community in the 1940’s determined that no change to this item of groups who could prove the criteria and 1950’s that are explainable by of evidence is necessary in response to only in 1954, 1974, 1994, and 2014. World War II and the Korean War. comments, because this item These commenters stated that this is a 9. Criterion (f) (Unique Membership) demonstrates political influence/ major reduction in the standard, and authority only in combination with provides no clarity because it allows for a. Criterion (f), in General another item of evidence. The final rule gaps less than or more than 20 years. Criterion (f) (at § 83.11(f)) requires does replace ‘‘majority’’ with These commenters also disputed the that the petitioner’s membership be ‘‘significant number’’ because the entity Department’s assertion that this reflects composed principally of persons who may allow for fewer than a majority of past practice because the current are not members of any federally members to select leaders. See the approach rejects a specific time period recognized Indian tribe. A few discussion in ‘‘Substantially Continuous for an allowable gap. commenters opposed this criterion, Basis, Without Substantial Some commenters requested more stating that it is an imposition into tribal Interruption,’’ below, regarding specification as to what level and time sovereignty by prohibiting dual tribal allowable evidentiary gaps. The final period of evidence is necessary before membership. Commenters noted that rule does not specify that ‘‘adult’’ and after the gap (bookends) and a more tribal memberships may change, and members need to select or acquiesce definitive gap limit, given that the that such changes do not indicate that because petitioners may allow for youth proposed rule allows longer than 20- a tribe ceases to exist (even if ‘‘key participation in some circumstances. year gaps in some circumstances. Others members’’ of the petitioner leave to join VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37873 a federally recognized tribe to obtain process to become a vehicle to allow for petitioners’ members have become services). A commenter suggested acknowledgment of factions of federally members of federally recognized tribes renaming this criterion as something recognized tribes. These commenters to obtain needed services pending the other than ‘‘membership’’ because it is requested that the Department correct Department’s review of a petition. The confusable with criterion (d). Other the rule if criterion (f) is not intended proposed rule attempted to address this commenters suggested clarifying to allow portions of a recognized tribe situation by establishing a blanket whether members must withdraw from to separate. exception. After reviewing the the federally recognized tribe, clarifying Response: Criterion (f) requires that comments and past petitions, the how this criterion discourages the petitioner be a separate politically Department has determined that this splintering, and clarifying ‘‘principally’’ autonomous community since 1900. In exception is not necessary because, if so with a percentage. the past, the Department has many of a petitioner’s members join a Response: The Department has not acknowledged a tribe even though its federally recognized tribe that the changed Criterion (f)’s substantive members had census numbers with a petitioner is then ‘‘composed requirements from the previous rule. federally recognized tribe. Notice of principally’’ of members of the federally The previous rule does not prohibit dual Final Determination That the San Juan recognized tribe (i.e., the petitioner is tribal membership; it requires only that Southern Paiute Tribe Exists as an ‘‘composed principally’’ of members a petitioner’s membership not be Indian Tribe, 54 FR 51502, 51504 with dual membership), then the ‘‘composed principally’’ of persons who (December 15, 1989) (finding that San petitioner may nevertheless be have dual membership. The Department Juan Paiute members were not members acknowledged if it meets criterion (f) as recognizes that tribal memberships may in the Navajo Nation despite having just discussed. The proposed additional change, and that such changes do not Navajo census numbers). Indeed, the exception for petitioners who filed prior indicate that a tribe ceases to exist. This Department may acknowledge a tribe to 2010 is unnecessary because the criterion is intended to prohibit factions even though its members has dual existing exception adequately addresses or portions of federally recognized tribes citizenship in a federally recognized those situations where a petitioner’s from seeking Federal acknowledgment tribe and maintains a bilateral political members join a federally recognized as a separate tribe, unless they have relationship with that tribe if the tribe to obtain services. For this reason, been a politically autonomous petitioner operates as a separate the final rule deletes the proposed community since 1900 (criteria (b) and politically autonomous community on a exception for petitioners who filed prior (c)). The final rule does not define a substantially continuous basis. The to 2010, but retains the intent of the percentage for ‘‘composed principally’’ disqualification for having a bilateral proposed exception by permitting because the appropriate percentage may political relationship in (f) is petitioners whose members have joined vary depending upon the role the unnecessary because criterion (f) federally recognized tribes to obtain individuals play within the petitioner already requires that the petitioner services while their petition is in the and recognized tribe. Even if a function as a politically autonomous queue to still be eligible for petitioner is composed principally of entity. For this reason, the final rule acknowledgment. See final § 83.11(f). members of a federally recognized tribe, implements the proposed deletion of the petitioner may meet this criterion— bilateral political relationship from 10. Criterion (g) (Termination) as long as it satisfies criteria (b) and (c) criterion (f). See final § 83.11(f). A few commenters expressed support and its members have provided written for the proposed change to criterion (g) c. Exception for Members of Petitioners confirmation of their membership in the (at § 83.11(g)), which would put the Who Filed Prior to 2010 petitioner. There is no requirement to burden on the Department to show that withdraw from membership in the For a petitioner who filed a letter of a petitioner was terminated or the federally recognized tribe. The final rule intent or a documented petition prior to subject of legislation forbidding the titles this criterion ‘‘unique 2010, the proposed rule would not Federal relationship. Commenters stated membership’’ in response to the consider as members of a federally this is ‘‘obviously an important comment that the title ‘‘membership’’ recognized tribe, petitioner’s members improvement’’ and ‘‘common sense.’’ A causes confusion. who became members of a federally few commenters objected to the recognized tribe after filing of the proposed amendment because it reduces b. Deletion of Previous Rule’s Provision petition. Several commenters supported the burden on petitioners and is ‘‘not Prohibiting Members From Maintaining this proposed new exception. However, appropriate.’’ One commenter stated a ‘‘Bilateral Political Relationship’’ With nearly all of those who commented on that there should be a process for groups the Federally Recognized Tribe the 2010 cut-off date requested to respond to the Federal Government’s The previous rule at § 83.11(f) clarification of why the date was chosen position on termination and for requires that, if petitioner’s membership or advocated for eliminating the date interested parties to weigh in. is principally composed of members of limitation. See proposed § 83.11(f)(2). Response: In past practice, the a federally recognized tribe, the Several commenters opposed the Department’s legal team reviewed petitioner must show that ‘‘its members exception, stating that it creates the whether the petitioner is subject to do not maintain a bilateral political possibility that portions of a recognized legislation that has terminated or relationship with the acknowledged tribe could separate and become forbidden the Federal relationship, tribe,’’ in addition to showing the acknowledged. Some stated that a case- regardless of the documentation the petitioner is politically autonomous and by-case examination is more appropriate petitioner provided in support of this providing written confirmation of than a blanket exception. Others criterion. Additionally, terminating or membership in petitioner. The proposed requested specifying that a petitioner’s forbidding the relationship is a Federal rule deleted the requirement to show members should sign statements saying action. For these reasons, the that members do not maintain a bilateral they would belong exclusively to the Department has determined that it is political relationship with an petitioner should the petitioner obtain appropriate to clarify explicitly that the acknowledged tribe. Some commenters acknowledgment. burden is on the Department to show opposed this change, stating that it Response: The Department recognizes that a petitioner was terminated or could allow the acknowledgment that there are situations in which forbidden. See final § 83.11(g). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37874 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations Petitioners and interested parties may groups who claim the same historical • Violates Federal law (separation of weigh in on the Federal Government’s tribe could appropriate the federally powers, collateral estoppel, res position on this criterion in response to recognized tribe’s history and that the judicata), is arbitrary and capricious, the PF. shortened time period for showing and exceeds the Department’s authority; community and political influence/ • 11. Splinter Groups Is unnecessary if the regulatory authority would facilitate their revisions truly are not affecting criteria The proposed rule did not revise acknowledgment. A few commenters or changing the standard of proof; provisions addressing ‘‘splinter groups,’’ requested prohibiting splinters from • Is inefficient and administratively which is a subset of membership that historical tribes and State-recognized burdensome; ‘‘separates from the main group.’’ See tribes to prevent subsets of a historical • Undermines finality and certainty, proposed § 83.4(a)(2). Many commenters tribe from being acknowledged (rival disrupting settled expectations; stated that clarification is necessary groups may claim to be descendants of • Is unfair to stakeholders, especially regarding treatment of splinter groups in the historical tribe). those who have already litigated against light of the proposed allowance for re- Response: The final rule does not the unsuccessful original petition; petitioning and proposed revisions to change the way the Department has • Is unfair to other petitioners and criteria. (For example, one commenter handled ‘‘splinter groups.’’ The tribes who may have legitimate speculated that splinter groups each Department will continue to address petitions; could be recognized without actually ‘‘splinter groups’’ with the same rigor it • Is unfair particularly to demonstrating criteria (b) (community) has applied under the existing rules. Connecticut; or (c) (political influence/authority) With regard to splinters of petitioners, • Could result in acknowledgment of simply by pointing to a State the final rule continues to allow for the previously denied petitioners; reservation.) Among the clarifications approach of the 2008 Departmental • Is unnecessary because petitioners requested were what qualifies as a guidance to address conflicting claims can challenge in court instead; and ‘‘splinter group,’’ and whether and to to leadership within a petitioning group • Is unreasonable, especially with what extent splinter groups may be that interfere with OFA’s ability to such a low standard for allowing re- acknowledged. Commenters appeared to conduct business with the group. petitioning. use the term ‘‘splinter group’’ to mean Specifically, the Department may one or more of the following: Groups A few commenters were neutral on re- request additional information from the who splinter from current petitioners; petitioning because ultimately the same petitioner to clarify the situation and groups who splinter from previously individuals who reviewed the original OFA may suspend its review of the denied petitioners; groups who splinter petition would be reviewing the re- from currently federally recognized petition. See 73 FR 30146 (May 23, petition and re-petitioning will require tribes (as evidenced by eligibility for 2008). OFA’s suspension would be a petitioner to obtain resources (hire membership or claiming the same based on the leadership dispute historians, genealogists, e.g.) to go historical tribe); groups who splinter qualifying as an ‘‘administrative through the petitioning process again. from (i.e., are just a portion of) a problem’’ with the petition under Some suggested that any Departmental historical tribe claimed by another § 83.31. employee who was associated with the petitioner or federally recognized tribe; With regard to other types of ‘‘splinter original negative finding should be and groups who splinter from tribes groups,’’ final 83.4 incorporates a cross- precluded from participating in the named in Termination Acts. reference to criterion (f), which review of the re-petition. A few Commenters argued that various types prohibits any petitioner from being requested clarifications on the standard of these groups should or should not be composed principally of members of a for allowing re-petitioning and on the acknowledged. For example, with federally recognized tribe unless the order in which petitions, once re- regard to groups who splinter from petitioner can provide evidence that it petitioning is granted, would be current petitioners, several commenters was an autonomous political reviewed. requested incorporating the procedures community since 1900. The Department Many commenters, including those in the 2008 Directive for dealing with will continue the approach it has who submitted form letters, opposed the splintering petitioners, noting that previously utilized. Final Determination proposed condition that re-petitioning continued leadership disputes hamper of Federal Acknowledgment for the Jena would be allowed only with the consent the evaluation process, and dueling Band of Choctaw Indians, 60 FR 28480 of the opponents to the original petition, petitions from entities that trace (May 31, 1995) (finding the Jena Band which some characterized as the ‘‘third themselves in some fashion to a of Choctaw Indians to be a separate and party veto.’’ These commenters stated common tribal entity have long caused distinct Indian group, first identified by that this condition, among other things: problems, leading to delayed and costly Federal Census in 1880, who descended • Is unfair (favoring third-party petition reviews, intense conflicts, and from the Choctaws who left the interest over correction of injustice), litigation. Commenters also requested a historical Mississippi Choctaws). will deprive a petitioner of even making the case for re-petitioning, and will prohibition against the Department B. Re-Petitioning forcing petitioners into one group. prevent getting to the truth of whether With regard to groups who splinter Numerous commenters stated their the tribe should be acknowledged; from previously denied petitioners, support for allowing re-petitioning, • Treats petitioners unequally; several commenters were concerned stating that it is necessary for equal • Allows for political intervention in that petitioners may be acknowledged protection, appropriate because what should be a fact-driven process; even if they are splinters of previously implementation of the rules has become • Is an illegal delegation of authority denied petitioners or petitioners who more stringent over the years, and may under the Appointment Clause and is claim they are the ‘‘main group’’ and the be legally permissible. See proposed legally unprecedented; previously denied petitioner was the § 83.4(b). • Is illegal for other reasons (under splinter. Numerous commenters were opposed the Fifth Amendment Due Process Federally recognized tribes, in to allowing re-petitioning, stating that Clause, Supremacy Clause, Commerce particular, expressed concern that allowing re-petitioning: Clause) or is arbitrary and capricious; VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37875 • Is based on an invalid justification Allowing for re-petitioning by denied a criterion is met ‘‘if the evidence is (established equities) that fails to petitioners would be unfair to sufficient for a reasonable mind to consider petitioners’ interests; and/or petitioners who have not yet had a conclude that the criterion is met • Is politically motivated by review, and would hinder the goals of viewing the evidence in the light most Connecticut’s influence. increasing efficiency and timeliness by favorable to the petitioner, in the Some commenters suggested imposing the additional workload specific cultural, social, political, and removing the third-party consent associated with re-petitions on the historical context of the tribe and in the condition and instead allowing Department, and OFA in particular. The light of adverse consequences caused by interested parties to participate in the Part 83 process is not currently an Federal policy or actions.’’ Some hearing on whether re-petitioning is avenue for re-petitioning. commenters stated that subjective appropriate. Others suggested third judgment is involved, even with a clear C. Standard of Proof parties be limited to participating in the definition of ‘‘reasonable likelihood.’’ petitioning process, if the re-petitioning Proposed § 83.10(a) would attempt to Some requested reinserting the June request is granted. Some commenters clarify that the ‘‘reasonable likelihood’’ 2013 discussion draft’s language that the stated that no third-party participation standard of proof means that there must evidence will be viewed in the light is appropriate in a re-petitioning request be more than a mere possibility but does most favorable to the petitioner. because third parties’ objections are not require ‘‘more likely than not.’’ The Response: In light of commenters’ based on factors other than whether the clarifying language is based, in part, concerns that the proposed rule changed petitioner meets the criteria for upon the definition of ‘‘reasonable the standard of proof, the final rule acknowledgment. likelihood’’ applied by the Supreme retains the current standard of proof and Those in support of the third-party Court in determining whether there is a discards the proposed interpreting consent condition stated that they reasonable likelihood that a jury has language. The final rule expressly would prefer not to allow re-petitioning misapplied a jury instruction for capital provides that evidence or methodology at all, but if re-petitioning is allowed, offense sentencing. See proposed that was sufficient to satisfy any then the third-party veto is necessary to § 83.10(a)(1). Several commenters particular criterion in a previous protect established equities and should expressed support for the proposed positive decision on that criterion will be expanded to require consent of all clarification to increase predictability be sufficient to satisfy the criterion for interested parties, regardless of whether and consistency in application. Some a present petitioner. In other words, a they participated in a prior proceeding stated they specifically support petitioner today satisfies the standards involving the original petition. clarification that the standard does not of evidence or baseline requirements of A few commenters suggested different require ‘‘more likely than not’’ to a criterion if that type or quantum of approaches to re-petitioning, allowing counteract what, they assert, is a evidence was sufficient for a past re-petitioning in only certain Departmental trend to require more and positive decision on that criterion. The circumstances, such as if: more evidence over time. Several Department will continue to interpret • A substantial number of years commenters opposed how the proposed ‘‘reasonable likelihood of the validity of passes and there is significant new rule defined ‘‘reasonable likelihood,’’ the facts’’ as described in the 1994 evidence; stating that it would substantially lower preamble (at 59 FR 9280 (February 25, • There is a showing of some the standard of proof, would allow 1994)) and will not apply a more modification of evidence; acknowledgment of groups who ‘‘more stringent interpretation of that standard. • The ALJ consults with nearby likely than not’’ do not meet criteria, See final § 83.10(a). See also, e.g., federally recognized tribes before and would take away the Department’s Summary Under the Criteria and making a decision, to give those who ability to balance evidence by requiring Evidence for Final Determination for were not notified previously a chance to acknowledgment if there is ‘‘more than Federal Acknowledgment of the Cowlitz be involved; a mere possibility.’’ Commenters also Indian Tribe, February 14, 2000, p. 101 • The petitioner exhausted their stated that the Supreme Court’s (stating that the general standard is a administrative and appellate remedies; interpretation of ‘‘reasonable ‘‘reasonable likelihood’’ and ‘‘not that or likelihood’’ in the case cited in the there must be conclusive proof’’). • Third parties involved in a prior proposed rule is inapplicable and proceeding are granted special standing. inappropriate for application to the D. Third-Party Participation in the Response: The proposed rule would acknowledgment process because the Acknowledgment Process have provided for a limited opportunity cited case involved jury instructions in Many commenters addressed the level for re-petitioning. After reviewing the a criminal (death penalty) case—where, of third-party participation in the comments both in support of and in as one commenter stated, society would petitioning process. Those commenters opposition to allowing for any rather acquit the guilty than wrongly arguing that third parties should have opportunity for re-petitioning, limiting convict the innocent. Commenters also more opportunity for participation re-petitioning by providing for third- stated that interpreting ‘‘reasonable stated that the proposed rule would party input, and other suggested likelihood’’ in this way exceeds the severely limit third-party involvement approaches for re-petitioning, the Department’s authority, is inconsistent by restricting the right to notice, Department has determined that with the Administrative Procedure Act allowing no opportunity to rebut allowing re-petitioning is not and Steadman v. SEC, 450 U.S. 91 petitioner’s responses, eliminating the appropriate. The final rule promotes (1981), raises significant due process opportunity to seek an on-the-record consistency, expressly providing that issues, and is unprecedented (no other meeting or IBIA reconsideration, evidence or methodology that was Federal agency uses this standard in restricting to certain parties the right to sufficient to satisfy any particular making eligibility determinations). have an impact on a positive PF, and criterion in a previous positive decision Several commenters provided making monitoring the petition more on that criterion will be sufficient to alternative suggestions, including difficult by establishing more phases of satisfy the criterion for a present applying a preponderance of the review. One commenter stated that the petitioner. The Department has petitions evidence/‘‘more likely than not’’ proposed rule establishes an iterative pending that have never been reviewed. standard. One suggested providing that process for the petitioner to engage OFA VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37876 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations at every stage—creating a tutelage-like suggested notifying any federally fairness, integrity, and transparency. process between the petitioner and the recognized tribe: To which the Some federally recognized tribal agency. Federally recognized tribes petitioner claims to have ties or shared commenters stated that the asserted that they, in particular, should heritage; with trust land in the same Department’s Indian trust responsibility have more opportunity for input under State as petitioner; within a radius of requires their full participation in the the DOI Policy on Consultation with aboriginal territory rather than acknowledgment process. Other Indian Tribes and because they are more headquarters; or within 100 miles. The commenters suggested reinserting the aware of tribal histories. Commenters proposal also provided that when a definition of ‘‘interested party’’ but provided a number of suggestions for positive PF is issued, only certain establishing a formal process for allowing more opportunity for third- parties may object, including tribes determining who qualifies as an party input. within 25 miles. See proposed § 83.37. ‘‘interested party’’ or restricting Other commenters stated that more Several commenters stated that local interested parties to those with direct limits on third-party participation governments should receive written material interests. Commenters had should be imposed because third parties notice of the petition because the local other suggestions about disclosing the improperly weigh in on governments have interests beyond identity of interested parties and acknowledgment petitions based on those of the State (e.g., public health clarifying what happens to those who land-into-trust issues, taxation, and safety service impacts) and already have been granted interested discrimination, gaming fears, financial otherwise may not be aware of the party status in pending petitions. and political pressures, and other petition. Some commenters suggested Comments on the term ‘‘informed factors that do not address whether the that notice of the petition and proposed party’’ defined in § 83.1 requested some petitioner meets the criteria. These finding should be provided to all process for determining whether a party commenters state that the process residents, businesses, landowners, and is informed of the petitioner’s history should be between a petitioner and the others within a 25-mile radius. Another (as opposed to a party who wants to be Department only and that, otherwise, commenter suggested notice to State informed of the petition’s progress). third parties with substantial resources government agencies responsible for Response: The final rule allows and power can challenge evidence and Indian affairs. A few commenters stated anyone who is interested in the petition question interpretation of the criteria to that sending notice to the State and to submit comments and evidence and disrupt petitions. Commenters provided others is inappropriate because tribes do receive notice, without labelling such suggestions for prohibiting or limiting not receive notice of every State action. individuals or entities. The final rule third party participation, including Response: After reviewing the allows for broader notice, regardless of imposing a requirement for comments comments, the Department determined whether a particular party would and evidence to be directly relevant to the proposed addition of notice to tribes qualify as an ‘‘interested’’ or ‘‘informed’’ whether the petitioner meets the within a certain radius or within the party under the prior rules. The criteria. State to be unnecessary, because the Department wishes to obtain relevant, Specific provisions that were the rule already provides for constructive reliable evidence from any source. focus of comments on third party notice to all through publication in the Accordingly, the terms ‘‘interested participation follow. Federal Register and direct notice to party’’ and ‘‘informed party’’ are no any tribe that appears to have a 1. Who Receives Notice of the Receipt longer necessary for the purposes of historical or present relationship with of the Petition defining the persons who will be the petitioner or that may otherwise be notified of actions on a specific petition, The proposed rule provides that the considered to have a potential interest and therefore the terms have been Department will publish receipt of a in the acknowledgment determination. deleted. See final § 83.1. documented petition in the Federal The final rule provides additional notice Register and on the OFA Web site, but to county-level (or equivalent) 3. Comment Periods will also notify in writing the governor governments, in response to comments Several commenters stated that and attorney general of the State in by Stand Up for California and others; which petitioner is located, any limiting the period for commenting after continues to require notice to the State receipt of a petition to 90 days from federally recognized tribe within the governor and attorney general and State or within a 25-mile radius, or any Web site posting and reducing the time affected tribes and petitioners; and period for comment on PFs unjustly other recognized tribe and petitioner allows for notice to everyone else that appears to have a historical or limits third party participation. through publication in the Federal Response: These comments are present relationship with the petitioner Register and on the OFA Web site. See addressed in Process—Timelines, or may otherwise have a potential final § 83.22. Through much greater use below. interest. See proposed § 83.22(b)(2). of Web site publication, the new rule With regard to restricting notice to increases transparency throughout the E. Process—Approach tribes within a certain radius, some administrative process of consideration. commenters supported this limitation, 1. Letter of Intent stating that it would reduce the 2. Deletion of Interested Party Status The proposed rule would delete the influence of parties hundreds of miles Many commenters opposed the optional step in the current § 83.4 of away who may be antagonists. proposed deletion of the ‘‘interested providing a letter of intent to submit a Commenters opposed to this limitation party’’ definition from § 83.1 and petition. Some commenters expressed stated that it is arbitrary because asserted that certain parties should have support for deletion because many who petitioners beyond the 25-mile radius the ability to participate fully in the provide letters of intent never submit could claim the same heritage as a acknowledgment process. These petitions. Some commenters opposed federally recognized tribe, that it commenters stated that local eliminating this step because the letters inappropriately suggests a gaming governments, landowners, and other track groups claiming tribal status, put standard, and that generally a tribe’s parties affected by the acknowledgment others on notice that groups intend to presence extends beyond its decision must have broader rights of seek Federal acknowledgment (and headquarters. Some commenters participation to ensure due process, allow the others to start their own VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37877 research), provide information for (a) (identification), (b) (community), and these changes are necessary to ensure Departmental budget and staffing (c) (political influence/authority). See due process and address the problems planning, benefit petitioners by final § 83.26. These two phases combine that, in its experience as a petitioner, allowing them to qualify for grants, etc., evaluations of the criteria that are most plagued its petition following a impose only a minimal burden, and are likely to be evaluated together even in favorable PF. consistent with other Federal practices. the absence of defined phases. The Response: The final rule includes the Some commenters suggested result is likely to produce any negative proposed approach allowing a petitioner alternatives to deleting this step, for decisions in a quicker manner, thereby to respond to comments prior to the example, imposing an expiration date so resolving petitions sooner, reducing issuance of a PF and ensuring OFA that a letter of intent is effective for a time delays, increasing efficiency, and provides the petitioner with any limited time (e.g., three years). preserving resources. material used in the PF, to the extent Response: The final rule deletes the allowable under Federal law. The letter of intent step because, as some 3. Technical Assistance requirement in proposed § 83.42(b) for commenters noted, many who submit The proposed rule would require OFA remand to OFA if new evidence may letters of intent never follow through to to conduct a technical assistance (TA) support reversal of a positive PF has submit petitions. The Department review for each of the two review been deleted because it could have reviewed the commenters’ concerns phases, see proposed § 83.26(a)(1) and added significant delays to the process. with deleting this step and determined (b)(1). A few commenters requested that Instead, the final rule provides, at that the improvements in clarity (the interested parties be permitted to § 83.41, that the Assistant Secretary will process will now clearly begin with the request and participate in TA reviews. review the positive PF in light of the filing of a documented petition) and A few commenters stated that allowing comments on the PF and the petitioner’s efficiency (fewer Departmental multiple TA reviews creates a response. resources required) outweigh the fragmented process and omits the pre- 5. Suspensions (Proposed § 83.31) and potential negatives of eliminating this review TA that often identifies problems Withdrawals (Proposed § 83.30) step. Prior to the effective date of this in advance of OFA consideration. rule, the Department will send a letter Response: Under the Department’s Several commenters requested a time to each entity who has submitted only long-standing practice, OFA provides limit on suspension of review of a a letter of intent, and encourage the petitioner with TA review because petition for technical or administrative submission of a documented petition the petitioner is seeking Federal problems to ensure the suspension lasts and inform them that if they do not, acknowledgment. However, to promote no longer than a year and to allow the they will not be considered petitioners. transparency, the final rule provides for petitioner to resume at any time. A few Each entity that has submitted only a the Department to make each TA review commenters also requested allowing letter of intent is not a petitioner in the letter publicly available by posting it on petitioners to request suspension of process unless and until it submits a the Web site as soon as it is issued, to their petitions where acts of God documented petition. allow review by anyone who is impede them from moving forward. interested. See final § 83.22(c). The final Some commenters stated that the 2. Phased Review rule limits the number of TA reviews to proposal to allow petitioners to Under proposed § 83.26, OFA would two, at the most: One for each phase. withdraw their petitions after active conduct a phased review of the criteria. Each TA review will be limited to the consideration begins would allow Most who commented on the proposed criteria that are to be reviewed during petitioners to avoid negative findings, phased review supported it, noting that that stage (i.e., Criteria (d) (Governing affecting the integrity of the satisfaction of the descent criterion (e) is Document), (e) (Descent), (f) (Unique acknowledgment process. They also a threshold issue and that, because Membership) and (g) (Termination) in note that it is inefficient to allow evaluation of criteria (b) (community) Phase I and the remaining criteria in withdrawals because the Department and (c) (political influence/authority) is Phase II). Because some petitioners may will expend resources without reaching more time consuming, phased review fail to proceed to the second phase, a final decision. A few commenters should make the process more efficient. splitting the TA review into two phases suggested allowing for withdrawal after One petitioner suggested reviewing will help promote efficiency. In active consideration only with the criterion (d) (governing document) with addition, petitioners may seek informal consent of AS–IA. criterion (e) to ensure submission of a assistance and guidance from OFA prior Other commenters said that the governing document and membership to submitting a petition. proposal to allow withdrawal after the list. beginning of active consideration is only A few commenters opposed 4. Providing Petitioner With fair, to allow petitioner to gather eliminating the process for allowing Opportunities To Respond additional evidence if needed. Several expedited rejections of petitions in the Several commenters supported the commenters objected to the proposal current § 83.10(e) based on any one of proposed provision allowing a that petitions that are withdrawn and the descent, membership, or termination petitioner to respond to comments prior then re-filed will be placed at the end criteria; others preferred the 2013 to issuance of a PF (proposed § 83.24), of the register of documented petitions discussion draft approach of having ensuring the Department has all relevant when re-filed; these commenters stated expedited positive and negative information. A few suggested allowing a that petitioners who withdraw should findings. reasonable extension beyond 60 days, if not lose their place in line if the Response: The final rule streamlines requested. Also, some commenters withdrawal is for less than a year. the phased review and expedites the expressed support for the proposed Response: The final rule takes the entire process by providing for a review requirements that OFA provide the approach that when the petitioner is first of criteria (d) (governing petitioner with any material used in the preparing information to submit in document), (e) (descent), (f) (unique PF or FD and that the AS–IA remand a response to technical assistance, no membership), (g) (termination), and any favorable PF to OFA if new evidence timeline applies. This negates the need claim to previous Federal might support a negative PF (proposed for the petitioner to request a acknowledgment; and second of criteria § 83.42(b)). One commenter stated that suspension from the Department; rather, VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37878 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations the petitioner may take whatever time it on the complete record, including the 9. Proceeding Under the New or Old needs. Upon submission of petitioner’s PF issued by OFA, comments and Version of the Regulations response, the timelines imposed on the responses on the PF, and any hearing Several commenters stated their Department for that phase will begin to record and ALJ recommended decision. support for allowing a petitioner who run. Where the Department faces The Assistant Secretary may continue to has a currently pending, complete technical or administrative difficulties seek the input of OFA, as technical staff documented petition on active status to that prevent review, the final rule throughout this process. choose whether to proceed under the allows for the Department to suspend its 7. Automatic Final Determination new or current regulations. These own review. See final § 83.31. No commenters requested clarification on suspension is necessary to allow time For improved efficiency, several how to proceed under the new for the petitioner’s responses to commenters supported proposed regulations and requested that they be technical assistance, because the final § 83.37(a), which would require placed in highest priority if they already rule does not impose timelines on these automatic issuance of a positive FD submitted a letter of intent or other actions. With regard to withdrawal, the when there is no significant opposition documentation under the current final rule allows for withdrawal but to a positive PF from the State or local regulations. with the consequence that the petition government or any federally recognized Response: The final rule, at § 83.7, will be placed at the end of the Indian tribe within the State or within establishes that the final rule will apply, numbered register upon re-submission. a 25-mile radius of petitioner’s except that a petitioner with a currently There is no need to provide that a headquarters. One commenter stated pending, complete documented petition petitioner does not lose their place in that a positive FD should be issued may choose to proceed under the line if the withdrawal is less than a within 30 days after issuance of the current regulations if it notifies the certain timeframe, because the positive PF rather than waiting 90 days petitioner always has the option of for comments under proposed Department by the stated deadline. The taking as long as they like to respond to § 83.35(a). Those who opposed this Department will notify each such technical assistance, in lieu of requirement stated that all positive PFs petitioner of the option to proceed withdrawal. should be treated the same, regardless of under the current regulations. A who submits comments, and that petitioner must respond by the deadline 6. Decision-Maker limiting commenters to certain if it chooses to do so; otherwise, the Several commenters opposed the interested parties violates the APA petitioner will be subject to the new proposed approach of having OFA issue requirement that the whole record be regulations. See § 83.7. OFA will the PF (proposed § 83.32) and AS–IA considered, leaving those other maintain a list of petitions that are issue the FD (proposed § 83.42), rather interested parties without any awaiting Departmental action at any than the current approach where AS–IA procedural rights to protect their given time and address those petitions issues both the PF and FD with OFA’s interests. in the order in which they were input. These commenters stated that Response: In response to commenters’ submitted. separating OFA experts’ analysis from concerns regarding limiting commenters 10. Precedent and Other Comments AS–IA’s evaluation would allow AS–IA to certain parties, the final rule treats all to deviate from evidence and findings commenters the same, regardless of who A few commenters requested specific without standards and make a political submits comments, but clarifies that the language be added to the preamble decision. Commenters also stated that objection to the positive PF must be regarding precedent (ranging from the proposed approach promotes the supported by evidence as to whether the ensuring that OFA precedent continues idea that there is an adversarial petitioner meets the criteria. See final to be followed, to ensuring that prior relationship between OFA and AS–IA. § 83.36. Allowing for automatic issuance negative decisions of OFA will not be These commenters believe OFA should of a positive FD if there is no objection used to interpret the new regulations) provide neutral, expert analysis to AS– with evidence germane to the criteria, and other statements as to applicability. IA in each instance and AS–IA should conserves resources, and promotes Commenters commented on various issue both the PF and FD to provide efficiency in the process. other aspects of the process, OFA’s greater checks and balances and more qualifications and oversight, making accurate findings by allowing for 8. Prioritizing Reviews available example formats for the another level of fact checking and A number of commenters requested petition, and whether the Department editing. At least one commenter clarification of the priority of various owes a trust responsibility to supported the proposed approach, categories of petitions (those pending petitioners. saying that OFA’s findings should be during the regulatory process, Response: Because the final rule does advisory only. suspended petitions, previously denied not make significant changes to the Response: The Department does not petitions), and advocated that various criteria, the Department’s precedent agree that having OFA issue the PF categories be given top priority in the stands. To address concerns that the separates OFA experts from AS–IA, order of review. One commenter Department is implementing the criteria allows for arbitrary deviation, or suggested creating tiers for review based in an increasingly stringent manner, the promotes an adversarial relationship. on which petitions are easiest to final rule adds a section in § 83.10 to OFA exists within and reports to the process. ensure that the Department is applying Office of the AS–IA and works at AS– Response: The final rule’s revised the criteria consistently. The final rule IA’s direction. Moreover, having OFA process, which separates review into states that if there is a prior final issue the PF underscores the crucial role two phases, is intended to improve positive decision finding evidence or that OFA plays in the process. The final efficiency by focusing review first on a methodology to be sufficient to satisfy rule retains the proposed approach of limited number of criteria to eliminate any particular criterion previously, the having OFA issue the PF as a petitioners who do not meet those basic Department will find it sufficient to documented recommendation for AS–IA criteria, before embarking on the more satisfy the criterion for a present to consider when preparing the FD. AS– time- and resource-intensive review of petitioner. In other words, a petitioner IA’s preparation of the FD will be based the other criteria. See final § 83.26. satisfies the standards of evidence or VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37879 baseline requirements of a criterion if the process; however, the Department 6 months, as required by proposed that type or amount of evidence was believes this is an instance where the § 83.32, for petitioners with large sufficient for a positive decision on that need for transparency, fairness, and memberships. One commenter criterion in prior final decisions (see., rigor outweighs the need for suggested adding flexibility to allow e.g., the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa promptness. The final rule does not OFA and the petitioner to agree upon a and Chippewa Indians, the Jamestown impose parameters for how long a deadline. This commenter pointed out S’Klallam Tribe, the Tunica-Biloxi petition stays on the ‘‘ready’’ list that proposed § 83.26(a)(1)(i)(B) allows Indian Tribe, the Death Valley Timbi- because the length of stay is subject to the petitioner to submit additional sha Shoshone Tribe, the Poarch Band of the availability of OFA staff at any given information, but proposed § 83.32 still Creeks, the San Juan Southern Paiute time. To emphasize that the Department requires issuance of PF within 6 months Tribe of Arizona, the Jena Band of plans to strictly uphold its timelines, of beginning review. Choctaws). The Department has the final rule deletes each individual Response: The final rule clarifies that considered the other miscellaneous provision allowing for a specific time the time periods for issuance of PFs and comments and determined that they do extension and replaces them with a new FDs are suspended when the not warrant any revisions to the section providing that the Department Department is waiting for a technical regulation. may extend a deadline only upon assistance response from the petitioner. consent of the petitioner or for good See §§ 83.32(b), 83.42(b). In other F. Petitioning Process Timelines cause. See § 83.8. words, the clock on these timelines runs 1. Timelines—Overall only when the Department is obligated 2. Timelines—Notice of Receipt of to act. We received several comments on Documented Petition 5. Timelines—Comment Period on PF how long the process currently takes, Proposed § 83.22(b)(1)(iv) establishes noting that, even with the proposed a deadline of 90 days from the date a The previous rule provides a 180-day deadlines, the proposed process would documented petition is posted on OFA’s period for comment on the PF, with the continue to be lengthy, due to multiple Web site for submission of comments. possibility of a 180-day extension. The instances of providing technical Several commenters stated that proposed rule would reduce these time assistance, submission of new evidence, comments should be accepted without periods, allowing for a 90-day comment and the requirement that petitioners see any definitive time limit until active period (proposed § 83.35), with the and respond to any evidence before a PF consideration of the documented possibility of a 60-day extension is issued. These commenters stated that petition begins. These commenters (proposed § 83.36). Most who these parts of the process are unrealistic, argued that petitioners have as long as commented on the proposed comment unworkable, and inefficient. A few possible to prepare research and period stated their opposition to commenters suggested having more limiting others’ input to a 90-day reducing the period from 180 days to 90 accountability for timeliness through a window appears to be designed to days. These commenters stated that this deadline for all prospective petitioners preclude meaningful public comment. A is a significant reduction, will place a to submit their petitions, a deadline for few commenters requested expanding substantial burden on petitioners and the Department to issue decisions on all the 90-day comment period to 120 or interested parties, and fails to account petitions, or parameters for how long a 150 days. for petitions with large amounts of petition stays on the ‘‘ready’’ list. Response: In response to comments, evidence requiring substantial time to Several commenters supported the the final rule extends the comment review and possibly time to conduct proposed timelines and requested they period to 120 days. The final rule independent research and submit be strictly upheld, either allowing for a retains a defined comment period evidence. Some commenters stated that way to compel agency action or the because it is necessary to have a cut-off this provision also appears designed to issuance of automatic findings in point in order to allow the petitioner preclude third-party participation. A support of petitioner. One commenter time to respond to comments. We note few commenters stated that the time suggested adding timelines to the that commenters also have the time to should be further reduced to limit third- technical assistance process and one further prepare comments and gather party involvement. suggested the entire process be subject evidence for submission during the Most commenters advocated for to a 6-month deadline. comment period on the proposed retaining the 180-day timeframe; one Response: The Department has finding. requested at least 120 days. Commenters retained the proposed timelines in also stated that, even with the 60-day nearly all instances to ensure efficiency. 3. Timelines—Petitioner Response to extension, depending on the nature of The final rule reduces the proposed Comments Prior to PF the findings and petitioner’s resources, opportunities for technical assistance to Proposed § 83.24 would allow a it may require longer than the initial 90- two (not including any informal petitioner at least 60 days to respond to day period plus the additional 60 days guidance a petitioner may obtain prior comments before OFA begins review. A to submit comments. These commenters to submitting a documented petition)— few commenters suggested allowing a advocated for a 90-day extension, an one for each of the two review phases. reasonable extension beyond 60 days, if extension for any period AS–IA This change is intended to promote requested by petitioner. chooses, or an automatic 60-day efficiency because the expectation is Response: The final rule allows the extension at the petitioner’s request and that each technical assistance review petitioner 90 days rather than 60 days allowance of additional extensions for will be more targeted to certain criteria, to respond to comments (§ 83.24) and good cause shown, such as needing and therefore likely shorter, and some adds a provision in § 83.8 that generally more time to generate probative petitioners may receive only the first allows for extensions of time for good evidence. phase of technical assistance, where cause. Response: The final rule establishes a Phase I results in a negative final 120-day timeframe to comment on the determination. Ensuring that petitioners 4. Timelines—Issuance of a PF PF. See final § 83.35. This deadline is see and respond to any evidence before A few commenters noted that it will shorter than the existing 180-day a PF is issued may, in fact, add time to be difficult for OFA to issue a PF within timeframe, but longer than the proposed VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37880 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 90-day timeframe, in order to promote occasion for the AS–IA to review the discrete issues in a transparent manner. efficiency in the process while still administrative record and formulate a Rather than making the process more allowing sufficient time for input. The determination. See final § 83.42. adversarial, a hearing will help final rule also allows the timeframe to crystalize the issues in preparation for G. Hearings be extended for good cause. See final consideration by the AS–IA. Since it § 83.8. 1. Deleting the IBIA Reconsideration occurs before an objective forum Process, and Adding a Hearing on the without any preconceived notion of an 6. Timelines—Period for Petitioner’s PF outcome, it will further insulate the Response to Comments on a Positive PF The proposed rule eliminates the process from criticisms of perceived Several commenters requested process for limited reconsideration of bias. additional time for the petitioner to the AS–IA’s determination by the IBIA respond to comments on a positive PF 2. Opportunity for Third Parties To and adds an option for a petitioner to (proposed § 83.37 would allow 60 days Request a Hearing and Intervene in elect a hearing on a negative PF before Hearings and an unspecified extension), an independent judge in the Office of advocating for a total of 120 days Many commenters objected to the Hearings and Appeals (OHA). Many because petitioners may not have the proposed rule allowing hearings only at commenters expressed their strong resources to respond more quickly. the election of a petitioner on a negative Response: The final rule retains the support for the proposed option, saying PF. See § 83.38(a). These commenters 60-day deadline to respond in order to this process adds transparency, fairness, asserted that any party should be promote efficiency in the process while and neutrality. These commenters also entitled to request a hearing on a PF to still allowing sufficient time for input. supported the proposed elimination of ensure that all parties are treated The final rule also allows the timeframe the IBIA reconsideration process, stating equally. They asserted that third parties to be extended for good cause. See final that the hearing process would be more with evidence relevant to a positive PF § 83.8. fair and efficient. are left only with the option of Others expressed their strong submitting comments and pursuing an 7. Timelines—Petitioner Response to opposition to the proposed hearing appeal before Federal district court Comments and/or Election of Hearing process, stating that it makes the under the APA’s deferential ‘‘arbitrary Proposed § 83.38 would allow the petitioning process more adversarial, and capricious’’ standard of review. petitioner 60 days to respond to more burdensome, and less transparent. Some commenters also stated that the comments and/or elect a hearing on a These commenters also stated that the proposed approach effectively precludes negative PF, and would allow AS–IA to hearing and review of re-petition interested parties from appealing, extend the comment period if requests inappropriately burden an because the proposed rule would not warranted. Commenters stated that 60 administrative court with analysis of allow a hearing on a positive PF and days is too short (see comments under non-legal issues. Several commenters interested parties may not be able to ‘‘Hearings’’). They also suggested also opposed elimination of the IBIA establish standing in Federal district requiring filing of just a notice of appeal reconsideration process, disputing the court. Tribal commenters stated that the initially, then allowing for submission accuracy of the rational for the Department owes a trust responsibility of lists of material facts, exhibits, and elimination: that there are no other to allow tribes the opportunity for a witnesses later rather than requiring instances where IBIA reviews an AS–IA hearing where they have a present or their submittal with the election of decision). Those commenters also historical relationship to petitioner and hearing. argued that the IBIA process is more the petition involves the identity or Response: The final rule retains the efficient than appeals to Federal court heritage of the federally recognized 60-day deadline in order to promote and is necessary to correct tribe. efficiency in the process; however, the administrative errors before costly Commenters also stated that standards final rule provides the response litigation and to guard against for intervention should be broader than timeframe and the timeframe for politically motivated Departmental traditional standards, to allow electing a hearing will run sequentially, decisions. These commenters note that intervention by States, local rather than concurrently, to allow time IBIA has particular expertise with governments, federally recognized to prepare the election of hearing listing respect to Federal-tribal relations that a tribes, and any entity with a legal, the issues of law and material fact, judge from elsewhere in OHA lacks. factual, or property interest. These witnesses, and exhibits. See final Some commenters claimed that commenters stated that there should be §§ 83.36(b), 83.38. The final rule also replacing the IBIA process with the no limit on the issues an intervenor can allows the timeframe to be extended for option for a hearing will result in more raise and intervenors should have the good cause. See final § 83.8. adversarial dealings and litigation. A right to introduce evidence and few commenters suggested allowing the testimony. 8. Timelines—Issuance of FD Secretary to direct reconsideration to Response: The Part 83 petitioning Proposed § 83.42 would require the IBIA on her own motion or upon process is similar to other Assistant Secretary to issue a FD within request. administrative processes uniquely 90 days. This is an increase from the Response: The final rule implements affecting an applicant’s status in that the current 60-day period for issuance of a the proposal to delete the limited IBIA applicant may administratively FD. A small number of commenters reconsideration process and to allow for challenge a negative determination, but opposed the extended time for AS–IA a hearing on a negative PF. This third parties may not administratively review as counter to the goal for procedure will require the parties to challenge a positive determination. The efficiency. pinpoint specific findings that they question being examined in Part 83 is Response: While the 90-day period is dispute and provide evidence from the whether a petitioner meets the criteria an increase from the current 60 days, record, from testimony based on the to be federally acknowledged as an the Department believes this increase is record, or cite to precedent in support Indian tribe. Part 83 does not allow for justified given that the preparation of of their positions in a setting that is consideration of speculative the final determination will be the first well-suited to objective consideration of consequences because such VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37881 consequences are not yet ripe for for the entire hearing process upon A few commenters stated that the ALJ consideration and administrative and request of the petitioner, and additional should engage in traditional fact- judicial review is available for those extensions upon good cause shown, finding, limiting the hearing record to separate decisions. For example, if the such as needing more time to prepare the testimony and exhibits presented by newly acknowledged tribe seeks to have and generate probative evidence. the parties, to narrow the issues in the land taken into trust and that Some commenters stated that the 60- record and put the burden on the parties application is approved, state or local day timeframe for electing a hearing is to bring the salient facts to the decision- governments may challenge that action too short to provide the required lists of maker’s attention. Commenters under the land-into-trust process (25 issues of material fact, exhibits, and provided arguments both for and against CFR part 151), an entirely separate and witnesses. These commenters suggested allowing the parties to provide evidence distinct decision from the Part 83 requiring a filing of ‘‘intent to beyond what was in the OFA process. Submissions are more challenge’’ within 60 days, then leaving administrative record during and after appropriately addressed there. The Part it to the ALJ to establish the schedule the hearing—some saying it offers the 83 process provides third parties with for pre-hearing submittal of the lists. opportunity to clarify the OFA the opportunity to submit comments Others suggested expanding it to 180 administrative record and others saying and evidence. Comments that are days. it reduces transparency to expand the germane to the criteria will be carefully Commenters also specifically opposed OFA administrative record after OFA considered. the proposed timeline for filing motions has already issued a PF. Also, the Office of the Secretary (OS) to intervene (15 days after issuance of Response: A primary purpose of the companion final rule at 43 CFR part 4, the referral notice under § 83.39(a)) as a hearing process is to inform the AS–IA’s subpart K, adopts the proposed violation of due process, because the final determination by focusing in on approach of allowing for intervention as short timeframe would be ‘‘wholly the key issues and evidence and of right in the hearing process for unreasonable’’ for reviewing the producing a recommended decision on anyone with an interest that may be administrative record and providing those issues from an independent adversely affected by the FD. See 43 notice of all witnesses, issues, and tribunal. To that end, under the OS CFR 4.1021(d). No good reason has been exhibits. Commenters suggested a companion final rule, the hearing record identified for deviating from this minimum timeline of 30, 45, or 60 days, will not automatically include the entire traditional standard of intervention. The or a deadline to identify only the administrative record reviewed by OFA, final rule allows anyone who intervenes movant’s affected interest and position but only those portions which are as of right to participate as a full party, on the issues, and then allowing the considered sufficiently important to be subject to the restriction that the judge to set timelines for identifying offered by the parties as exhibits and intervenor may not raise issues of law witnesses and exhibits. admitted into evidence by the ALJ. or material fact beyond those raised in Response: These comments relate to While the AS–IA may consider not only the election of hearing. 43 CFR the OS companion final rule addressing the hearing record, but also OFA’s entire 4.1021(f)(3). This restriction is necessary hearing procedures at 43 CFR part 4, administrative record, we believe that to keep the hearing focused on the subpart K. To maintain an efficient an independent review of the key issues issues related to the negative PF. process, that final rule adopts the and evidence will be invaluable to the proposed 180-day time period for AS–IA. 3. Hearing Process Timelines completion of the hearing process. See Part of the hearing process is to In the OS companion proposed rule, final 43 CFR 4.1051(a). Because the ensure that the Department abides by timelines were proposed for various hearing record is limited to documents the baseline precedent of previous final activities during the hearing process as that have already been presented, except decisions. Petitioners may rely on well as an overall 180-day time limit to in under extraordinary circumstances, previous final decisions to establish that complete the hearing process and issue see final 43 CFR 4.1046(a), the time their evidence is sufficient to meet a a recommended decision. See proposed needed to ‘‘generate probative criterion, where evidence in a previous 43 CFR part 4, subpart K. Some evidence’’ should be minimal (see the final decision was sufficient to meet a commenters supported establishing discussion below on scope of record). criterion. The companion final rule also definitive timelines. One commented To address comments that the proposed includes documentation in the OFA that the proposed timelines were too timeline for intervention is administrative record, including long because the timelines are similar to unreasonably short, the final 43 CFR comments and responses on the PF, and those in the IBIA process, which is 4.1021(a), doubles the proposed testimony clarifying or explaining the considered lengthy. Most commented timeline to file a motion to intervene to information in that documentation. See that the timelines are unrealistically 30 days. 43 CFR 4.1046. That rule also limits short given all that must occur during who may testify to expert witnesses and the overall 180-day timeline— 4. Scope of Record OFA staff who participated in prehearing conference, interventions, In the proposed rule, we invited preparation of the negative proposed discovery, written direct testimony, oral comment on whether the hearing record finding. See 43 CFR 4.1042. The ALJ cross-examination, post-hearing briefs, before OHA should include all the may admit other evidence or allow other and issuance of a recommended evidence in OFA’s administrative record persons to testify only under decision. These commenters stated that for the petition or be limited to extraordinary circumstances. full adjudications could take a year and testimony and exhibits specifically These limits will afford the parties the opposed the overall 180-day deadline as identified by the parties. Most who opportunity to clarify the record, interfering with the judge’s deliberation. commented on this question stated that without expanding the record beyond Others opposed the timelines as not the ALJ should rely on the entire what was before OFA when it issued the accounting for petitioner’s limited administrative record before OFA PF and comments and responses resources, and thereby compromising (including the petition and all submitted following issuance of the PF. their ability to fully participate. Another documents that were provided, or relied The limits will encourage the petitioner commenter suggested an automatic 90- upon, for the PF, and comments and and all others to be diligent in gathering day extension of the 180-day time limit responses on the PF). and presenting to OFA all their relevant VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37882 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations evidence and discourage strategic requested clarification of whether only summary recommended decision were withholding of evidence, which will ‘‘senior departmental employees’’ or all in favor of the petitioner who had further ensure that OFA’s PF is based on of OFA were subject to discovery. A few received a negative PF), it would not the most complete record possible, commenters stated that OFA should not overturn the PF; rather, the AS–IA allowing the ALJ to focus on discrete need to restate its PF at hearing to would consider that recommended issues in dispute if a hearing is controvert petitioner’s claims because decision when preparing a FD. requested. the PF should be sufficient on its own. A standard hearing procedure is for Other commenters observed that the 5. Presiding Judge Over Hearings the ALJ to consider the convenience of proposed requirement to submit direct all parties, their representatives, and In the OS companion proposed rule, testimony in writing will allow for faster witnesses in setting a place for hearing, any of several different employees of hearings. but not to unduly favor the preferences OHA could be assigned to preside as the Response: The OS companion final of one party over another. A provision judge over the hearing process: an ALJ rule clarifies that OFA employees who mandating that the hearing be held in a appointed under 5 U.S.C. 3105, an IBIA participated in preparing the negative location near the petitioner would judge, or an attorney designated by the PFs may be called as witnesses. See deviate from this fair standard in all OHA Director. See proposed 43 CFR final 43 CFR 4.1042. While the PF may cases without sufficient justification. 4.1001, definition of ‘‘judge.’’ We be sufficient on its own in some cases, Indeed, in some cases, the petitioner invited comments on who is an in others, it may be appropriate for OFA itself may not favor a hearing location appropriate OHA judge to preside. Most to call its staff to testify to elucidate near to it, such as where its witnesses commenters who expressed an opinion parts of the PF or the OFA are not located near the petitioner. The on this question stated that an ALJ is administrative record, subject to cross- selection of a hearing location is best necessary to ensure sufficient examination, and/or to allow the left to the discretion of the ALJ. To qualifications, independence, petitioner or other parties to probe guide the exercise of that discretion, a impartiality, and objectivity. One OFA’s rationale through direct provision has been added to the OS commenter recommended an attorney examination of OFA staff. The OS companion final rule incorporating the because of the commenter’s belief that companion final rule affords the ALJ fair standard that the ALJ will consider the attorney would be able to issue discretion to consider requests regarding the convenience of all parties, their decisions more quickly. One stated that hearing locations, prehearing telephonic representatives, and witnesses in setting an IBIA judge would be most qualified conferences, any discovery that the ALJ a place for hearing. See 43 CFR due to experience with acknowledgment believes to be appropriate, and written 4.1040(a)(2). issues. Several commenters stated that testimony submittals. the judge should have some background Regarding telephonic conferences, or training in Indian law and tribal 7. Miscellaneous Hearing Process both the OS proposed and final rules histories and cultures. Comments include a provision that conferences Response: The final rule establishes A few commenters stated that the will ordinarily be held by telephone. that the judge presiding over hearings summary recommended decision See proposed 43 CFR 4.1022(c) and final will be an ALJ. See final § 83.39. There process in proposed 43 CFR 4.1023 is 43 CFR 4.1022(d). is no evidence that an attorney could not an appropriate procedure to The suggestion to allow for filing and issue decisions more quickly than an overturn a PF. Other commenters made service of documents by priority mail ALJ. An IBIA judge does not necessarily suggestions for facilitating petitioner has not been adopted in the OS final have more background in participation in the hearing process, rule. Requiring filing and service by acknowledgment issues or tribal stating that hearings should be held in overnight delivery promotes compliance histories and cultures, and ALJs are a location near the petitioner, that with time limits for specific actions as skilled at presiding over hearings and telephonic conferences should be well as with the overall time limit for managing procedural matters to allowed, and that filing and service of the hearing process of 180 days. The use facilitate justice. Also, their documents by priority mail or email and cost of overnight delivery can be independence is protected and should be allowed as an alternative to avoided by filing and serving a impartiality fostered by laws which, the OS companion proposed rule’s document by fax and regular mail if the among other things, exempt them from requirements that overnight mail or document is 20 pages or less. See 43 performance ratings, evaluation, and delivery services be used for both filing CFR 4.1012(b)(iii). Given the limits on bonuses (see 5 U.S.C. 4301(2)(D), 5 CFR and service. See proposed 43 CFR discovery and admissible evidence, we 930.206); vest the Office of Personnel 4.1012(b) and 4.1013(c). These do not anticipate a large volume of Management rather than the Department suggestions are based in part upon the exchanges of documents exceeding 20 with authority over the ALJ’s commenters’ stated concern that a pages. Nevertheless, to address the rare compensation and tenure (see 5 U.S.C. petitioner’s participation may be situation where mandating strict 5372, 5 CFR 930.201–930.11); and impeded by a lack of resources. compliance with the prescribed filing provide that most disciplinary actions Commenters also observed that some and service methods would be unfair, against ALJs may be taken only for good petitioners may be in remote locations the OS final rule adds language to both cause established and determined by the without access to overnight mail or 43 CFR 4.1012(b) and 4.1013(c) giving Merit Systems Protection Board on the delivery services. the ALJ discretion to allow deviation record after opportunity for a hearing Response: Proposed 43 CFR 4.1023 from those methods. (see 5 U.S.C. 7521). would allow any party to file a motion Nor has the OS final rule adopted the for a summary recommended decision if suggestion to allow filing and service by 6. Conduct of the Hearing the material facts are undisputed and a email. A hard copy of each filing is Several commenters asserted that summary decision is appropriate as a needed to complete the hearing record OFA should be required to participate matter of law. The OS companion final that ultimately becomes part of the OFA in the hearing and be subject to cross- rule retains this provision. If the ALJ administrative record. Service by email examination to increase transparency in issued a summary recommended is problematic because not all parties the process. A few commenters decision contrary to the PF (e.g., if the may have email access. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37883 H. Previous Federal Acknowledgment of unambiguous previous Federal that was sufficient to satisfy previous Several commenters suggested acknowledgment. Federal acknowledgment previously rearranging the review process so that One commenter stated that proposed remains sufficient to satisfy previous § 83.12 eliminates the current previous Federal acknowledgment is Federal acknowledgment today. This requirement at § 83.8(d)(1) that the considered at the beginning, making it clarification ensures that this section is petitioner demonstrate it is the same procedurally easier for previously not applied in a manner that raises the group as was previously acknowledged federally recognized tribes to obtain bar for each subsequent petitioner tribe. acknowledgment. Several commenters claiming previous Federal A few commenters asserted that the acknowledgment. In response to stated that the rule should be clarified rule should state that claims statutes so that previously acknowledged tribes comments, the phrase ‘‘for the purposes allowing descendants of tribes to bring of Federal law’’ is also deleted as overly need not meet criteria (b) (Community) claims do not constitute previous broad. and (c) (Political Influence or Authority) Federal acknowledgment. Others While moving the evaluation date to in proposed § 83.11 prior to either 1934 advocated for including various 1900 may limit the usefulness of the or the date of previous additional items in the proposed previous Federal acknowledgment acknowledgment, whichever is later. § 83.12(a) list of evidence of previous provisions, there remains a possibility Otherwise, previous Federal Federal acknowledgment (e.g., that a petitioner may show previous acknowledgment would be more recognition by Federal court, allotments, Federal acknowledgment post-1900. The stringent than fulfilling all criteria at payments by Indian Court of Claims, final rule does not substantively change proposed § 83.11. unratified treaties, documented attempts the burden for showing previous Several commenters provided to obtain land for the petitioner). Federal acknowledgment—deletion of suggestions for the definition of Several commenters advocated for the term ‘‘substantial’’ in ‘‘substantial ‘‘previous Federal acknowledgment’’ at redefining previous Federal evidence of unambiguous Federal proposed § 83.1—some stating that it acknowledgment to include any tribe acknowledgment’’ does not change the should mean Federal government that can show it was under Federal evaluation—unambiguity is still officials with authority had clearly jurisdiction, particularly for tribes who required. The rule requires a showing acknowledged the government-to- were never terminated but for whom the that the petitioner is the same tribe that government relationship with the Federal Government may have failed to was previously acknowledged. Previous petitioner, others stating that it should take action. Federal acknowledgment requires that be defined more broadly to include Some commenters supported the the petitioner, not another group, was tribes under Federal jurisdiction or to proposed previous Federal previously acknowledged. The final rule capture other historical dealings where acknowledgment provisions at § 83.12 adds that the entity may have evolved the Federal Government did not respect as more clear, particularly provisions out of the previously recognized tribe the tribes’ sovereignty. Several clarifying that a showing of continuous (see § 83.12(a)); this addition commenters stated that the key community is not necessary. incorporates a provision in the current proposed language, ‘‘an entity that Response: The final rule adopts the § 83.8(d)(1) that was inadvertently qualified as an Indian tribe for the commenters’ suggestion for moving omitted in the proposed rule. See purposes of Federal law,’’ is more vague evaluation of previous Federal § 83.12(a). The final rule does not than the current ‘‘tribal political entity.’’ acknowledgment to the first phase of substantively change the list of Commenters also stated that ‘‘for the OFA review and clarifying that, once examples of evidence of previous purposes of Federal law’’ should be previous Federal acknowledgment is Federal acknowledgment in response to deleted because it is broader than shown, the petitioner need only meet requests for additions (or deletions). necessary. the criteria in § 83.11 since 1900 or the Land held by the United States for a Some commenters noted that the date of previous Federal group satisfies the existing category of proposal to evaluate criteria (b) and (c) acknowledgment, whichever is later. evidence that the group has been treated from 1934 to the present may reduce the See final § 83.12(b). Otherwise, the by the Federal Government as having advantage of previous Federal intention of the final rule is not to make collective rights in tribal lands. acknowledgment, because the types of any changes to the previous Federal The final rule simplifies the showing actions listed in proposed § 83.12(a) as acknowledgment provisions but to required after a petitioner proves evidence of previous Federal clarify them. previous Federal acknowledgment, to acknowledgment are not likely to be For example, the final rule deletes the require the petitioner to meet criterion probative post-1934. For example, there proposed new phrase ‘‘government-to- (b) (community) at present, as currently were no treaty negotiations between government’’ in proposed § 83.12(a). required, and require the petitioner to 1934 and the present, and any petitioner That proposed section provided that meet criteria (a) and (c) since 1900 or that was recognized by an Act of previous Federal acknowledgment may date of previous Federal Congress or Executive Order since 1934 be proven ‘‘by providing unambiguous acknowledgment, whichever is later. is likely already a recognized tribe. evidence that the United States See § 83.12(b). The final rule deletes the Some commenters requested Government recognized the petitioner as proposed provision allowing a clarification of the burden of showing an Indian tribe for purposes of Federal petitioner that has established previous previous Federal acknowledgment, law with which it carried on a Federal acknowledgment to meet the stating that the ‘‘reasonable likelihood’’ government-to-government relationship criteria for acknowledgment through standard of proof should apply, or that at some prior date. . . .’’ The ‘‘demonstration of substantially this standard conflicts with the ‘‘government-to-government’’ phrase continuous historical identification by requirement for ‘‘unambiguous has been deleted because it is not in the authoritative, knowledgeable external evidence’’ in proposed § 83.12(a). One current provisions and may indicate a sources of leaders and/or a governing commenter stated that the proposed rule more formal relationship than is body that exercises political influence weakens the criteria for previous currently required for previous Federal or authority, together with Federal acknowledgment because it no acknowledgment. Further, just as with demonstration of one form of evidence longer requires ‘‘substantial’’ evidence each criterion, evidence or methodology listed in § 83.11(c),’’ because the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37884 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations existing criteria are satisfactory to information. See § 83.21(b). The Response: The final rule replaces the provide adequate justification for Department will withhold any phrase ‘‘for the purposes of Federal acknowledgment. information that is protectable under law’’ with language that more closely Federal law, but may release any tracks the Federally Recognized Indian I. Automatic Disclosure of Documents redacted information that is not Tribe List Act of 1994. See 25 U.S.C. Several commenters stated that the protectable under Federal law. In 479a–1. proposed regulations increase response to the comment regarding L. Definitions transparency by requiring, throughout listing lobbyists on the Web site, the the process, prompt and automatic final rule adds that OFA’s list of 1. ‘‘Historical’’ disclosure of documents to the contacts for each petitioner, which may petitioner, without a FOIA request and Several commenters opposed the include attorneys and other proposed definition of ‘‘historical’’ to posting documents to the Internet. representatives of the petitioner, along Others requested that additional mean 1900 or earlier. These commenters with a list of anyone else who requested were concerned that the definition documents, such as all TA letters, be to be kept informed of the petition will posted on the Internet based on the implied that tracing prior to 1900 would be posted on the Web site. See not be required, allowing allegation that publishing only the § 83.22(c). The Department encourages narrative denies the public the acknowledgment of petitioners who did petitioners and others to provide their not exist as tribes before 1900 and opportunity to critically examine the submissions electronically. evidence, and is thus a denial of due ignoring over a century of relevant process. One suggested posting all OFA J. Elimination of Enrollment Limitations history. Some pointed to alternative communications and a review of each dates, such as 1830 when the Indian A few commenters objected to the petition’s status on OFA’s Web site. Removal Act was passed, or the date the Some opposed making documents deletion of current § 83.12(b), which State was admitted to the United States. available on the Web site because of requires BIA review of tribal enrollment Others stated that the definition should their concern about others appropriating of acknowledged tribes to ensure that require tracing back to the date of first their information and viewing major changes have not occurred prior sustained European contact. confidential information such as sacred to taking administrative action in favor Several commenters supported the sites. One pointed out that posting will of the tribe. These commenters state that proposed definition of ‘‘historical.’’ require additional OFA time. this review serves an important function These commenters stated that relying on One commenter stated that lobbyists by ensuring a tribe remains the tribe it 1900 greatly reduces the evidentiary should present themselves to OFA and was for the basis of acknowledgment, burden on petitioners and the be listed on a Web site. and that eliminating this section Department, prevents further Response: The final rule takes a without explanation violates the APA. penalization of tribes for disruptive significant step forward in promoting Response: The Department eliminated historical circumstances resulting from transparency by providing that the OFA this section because Part 83 is focused expansion of the United States, and will publish on its Web site the on the process and criteria for Federal because records before 1900 may have narrative portion of the petition and, to acknowledgment and this section would been lost, destroyed, or expunged. A the extent allowable under Federal law, impose limitations on newly few commenters requested that the other portions of the documented acknowledged tribes. The Department definition of ‘‘historical’’ be explicitly petition, in addition to other items of affords newly acknowledged tribes the restated in each criterion. information including but not limited same deference to determine its own A few commenters requested to: The name, location, and mailing membership as it affords other federally flexibility, to ensure the 1900 date address of the petitioner and other recognized tribes. serves as a benchmark rather than a information to identify the entity; the K. Purpose (Proposed § 83.2) definitive cut-off date. These date of receipt of the petition; a notice commenters pointed out that a of the opportunity to submit comments Several commenters opposed the petitioner may have had reliable and evidence; and a notice of the provision in § 83.2 stating that Part 83 evidence in 1901, and that such opportunity to be kept informed of establishes whether the petitioner is an evidence should be sufficient if the general actions regarding a specific Indian tribe ‘‘for the purposes of Federal petitioner provides an explanation as to petitioner. Transparency is crucial to law’’ because some non-listed tribes are why it is unable to produce earlier maintaining trust in the Federal considered Indian tribes for certain evidence. Others stated that ‘‘first acknowledgment process. The benefits under other Federal statutes. sustained contact’’ is subject to Department will endeavor to make all Other commenters opposed the disagreement among experts, so exact, information on each petition available provision in § 83.2 stating that Part 83 federally accepted sources of when first on the OFA Web site to the extent it is establishes whether a petitioner is an sustained contact occurred should be releasable under Federal law, and to the Indian tribe and ‘‘therefore entitled to a used. extent it is feasible to do so (e.g., government-to-government relationship Response: The final rule defines extraordinarily large files may instead with the United States.’’ One ‘‘historical’’ as being before 1900. The be provided upon request). commenter pointed to the Federally rule still requires tracing to a historical Nevertheless, the Department generally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of (i.e., pre-1900) tribe as set forth in will not post genealogical information 1994, and noted that it says nothing criterion (e) of 83.11. As explained on living persons, in response to about acknowledging tribes for the above, the Department considered other concerns about confidentiality and purposes of Federal law or that the dates for the start of our evaluation privacy. The final rule also allows Secretary maintains a government-to- period, but determined that the fact that petitioners to identify additional government relationship with listed more documents are generally available confidential information to be withheld tribes. This commenter disagreed with after 1900 justifies a more intensive by directing the petitioner to provide an the implication that even if a tribe is not documentary review from that date on. unredacted version and a separate recognized for purposes of Federal law, The 1900 date is a definitive start date, version redacting any confidential it might still exist. but the Department will examine all VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37885 evidence in light of the history, regional 4. Other Definitions V. Procedural Requirements differences, culture, and social A. Regulatory Planning and Review organization of the petitioner. See Some commenters suggested (E.O. 12866 and 13563) 83.10(b)(7). additional definitions in conjunction with their more substantive comments, Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides 2. ‘‘Indigenous’’ such as for ‘‘federal jurisdiction’’ and that the Office of Information and Several commenters requested ‘‘government-to-government.’’ Some Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) at the Office reinsertion of the term ‘‘indigenous’’ (to commenters suggested various edits to of Management and Budget (OMB) will come from within the continental U.S. proposed definitions—for example, a review all significant rules. OIRA has at the time of first sustained contact, commenter stated that the definition of determined that this rule is significant. rather than migrating into the U.S. ‘‘tribal rolls’’ should recognize that E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of during historical times), stating that many tribes did not have formal rolls. A E.O. 12866 while calling for Indians must have been in the U.S., at commenter suggested using the term improvements in the nation’s regulatory least in part, throughout history, and ‘‘determination’’ rather than system to promote predictability, to that it is inappropriate to delete the term ‘‘recognition’’ or ‘‘acknowledgment.’’ reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, in light of the United Nations most innovative, and least burdensome Response: The final rule does not Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous tools for achieving regulatory ends. The Peoples. incorporate any of the new suggested E.O. directs agencies to consider definitions or edits to proposed Response: In response to these regulatory approaches that reduce comments, the final rule reinserts the definitions because they are not burdens and maintain flexibility and current definition of ‘‘indigenous’’ and necessary for understanding the content freedom of choice for the public where the reference to ‘‘indigenous’’ in § 83.3. of the rule. For example, the definition these approaches are relevant, feasible, of ‘‘tribal rolls’’ already recognizes that and consistent with regulatory 3. ‘‘Tribe’’ tribes may not have a formal roll and objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes Several commenters supported the provides an alternative definition in the further that regulations must be based proposed definition of ‘‘tribe’’ as any absence of such a roll. The final rule on the best available science and that Indian tribe, band, nation, pueblo, does, however, change the term from the rulemaking process must allow for village or community. One requested ‘‘tribal roll’’ to ‘‘roll’’ to better match the public participation and an open clarification of a ‘‘community’’ versus a terminology used throughout the rule. exchange of ideas. We have developed ‘‘tribe,’’ given that ‘‘community’’ is used this rule in a manner consistent with The final rule ensures that these requirements. in the proposed definition. A ‘‘acknowledgment’’ is used to refer to commenter suggested definitions for the process by which the United States B. Regulatory Flexibility Act new terms: ‘‘Federal Indian tribe’’ and acknowledges a tribe; once a tribe is The Department of the Interior ‘‘Non-Federal Indian tribe.’’ A acknowledged, it is considered a certifies that this rule will not have a commenter stated that the definition of ‘‘recognized’’ tribe. significant economic effect on a ‘‘tribe’’ should clarify that if the tribe is substantial number of small entities not recognized, the Federal Government IV. Legislative Authority under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 does not consider it to be a tribe. One U.S.C. 601 et seq.). commenter requested adding Native Congress granted the Assistant Hawaiians to the definition. A few Secretary-Indian Affairs (then, the C. Small Business Regulatory commenters opposed the statement in Commissioner of Indian Affairs) Enforcement Fairness Act § 83.2 that the regulations determine authority to ‘‘have management of all This rule is not a major rule under 5 whether a petitioner is an Indian tribe Indian affairs and of all matters arising U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business ‘‘for the purposes of Federal law’’ and out of Indian relations.’’ 25 U.S.C. 2 and Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. It is therefore entitled to a ‘‘government- 9, and 43 U.S.C. 1457. This authority will not result in the expenditure by to-government relationship.’’ includes the authority to State, local, or tribal governments, in the Response: The final rule maintains administratively acknowledge Indian aggregate, or by the private sector of the proposed definition of ‘‘tribe.’’ tribes. See, e.g., Miami Nation of $100 million or more in any one year. Clarification of ‘‘community’’ versus Indians of Indiana, Inc. v. United States The rule’s requirements will not result ‘‘tribe’’ is unnecessary because the word Dep’t of the Interior, 255 F.3d 342,, 346 in a major increase in costs or prices for ‘‘community’’ in the definition of (7th Cir. 2001); James v. United States consumers, individual industries, ‘‘tribe’’ is merely nomenclature (as Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 824 F. Federal, State, or local government opposed to the concept of community 2d 1132, 1137 (D.C. Cir. 1987). The agencies, or geographic regions. Nor will required by criterion (b)). The final rule Congressional findings that supported this rule have significant adverse effects also separately defines ‘‘federally the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe on competition, employment, recognized tribe.’’ The final rule does List Act of 1994 expressly investment, productivity, innovation, or not change the current approach to acknowledged that Indian tribes could the ability of the U.S.-based enterprises Native Hawaiians; rather, it continues to be recognized ‘‘by the administrative to compete with foreign-based exclude Native Hawaiians from the procedures set forth in part 83 of the enterprises because the rule is limited to definition of ‘‘tribe,’’ because the Code of Federal Regulations Federal acknowledgment of Indian acknowledgment process has never tribes. applied to them. denominated ‘Procedures for The final rule also simplifies the Establishing that an American Indian D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act language in § 83.2 to instead reflect the Group Exists as an Indian Tribe,’ ’’ and This rule does not impose an language of the Federally Recognized described the relationship that the unfunded mandate on State, local, or Indian Tribe List Act of 1994; that United States has with federally tribal governments or the private sector simplification deletes the phrases recognized tribes. See Public Law 103– of more than $100 million per year. The suggested for deletion. 454 Sec. 103(2), (3), (8) (Nov. 2, 1994). rule does not have a significant or VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37886 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations unique effect on State, local, or tribal H. Consultation With Indian Tribes Brief Description of Collection: This governments or the private sector. A (E.O. 13175) information collection requires entities statement containing the information In accordance with the President’s seeking Federal recognition as an Indian required by the Unfunded Mandates memorandum of April 29, 1994, tribe to collect and provide information Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations in a documented petition evidencing required. with Native American Tribal that the entities meet the criteria set out Governments,’’ Executive Order 13175 in the rule. E. Takings (E.O. 12630) (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000), and Type of Review: Revision of currently approved collection. Under the criteria in Executive Order 512 DM 2, we have evaluated the Respondents: Entities petitioning for 12630, this rule does not affect potential effects on federally recognized Federal acknowledgment. individual property rights protected by Indian tribes and Indian trust assets. The Department distributed a Number of Respondents: 10 on the Fifth Amendment nor does it average (each year). involves a compensable ‘‘taking.’’ A ‘‘Discussion Draft’’ of this rule to federally recognized Indian tribes in Number of Responses: 10 on average takings implication assessment is (each year). therefore not required. June 2013, and hosted five consultation sessions with federally recognized Frequency of Response: On occasion. F. Federalism (E.O. 13132) Indian tribes throughout the country in Estimated Time per Response: (See July and August 2013. Several federally table below). Under the criteria in Executive Order recognized Indian tribes submitted Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 13132, this rule has no substantial direct written comments; some strongly 14,360 hours. effect on the States, on the relationship supportive of revising the regulations Estimated Total Annual Non-Hour between the national government and and others strongly opposed to Cost: $21,000,000. the States, or on the distribution of revisions. Following publication of the OMB Control No. 1076–0104 power and responsibilities among the proposed rule, the Department then currently authorizes the collections of various levels of government. hosted five additional in-person information contained in 25 CFR part consultations and two teleconferences 83. DOI estimates that the annual G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) in July and August 2014. We considered burden hours for respondents (entities each tribe’s comments and concerns and petitioning for Federal This rule complies with the acknowledgment) from this final rule requirements of Executive Order 12988. have addressed them, where possible, in the final rule. will decrease by a minimum by Specifically, this rule has been reviewed approximately 6,390 hours. Because the to eliminate errors and ambiguity and I. Paperwork Reduction Act final rule would change sections where written to minimize litigation; and is OMB Control Number: 1076–0104. the information collections occur, we written in clear language and contains Title: Federal Acknowledgment as an are including a table showing the clear legal standards. Indian Tribe, 25 CFR part 83. section changes. Burden Annual hours on burden Current sec. New sec. Description of requirement respondents hours (10 per respond- response ents) 83.7 (a)–(d), 83.7 (f)–(g); 83.21 (referring to 83.11 Conduct the anthropological and historical research re- 1,221 12,210 83.7 (e). (a)–(d), 83.11 (f)–(g)); lating to the criteria (a)–(d) and (f)–(g); Conduct the 83.21 (referring to 83.11 genealogical work to demonstrate tribal descent. (e)). 83.7 (e) ...... 83.21 ...... Provide past membership rolls and complete a mem- 38 380 bership roll of about 333 * * members (BIA Form 8306). 83.7 (e) ...... 83.21 (referring to 83.11 Complete Individual History Chart (BIA Form 8304). 11 110 (e)). On average, it takes 2 minutes per chart × 333** charts. 83.7 (e) ...... 83.21 (referring to 83.11 Complete the Ancestry Chart (BIA Form 8305). On av- 166 1,660 (e)). erage, it takes about 30 minutes per chart × 333** charts. One comment submission, from on petitioners for later stages of the comment alerted the Department to the several towns in Connecticut, was process. fact that it had previously included the submitted specifically addressing the PRA Response 1: The commenter is burden for responding to a TA review; information collection requirements in correct that the estimate only covers the because the TA review occurs following the proposed rule. The comments and burden hours for petitioners in the opening of the administrative case responses are summarized here. collecting the information to develop file, this too is covered by the regulatory PRA Comment 1: The estimate only and submit the documented petition. exemption. As such, the Department has considers the annual burden hours for Once the documented petition is removed this burden estimate. No petitioners in collecting information to submitted, the Department opens an change is necessary in response to this meet the mandatory criteria in preparing administrative case file for the comment. a documented petition and responding petitioner, and all subsequent PRA Comment 2: The estimate fails to to a Technical Assistance (TA) review, information collections are covered by include burden hours for previously and fails to consider the burden hours the exemption in 5 CFR 1320.4(c). The denied petitioners that must submit new VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37887 arguments and evidence in order to the process, including the stages that the revises part 83 in Title 25 of the Code request permission from an Office of Department is not including in its of Federal Regulations as follows: Hearings and Appeals (OHA) judge to estimate, the team spent approximately re-petition. 10,000 hours total. This experience PART 83—PROCEDURES FOR PRA Response 2: The proposed rule strongly suggests the Department FEDERAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF contained a provision that allowed underestimated the annual burden INDIAN TRIBES previously denied petitioners to seek hours with its estimate of 2,075. the opportunity to re-petition. The final PRA Response 5: The burden hour Subpart A—General Provisions rule deletes this provision. This estimate includes only the time that the Sec. comment is no longer applicable. No petitioner itself expended in preparing 83.1 What terms are used in this part? change is necessary in response to this the documented petition; the time that 83.2 What is the purpose of the regulations comment. all professionals the petitioner had to in this part? PRA Comment 3: The estimate fails to 83.3 Who does this part apply to? hire to prepare the petition is accounted 83.4 Who cannot be acknowledged under consider the burden hours on other for as non-hour cost burden. In our respondents in the Federal this part? development of the non-hour cost 83.5 How does a petitioner obtain Federal Acknowledgment process, such as State burden, we reached out to several acknowledgment under this part? governments, federally recognized petitioners (one of whom indicated the 83.6 What are the Department’s duties? tribes, and other petitioners that may total hours reached 12,000 cumulative 83.7 How does this part apply to submit information in support of or hours). No change is necessary in documented petitions submitted before opposition to a petition. response to this comment. July 31, 2015? PRA Response 3: The estimate does 83.8 May the deadlines in this part be PRA Comment 6: Provisions of the not consider the burden hours on those extended? proposed rule will slow down the who may submit information in support 83.9 How does the Paperwork Reduction acknowledgment process by: of or in opposition to a petition because Act affect the information collections in Incentivizing more documented this part? such information is voluntarily submitted only after the administrative petitions; allowing denied petitioners to Subpart B—Criteria for Federal case file is opened, and is therefore re-petition; requiring OFA time to redact Acknowledgment petition narratives; providing more covered by the exemption in 5 CFR 83.10 How will the Department evaluate 1320.4(c). No change is necessary in extensive technical assistance to each of the criteria? response to this comment. petitioners; allowing petitioners to 83.11 What are the criteria for PRA Comment 4: The preamble to the withdraw from the review process; acknowledgment as a federally proposed rule fails to describe the requiring appeals to OHA rather than recognized Indian tribe? methodology used to arrive at the IBIA; and requiring appeals of a final 83.12 What are the criteria for a previously federally acknowledged petitioner? projections. The estimate is not based determination to go to Federal district on any broad or accurate statistical data court. Subpart C—Process for Federal because there is no requirement or PRA Response 6: Overall, this Acknowledgment comment is not directly related to the mechanism in place for petitioners to Documented Petition Submission report annual burden hours. Paperwork Reduction Act burdens; 83.20 How does an entity request Federal PRA Response 4: The supporting however, the Department disagrees with the assertions that the rule will slow acknowledgment? statement submitted in conjunction 83.21 What must a documented petition with the proposed rule described the down the acknowledgment process for include? methodology for arriving at the the reasons stated elsewhere in this 83.22 What notice will OFA provide upon proposed projections, and was available preamble. No change is necessary in receipt of a documented petition? response to this comment. upon request or at www.reginfo.gov. A Review of Documented Petition revised supporting statement, which J. National Environmental Policy Act again describes the methodology used to 83.23 How will OFA determine which documented petition to consider first? arrive at the projections, has been This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the 83.24 What opportunity will the petitioner submitted to OMB in conjunction with have to respond to comments before this final rule. The comment is correct quality of the human environment OFA reviews the petition? that there is no requirement or because it is of an administrative, 83.25 Who will OFA notify when it begins mechanism in place for petitioners to technical, and procedural nature. See, review of a documented petition? report annual burden hours—the 43 CFR 46.210(i). No extraordinary 83.26 How will OFA review a documented Department examined Congressional circumstances exist that would require petition? testimony and reached out to petitioners greater review under the National 83.27 What are technical assistance for help in developing its estimates. No Environmental Policy Act. reviews? 83.28 When does OFA review for previous change is necessary in response to this K. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. Federal acknowledgment? comment. 13211) 83.29 What will OFA consider in its PRA Comment 5: Most petitioners reviews? have a team of individuals working on This rule is not a significant energy 83.30 Can a petitioner withdraw its their petitions, including group leaders action under the definition in Executive documented petition? and members, legal counsel, and Order 13211. A Statement of Energy 83.31 Can OFA suspend review of a professional researchers (such as Effects is not required. documented petition? anthropologists, historians, and List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 83 Proposed Finding genealogists). If each of these spent a 83.32 When will OFA issue a proposed quarter of their time working on a Administrative practice and procedure, Indians-tribal government. finding? documented petition, the team would 83.33 What will the proposed finding have an average of 4,160 annual burden For the reasons stated in the include? hours. For an actual case, including all preamble, the Department of the 83.34 What notice of the proposed finding the information provided throughout Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, will OFA provide? VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37888 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations Comment and Response Periods, Hearing Membership (§ 83.11(f)), and benefit of Indian tribes by establishing 83.35 What opportunity will there be to Congressional Termination (§ 83.11(g)) procedures and criteria for the comment after OFA issues the proposed Criteria and claiming that it: Department to use to determine whether finding? (1) Demonstrates previous Federal a petitioner is an Indian tribe eligible for 83.36 What procedure follows the end of acknowledgment under § 83.12(a) and the special programs and services the comment period for a favorable meets the criteria in § 83.12(b); or provided by the United States to Indians proposed finding? (2) Meets the Community (§ 83.11(b)) because of their status as Indians. A 83.37 What procedure follows the end of and Political Authority (§ 83.11(c)) the comment period on a negative positive determination will result in proposed finding? Criteria. Federal recognition status and the 83.38 What options does the petitioner Federally recognized Indian tribe petitioner’s addition to the Department’s have at the end of the response period means an entity listed on the list of federally recognized Indian tribes. on a negative proposed finding? Department of the Interior’s list under Federal recognition: 83.39 What is the procedure if the the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe (a) Is a prerequisite to the protection, petitioner elects to have a hearing before List Act of 1994, which the Secretary services, and benefits of the Federal an ALJ? currently acknowledges as an Indian Government available to those that AS–IA Evaluation and Preparation of Final tribe and with which the United States qualify as Indian tribes and possess a Determination maintains a government-to-government government-to-government relationship 83.40 When will the Assistant Secretary relationship. with the United States; begin review? Historical means before 1900. (b) Means the tribe is entitled to the 83.41 What will the Assistant Secretary Indigenous means native to the immunities and privileges available to consider in his/her review? continental United States in that at least other federally recognized Indian tribes; 83.42 When will the Assistant Secretary part of the petitioner’s territory at the (c) Means the tribe has the issue a final determination? time of first sustained contact extended responsibilities, powers, limitations, 83.43 How will the Assistant Secretary into what is now the continental United and obligations of other federally make the final determination decision? States. recognized Indian tribes; and 83.44 Is the Assistant Secretary’s final Member of a petitioner means an (d) Subjects the Indian tribe to the determination final for the Department? individual who is recognized by the 83.45 When will the final determination be same authority of Congress and the effective? petitioner as meeting its membership United States as other federally 83.46 How is a petitioner with a positive criteria and who consents to being listed recognized Indian tribes. final determination integrated into as a member of the petitioner. Federal programs as a federally Office of Federal Acknowledgment or § 83.3 Who does this part apply to? recognized Indian tribe? OFA means the Office of Federal This part applies only to indigenous Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 U.S.C. 2, 9, Acknowledgment within the Office of entities that are not federally recognized 479a–1; Pub. L. 103–454 Sec. 103 (Nov. 2, the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, Indian tribes. 1994); and 43 U.S.C. 1457. Department of the Interior. Petitioner means any entity that has § 83.4 Who cannot be acknowledged under this part? Subpart A—General Provisions submitted a documented petition to OFA requesting Federal The Department will not § 83.1 What terms are used in this part? acknowledgment as a federally acknowledge: As used in this part: recognized Indian tribe. (a) An association, organization, ALJ means an administrative law Previous Federal acknowledgment corporation, or entity of any character judge in the Departmental Cases means action by the Federal government formed in recent times unless the entity Hearings Division, Office of Hearings clearly premised on identification of a has only changed form by recently and Appeals (OHA), Department of the tribal political entity and indicating incorporating or otherwise formalizing Interior, appointed under 5 U.S.C. 3105. clearly the recognition of a relationship its existing politically autonomous Assistant Secretary or AS–IA means between that entity and the United community; the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs States. (b) A splinter group, political faction, within the Department of the Interior, or Roll means a list exclusively of those community, or entity of any character that officer’s authorized representative, individuals who have been determined that separates from the main body of a but does not include representatives of by the tribe to meet the tribe’s currently federally recognized Indian the Office of Federal Acknowledgment. membership requirements as set forth in tribe, petitioner, or previous petitioner Autonomous means independent of its governing document. In the absence unless the entity can clearly the control of any other Indian of such a document, a roll means a list demonstrate it has functioned from 1900 governing entity. of those recognized as members by the until the present as a politically Bureau means the Bureau of Indian tribe’s governing body. In either case, autonomous community and meets Affairs within the Department of the those individuals on a roll must have § 83.11(f), even though some have Interior. affirmatively demonstrated consent to regarded them as part of or associated in Continental United States means the being listed as members. some manner with a federally contiguous 48 states and Alaska. Secretary means the Secretary of the recognized Indian tribe; Department means the Department of Interior within the Department of the (c) An entity that is, or an entity the Interior, including the Assistant Interior or that officer’s authorized whose members are, subject to Secretary and OFA. representative. congressional legislation terminating or Documented petition means the Tribe means any Indian tribe, band, forbidding the government-to- detailed arguments and supporting nation, pueblo, village or community. government relationship; or documentary evidence submitted by a (d) An entity that previously petitioner claiming that it meets the § 83.2 What is the purpose of the petitioned and was denied Federal Indian Entity Identification (§ 83.11(a)), regulations in this part? acknowledgment under these Governing Document (§ 83.11(d)), The regulations in this part regulations or under previous Descent (§ 83.11(e)), Unique implement Federal statutes for the regulations in part 83 of this title VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37889 (including reconstituted, splinter, spin- version of the acknowledgment themselves be a cause for denial of off, or component groups who were regulations as published in 25 CFR part acknowledgment under these criteria. once part of previously denied 83, revised as of April 1, 1994. (3) The petitioner may use the same petitioners). (c) Any petitioner who has submitted evidence to establish more than one a documented petition under the criterion. § 83.5 How does a petitioner obtain (4) Evidence or methodology that the Federal acknowledgment under this part? previous version of the acknowledgment regulations and chooses to proceed Department found sufficient to satisfy To be acknowledged as a federally under these revised regulations does not any particular criterion in a previous recognized Indian tribe under this part, need to submit a new documented decision will be sufficient to satisfy the a petitioner must meet the Indian Entity petition, but may supplement its criterion for a present petitioner. Identification (§ 83.11(a)), Governing petition. (b) When evaluating a petition, the Document (§ 83.11(d)), Descent Department will: (§ 83.11(e)), Unique Membership § 83.8 May the deadlines in this part be (1) Allow criteria to be met by any (§ 83.11(f)), and Congressional extended? suitable evidence, rather than requiring Termination (§ 83.11(g)) Criteria and (a) The AS–IA may extend any of the the specific forms of evidence stated in must: deadlines in this part upon a finding of the criteria; (a) Demonstrate previous Federal good cause. (2) Take into account historical acknowledgment under § 83.12(a) and (b) For deadlines applicable to the situations and time periods for which meet the criteria in § 83.12(b); or evidence is demonstrably limited or not (b) Meet the Community (§ 83.11(b)) Department, AS–IA may extend the and Political Authority (§ 83.11(c)) deadlines upon the consent of the available; (3) Take into account the limitations Criteria. petitioner. (c) If AS–IA grants a time extension, inherent in demonstrating historical § 83.6 What are the Department’s duties? it will notify the petitioner and those existence of community and political (a) The Department will publish in listed in § 83.22(d). influence or authority; the Federal Register, by January 30 each (4) Require a demonstration that the § 83.9 How does the Paperwork Reduction year, a list of all Indian tribes which the criteria are met on a substantially Act affect the information collections in this continuous basis, meaning without Secretary recognizes to be eligible for part? the special programs and services substantial interruption; and provided by the United States to Indians The collections of information (5) Apply these criteria in context because of their status as Indians, in contained in this part have been with the history, regional differences, accordance with the Federally approved by the Office of Management culture, and social organization of the Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. petitioner. and assigned OMB Control Number 1994. The list may be published more § 83.11 What are the criteria for frequently, if the Assistant Secretary 1076–0104. Response is required to obtain a benefit. A Federal agency may acknowledgment as a federally recognized deems it necessary. Indian tribe? (b) OFA will maintain guidelines not conduct or sponsor, and you are not The criteria for acknowledgment as a limited to general suggestions on how required to respond to, a collection of federally recognized Indian tribe are and where to conduct research. The information unless the form or delineated in paragraphs (a) through (g) guidelines may be supplemented or regulation requesting the information of this section. updated as necessary. OFA will also displays a currently valid OMB Control (a) Indian entity identification. The make available examples of portions of Number. Send comments regarding this petitioner has been identified as an documented petitions in the preferred collection of information, including American Indian entity on a format, though OFA will accept other suggestions for reducing the burden, to substantially continuous basis since formats. the Information Collection Clearance 1900. Evidence that the group’s (c) OFA will, upon request, give Officer—Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street, character as an Indian entity has from prospective petitioners suggestions and NW., Washington, DC 20240. time to time been denied will not be advice on how to prepare the Subpart B—Criteria for Federal considered to be conclusive evidence documented petition. OFA will not be Acknowledgment that this criterion has not been met. responsible for the actual research on Evidence to be relied upon in behalf of the petitioner. § 83.10 How will the Department evaluate determining a group’s Indian identity each of the criteria? § 83.7 How does this part apply to may include one or a combination of the documented petitions submitted before (a) The Department will consider a following, as well as other evidence of August 17, 2015? criterion in § 83.11 to be met if the identification. (a) Any petitioner who has not available evidence establishes a (1) Identification as an Indian entity submitted a complete documented reasonable likelihood of the validity of by Federal authorities. petition as of July 31, 2015 must the facts relating to that criterion. (2) Relationships with State proceed under these revised regulations. (1) The Department will not require governments based on identification of We will notify these petitioners and conclusive proof of the facts relating to the group as Indian. provide them with a copy of the revised a criterion in order to consider the (3) Dealings with a county, parish, or regulations by July 31, 2015. criterion met. other local government in a relationship (b) By August 31, 2015, OFA will (2) The Department will require based on the group’s Indian identity. notify each petitioner that has submitted existence of community and political (4) Identification as an Indian entity complete documented petitions but has influence or authority be demonstrated by anthropologists, historians, and/or not yet received a final agency decision on a substantially continuous basis, but other scholars. that it must proceed under these revised this demonstration does not require (5) Identification as an Indian entity regulations unless it chooses by meeting these criteria at every point in in newspapers and books. September 29, 2015 to complete the time. Fluctuations in tribal activity (6) Identification as an Indian entity petitioning process under the previous during various years will not in in relationships with Indian tribes or VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37890 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations with national, regional, or state Indian boarding schools or other Indian (ii) Many of the membership consider organizations. educational institutions, to the extent issues acted upon or actions taken by (7) Identification as an Indian entity that supporting evidence documents the entity leaders or governing bodies to be by the petitioner itself. community claimed; or of importance. (b) Community. The petitioner (xi) A demonstration of political (iii) There is widespread knowledge, comprises a distinct community and influence under the criterion in communication, or involvement in demonstrates that it existed as a § 83.11(c)(1) will be evidence for political processes by many of the community from 1900 until the present. demonstrating distinct community for entity’s members. Distinct community means an entity that same time period. (iv) The entity meets the criterion in with consistent interactions and (2) The petitioner will be considered § 83.11(b) at greater than or equal to the significant social relationships within to have provided more than sufficient percentages set forth under § 83.11(b)(2). its membership and whose members are evidence to demonstrate distinct (v) There are internal conflicts that differentiated from and distinct from community and political authority show controversy over valued entity nonmembers. Distinct community must under § 83.11(c) at a given point in time goals, properties, policies, processes, or be understood flexibly in the context of if the evidence demonstrates any one of decisions. (vi) The government of a federally the history, geography, culture, and the following: recognized Indian tribe has a significant social organization of the entity. The (i) More than 50 percent of the relationship with the leaders or the petitioner may demonstrate that it meets members reside in a geographical area this criterion by providing evidence for governing body of the petitioner. exclusively or almost exclusively (vii) Land set aside by a State for known adult members or by providing composed of members of the entity, and evidence of relationships of a reliable, petitioner, or collective ancestors of the the balance of the entity maintains petitioner, that is actively used for that statistically significant sample of known consistent interaction with some adult members. time period. members residing in that area; (viii) There is a continuous line of (1) The petitioner may demonstrate (ii) At least 50 percent of the members entity leaders and a means of selection that it meets this criterion at a given of the entity were married to other or acquiescence by a significant number point in time by some combination of members of the entity; of the entity’s members. two or more of the following forms of (iii) At least 50 percent of the entity (2) The petitioner will be considered evidence or by other evidence to show members maintain distinct cultural to have provided sufficient evidence of that a significant and meaningful patterns such as, but not limited to, political influence or authority at a portion of the petitioner’s members language, kinship system, religious given point in time if the evidence constituted a distinct community at a beliefs and practices, or ceremonies; demonstrates any one of the following: given point in time: (iv) There are distinct community (i) Entity leaders or other internal (i) Rates or patterns of known social institutions encompassing at least mechanisms exist or existed that: marriages within the entity, or, as may 50 percent of the members, such as (A) Allocate entity resources such as be culturally required, known patterned kinship organizations, formal or land, residence rights, and the like on a out-marriages; informal economic cooperation, or consistent basis; (ii) Social relationships connecting religious organizations; or (B) Settle disputes between members individual members; (v) The petitioner has met the or subgroups by mediation or other (iii) Rates or patterns of informal criterion in § 83.11(c) using evidence means on a regular basis; social interaction that exist broadly described in § 83.11(c)(2). (C) Exert strong influence on the among the members of the entity; behavior of individual members, such as (iv) Shared or cooperative labor or (c) Political influence or authority. The petitioner has maintained political the establishment or maintenance of other economic activity among norms or the enforcement of sanctions members; influence or authority over its members as an autonomous entity from 1900 until to direct or control behavior; or (v) Strong patterns of discrimination (D) Organize or influence economic the present. Political influence or or other social distinctions by non- subsistence activities among the authority means the entity uses a members; members, including shared or council, leadership, internal process, or (vi) Shared sacred or secular ritual cooperative labor. activity; other mechanism as a means of (ii) The petitioner has met the (vii) Cultural patterns shared among a influencing or controlling the behavior requirements in § 83.11(b)(2) at a given portion of the entity that are different of its members in significant respects, time. from those of the non-Indian making decisions for the entity which (d) Governing document. The populations with whom it interacts. substantially affect its members, and/or petitioner must provide: These patterns must function as more representing the entity in dealing with (1) A copy of the entity’s present than a symbolic identification of the outsiders in matters of consequence. governing document, including its group as Indian. They may include, but This process is to be understood flexibly membership criteria; or are not limited to, language, kinship in the context of the history, culture, (2) In the absence of a governing organization or system, religious beliefs and social organization of the entity. document, a written statement or practices, and ceremonies; (1) The petitioner may demonstrate describing in full its membership (viii) The persistence of a collective that it meets this criterion by some criteria and current governing identity continuously over a period of combination of two or more of the procedures. more than 50 years, notwithstanding following forms of evidence or by other (e) Descent. The petitioner’s any absence of or changes in name; evidence that the petitioner had membership consists of individuals who (ix) Land set aside by a State for the political influence or authority over its descend from a historical Indian tribe petitioner, or collective ancestors of the members as an autonomous entity: (or from historical Indian tribes that petitioner, that was actively used by the (i) The entity is able to mobilize combined and functioned as a single community for that time period; significant numbers of members and autonomous political entity). (x) Children of members from a significant resources from its members (1) The petitioner satisfies this geographic area were placed in Indian for entity purposes. criterion by demonstrating that the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37891 petitioner’s members descend from a recognized Indian tribe, or is a portion Termination Criterion (§ 83.11 (g)), the tribal roll directed by Congress or that evolved out of a previously Department will accept it; but prepared by the Secretary on a federally recognized Indian tribe, by (ii) The Department will conduct the descendancy basis for purposes of providing substantial evidence of research necessary to determine distributing claims money, providing unambiguous Federal acknowledgment, whether the petitioner meets the allotments, providing a tribal census, or meaning that the United States Congressional Termination Criterion other purposes, unless significant Government recognized the petitioner as (§ 83.11 (g)). countervailing evidence establishes that an Indian tribe eligible for the special (3) Supporting documentation cited in the tribal roll is substantively programs and services provided by the the written narrative and containing inaccurate; or United States to Indians because of their specific, detailed evidence that the (2) If no tribal roll was directed by status as Indians with which the United petitioner meets each of the criteria in Congress or prepared by the Secretary, States carried on a relationship at some § 83.11; the petitioner satisfies this criterion by prior date including, but not limited to, (4) Membership lists and demonstrating descent from a historical evidence that the petitioner had: explanations, including: (i) An official current membership Indian tribe (or from historical Indian (1) Treaty relations with the United list, separately certified by the tribes that combined and functioned as States; petitioner’s governing body, of all a single autonomous political entity) (2) Been denominated a tribe by act of known current members of the with sufficient evidence including, but Congress or Executive Order; petitioner, including each member’s full not limited to, one or a combination of (3) Been treated by the Federal the following identifying present name (including maiden name, if any), Government as having collective rights date of birth, and current residential members or ancestors of present in tribal lands or funds; or members as being descendants of a address; (4) Land held for it or its collective (ii) A statement describing the historical Indian tribe (or of historical ancestors by the United States. Indian tribes that combined and circumstances surrounding the (b) Once the petitioner establishes functioned as a single autonomous preparation of the current membership that it was previously acknowledged, it political entity): list; (i) Federal, State, or other official must demonstrate that it meets: (iii) A copy of each available former records or evidence; (1) At present, the Community list of members based on the petitioner’s (ii) Church, school, or other similar Criterion; and own defined criteria; and enrollment records; (2) Since the time of previous Federal (iv) A statement describing the (iii) Records created by historians and acknowledgment or 1900, whichever is circumstances surrounding the anthropologists in historical times; later, the Indian Entity Identification preparation of the former membership (iv) Affidavits of recognition by tribal Criterion and Political Authority lists, insofar as possible. elders, leaders, or the tribal governing Criterion. (b) If the documented petition body with personal knowledge; and contains any information that is (v) Other records or evidence. Subpart C—Process for Federal protectable under Federal law such as (f) Unique membership. The Acknowledgment the Privacy Act and Freedom of petitioner’s membership is composed Information Act, the petitioner must Documented Petition Submission and principally of persons who are not provide a redacted version, an Review members of any federally recognized unredacted version of the relevant Indian tribe. However, a petitioner may § 83.20 How does an entity request pages, and an explanation of the legal be acknowledged even if its Federal acknowledgment? basis for withholding such information membership is composed principally of Any entity that believes it can satisfy from public release. The Department persons whose names have appeared on the criteria in this part may submit a will not publicly release information rolls of, or who have been otherwise documented petition under this part to: that is protectable under Federal law, associated with, a federally recognized Department of the Interior, Office of the but may release redacted information if Indian tribe, if the petitioner Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, not protectable under Federal law. demonstrates that: Attention: Office of Federal (1) It has functioned as a separate § 83.22 What notice will OFA provide upon Acknowledgement, 1951 Constitution receipt of a documented petition? politically autonomous community by Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20240. satisfying criteria in paragraphs (b) and When OFA receives a documented (c) of this section; and § 83.21 What must a documented petition petition, it will do all of the following: (2) Its members have provided written include? (a) Within 30 days of receipt, confirmation of their membership in the (a) The documented petition may be acknowledge receipt in writing to the petitioner. in any readable form and must include petitioner. (b) Within 60 days of receipt: (g) Congressional termination. Neither the following: the petitioner nor its members are the (1) Publish notice of receipt of the (1) A certification, signed and dated documented petition in the Federal subject of congressional legislation that by the petitioner’s governing body, has expressly terminated or forbidden Register and publish the following on stating that it is the petitioner’s official the OFA Web site: the Federal relationship. The documented petition; Department must determine whether the (i) The narrative portion of the (2) A concise written narrative, with petitioner meets this criterion, and the documented petition, as submitted by citations to supporting documentation, petitioner is not required to submit the petitioner (with any redactions thoroughly explaining how the evidence to meet it. appropriate under § 83.21(b)); petitioner meets each of the criteria in (ii) The name, location, and mailing § 83.12 What are the criteria for a § 83.11, except the Congressional address of the petitioner and other previously federally acknowledged Termination Criterion (§ 83.11 (g))— information to identify the entity; petitioner? (i) If the petitioner chooses to provide (iii) The date of receipt; (a) The petitioner may prove it was explanations of and supporting (iv) The opportunity for individuals previously acknowledged as a federally documentation for the Congressional and entities to submit comments and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37892 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations evidence supporting or opposing the Review of Documented Petition (§ 83.11(d)), Descent Criterion petitioner’s request for acknowledgment (§ 83.11(e)), Unique Membership within 120 days of the date of the Web § 83.23 How will OFA determine which Criterion (§ 83.11(f)), and Termination documented petition to consider first? site posting; and Criterion (§ 83.11(g)), in accordance (v) The opportunity for individuals (a) OFA will begin reviews of with the following steps. and entities to request to be kept documented petitions in the order of (1)(i) OFA will conduct a Phase I informed of general actions regarding a their receipt. technical assistance review and notify (1) At each successive review stage, specific petitioner. the petitioner by letter of any there may be points at which OFA is (2) Notify, in writing, the following: deficiencies that would prevent the waiting on additional information or (i) The governor of the State in which petitioner from meeting the Governing clarification from the petitioner. Upon Document, Descent, Unique the petitioner is located; receipt of the additional information or (ii) The attorney general of the State Membership, or Termination Criteria. clarification, OFA will return to its Upon receipt of the letter, the petitioner in which the petitioner is located; review of the documented petition as (iii) The government of the county- must submit a written response that: soon as possible. (A) Withdraws the documented level (or equivalent) jurisdiction in (2) To the extent possible, OFA will petition to further prepare the petition; which the petitioner is located; and give highest priority to completing (B) Submits additional information (iv) Notify any recognized tribe and reviews of documented petitions it has and/or clarification; or any petitioner that appears to have a already begun to review. (C) Asks OFA to proceed with the historical or present relationship with (b) OFA will maintain a numbered review. the petitioner or that may otherwise be register of documented petitions that (ii) If the documented petition claims considered to have a potential interest have been received. previous Federal acknowledgment and/ in the acknowledgment determination. (c) OFA will maintain a numbered or includes evidence of previous (c) Publish the following additional register of any letters of intent, which Federal acknowledgment, the Phase I information to the OFA Web site: were allowable prior to July 31, 2015, or technical assistance review will include (1) Other portions of the documented incomplete (i.e., not fully documented) a review to determine whether that petition, to the extent feasible and petitions and the original dates of their evidence meets the requirements of allowable under Federal law, except filing with the Department. If two or previous Federal acknowledgment documentation and information more documented petitions are ready (§ 83.12). protectable from disclosure under for review on the same date, this register (2) Following the receipt of the Federal law, as identified by Petitioner will determine the order of petitioner’s written response to the under § 83.21(b) or otherwise; consideration. Phase I technical assistance review, (2) Any comments or materials § 83.24 What opportunity will the petitioner OFA will provide the petitioner with: submitted by third parties to OFA have to respond to comments before OFA (i) Any comments and evidence OFA relating to the documented petition; reviews the petition? may consider that the petitioner does (3) Any substantive letter, proposed Before beginning review of a not already have, to the extent allowable finding, recommended decision, and documented petition, OFA will provide by Federal law; and (ii) The opportunity to respond in final determination issued by the the petitioner with any comments on writing to the comments and evidence Department; the petition received from individuals (4) OFA’s contact list for each provided. or entities under § 83.22(b) and provide (3) OFA will publish a negative petitioner, including the point of the petitioner with 90 days to respond contact for the petitioner; attorneys, and proposed finding if it issues a deficiency to such comments. OFA will not begin letter under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this representatives; and review until it receives the petitioner’s (5) Contact information for any other section, and the petitioner: response to the comments or the (i) Does not withdraw the individuals and entities that request to petitioner requests that OFA proceed documented petition or does not be kept informed of general actions without its response. respond with information or regarding the petitioner. clarification sufficient to address the (d) All subsequent notices that the § 83.25 Who will OFA notify when it begins deficiencies; or Department provides under this part review of a documented petition? OFA will notify the petitioner and (ii) Asks OFA in writing to proceed will be provided via the most efficient with the review. means for OFA to: those listed in § 83.22(d) when it begins review of a documented petition and (4) OFA will publish a positive (1) The governor of the State in which proposed finding and proceed to Phase the petitioner is located; will provide the petitioner and those listed in § 83.22(d) with: II if it determines that the petitioner (2) The attorney general of the State meets the Governing Document, in which the petitioner is located; (a) The name, office address, and telephone number of the staff member Descent, Unique Membership, and (3) The government of the county- with primary administrative Termination criteria. level (or equivalent) jurisdiction in responsibility for the petition; (b) Phase II. If the petitioner meets the which the petitioner is located; (b) The names of the researchers Governing Document, Descent, Unique (4) Any recognized tribe and any conducting the evaluation of the Membership, and Termination criteria, petitioner that appears to have a petition; and OFA will next review whether the historical or present relationship with (c) The name of their supervisor. petitioner meets the Indian Entity the petitioner or that may otherwise be Identification Criterion (§ 83.11(a)), the considered to have a potential interest § 83.26 How will OFA review a Community Criterion (§ 83.11(b)), and in the acknowledgment determination; documented petition? the Political Influence/Authority and (a) Phase I. When reviewing a Criterion (§ 83.11(c)). If the petitioner (5) Any individuals and entities that documented petition, OFA will first claims previous Federal request to be kept informed of general determine if the petitioner meets the acknowledgment, the Department will actions regarding a specific petitioner. Governing Document Criterion also review whether petitioner proves VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37893 previous Federal acknowledgment and, with previous Federal acknowledgment, support or supplement their comments if so, will review whether the petitioner that the petitioner meets the criteria at on the proposed finding and from the meets the criteria under § 83.12(b). § 83.12(b). petitioner to support or supplement (1) OFA will conduct a Phase II their responses to comments. technical assistance review and notify § 83.27 What are technical assistance reviews? (c) OFA must provide the petitioner the petitioner by letter of any with the additional material obtained in deficiencies that would prevent the Technical assistance reviews are paragraph (b) of this section, and petitioner from meeting these criteria. preliminary reviews for OFA to tell the provide the petitioner with the Upon receipt of the letter, the petitioner petitioner where there appear to be opportunity to respond to the additional must submit a written response that: evidentiary gaps for the criteria that will material. The additional material and (i) Withdraws the documented be under review in that phase and to any response by the petitioner will petition to further prepare the petition; provide the petitioner with an become part of the record. (ii) Provides additional information opportunity to supplement or revise the and/or clarification; or documented petition. § 83.30 Can a petitioner withdraw its (iii) Asks OFA to proceed with the documented petition? review. § 83.28 When does OFA review for previous Federal acknowledgment? A petitioner can withdraw its (2) Following receipt of the documented petition at any point in the petitioner’s written response to the (a) OFA reviews the documented process but the petition will be placed Phase II technical assistance review, petition for previous Federal at the end of the numbered register of OFA will provide the petitioner with: acknowledgment during the Phase II documented petitions upon re- (i) Any comments and evidence OFA technical assistance review of the submission and may not regain its may consider in preparing the proposed documented petition. initial priority number. finding that the petitioner does not (b) If OFA cannot verify previous already have, to the extent allowable by Federal acknowledgment during this § 83.31 Can OFA suspend review of a Federal law; and technical assistance review, the documented petition? (ii) The opportunity to respond in petitioner must provide additional (a) OFA can suspend review of a writing to the comments and evidence evidence. If a petitioner claiming documented petition, either provided. previous Federal acknowledgment does conditionally or for a stated period, (3) OFA will then review the record not respond or does not demonstrate the upon: to determine: claim of previous Federal (1) A showing to the petitioner that (i) For petitioners with previous acknowledgment, OFA will consider its there are technical or administrative Federal acknowledgment, whether the documented petition on the same basis problems that temporarily preclude criteria at § 83.12(b) are met; or as documented petitions submitted by continuing review; and (ii) For petitioners without previous petitioners not claiming previous (2) Approval by the Assistant Federal acknowledgment, whether the Federal acknowledgment. Secretary. Indian Entity Identification (§ 83.11(a)), (b) Upon resolution of the technical or Community (§ 83.11(b)) and Political § 83.29 What will OFA consider in its reviews? administrative problems that led to the Authority (§ 83.11(c)) Criteria are met. suspension, the documented petition (4) OFA will publish a negative (a) In any review, OFA will consider will have the same priority on the proposed finding if it issues a deficiency the documented petition and evidence numbered register of documented letter under paragraph (a)(1) of this submitted by the petitioner, any petitions to the extent possible. section, and the petitioner: comments and evidence on the petition (i) Does not withdraw the received during the comment period, (1) OFA will notify the petitioner and documented petition or does not and petitioners’ responses to comments those listed in § 83.22(d) when it respond with information or and evidence received during the suspends and when it resumes review of clarification sufficient to address the response period. the documented petition. deficiencies; or (b) OFA may also: (2) Upon the resumption of review, (ii) Asks OFA in writing to proceed (1) Initiate and consider other OFA will have the full six months to with the review. research for any purpose relative to issue a proposed finding. (5) OFA will publish a positive analyzing the documented petition and Proposed Finding proposed finding if it determines that obtaining additional information about the petitioner meets the Indian Entity the petitioner’s status; and § 83.32 When will OFA issue a proposed Identification (§ 83.11(a)), Community (2) Request and consider timely finding? (§ 83.11(b)) and Political Authority submitted additional explanations and (a) OFA will issue a proposed finding (§ 83.11(c)) Criteria or, for petitioners information from commenting parties to as shown in the following table: OFA must within . . . (1) Complete its review under Phase I and either issue a negative pro- six months after notifying the petitioner under § 83.25 that OFA has posed finding and publish a notice of availability in the Federal Reg- begun review of the petition. ister, or proceed to review under Phase II. (2) Complete its review under Phase II and issue a proposed finding six months after the deadline in paragraph (a)(1) of this section. and publish a notice of availability in the Federal Register. (b) The times set out in paragraph (a) response or additional information from more than 100 pages, cumulatively, of this section will be suspended any the petitioner. excluding source documents. time the Department is waiting for a (c) OFA will strive to limit the proposed finding and any reports to no VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 37894 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations § 83.33 What will the proposed finding will automatically issue a final (ii) For each exhibit listed, a statement include? determination acknowledging the confirming that the exhibit is in the The proposed finding will summarize petitioner as a federally recognized administrative record reviewed by OFA the evidence, reasoning, and analyses Indian tribe if OFA does not receive a or is a previous final determination of that are the basis for OFA’s proposed timely objection with evidence a petitioner issued by the Department. finding regarding whether the petitioner challenging the proposed finding that (b) The Department will not consider meets the applicable criteria. the petitioner meets the additional comments or evidence on the (a) A Phase I negative proposed acknowledgment criteria. proposed finding submitted by finding will address that the petitioner (b) If OFA has received a timely individuals or entities during this fails to meet any one or more of the objection and evidence challenging the period. following criteria: Governing Document favorable proposed finding, then the (§ 83.11(d)), Descent (§ 83.11(e)), Unique petitioner will have 60 days to submit § 83.39 What is the procedure if the Membership (§ 83.11(f)), or a written response, with citations to and petitioner elects to have a hearing before an Congressional Termination (§ 83.11(g)). explanations of supporting evidence, ALJ? (b) A Phase II proposed finding will and the supporting evidence cited and (a) If the petitioner elects a hearing to address whether the petitioner meets explained in the response. The challenge the proposed finding before the following criteria: Indian Entity Department will not consider additional an ALJ, OFA will provide to the Existence (§ 83.11(a)), Community comments or evidence on the proposed Departmental Cases Hearings Division, (§ 83.11(b)), and Political Influence/ finding submitted by individuals or Office of Hearings and Appeals, copies Authority (§ 83.11(c)). entities during this response period. of the negative proposed finding, critical documents from the administrative § 83.34 What notice of the proposed § 83.37 What procedure follows the end of finding will OFA provide? record that are central to the portions of the comment period on a negative the negative proposed finding at issue, proposed finding? In addition to publishing notice of the and any comments and evidence and proposed finding in the Federal If OFA has received comments on the responses sent in response to the Register, OFA will: negative proposed finding, then the proposed finding. (a) Provide copies of the proposed petitioner will have 60 days to submit (1) Within 5 business days after finding and any supporting reports to a written response, with citations to and receipt of the petitioner’s hearing the petitioner and those listed in explanations of supporting evidence, election, OFA will send notice of the § 83.22(d); and and the supporting evidence cited and election to each of those listed in (b) Publish the proposed finding and explained in the response. The § 83.22(d) and the Departmental Cases reports on the OFA Web site. Department will not consider additional Hearings Division by express mail or comments or evidence on the proposed Proposed Finding—Comment and courier service for delivery on the next finding submitted by individuals or Response Periods, Hearing business day. entities during this response period. § 83.35 What opportunity to comment will (2) OFA will retain custody of the there be after OFA issues the proposed § 83.38 What options does the petitioner entire, original administrative record. finding? have at the end of the response period on (b) Hearing process. The assigned ALJ a negative proposed finding? (a) Publication of notice of the will conduct the hearing process in proposed finding will be followed by a (a) At the end of the response period accordance with 43 CFR part 4, subpart 120-day comment period. During this for a negative proposed finding, the K. comment period, the petitioner or any petitioner will have 60 days to elect to (c) Hearing record. The hearing will individual or entity may submit the challenge the proposed finding before be on the record before an ALJ. The following to OFA to rebut or support the an ALJ by sending to the Departmental hearing record will become part of the proposed finding: Cases Hearings Division, Office of record considered by AS–IA in reaching (1) Comments, with citations to and Hearings and Appeals, with a copy to a final determination. OFA a written election of hearing that explanations of supporting evidence; (d) Recommended decision. The ALJ lists: and will issue a recommended decision and (2) Evidence cited and explained in (1) Grounds for challenging the proposed finding, including issues of forward it along with the hearing record the comments. to the AS–IA in accordance with the (b) Any individual or entity that law and issues of material fact; and (2) The witnesses and exhibits the timeline and procedures in 43 CFR part submits comments and evidence must 4, subpart K. provide the petitioner with a copy of petitioner intends to present at the their submission. hearing, other than solely for AS–IA Evaluation and Preparation of impeachment purposes, including: Final Determination § 83.36 What procedure follows the end of (i) For each witness listed, his or her the comment period on a favorable name, address, telephone number, and § 83.40 When will the Assistant Secretary proposed finding? qualifications and a brief narrative begin review? (a) At the end of the comment period summary of his or her expected (a) AS–IA will begin his/her review in for a favorable proposed finding, AS–IA testimony; and accordance with the following table: If the PF was: And: AS–IA will begin review upon: (1) Negative ...... The petitioner did not elect a hearing ...... Expiration of the period for the petitioner to elect a hear- ing. (2) Negative ...... The petitioner elected a hearing ...... Receipt of the ALJ’s recommended decision. (3) Positive ...... No objections with evidence were received .... Expiration of the comment period for the positive PF. (4) Positive ...... Objections with evidence were received ...... Expiration of the period for the petitioner to respond to comments on the positive PF. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 37895 (b) AS–IA will notify the petitioner (1) Demonstrates previous Federal § 83.46 How is a petitioner with a positive and those listed in § 83.22(d) of the date acknowledgment under § 83.12(a) and final determination integrated into Federal he/she begins consideration. meets the criteria in § 83.12(b); or programs as a federally recognized Indian tribe? § 83.41 What will the Assistant Secretary (2) Meets the Indian Entity (a) Upon acknowledgment, the consider in his/her review? Identification (§ 83.11(a)), Community petitioner will be a federally recognized (a) AS–IA will consider all the (§ 83.11(b)) and Political Authority Indian tribe entitled to the privileges evidence in the administrative record, (§ 83.11(c)) Criteria. and immunities available to federally including any comments and responses (b) AS–IA will issue a final recognized Indian tribes. It will be on the proposed finding and any the determination declining included on the list of federally hearing transcript and recommended acknowledgement as a federally recognized Indian tribes in the next decision. recognized Indian tribe when he/she scheduled publication. (b) AS–IA will not consider comments finds that the petitioner: (b) Within six months after submitted after the close of the acknowledgment, the appropriate (1) In Phase I, does not meet the comment period in § 83.35, the response Bureau of Indian Affairs Regional Office Governing Document (§ 83.11(d)), period in § 83.36 or § 83.37, or the will consult with the newly federally Descent (§ 83.11(e)), Unique hearing election period in § 83.38. recognized Indian tribe and develop, in Membership (§ 83.11(f)), or cooperation with the federally § 83.42 When will the Assistant Secretary Congressional Termination (§ 83.11(g)) recognized Indian tribe, a determination issue a final determination? Criteria: or of needs and a recommended budget. (a) AS–IA will issue a final (2) In Phase II, does not: These will be forwarded to the Assistant determination and publish a notice of (i) Demonstrate previous Federal Secretary. The recommended budget availability in the Federal Register will then be considered with other within 90 days from the date on which acknowledgment under § 83.12(a) and meet the criteria in § 83.12(b); or recommendations by the Assistant he/she begins its review. AS–IA will Secretary in the usual budget request also (ii) Meet the Indian Entity process. (1) Provide copies of the final Identification (§ 83.11(a)), Community (c) While the newly federally determination to the petitioner and (§ 83.11(b)) and Political Authority acknowledged Indian tribe is eligible for those listed in § 83.22(d); and (§ 83.11(c)) Criteria. benefits and services available to (2) Make copies of the final federally recognized Indian tribes, determination available to others upon § 83.44 Is the Assistant Secretary’s final determination final for the Department? acknowledgment as a federally written request. recognized Indian tribe does not create (b) AS–IA will strive to limit the final Yes. The AS–IA’s final determination immediate access to existing programs. determination and any reports to no is final for the Department and is a final The newly federally acknowledged more than 100 pages, cumulatively, agency action under the Administrative Indian tribe may participate in existing excluding source documents. Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 704). programs after it meets the specific program requirements, if any, and upon § 83.43 How will the Assistant Secretary § 83.45 When will the final determination make the determination decision? appropriation of funds by Congress. be effective? Requests for appropriations will follow (a) AS–IA will issue a final The final determination will become a determination of the needs of the determination granting acknowledgment immediately effective. Within 10 newly federally acknowledged Indian as a federally recognized Indian tribe tribe. when AS–IA finds that the petitioner business days of the decision, the meets the Governing Document Assistant Secretary will submit to the Dated: June 23, 2015. (§ 83.11(d)), Descent (§ 83.11(e)), Unique Federal Register a notice of the final Kevin K. Washburn, Membership (§ 83.11(f)), and determination to be published in the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. Congressional Termination (§ 83.11(g)) Federal Register. [FR Doc. 2015–16193 Filed 6–29–15; 11:15 am] Criteria and: BILLING CODE 4337–15–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:58 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYR2.SGM 01JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Vol. 80 Wednesday, No. 126 July 1, 2015 Part V National Credit Union Administration 12 CFR Parts 701, 723, and 741 Member Business Loans; Commercial Lending; Proposed Rule VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37898 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules NATIONAL CREDIT UNION Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314– A. Intent and Purpose ADMINISTRATION 3428. • In 2011, Chairman Matz announced Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as NCUA’s Regulatory Modernization 12 CFR Parts 701, 723, and 741 mail address. Initiative, consistent with President FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RIN 3133–AE37 Obama’s Executive Order 13579. NCUA Vincent Vieten, Member Business Loan remains committed to regulatory Member Business Loans; Commercial Program Officer, or Lin Li, Credit Risk modernization, including modifying, Lending Program Officer, Office of Examination streamlining, refining, or repealing and Insurance, at the above address or outdated regulations. In addition to AGENCY: National Credit Union telephone (703) 518–6360 or Pamela Yu, making regulatory changes as the need Administration (NCUA). Senior Staff Attorney, Office of General arises, the Board has a policy of ACTION: Proposed rule. Counsel, at the above address or continually reviewing NCUA’s telephone (703) 518–6540. regulations to ‘‘update, clarify and SUMMARY: As part of NCUA’s Regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: simplify existing regulations and Modernization Initiative, the NCUA I. Background eliminate redundant and unnecessary Board (Board) proposes to amend its A. Intent and Purpose provisions.’’ 4 To carry out this policy, member business loans (MBL) rule to B. Key Changes to the Current MBL Rule NCUA identifies one-third of its existing provide federally insured credit unions II. Summary of the Proposed Rule regulations for review each year and with greater flexibility and individual A. Overview provides notice of this review so the autonomy in safely and soundly B. Key Provisions of the Proposed Rule public may comment. In 2013, NCUA providing commercial and business C. Amendments to the Loan Participation Rule reviewed its MBL rule as part of this loans to serve their members. The process. Public comments on the rule proposed amendments would D. Delayed Implementation E. Request for Public Comment included general requests for regulatory modernize the regulatory requirements III. Regulatory Procedures relief and more flexibility in the MBL that govern credit union commercial A. Regulatory Flexibility Act rule. Specific requests for relief focused lending activities by replacing the B. Paperwork Reduction Act on provisions regarding the loan-to- current rule’s prescriptive requirements C. Executive Order 13132 value (LTV) ratio requirement, the and limitations—such as collateral and D. Assessment of Federal Regulations and personal guarantee requirement, vehicle Policies on Families security requirements, equity lending, and construction and requirements, and loan limits—with a I. Background development lending. Commenters also broad principles-based regulatory Part 723 of NCUA’s regulations requested changes to streamline the approach. As such, the amendments defines MBLs, establishes minimum waiver process. Other commenters would also eliminate the current MBL standards for making MBLs, and broadly called for NCUA to eliminate waiver process, which is unnecessary implements various statutory limits from the MBL rule any prescriptive under a principles-based rule. The pursuant to Section 107A of the Federal requirements that are not specifically Board emphasizes that the proposed Credit Union Act (FCU Act).1 Under the required by the FCU Act. rule represents a change in regulatory current rule, an MBL is any loan, line Credit unions are an important source approach and supervisory expectations of credit, or letter of credit, where the of credit for small businesses, as for safe and sound lending would proceeds will be used for a commercial, reflected in the average member change accordingly. With adoption of a business loan balance of $217,000, and corporate, other business investment final rule, NCUA would publish they continued to lend during the 2008– property or venture, or agricultural updated supervisory guidance to 2009 recession. Over the last ten years, purpose.2 There are several exceptions examiners, which would be shared with credit unions’ business loan portfolios to this general definition.3 credit unions, to provide more extensive 5 The current rule, however, does not have experienced significant growth. discussion of expectations in relation to distinguish between commercial loans Total business loans including the revised rule. and MBLs. MBLs are defined by the unfunded commitments at federally DATES: Comments must be received on FCU Act and the current MBL rule, but insured credit unions grew from $13.4 billion in 2004 to $51.7 billion in 2014, or before August 31, 2015. commercial loans are not. As a result, an annualized growth rate of 14 percent. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the safety and soundness risk Business loans have also become a by any of the following methods (Please management requirements contained in larger share of credit unions’ loans and send comments by one method only): the MBL rule have not always been assets. During the same time period, • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// consistently applied to commercial business loans outstanding as a www.regulations.gov. Follow the loans that are not MBLs. percentage of total assets grew from 1.9 instructions for submitting comments. percent to 4.3 percent, and business • NCUA Web site: http:// 1 12 U.S.C. 1757a. loans as a percentage of total loans grew www.ncua.gov/RegulationsOpinions 2 12 CFR 723.1(a). 3 from 3.0 percent to 6.8 percent. The Laws/proposed_regs/proposed_ Under the current rule, the following are not percentage of credit unions offering regs.html. Follow the instructions for member business loans: (1) A loan fully secured by a lien on a 1 to 4 family dwelling that is the business loans also increased submitting comments. member’s primary residence; (2) A loan fully significantly. Once an ancillary product • Email: Address to regcomments@ secured by shares in the credit union making the offered by a small number of credit ncua.gov. Include ‘‘[Your name]— extension of credit or deposits in other financial Comments on Proposed Rulemaking for institutions; (3) Loan(s) to a member or an associated member which, when the net member 4 NCUA Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statement Part 723’’ in the email subject line. business loan balances are added together, are equal (IRPS) 87–2, Developing and Reviewing • Fax: (703) 518–6319. Use the to less than $50,000; (4) A loan where a federal or Government Regulations, (Sept. 18, 1987), as subject line described above for email. state agency (or its political subdivision) fully amended by IRPS 03–2 (May 29, 2003) and 13–1 • Mail: Address to Gerard S. Poliquin, insures repayment, or fully guarantees repayment, (Jan. 18, 2013). or provides an advance commitment to purchase in 5 Unless otherwise specified, all call report based Secretary of the Board, National Credit full; or (5) A loan granted by a corporate credit data is as of December 31, 2014, and other data Union Administration, 1775 Duke union to another credit union. 12 CFR 723.1(b). (such as CAMEL ratings) is as of February 24, 2015. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37899 unions, business lending is now account for roughly $141 million, or 25 management practices. The Board becoming a core service offered by many percent of total share insurance fund expects credit unions to perform the credit unions as they strive to meet the losses over the last five years. necessary risk assessments to ensure expanding needs of their small business The Board recognizes that credit sound lending practices. Through sound members. unions generally have conducted business lending, credit unions are able business lending safely, and that the to manage risk and benefit their PERCENT OF CREDIT UNIONS THAT supervision process has been largely members by offering financing tailored OFFER BUSINESS LOANS successful in addressing most of those to members’ specific circumstances, credit unions that did not perform as needs, and financial capacity. For the Credit unions with well. Accordingly, to modernize the 2004 2014 principles-based regulatory approach to total assets MBL rule and provide reasonable regulatory relief to federally insured be effective, it is essential there be a Below $100 million ...... 13 21 credit unions, the Board is proposing to clear set of supervisory expectations. Between $100 and $500 mil- alter its overall approach to regulating The Board understands that providing lion ...... 53 77 more flexibility to credit unions to Greater than $500 million ..... 72 93 commercial lending, by shifting from a Total Throughout Industry .... 19 36 prescriptive rule to a principles-based manage their business lending risks rule. Specifically, the proposed rule must be predicated on the notion that The majority of business loans are eliminates detailed collateral criteria credit unions will carefully adhere to held by larger credit unions. and portfolio limits and instead focuses sound practices. Moreover, the Board on broad yet well-defined principles believes credit unions should be 2014 that clarify regulatory expectations for expressly guided by the principle that Credit unions federally insured credit unions engaged their business loans will be designed to Total busi- Percent of with total assets ness loans total busi- in commercial lending activities. As meet the needs of the members while at (in millions) ness loans discussed further below, the proposed the same time ensuring credit union rule also distinguishes between the capital is adequately protected from Below $100 mil- broad commercial lending activities in unnecessary risk. Credit unions that lion ...... 1,855 4% which a credit union is authorized to Between $100 make business loans will best meet this engage, and the more narrowly defined standard by ensuring they have the right and $500 mil- category of MBLs subject to the statutory lion ...... 10,571 20% risk management processes and staff to aggregate limits in the FCU Act. The Greater than maintain a comprehensive $500 million ... 39,316 76% proposed new approach will eliminate some unintended consequences of the understanding of the member- borrower’s business operations and Total prescriptive approach, such as causing Through- credit unions to manage their lending financial capacity. These processes need out Indus- practices to regulatory restrictions to be ongoing for the life of the loans. try ...... 51,741 100% instead of focusing on sound risk Credit unions that maintain a strong risk management practices. The uniform management process in their As the economy has recovered from regulatory prescriptions also inhibit commercial lending activities will be the recent recession, the performance of credit unions from considering all more successful transitioning from the credit unions’ business lending has relevant risk-mitigating factors in current rule to the proposed approach. improved. The delinquency and charge- certain borrowing relationships. The Credit unions with less sophisticated off rates of business loans continue to current waiver process originally was processes or a tendency to manage risk decrease and revert to pre-recession intended to address case-by-case through strict adherence to regulatory levels. Delinquency and net charge-off situations. However, navigating and restrictions may need to update staff rates in 2014 dropped to 85bps and administering that process requires experience and risk management 28bps respectively, from 406bps and significant time and resources from both 81bps in 2010. For credit unions that methodologies to safely manage credit unions and NCUA, and can lead business loan portfolios in the future. have business loans at the end of 2014, to delays in acting on the borrower’s 98 percent are well-capitalized. In application. There are currently over B. Key Changes to the Current MBL Rule addition, a significant majority of the 1,000 active MBL-related waivers. In credit unions with business loans have 2014 alone, NCUA approved 115 MBL As mentioned above, the proposed strong CAMEL ratings. At the end of waivers. rule would significantly alter NCUA’s 2014, 81 percent of credit unions with The industry has gained valuable overall approach to regulating and business loans had an overall CAMEL experience as the level of commercial supervising credit union commercial rating of 1 or 2, compared to 69 percent loan activity has increased and credit lending activities. The proposal for those without business loans. unions navigated a deep recession. The modernizes the regulatory requirements Generally, credit unions have conducted Board now believes the principles-based that govern credit union commercial business lending safely and served their regulatory approach that is reflected in lending by eliminating the current rule’s small business members’ needs well. this proposal is preferable to the prescriptive underwriting criteria and However, there have been instances prescriptive approach in the current waiver requirements in favor of a where some credit unions have failed to rule. Under the proposed approach, principles-based approach to regulating adequately manage the risks of their NCUA supervision will focus on the commercial loans. business lending activities and this has effectiveness of the credit union’s risk led to their failure and, in some cases, management process, which will allow The proposed rule distinguishes losses to the National Credit Union credit unions greater autonomy and between the specific category of Share Insurance Fund. Poorly managed flexibility to soundly administer, statutorily defined MBLs and the business lending activities were a underwrite, and service commercial universe of commercial loans that a contributing factor in the failure of at loans in a manner that is consistent with credit union may extend to a borrower least five credit unions since 2010. They regulatory objectives and accepted risk for commercial, industrial, agricultural, VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37900 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules and professional purposes.6 Prudent The key provisions of the proposed Further, the proposed rule exempts risk assessment is necessary for all rule are discussed in more detail below. from the requirements of proposed commercial loans, and this proposal § 723.3 and § 723.4 credit unions with B. Key Provisions of the Proposed Rule focuses on the principles and both assets less than $250 million and supervisory expectations for safe and § 723.1—Purpose and Scope total commercial loans less than 15 sound commercial lending. The Section 723.1 of the proposed rule percent of net worth that are not proposed rule also adopts a broader, articulates and summarizes the rule’s regularly originating and selling or more practical approach to ensuring that overall purpose. The Board intends for participating out commercial loans credit unions have the pertinent staff the rule to accomplish two broad (qualifying credit unions). Accordingly, expertise and organizational discipline objectives. First, it establishes policy qualifying credit unions, especially necessary to support a safe and sound and program responsibilities that a smaller institutions, which are only occasionally granting a loan(s) that commercial loan program. It also credit union must adopt and implement meets the proposed commercial loan reinforces the broad principle that a as part of a safe and sound commercial definition would be alleviated from the credit union’s board of directors is lending program. Second, it burden of having to develop a full responsible for the credit union’s incorporates the statutory constraints in commercial loan policy and commercial commercial loan risk, and that the board Section 107A of the FCU Act, which lending organizational infrastructure. must establish adequate controls and limits the aggregate amount of MBLs The intent is to avoid the inclusion of provide sound governance for the credit that a credit union may make to the credit unions that infrequently originate union’s commercial lending program. lesser of 1.75 times the actual net worth minimal amounts of loans that of the credit union or 1.75 times the II. Summary of the Proposed Rule technically meet the proposed minimum net worth required under the commercial loan definition, or that A. Overview FCU Act for a credit union to be well 7 infrequently reduce their risk profile by The proposed rule would provide capitalized. selling or participating part of their loan The Board recognizes that commercial federally insured credit unions with portfolio. However, the Board notes that greater flexibility and individual lending is complex and involves credit unions need to have a board autonomy in safely and soundly making different risks than consumer lending. approved loan policy covering their commercial and business loans to meet Managing those risks entails lending activity in general. Qualifying the needs of their membership. The substantially greater effort and attention credit unions would merely need to proposed amendments modernize the than merely applying a strict limit on make sure their existing loan policy regulatory requirements that govern the aggregate amount a credit union is provides for the types of commercial credit union commercial lending allowed to invest in MBLs. Accordingly, loans granted, including satisfying all activities by replacing the current rule’s the proposed rule distinguishes between the other applicable commercial lending prescriptive requirements and the safety and soundness objectives requirements in the proposed rule. limitations, such as collateral and generally applicable to all loans for The proposed 15 percent of net worth security requirements, equity commercial, industrial, agricultural, and threshold is consistent with the requirements, and loan limits, with professional purposes and the statutory longstanding single-obligor limit broad principles to govern safe and limitations affecting MBLs. The common in the credit union and sound commercial lending. The proposed rule is intended to clarify that banking industries. The Board regards principles are predicated on NCUA’s prudential risk management is required 15 percent as a prudent level for expectation that credit unions will for all commercial loans. exempting credit unions from proposed maintain prudential risk management Proposed § 723.1 also describes which § 723.3 and § 723.4 and it coheres to practices and sufficient capital credit unions and loans are covered by standard industry practices. The commensurate with the risks associated Part 723, and which other regulations proposed $250 million asset threshold is with their commercial lending apply to commercial loans. Part 723 consistent with similar provisions the activities. The Board emphasizes that applies to commercial and member Board adopted in NCUA’s derivatives 8 the proposed rule represents a change in business loans made by federal natural- and liquidity and contingency funding regulatory approach and supervisory person credit unions and state- plans 9 regulations. With regard to asset expectations will change accordingly. chartered, federally insured natural- size, the Board is concerned that NCUA remains committed to rigorous person credit unions. The rule does not extending this exemption to credit and prudential supervision of credit apply to (1) loans made by corporate unions over $250 million in assets could union commercial lending activities. credit unions; (2) loans made by one incentivize some credit unions, Oversight will focus on the effectiveness federally insured credit union to regardless of their capacity and member of the risk management process and the another federally insured credit union; business loan needs, to unduly restrict aggregate risk profile of the credit (3) loans made by a federally insured the volume of business lending—a vital union’s loan portfolio, as opposed to credit union to a credit union service source of working capital and job compliance with prescriptive measures. organization (CUSO); (4) loans fully creation—to avoid higher prudential Responsible risk management and secured by a lien on a 1- to 4- family standards. comprehensive due diligence remain residential property that is the The Board recognizes that credit crucial to safe and sound commercial borrower’s primary residence; (5) any unions under $250 million in assets lending, and it is expected that credit loan fully secured by shares in the have more limited staff and facility unions subscribe to these overarching credit union making the extension of resources and are generally not engaged principles in administering, credit or deposits in other financial in business lending on a material scale. underwriting, and servicing commercial institutions; and (6) any loan(s) to a The proposed exemption acknowledges loans. borrower or an associated borrower, the that small portfolio exposures coupled aggregate balance of which is equal to with a generally inactive business 6 As discussed in further detail below, there are less than $50,000. certain exceptions to the proposed definition of 8 12 CFR part 703. commercial loan. 7 12 U.S.C. 1757a(a). 9 12 CFR 741.12. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37901 lending program do not warrant the are also included in the definitions defined in part 722 of NCUA’s adoption of the broader risk section of the proposed rule. Under the regulations for real estate. For other management standards included in the proposal, an ‘‘associated borrower’’ is assets, the Board expects credit unions proposal. Conversely, the Board views ‘‘any other person or entity with a to use prudent and appropriate credit unions that are holding business shared ownership, investment, or other valuation methods aligned with loans, and that are $250 million in pecuniary interest in a business or commercial lending practices that will assets or greater, as having sufficient commercial endeavor with the result in a reliable and accurate size and capacity to incorporate these borrower. This means any person or collateral value. common prudential standards into their entity named as a borrower or debtor in Net worth operations. The Board, however, invites a loan or extension of credit, or any For consistency, the proposed comment on whether all credit unions other person or entity, such as a drawer, definition of ‘‘net worth’’ provides a maintaining only relatively small endorser, or guarantor, engaged in a cross reference to NCUA’s prompt amounts of commercial loans should be common enterprise with the borrower, corrective action and risk-based capital exempt from proposed § 723.3 and or deriving a direct benefit from the loan rules in part 702, which more fully § 723.4. to the borrower.’’ address the methodology for The other regulations applying to As discussed below, for consistency, determining a credit union’s net worth. commercial loans, which are the associated borrower definition in enumerated in proposed § 723.1(c), are NCUA’s loan participation rule is ii. New Definitions substantively consistent with the proposed to be amended in a parallel Commercial loan 11 current MBL rule, with minor changes manner. The Board is proposing to add a new for clarity. Loan-to-value ratio definition to distinguish between the § 723.2—Definitions The proposed rule modifies the commercial lending activities in which current definition of ‘‘loan-to-value a credit union may engage, and the For clarity and improvement, the ratio’’ (LTV) to clarify how this ratio statutorily defined MBLs, which are proposed rule modifies the current should be calculated. Specifically, in subject to the aggregate MBL cap rule’s definitions of the following terms: calculating an LTV ratio, a credit union contained in the FCU Act.12 The Board • Associated borrower • must include in the numerator all emphasizes that all commercial loans, Loan-to-value ratio outstanding loan balances plus any whether MBLs or not, are subject to the • Net worth unfunded commitments secured by the safety and soundness requirements Additionally, the proposed rule collateral, including those from other provided in § 723.3 through § 723.7 of includes new definitions for the lenders that are senior to the credit the proposed rule, unless the credit following terms, which are not currently union’s lien position. Outstanding union is exempt from some of these defined in the MBL rule: exposures from other lenders that are provisions as provided in proposed • Commercial loan subordinated to the credit union’s lien § 723.1. Only MBLs are subject to the • Common enterprise position do not need to be included in statutory limits on the aggregate amount • Controlling interest the LTV calculation. However, the risk • of MBLs that may be held by a credit Credit risk rating system assessment performed by the credit union, per § 723.8 of the proposed rule. • Direct benefit • union should evaluate the impact on the The proposed rule generally defines a Loan secured by a 1- to 4- family borrower’s cash flow all outstanding ‘‘commercial loan’’ as any credit a credit residential property • debt owed by the borrower in union extends to a borrower for Loan secured by a vehicle determining the borrower’s ability to commercial, industrial, agricultural, and manufactured for household use sufficiently meet all obligations. In professional purposes, with several • Readily marketable collateral addition, the presence of subordinate exceptions. Specifically, the proposed • Residential property financing can have an impact on actions definition expressly specifies that the Finally, to improve the readability of taken by the credit union if it has to following loans are not commercial the rule, the proposal moves two exercise its rights to the collateral. The loans: (1) Loans made by a corporate definitions to more relevant sections of credit union should limit the amount of credit union; (2) loans made by a the proposed regulation: subordinate financing the borrower may federally insured credit union to • Construction and development loan obtain and require an equity investment another federally insured credit union; • Net member business loan balance by the borrower that is commensurate to (3) loans made by a federally insured Each of the modified, new, and the risk. This strengthens the credit credit union to a credit union service moved definitions is discussed in more union’s position and also achieves a organization; (4) loans secured by a 1- detail below. more meaningful risk sharing to 4- family residential property arrangement with its borrower. i. Modified Definitions (whether or not it is the borrower’s In addition, the proposed definition primary residence); (5) loans secured by Associated borrower clarifies that the denominator of the a vehicle manufactured for household The proposed rule replaces the LTV ratio is the market value for use; (6) any loan fully secured by shares current rule’s definition of ‘‘associated collateral held longer than 12 months, in the credit union making the member’’ with the term ‘‘associated and the lesser of the purchase price and extension of credit or deposits in other borrower,’’ and updates the definition to the market value for collateral held 12 financial institutions; and (7) any be more consistent with the months or less. The Board intends this loan(s) to a borrower or an associated combination rules applicable to banks.10 clarification to ensure that credit unions borrower, the aggregate balance of The proposed definition introduces the have appropriate collateral protection in which is equal to less than $50,000. concepts of direct benefit, common the event that the appraisal value is Loans by corporate credit unions and enterprise, and control. This and each inflated or the borrower overpays for the loans to other insured credit unions are newly defined term, as discussed below, purchased collateral. Market value is excluded from the definition because 10 12 CFR 32.5. 11 12 CFR 701.22(a). 12 12 U.S.C. 1757a. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37902 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules these loans possess characteristics that but are not MBLs and do not count may be fully repaid; or (2) when loans are distinct from the types of toward the aggregate MBL limit. Any are extensions of credit made to commercial loans that the proposal’s commercial, industrial, agricultural, or borrowers who are related directly or safety and soundness provisions are professional loan in which a federal or indirectly through common control intended to address. Loans to CUSOs state agency (or its political subdivision) (including where one borrower is are excluded from the definition has committed to fully insure directly or indirectly controlled by because loans to CUSOs, up to 1 percent repayment, fully guarantee payment, or another borrower) and substantial of the paid-in and unimpaired capital provide an advance commitment to financial interdependence exists and surplus of the credit union, are purchase the loan in full is a between or among the borrowers; or (3) authorized and governed by a provision commercial loan but not an MBL. when separate borrowers obtain loans or of the FCU Act not related to MBLs.13 Defining these as commercial loans is extensions of credit to acquire a Loans secured by a 1- to 4-family intended to ensure the credit union has business enterprise of which those residential property, whether or not it is the requisite expertise and risk borrowers will own more than 50 the borrower’s primary residence (i.e., management systems to meet the percent of the voting securities or voting owner or non-owner occupied), are requirements to maintain the interests. excluded from the commercial loan government guarantee or commitment to For purposes of the rule, substantial definition. However, the Board notes purchase. Also, any non-member loan or financial interdependence means 50 that loans secured by non-owner non-member participation interest in a percent or more of one borrower’s gross occupied 1- to 4-family residential commercial, industrial, agricultural, or receipts or gross expenditures (on an properties have risk characteristics that professional loan is a commercial loan annual basis) are derived from are more similar to commercial real but generally not an MBL.14 Although transactions with another borrower. estate loans than those of owner- these loans are not MBLs because they Gross receipts and expenditures include occupied 1- to 4- family residential are loans to non-members, they are still gross revenues or expenses, loans. Credit unions should have credit commercial loans and thus fall within intercompany loans, dividends, capital risk management policies and processes the rule’s definition and must follow the contributions, and similar receipts or suitable for the risks specific to this type same risk management practices. payments. In addition, an employer will of lending. Underwriting standards and There are two types of loans that are not be treated as a source of repayment the complexity of risk analysis should not commercial loans subject to the because of wages and salaries paid to an increase as the number of properties proposed safety and soundness employee, unless the standards financed for a borrower and associated provisions but they are MBLs and thus, described above in (2) are met. borrowers increases. When a borrower must be counted against the credit Control finances multiple properties and the union’s net member business loan As discussed above, ‘‘control’’ is repayment of the loan is dependent on balance. Specifically, loans secured by a another element of the proposed the successful operation of the multiple 1- to 4-family residential property that definition of ‘‘associated borrower’’ in residential rental units, a is not the borrower’s primary the proposed rule. Control exists when comprehensive global cash-flow residence,15 and loans secured by a a person or entity directly or indirectly, analysis of the borrower and principal is vehicle manufactured for household use or acting through or together with one generally necessary to properly that will be used for a commercial or more persons or entities: (1) Owns, underwrite and administer the credit purpose are generally not commercial controls, or has the power to vote 25 relationship. In such cases, credit loans, but they are MBLs. percent or more of any class of voting unions should analyze and administer Common enterprise securities of another person or entity; (2) the relationship on a consolidated basis. controls, in any manner, the election of The proposed definition also excludes As discussed in greater detail above, a majority of the directors, trustees, or loans secured by a vehicle generally the proposed definition of ‘‘associated other persons exercising similar manufactured for personal, family, and borrower’’ includes any other person or functions of another person or entity; or household use. As discussed in more entity with a shared ownership, (3) has the power to exercise a detail below, however, loans for the investment, or other pecuniary interest controlling influence over the purchase of fleet vehicles or to carry in a business or commercial endeavor management or policies of another fare-paying passengers are commercial with the borrower, including any person person or entity. loans. In addition, a loan to a vehicle or entity engaged in a common dealership or seller to replenish its enterprise with the borrower. Credit risk rating system Under the proposed rule, a ‘‘common regular inventory of vehicles for sale The proposed rule defines ‘‘credit risk enterprise’’ exists and loans to separate (i.e., a so-called ‘‘floor plan loan’’ or rating system’’ as a formal process to borrowers will be aggregated when (1) ‘‘vehicle inventory loan’’) is included in identify and measure risk through the the expected source of repayment for the definition of commercial loan. assignment of risk ratings. Assigning The Board emphasizes that there are each loan or extension of credit is the credit risk ratings, also referred to as several distinctions between a same for each borrower and no credit risk grades, is the standard and commercial loan and a statutorily individual borrower has another source accepted practice by commercial defined MBL, whether directly offered of income from which the loan (together lenders and other regulators for by the credit union or purchased as a with the borrower’s other obligations) establishing the level of risk associated loan participation. These distinctions with a commercial loan and the overall 14 Proposed § 723.8(b)(4) stipulates, however, that commercial loan portfolio. An effective are also discussed in more detail below, for the exclusion to apply, a credit union must relative to proposed § 723.8, which acquire the non-member loan or non-member credit risk rating system assigns risk addresses the statutory MBL limits. participation interest in compliance with applicable ratings to commercial loans at There are a two types of commercial laws and regulations and it must not be swapping inception. The ratings are reviewed and loans that are subject to the proposed or trading MBLs with other credit unions to confirmed as frequently as necessary circumvent the limit. rule’s safety and soundness provisions, 15 Any loan fully secured by a 1- to 4-family during the life of the loan to satisfy the residential property that is the borrower’s primary credit union’s risk monitoring and 13 See 12 U.S.C. 1757(5)(D). residence is neither a commercial loan nor an MBL. reporting policies. The risk ratings must VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37903 be supported by comprehensive analysis Loan secured by a vehicle manufactured included in that section of the rule and have sufficient granularity to for household use because that is the section that differentiate the level of credit risk Loans secured wholly or substantively addresses all of the requirements for associated with each borrower. The by a vehicle manufactured for construction and development loans. construct of a risk rating system usually household use for which the lien is As discussed in more detail below, consists of both quantitative and central to the extension of credit are the proposed definition of ‘‘construction qualitative risk factors. Quantitative risk generally not commercial loans for the and development loan’’ draws a factors may include the borrower’s purposes of the rule. Under the distinction between construction for an financial condition, size, collateral, and proposed rule, ‘‘vehicle manufactured income-producing property and for a guarantees. Qualitative risk factors may for household use’’ means new and used commercial property. This distinction is include, but are not limited to, the passenger cars and other vehicles such necessary to establish the appropriate ability and integrity of the borrower’s as minivans, sport-utility vehicles, prospective market value and the management, operation, and changes in pickup trucks, and similar light trucks financing period. In addition, the the economy and industry. The Board or heavy duty trucks generally examples in the current rule have been believes that an effective, accurate, and manufactured for personal, family, or eliminated because the proposed rule timely risk rating system is the household use and not used as fleet simplifies the definition of construction foundation of sound credit risk vehicles or to carry fare-paying and development loans. management for commercial loans. It passengers. In other words, loans for the Net member business loan balance allows credit union management to purchase of fleet vehicles or to carry The definition of ‘‘net member assess credit quality, identify problem fare-paying passengers are commercial business loan balance’’ also remains loans, monitor risk performance, and loans. For the purposes of the rule, a substantively the same as in the current manage the risk within its commercial ‘‘fleet’’ means five or more vehicles that rule; however, it is moved from current portfolio. A well-managed risk rating are centrally controlled and used for a § 723.21 to proposed § 723.8, which system also assists the credit union’s business purpose, including for the addresses the statutory limits on the board of directors, auditors, and NCUA purpose of transporting persons or aggregate amount of member business in monitoring and assessing the overall property for commission or hire.17 loans that may be held by a credit health of the credit union’s commercial Readily marketable collateral union. Proposed § 723.8 is discussed in loan portfolio and the effectiveness of The Board proposes to add the term greater detail below. It is more intuitive the credit union’s management.16 ‘‘readily marketable collateral’’ to the for readers for this definition to be Direct benefit rule to clarify the proposed collateral included in § 723.8 because that is the Under the proposal, ‘‘direct benefit’’ requirements. The proposed rule defines section that addresses the method for is a concept included in the amended this term as a financial instrument or calculating a credit union’s net member definition of ‘‘associated borrower,’’ bullion that is salable under ordinary business loan balance for purposes of which is discussed above. Direct benefit market conditions with reasonable compliance with the statutory cap and means the proceeds of a loan or promptness at a fair market value NCUA form 5300 reporting. extension of credit to a borrower, or determined by quotations based upon § 723.3—Board of Directors and assets purchased with those proceeds, actual transactions on an auction or Management Responsibilities that are transferred to another person or similarly available daily bid and ask entity, other than in a bona fide arm’s price market. The requirements in proposed § 723.3 length transaction where the proceeds address the overall elements necessary Residential property to administer a safe and sound are used to acquire property, goods, or Under the proposed rule, ‘‘residential services. commercial loan program. Proposed property’’ is defined as a house, § 723.3 reinforces the NCUA Board’s Loan secured by a 1- to 4-family condominium, cooperative unit, expectation that a credit union’s board residential property manufactured home, and unimproved of directors is ultimately accountable for Under the proposed rule, a ‘‘loan land zoned for 1- to 4-family residential the safety and soundness of the credit secured by a 1- to 4-family residential use. The Board proposes to add this union’s commercial lending activities property’’ means any loan secured definition to the rule to clarify that and must remain adequately informed wholly or substantively by a lien on a loans secured by a 1- to 4-family about the level of risk in the credit 1- to 4-family residential property for residential property are excluded from union’s commercial loan portfolio. The which the lien is central to the the definition of commercial loan.18 proposed rule modifies the current extension of credit. A lien is considered experience and expertise requirements iii. Definitions Moved to a Different central to the extension of credit if the for personnel involved in member Section borrower would not have been extended business lending and delineates the credit in the same amount or on as Construction and development loan qualifications required for a credit favorable terms without the lien. The To improve the readability of the rule, union’s senior executive officers and proposed definition is intended to the Board proposes to move the current staff. The proposal also provides options clarify that loans secured by a 1- to 4- definition of ‘‘construction and for how a credit union may meet such family residential property are not development loan’’ to proposed § 723.6. requirements. commercial loans for the purposes of The Board believes it is more intuitive The proposed rule requires a credit the rule. for readers for the definition to be union’s board of directors to approve a commercial loan policy that complies 16 NCUA Letter to Credit Unions 10–CU–02, 17 OGC Op. 12–0764 (Sept. 13, 2012). with proposed § 723.4. Commercial Current Risks in Business Lending and Sound Risk 18 However, loans secured by a 1- to 4-family loans may be subject to business and Management Practices. (Jan. 2010) (citing the Office residential property that is not the borrower’s economic changes that warrant frequent of Comptroller of the Currency, Comptroller’s primary residence are MBLs. Loans fully secured by Handbook, Rating Credit Risk (April 2001); NCUA a 1- to 4-family residential property that is the monitoring to ensure policy Accounting Bulletin 06–01, Attachment 1 (Dec. borrower’s primary residence are neither requirements remain effective. 2006). commercial loans nor MBLs. Consistent with the current rule, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37904 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules proposed rule requires a credit union’s monitor and control risks. Further, any party and to effectively oversee the third commercial loan policy to address staff involved in a credit union’s party relationship. Final responsibility commercial lending practices, commercial loan program must have for services provided by the third party, procedures, and organizational sufficient expertise in assessing and especially risk assessments, remains structure, and be reviewed at least managing the risks associated with the with the credit union because the risks annually, or more frequently if there is type of commercial lending in which a associated with the transaction are material change in portfolio credit union is engaged. Skills should be borne by the credit union. The third performance or economic conditions, commensurate with each particular party may be utilized for underwriting and updated when warranted. The individual’s position and level of and assessing the credit risk but the policy updates must be approved by the responsibility. credit union must ultimately make the board of directors. In addition, the board Specifically, a credit union should credit decision. of directors must understand the nature have: In addition, the credit union must and level of risk associated with the 1. Staff experience directly related to ensure that there is no affiliation or credit union’s commercial lending the specific types of commercial lending contractual relationship between the program and receive periodic updates in which the credit union is engaged; third party and the borrower or any from credit union management on the 2. Demonstrated experience in associated borrowers to avoid potential performance of its commercial loan conducting commercial credit analysis conflicts of interest. For example, a portfolio, including, but not limited to, and evaluating the risk of a borrowing circumstance where a third party is reports on overall credit risk ratings and relationship using a credit risk rating performing underwriting services for a trends, loan growth, adherence to policy system; credit union while also being and regulations, delinquencies, charge 3. Demonstrated experience in compensated by the borrower for offs, and workout activities. It is also the underwriting, processing, and obtaining the loan clearly violates the board of directors’ responsibility to conducting workout activities for the conflict of interest provisions of the ensure that credit union management types of commercial lending in which proposed regulation. In addition, the takes the necessary steps to identify, the credit union is engaged; and risk assessment performed and provided monitor, and control these risks. 4. Knowledge of the legal by the third party must be based on the The credit union must also ensure its documentation necessary to protect the credit union’s underwriting criteria, as commercial lending program is staffed credit union from legal liability, and all reflected in its commercial loan policy. with personnel demonstrating relevant law and regulation impacting § 723.4—Commercial Loan Policy appropriate expertise in managing the commercial lending activities. type of commercial lending in which In addition to the competencies listed Proposed § 723.4 is comparable to the credit union is engaged. For above, managers responsible for a credit § 723.6 of the current rule and sets out example, if a credit union wishes to union’s commercial lending program minimum expectations for risk engage in commercial lending activities should have demonstrated experience assessment of the commercial borrower to finance farm equipment, acquisition in: and for active risk management of the of farmland, or production expenses 1. Overseeing commercial credit risk commercial loan portfolio. Proposed related to farming or ranching, the credit assessment and underwriting; § 723.4 sets out the expectations and union needs to ensure its staff has 2. Managing and administering a policy requirements for credit unions expertise in underwriting, servicing, credit risk rating system; offering commercial loans and is and identifying and managing risks 3. Managing a commercial loan intended to facilitate a program that associated with agricultural loans. portfolio and being held accountable for accomplishes the dual objectives of In evaluating experience the risk in that portfolio; and providing appropriate service to the requirements, the Board is proposing a 4. Managing commercial lenders and members and managing the risk to the less prescriptive approach than that other risk managers. credit unions. The proposal provides contained in the current rule. Under the proposed rule, for greater more detail for credit unions by Specifically, the Board is proposing to flexibility, credit unions have multiple establishing the minimum risk eliminate the current two-year options to meet the experience assessment practices and procedures experience requirement and replace it requirements. For example, a credit that are consistent with accepted, safe with a broader, more flexible principles- union may meet the requirements by and sound practice within the based approach that evaluates the training and developing existing staff, commercial lending industry. overall experience of the staff involved hiring experienced professionals, or the As noted in the introductory language in a credit union’s commercial loan use of a third party such as a CUSO or of this section, the proposal specifies program, with an emphasis on an independent contractor. The Board that each credit union engaging in experience in commercial loan risk notes, however, that it is not prudent for commercial lending must ensure that its management. This includes experience credit unions newly adopting a policies have been approved by the requirements for any senior executive commercial loan program to initially credit union’s board of directors. officers who oversee the credit union’s rely solely on training and developing Further, policies and procedures must lending department and are otherwise existing staff, unless existing staff provide for ongoing control, accountable for the performance of the already possess the skills, competencies, measurement, and management of the commercial loan portfolio. It is essential and experience required. credit union’s commercial lending for the senior executive officers to have Before employing the use of a third activities. In short, the policies and a comprehensive understanding of its party, however, a credit union must procedures must ensure the credit credit union’s commercial lending ensure the third party meets the union’s commercial lending activities activities and the ability to adequately experience requirements outlined are performed in a safe and sound oversee the management of the risks above. It is vital for the credit union to manner, provide for prudent and timely associated with those activities. Senior possess sufficient in-house expertise to risk assessment and monitoring executive officers must ensure the credit fully evaluate the reasonableness and practices, and address key union implements appropriate risk accuracy of risk assessments and corresponding operational procedures. management processes to measure, recommendations provided by any third NCUA continues to expect an VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37905 appropriate separation of duties in a develop and establish its risk tolerances borrowing relationship as the current credit union’s commercial lending at both the relationship and overall rule, which is a maximum of 15 percent procedures, to prevent potential portfolio levels so that risks undertaken of the credit union’s net worth. conflicts of interest and other problems are consistent with prudential standards However, the proposed rule will allow in the loan underwriting, collection, and and are within the managerial and credit unions to exceed the general portfolio monitoring functions. An financial capability of the credit union limitation by 10 percent of the credit appropriate separation of duties for to accommodate. Accordingly, the union’s net worth, if the amount above underwriting, portfolio monitoring, and proposal eliminates prescriptive risk the 15 percent limit is fully secured by collection functions provides for a management requirements for LTV readily marketable collateral. This is strong internal control to prevent fraud ratios, minimum equity investments, consistent with the limit allowed by and error. Credit unions should strive to portfolio concentration limits for types other banking regulators.20 achieve separation of duties wherever of loans, and personal guarantees. As a 4. Qualifications and experience possible. result, the need for waivers of these requirements for lending staff. The A safe and sound lending program is requirements is also eliminated. The proposal reflects the importance of a beneficial to both the member and the Board emphasizes, however, that the properly staffed commercial loan credit union. Hence, a key principle removal of the prescriptive department, which is essential to underlying the proposal is that a credit requirements from the rule does not providing competent member service union can meet its mission and best relieve the credit union from setting and to actively managing risk. Credit serve its commercial members by appropriate limits as part of its overall unions will, in developing their staffing providing financing designed to meet commercial lending program. In fact, requirements, consider relevant factors the unique needs of each member, the Board believes these internal specific to the credit union and to the consistent with the financial capacity of constraints are necessary risk mitigation needs of its commercial borrowing both the member and the credit union. practices and expects credit unions to members. Staffing should be determined Thus, the proposed rule contemplates establish prudent limits in their policies based on loan volume, projected loan risk management processes that include appropriate for the credit union’s risk growth, trade area, complexity of the procedures for achieving a tolerance and management capability. borrowing relationships, types of loans comprehensive understanding of the NCUA will incorporate expectations permitted, and any other unique borrower’s operations, financial regarding risk management practices, influences on the credit union’s condition, and the industry and market such as LTV ratios and portfolio commercial loan portfolio. In in which the business operates. In concentration limits, into supervisory determining staffing levels, the credit addition, the proposal contemplates that guidance issued with any final rule union should consider appropriate the credit union will actively manage adopted by the Board. levels of management, relationship risks associated with its commercial As proposed, § 723.4 would require managers, and support staff as may be loan program, which includes that a credit union’s commercial loan required to ensure the needs of the submitting on a regular basis to senior policy must address each of the membership are responsibly serviced in management and the board of directors following areas: a safe and sound manner. reports on the performance of the 1. Types of commercial loans 5. Loan approval processes. This new portfolio. permitted. This provision, which is section of the proposal specifies that the Proposed § 723.4 also reinforces carried over from the current rule, credit union’s policy must establish current supervisory expectations that reflects the fundamental principle that lending authority for approving credit credit unions will adopt a formal credit loans offered by a credit union should decisions. A credit union must establish risk rating system to identify and meet the needs of its membership. The a process that assigns credit approval quantify the level of risk within their credit union should analyze its authority to individuals or committees commercial loan portfolios.19 Credit risk membership and ensure its commercial making such decisions commensurate rating systems are the standard method lending staff has the necessary with the individual’s or committee’s used by commercial lenders for expertise, gained through experience experience in evaluating and identifying and quantifying credit risk at and training, to understand the needs of understanding commercial loan risk. In the borrower, borrowing relationship the membership and the types of loans addition, the approval authorities and and overall commercial loan portfolio offered. system should ensure an adequate level levels. The proposed rule clarifies the 2. Trade area. This provision is also of review and approval by senior minimum requirements for assessing carried over from the current rule. A management prior to the loan decision credit risk and the processes necessary credit union must be certain that it is for complex and/or large loans or credit to support an accurate and reliable capable of serving its identified trade relationships. All lending authority credit risk rating system. Consistent area. Effective risk management requires limits should be assigned based on the with the proposed rule’s emphasis on that the credit union has the ability to aggregate loan relationship of the responsible risk management by credit make periodic site visits to evaluate the member and associated borrowers. The unions, future examinations will benefit borrower’s operations and inspect the system should provide for adequate by greater focus on the accuracy and collateral. oversight and review of the loan effectiveness of a credit union’s use of 3. Maximum loan amounts, both in approval process, with all loan its credit rating system to identify and terms of loan category and to any one approvals or denials tracked by loan manage risk. borrower or group of associated department management and Another key principle underlying the borrowers. This proposed section now periodically reported to senior proposal is that a credit union must combines language from current § 723.6 management. concerning maximum loan amounts by 6. Underwriting standards. The 19 While a credit union may use a risk rating type of loan with language from current proposed rule clarifies the requirements methodology developed by a third party, the credit § 723.8, describing maximum amounts for assessing risk at inception and over union must perform appropriate due diligence on the methodology and determine it meets the credit for loans to one borrower or a group of the life of the loan. This new section union’s needs for properly categorizing the risk of associated borrowers. The proposal commercial loans. would impose the same limit for one 20 12 CFR 32.3. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37906 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules provides in greater detail the types of sufficient to support the financial estate. The LTV ratios for equipment considerations and analyses that are analysis and the risk assessment of the and real estate should reflect influences required for proper commercial loan credit decision. Financial statement on the marketability of the collateral, underwriting. quality is determined by the level of such as age, condition, and potential The level and depth of credit analysis assurance provided by the preparer and alternative uses of the collateral, and be and risk assessment should be the required professional standards consistent with prudent commercial commensurate with the overall risk the supporting the preparer’s opinion. In lending practice. relationship poses to the credit union many cases, tax returns and/or financial The standards should also set forth based on its size, credit risk rating, and statements professionally prepared in the requirements for establishing an complexity. The policy must address accordance with generally accepted enforceable and perfected lien position the required analysis and depth of the accounting principles (GAAP) will be for different types of collateral. The financial review performed to support sufficient for less complex borrowing standards should also establish the credit decision. It should establish relationships, such as those that are procedures and processes to determine the approval process, including the limited to a single operation of the if property proposed as collateral has lending authorities and the borrower and principal with relatively been affected by contamination of documentation of the credit decision. It low debt. For more complex and larger hazardous material, either by the should outline the required components borrowing relationships, such as those borrower’s own operations, historic use of the credit approval document. The involving borrowers or principals with by previous owners, or from approval process and documentation significant loans outstanding or neighboring commercial operations, and should provide sufficient information to multiple or interrelated operations, the should outline processes to limit the allow the approving body to make a credit union should require borrowers exposure to the credit union for any fully informed credit decision. and principals to provide either (i) an possible liability. The credit approval document should auditor’s review of the financial 7. Risk Management Processes. The be in a standard, logical format and statements prepared consistent with risk associated with commercial lending provide all relevant information. GAAP to obtain limited assurance (i.e., is dynamic due to changing influences Standard formats provide for a a ‘‘review quality’’ financial statement), on the market and operational consistent and fair process for or (ii) an independent financial conditions of the borrower. The evaluating credit to all borrowers. statement audit under generally proposed rule requires the credit union The borrower analysis should focus accepted auditing standards (GAAS) for to establish policies and procedures to on satisfactory borrower payment the expression of an opinion on the identify and manage risk at the history, along with a review and financial statements prepared in inception of the loan and throughout the explanation of the financial trends of accordance with GAAP (i.e., an ‘‘audit life of the loan. Specific components to the borrower based on a reasonably long quality’’ financial statement). be addressed by the credit union are set period to establish a reliable trend. The In either case, the credit union’s out in the proposal and include: analysis should focus on income and policy should establish a threshold for (i) Use of loan covenants, when expense trends, debt service ability, the required financial reporting. The warranted. A change in risk is generally balance sheet changes and the impact of policy should also establish the reflected in an adverse change in the those changes on the ability to service requirements for financial projection, financial condition of the borrower or debt. The analysis should discuss the which will ensure the borrower is associated borrowers. Thus, the credit required evaluation of related parties actually planning and managing union’s policy should establish the and the influence of those parties on the operations to achieve future goals. requirements for the use of financial repayment ability of the borrower. Financial statement projections should covenants, financial reporting and The policy must establish due be required when the historic regular site visits. Early detection of diligence requirements to evaluate the performance does not support the adverse changes in the borrower’s other sources of income or losses proposed debt repayment, or a operation will provide the credit union affecting the guarantors or principals to structural change in the future with the best opportunity to assist the determine the global financial condition operations of the borrower is anticipated member and protect itself from losses. and the debt service ability of the and repayment depends on the success (ii) Periodic review. The credit union borrower. The commercial loan policy of the changes. The borrower or loan policy must set forth the should also set the requirements for the principals of the borrower should requirements for periodic loan financial reporting to support a credit prepare the projection, as it is they who relationship review. The Board notes decision. It should address the must execute and achieve the projected that areas to consider include frequency minimum criteria for historic reporting plan. of site visits, periodic financial at the inception of the loan, as well as Finally, the proposal calls for the reporting, and comprehensive review of regular reporting after the loan is closed, credit union to establish underwriting the relationship. The Board also notes and the required quality of financial standards to include LTV ratio limits that a standard practice in this respect information to establish an accurate and and methods for valuing all types of is to review the relationship from a reliable assessment of financial trends. collateral authorized. For real estate financial and operational standpoint on Risks should be monitored throughout valuation, the methods need to comply an annual basis, simultaneous with the the life of the loan based on periodic with Part 722 of NCUA’s regulations. timely submission of the fiscal year-end review of the financial position of the The standards should set minimum financial statements. borrower and site visits to detect any collateral requirements based on the (iii) A credit risk rating system. The operational changes. collateral characteristics and risk ability to quantify and report the level The proposal also notes that associated with the borrowing of risk is the paramount responsibility underwriting standards must address relationships. For dynamic assets with of the credit union. Accordingly, the the quality of the financial information changing quantities and value, such as proposed rule requires the credit union used to make the credit decision and accounts receivable and inventory, LTV to incorporate a credit risk rating system ensure that the degree of verification ratios should be lower than more stable to analyze and describe the credit risk reflected in the financial information is assets such as new equipment and real of each loan. A risk rating system is a VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37907 standard industry practice utilized by to the loan policy need to be tracked The proposal requires that a credit commercial lenders, a longstanding and periodically reported to senior union must establish a policy for NCUA supervisory expectation, and management and the board. monitoring collateral, including systems required by other regulators to monitor and processes to respond to changes in § 723.5—Collateral and Security and quantify risk.21 asset values. For example, real estate in An effective risk rating system Collateral good condition and in demand may be establishes risk grades that are applied All of the specific prescriptive limits inspected less frequently than other to each loan, with grades ranging from and requirements related to collateral in types of assets such as current assets, low risk to high risk. The risk rating the current rule have been eliminated which can undergo more frequent system should incorporate a sufficient and replaced with the fundamental changes in value and which require number of risk grades to differentiate principle that commercial loans must be regular reporting and monitoring to the level of credit risk in different loans, appropriately collateralized. While the ensure continued compliance with and should be supported by appropriate proposal simplifies the collateral collateral requirements. analysis of the borrower and associated Unsecured commercial lending requirements, it is predicated on borrowers. presents additional risk to the lender. NCUA’s expectation that commercial The credit risk rating is assigned to Such lending should be limited and loans require collateral sufficient to each loan at origination and reviewed treated as an exception, to be offered protect the credit union against the and adjusted periodically over the life of only when the additional risk is associated risk. The majority of loans the loan. All credit unions should adequately offset by appropriate risk granted support either the purchase of ensure the accuracy of the credit risk mitigants. Examples of some of these an asset or working capital to fund ratings and that the process for risk mitigants include a stable record of inventory or accounts receivable during determining the risk ratings is profitability, superior and consistent periodically validated. Both the the business cycle. At a minimum, those debt service coverage, a low debt-to- quantitative inputs and the expertise assets should collateralize the loan. worth ratio, and financially strong Accordingly, the proposal reflects the and judgment of staff responsible for guarantors. The unsecured loans should expectation that a credit union making assigning the ratings are critical in be tracked and the volume of such loans a commercial loan will require the making the credit decision and in periodically reported to senior borrower to provide collateral that is assigning risk ratings. The system management and the board. The credit appropriate for the type of transaction should provide for well-defined and union should set prudent portfolio and the risk associated with the clear criteria for each risk rating and limits for these types of loans, measured borrowing relationship. Credit unions promote consistency in assigning and in terms of a reasonable percentage of must use sound judgment when reviewing ratings. the credit union’s net worth. The evaluation should include requiring collateral and will require Personal Guarantees quantitative factors based on financial collateral coverage for each commercial performance and qualitative factors loan in an amount that is sufficient to Consistent with the overall, based on management, market, and offset the credit risk associated with that principles-based approach underlying business environmental considerations. loan. this proposal, the proposed rule An effective risk rating system will The marketability and type of removes the explicit requirement allow for active risk management of collateral should also be considered in contained in the current rule that credit individual member loans and the determining the collateral requirements. unions obtain a personal guarantee from portfolio. Marketability can be influenced by the the principal(s) of the borrower. The The procedures and policies outlined age, condition, and alternative uses of Board notes, however, that having the in NCUA Accounting Bulletin No. 06, the collateral. For depreciating assets principal(s) of the borrower commit Attachment 1, Loan Review Systems or such as equipment or vehicles, newer their personal liability to the repayment any updates to this guidance must be collateral in good condition would obligation is, in most cases, very reflected in the credit union’s policy. warrant a relatively higher loan-to-value important for commercial lending. This guidance outlines the minimum ratio. Collateral with limited alternative Accordingly, the proposed rule makes requirements for the application and uses, such as single-purpose real estate, clear that excusing principals from administration of an effective risk rating or assets with limited useful life, such providing their personal guarantee for and commercial loan review process. as used equipment or vehicles, would the repayment of the loan may only be NCUA’s assessment of a credit union’s warrant a lower loan-to-value ratio. The done with appropriate corresponding risk rating process will be a major term of the loan should also be underwriting parameters and portfolio emphasis of examinations. reflective of the anticipated useful life of safeguards. The credit union should set (iv) Loan exceptions. The commercial the collateral, which is determined prudent portfolio limits for these types loan policy may allow for exceptions to based on the type of collateral and its of loans, measured in terms of a policy when necessary to meet the expected use. In addition, credit unions reasonable percentage of the credit unique circumstances of a borrowing should consider the volatility of the union’s net worth. Commercial loans relationship and doing so would not asset as it relates to value and without a personal guarantee should be create undue risk to the credit union. quantities. Specifically, current assets, tracked and periodically reported to The policy must establish the process especially accounts receivable and senior management and the board. for approval and documentation of an inventory, are dynamic, with changing Personal guarantees provide an exception to loan policy. All exceptions market values and regular fluctuation in additional form of credit enhancement quantity on hand. Accordingly, when for a commercial loan. In small 21 NCUA Letter to Credit Unions 10–CU–02, these assets serve as collateral, a lower business, investor real estate, and Current Risks in Business Lending and Sound Risk loan-to-value ratio is warranted to privately held entity lending, it is Management Practices. (Jan. 2010) (citing The account for the volatility. Also, when standard industry practice for principals Office of Comptroller of the Currency, Comptroller’s establishing loan-to-value limits, credit of the business to assume the majority Handbook, Rating Credit Risk (April 2001); NCUA Accounting Bulletin 06–01, Attachment 1 (Dec. unions should align their policies with of the risk by personally guaranteeing 2006). prudent commercial lending practices. the loan. Business owners or principals VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37908 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules will benefit the most from the success project. As specified in the proposal, prospective market value method is of the business operation; therefore, it is ‘‘income producing’’ means any described in the Uniform Standards of appropriate for principals to shoulder property that generates income from the Professional Appraisal Practice the bulk of the risk by committing their rental or sale of the units constructed (Statement 4), which discusses the personal guarantee. with loan proceeds and the repayment method for valuing a completed and A personal guarantee by the principal of the loan is dependent on the stabilized construction project. The offers additional financial support to successful completion of the project. language in the proposed rule describes back the loan, but more importantly it ‘‘Commercial purpose,’’ by contrast, is a two different aspects of this approach, solidifies the long-term commitment by term that applies to structures that do based on whether the property is held the principal to the success of the not directly generate income but for a commercial or an income- business operation. The most effective enhance the operation of a commercial producing use. The first method, ‘‘as- guarantee will be from the principals or industrial operation, such as a completed,’’ is for a commercial who have control of the borrower’s warehouse, manufacturing facility, and purpose building, while the second, ‘‘as- operation and have sufficient financial management office space. The proposal stabilized,’’ is for income-producing real resources at risk. A firm commitment by also clarifies that a construction and estate. such a principal is vital to preserving development loan includes any loan for Finally, the proposed rule clarifies the the value of the borrower’s business, the construction or renovation of real requirements for administering a either by improving operations or, in the estate where prudent practice requires construction and development loan worst case, by preserving asset values in multiple disbursements as the project process, including requiring appropriate the event of default and liquidation. The progresses and the ultimate valuation of disbursement controls, to ensure the guarantor’s economic incentive is to the project and collateral protection is project is adequately funded and manage the business successfully and determined from the completed project. managed to reduce risk. The proposed retain value, which will ultimately serve The proposed rule also establishes rule requires a submission of a line-item to offset any deficiency the guarantor procedures for the valuation of budget by the borrower and calls for it might otherwise be obligated to pay. collateral for construction and to be reviewed and accepted by a development loans. As noted above, in qualified individual representing the § 723.6—Construction and Development this context, there is significant risk, credit union’s interest. It outlines the Loans aside from credit risk to the lender, so necessary components of the Construction and development the proposal provides significant detail disbursement process that will ensure lending represents an important and regarding collateral value and that funds are disbursed as planned and necessary service that credit unions can preserving that value through diligent in accordance with the budget for work provide to their membership. The Board loan administration. completed and to ensure that the is also concerned, however, that As proposed, the rule would outline collateral protection has not been construction and development lending two distinct methods for determining adversely affected by intervening liens. presents risk, in addition to credit risk, collateral value: One focused on cost, With the clarification of allowable in the areas of loan disbursement the other on market value. The proposed costs, the establishment of the concept administration and valuation of rule states explicitly that the credit of prospective market value, and an collateral. Credit unions that elect to union must use the lesser value outline of required loan administration pursue this line of business must protect resulting from these two valuation practices, the proposed rule sets out against those risks by ensuring they methods in its determination of policies and procedures that are in line have specific expertise and experience, collateral value. This protection ensures with contemporary commercial supported by appropriate systems, to the sufficiency of the investment by the construction lending practices. mitigate those risks. In addition to these borrower into the project. Requiring § 723.7—Prohibited Activities minimum requirements for evaluating credit unions to use the valuation credit risk, the proposed rule outlines method that projects the lesser value The prohibitions contained in current separate requirements that pertain will ensure that the borrower has capital § 723.2 have been moved to proposed exclusively to construction and at risk and will help the credit union to § 723.7 and are essentially unchanged, development lending. The proposed establish the appropriate balance in the except for minor clarifications in the rule clarifies the definition of a sharing of risk between lender and wording that are not intended to reflect construction and development loan, borrower. Requiring an evaluation of the substantive change. This section of the describes alternative methods for prospective market value will guard proposed rule also now includes valuing a construction project, and against the risk of financing provisions governing conflicts of explains which costs are considered overbuilding in the local real estate interest, which have been taken allowable in determining value of the market. virtually intact from § 723.5(b) of the project and therefore may be funded The first method entails an evaluation current rule. The proposal also adds a from loan proceeds. Finally, the of the cost to complete the project. The clause to clarify what it means to be proposal outlines required procedures proposal describes allowable costs for ‘‘independent from the transaction’’ and to be followed in the administration of valuation and funding purposes specifically provides that any third construction and development loans. consistent with prudent commercial party providing advice or support to the The proposal sets forth a new practice. This description supersedes credit union in connection with its definition for construction and two legal opinion letters issued by commercial loan program may not development loans that distinguishes NCUA’s Office of General Counsel in receive compensation of any sort that is between income-producing property 2001 and 2005, respectively.22 contingent on the closing of the loan. and projects built for a commercial The proposal also describes a second This would include, for example, a purpose. This distinction is necessary valuation method, which is the broker or finder who anticipates for determining the duration of the prospective market value method. The receiving remuneration from the financing period, as established in this borrower or a related party upon the section under the prospective market 22 OGC Op. 01–0422 (June 7, 2001); OGC Op. 05– funding of the loan. The proposal value method of valuing a construction 0243 (May 25, 2005). recognizes that such a party has an VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37909 interest that could conflict with the proposed commercial loan definition: TABLE—COMPARISON OF MEMBER interest of the credit union in making a Loans secured by a 1- to 4-family BUSINESS LOAN AND COMMERCIAL sound credit risk decision. The Board residential property and loans secured LOAN DEFINITIONS—Continued believes that having the prohibitions by a vehicle manufactured for and the conflicts of interest provisions household use. The Board emphasizes, Commer- in a single section of the rule makes however, that while these loans are not Type of loan MBL cial loan sense from an organizational standpoint considered to be commercial loans and will facilitate understanding of and subject to the safety and soundness Member business Yes 27 ...... No. compliance with its provisions. provisions in the rule, appropriate risk loan secured by management is still required. a vehicle manu- § 723.8—Aggregate Member Business The proposal defines two types of factured for Loan Limit; Exclusions and Exceptions household use. business loans as commercial loans that Business loan with No ...... No. As discussed above, one of the are not defined as MBLs for purposes of aggregate net underlying principles for the proposed the statutory MBL limit. The two loans member busi- revisions to the MBL rule is the defined as commercial loans but not ness loan bal- recognition that there are safety and MBLs are: ance less than soundness risks inherent in the making 1. Loans in which a federal or state $50,000. of commercial loans, and that managing agency (or its political subdivision) fully Commercial loan No ...... No. those risks entails substantially greater insures repayment, fully guarantees fully secured by effort and attention than merely repayment, or provides an advance shares in the applying a rigid limit on the aggregate credit union commitment to purchase the loan in making the ex- amount a credit union is allowed to full; and tension of credit invest in such loans. Nevertheless, the 2. Non-member commercial loans or or deposits in FCU Act does impose such a limit, and non-member participation interests in a other financial in- one purpose of the rule is to address commercial loan made by another stitutions. that statutory limit. Section 723.8 of the lender, provided the federally insured Commercial loan in No ...... Yes.28 proposed rule accomplishes that credit union acquired the non-member which a federal objective. loans and participation interests in or state agency Proposed § 723.8 sets out the statutory compliance with all relevant laws and (or its political aggregate limits of Section 107A of the regulations and it is not, in conjunction subdivision) fully insures repay- FCU Act.23 The general aggregate with one or more other credit unions, statutory limit on MBLs is applied in ment, fully guar- trading member business loans to antees repay- the current rule as the lesser of 1.75 circumvent the aggregate limit.25 ment, or pro- times the credit union’s net worth or Further, loans secured by a 1- to 4- vides an ad- 12.25 percent of the credit union’s total family residential property that is not vance commit- assets.24 The Board notes that while the the primary residence of the borrower ment to pur- minimum net worth requirement for are not commercial loans but they are chase the loan in most credit unions to be well- included in the MBL definition, and full. 29 capitalized is the 7 percent leverage therefore, must be included in the Non-member com- No ...... Yes. mercial loan or ratio, it can be a higher amount if a aggregate limit calculation. credit union is subject to a risk-based non-member net worth requirement that is higher participation in- TABLE—COMPARISON OF MEMBER terest in a com- than the amount required by the 7 BUSINESS LOAN AND COMMERCIAL mercial loan percent leverage ratio. Thus the MBL LOAN DEFINITIONS made by another limit should not be expressed as an lender. absolute percentage but rather as 1.75 Commer- times the applicable net worth Type of loan MBL cial loan The Board emphasizes that a credit requirement for a credit union to be union’s non-member commercial loans categorized as well-capitalized. For Loan fully secured No ...... No. or participation interests in non-member greater consistency with the statute, by a 1- to 4-fam- commercial loans made by another proposed § 723.8(a) more faithfully ily residential lender 30 continue to be excluded from incorporates the statutory language property (bor- rower’s primary 27 contained in the FCU Act. residence). If the outstanding aggregate net member business loan balance is greater than $50,000. The proposal also clarifies the Member business Yes 26 ...... No. 28 If the outstanding aggregate net member distinction between commercial loans loan secured by subject to the safety and soundness business loan balance is greater than $50,000. a 1- to 4-family 29 If the outstanding aggregate net member provisions and MBLs subject to the residential prop- business loan balance is greater than $50,000. statutory limit. The approach taken in erty (not the bor- 30 Federally insured credit unions are authorized the proposal is to indicate that ‘‘member rower’s primary to purchase participation interests in loans made by business loan’’ generally means any residence). other lenders to credit union members. 12 U.S.C. 1757(5)(E); 12 CFR 701.22. The borrower need not commercial loan, as defined in the rule. be a member of the purchasing credit union, only 25 As discussed above, two types of MBLs Non-member loans and non-member a member of one of the participating credit unions. are expressly excluded from the participation interests are excluded from the 12 CFR 701.22(b)(4). Additionally, federal credit statutory MBL limit, but credit unions are currently unions generally may purchase eligible obligations subject to a regulatory requirement to seek prior of its members from any source if the loans are 23 12 U.S.C. 1757a. approval from NCUA for non-member loan balances those the FCU is empowered to grant. 12 U.S.C. 24 In the current rule, the 12.25 percent figure is to exceed the lesser of 1.75 times the credit union’s 1757(13); 12 CFR 701.23(b). Certain well capitalized a shorthand reference to how the cap applies to the net worth or 12.25 percent of the credit union’s federal credit unions may also purchase whole requirement to maintain at least 7 percent of total total assets. loans from other federally insured credit unions, assets to be well capitalized—1.75 times 7 percent 26 If the outstanding aggregate net member including commercial loans, without regard to equals 12.25 percent. business loan balance is greater than $50,000. Continued VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37910 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules the MBL definition 31 and are not and it must not be swapping or trading shares in the credit union, or by shares counted for call report purposes or in MBLs with other credit unions to or deposits in other financial calculating the statutory aggregate circumvent the aggregate limit.35 The institutions, or by a lien on the amount of MBLs, provided the credit Board notes that participation interests member’s primary residence, or insured union acquired the loan or participation in member business loans and member or guaranteed by any agency of the interest in compliance with all relevant business loans purchased from other federal government, a state or any laws and regulations and the credit lenders continue to count against a political subdivision of such state, or union is not, in conjunction with one or credit union’s aggregate limit on net subject to an advance commitment to more other credit unions, trading MBLs member business loan balances. purchase by any agency of the federal to circumvent the aggregate limit. The proposed rule also identifies government, a state or any political However, the proposed rule eliminates those credit unions that are, by statute, subdivision of such state, or sold as a the need to apply for prior approval exempt from the aggregate MBL limit. participation interest without recourse from the NCUA regional director for a Specifically, it provides that credit and qualifying for true sales accounting credit union’s non-member loan unions that have a low-income under generally accepted accounting balances to exceed the lesser of 1.75 designation or that participate in the principles. times the credit union’s net worth or Community Development Financial § 723.9—Transitional Provisions 12.25 percent of the credit union’s total Institutions program are exempt from assets.32 compliance with the aggregate MBL Proposed § 723.9 would implement The current rule’s application limit. Credit unions chartered for the the transition from the current requirement was driven in part by safety purpose of making commercial loans are prescriptive rule to the proposed, and soundness concerns.33 Under the also exempt from compliance with the principles-based rule. This section proposal, however, safety and aggregate MBL limit. An additional covers two different scenarios and soundness is of paramount concern, and statutory exemption was provided for describes the way in which the the bulk of the rule focuses on those credit unions that had a history of proposed rule, if adopted, would impact considerations. Accordingly, rather than primarily making member business those credit unions currently operating continuing to impose the requirement loans, determined as of the date of under a waiver or an enforcement that the total of a credit union’s non- enactment of the Credit Union action. member loan balances may not exceed Membership Access Act of 1998 As discussed more fully below, the the lesser of 1.75 times the credit (CUMAA), which amended the FCU Act Board is additionally soliciting union’s net worth or 12.25 percent of to include certain new restrictions on comment on potential approaches with the credit union’s total assets unless it member business loans. The Board respect to those federally insured, state- receives prior NCUA approval, the continues to apply the ‘‘history of chartered credit unions currently proposal’s focus is on the risks primarily making member business operating under an NCUA-approved associated with that balance and how loans’’ exemption by reference to the state rule. 36 the credit union should manage the date of CUMAA’s enactment; i. Existing Waivers or Enforcement risks. The application requirement in therefore, the proposal removes the Constraints the current rule was also intended to outdated provisions in the current rule address concerns that the MBL rule’s that relate to the evidentiary In view of the principles-based treatment of participation interests documentation necessary to approach taken in the proposed rule, could create a loophole to the statutory demonstrate a credit union’s proposed § 723.9(a) provides that any limit, and that some credit unions may qualification for the exemption. The waiver previously issued by NCUA use the authority to purchase non- Board also emphasizes that, regardless concerning any aspect of the current member loans and non-member of the status of a credit union’s rule becomes moot upon the effective participation interests as a device to exemption from the aggregate limit, all date of any final MBL rule except swap loans and evade the aggregate credit unions are subject to the safety waivers that were granted for a single limit.34 To preserve the existing and soundness provisions of the rule. borrower or borrowing relationship to safeguard against evasion, the proposal Finally, the proposal establishes the exceed the limits set forth in § 723.8 of retains in substance the current rule’s method for calculating a credit union’s the current rule, or for federally insured stipulation that, for the exclusion to net member business loan balances for state chartered credit unions in states apply, a credit union must acquire the the purpose of complying with the that have grandfathered rules where non-member loan or non-member statutory cap and reporting on NCUA NCUA is required to concur with a participation interest in compliance form 5300. That method is consistent waiver to the state’s rule. Waivers with applicable laws and regulations with the current rule, but the granted to credit unions for single requirements for calculating the net borrowing relationships will remain in whether they are obligations of their members. 12 member business loan balances is effect until the aggregate balance of the CFR 701.23(b)(2). moved from the definitions section in loans outstanding associated with the 31 See 68 FR 56537, 56543 (Oct. 1, 2003) current § 723.21 to proposed § 723.8 for relationship are reduced and in (‘‘[P]urchases of nonmember loans and participation interests, as authorized under certain greater ease of reference and improved compliance with the requirements of conditions in NCUA’s rules and some state laws readability. Consistent with the current § 723.4(c) of the proposed rule. and rules, do not involve the provision of member rule, the proposal provides that a All blanket waivers granted to credit loan services, and the acquired loan assets are not federally insured credit union’s net unions for current § 723.8 will terminate MBLs . . . [and] they need not count against the purchasing credit union’s aggregate MBL limit. The member business loan balance is on the effective date of any final MBL Board believes it is important to avoid unnecessary determined by calculating the rule. The Board notes that any credit interference with the ability of credit unions to outstanding loan balance plus any union that qualified for a waiver place their excess funds in a member that best concerning any of the hard regulatory serves the credit union, its members, and the credit unfunded commitments, reduced by any union system.’’) portion of the loan that is secured by limits contained in the former rule will, 32 12 CFR 723.16(b). for the most part, already have the types 33 See 68 FR at 56544. 35 12 CFR 723.16(b)(2)(iv). of policies and procedures in place 34 Id. 36 See 64 FR 28721, 28726 (May 27, 1999). regarding its commercial loan program VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37911 that are contemplated by the proposed contains comparable risk management state MBL rule to preserve their rules in rule. Accordingly, the Board anticipates requirements and properly applies the their current format, thus permitting that there will be little if any disruption statutory limit on MBLs. There are, at FISCUs in those states to continue to arising from this transition. In keeping present, seven states in which the Board operate in compliance with the with the principles-based approach, has approved the state rule.38 applicable state rule. However, rather waivers and waiver requests are not part To address the regulation of business than prohibiting other SSAs from of the proposed rule. lending by FISCUs, the Board is seeking submitting their own state rules for In contrast to the effect of the comment on three options currently NCUA consideration and approval, proposed rule on waivers, proposed under consideration, as well as any Option C would permit SSAs to submit § 723.9(b) clarifies that any constraints alternative approaches. such rules as long as they conform with imposed on a credit union in The following chart briefly highlights language similar to the beginning of connection with its commercial lending key provisions of the three options. current § 723.20(a). In determining program, such as may be contained in Below the chart, each option is whether or not to approve a state MBL a Letter of Understanding and described in further detail. rule, current § 723.20(a) notes, ‘‘the Agreement, would survive the adoption Board is guided by safety and soundness of the proposed rule and remain intact. Grandfathers Permits considerations and reviews whether the Thus, the proposed rule specifies that States to 7 States submit state regulation minimizes the risk and any particular enforcement measure to with MBL new MBL accomplishes the overall objectives of which a credit union may uniquely be Key provisions rules pre- rules NCUA’s member business loan subject takes precedence over the more viously ap- proved by for NCUA rule. . . .’’ In past practice, the Board general application of the regulation. A Board ap- NCUA Board proval has generally approved state rules that constraint may take the form of a are substantially similar to NCUA’s rule limitation or other condition that is Option A ...... Yes ...... No. or more restrictive if the state so chose. actually imposed as part of a waiver. In Option B ...... No ...... Yes. The Board invites public comment on such cases, the constraint would survive Option C ...... Yes ...... Yes. whether Option A, Option B, or Option the adoption of the proposed rule in C should be adopted in the final rule, final form. The first option (Option A), for which and how any federal parity provisions ii. State Regulation of Business Lending comment is solicited, would be to allow in state law would affect these options. SSAs that currently administer a state The Board also welcomes commenters’ The Board solicits comment on how MBL rule to preserve their rules in their suggestions for any alternative best to approach the issue of state current format, thus allowing FISCUs in approaches to addressing the state regulation of business lending. Broadly those states to continue to operate in regulation of business lending. speaking, there are two threshold compliance with the pertinent state questions that arise in this context: first, C. Amendments to the Loan rule. In this respect, the Board notes that how to address those states that Participation Rule each of the seven state rules is based on currently have an NCUA-approved MBL the model of Part 723 in its current As discussed above, the proposed rule rule in place; and second, whether to form. amends the definition of ‘‘associated continue the convention, as set out in Under this approach, FISCUs in these member’’ in the current MBL rule to be the current rule, of permitting states to seven states would continue to comply more consistent with the combination submit a version of an MBL rule to the with the applicable provisions in their rules applicable to banks by introducing Board for its approval as provided for in state. However, no other SSA would be the concepts of direct benefit, common § 723.20 of the current rule. Each of permitted to submit a rule for NCUA enterprise, and control.39 these questions is addressed below. consideration and approval. Instead, NCUA’s loan participation rule As a preliminary matter, the Board contains a similar definition for notes that, while it may authorize a state aside from FISCUs operating in the seven grandfathered states, all other ‘‘associated borrower,’’ 40 which was supervisory authority (SSA) to play a amended by the Board in 2013 to track role in the regulation of business FISCUs would be subject to Part 723. A second option (Option B), for which closely with the definition in the MBL lending, that role is necessarily limited. rule.41 In order to maintain that Congress granted the Board the sole comment is also solicited, would be for NCUA to require SSAs in these seven consistency, the proposed rule also authority to interpret the MBL makes parallel amendments to provisions of the FCU Act and to states to make conforming amendments to their rules and resubmit them to § 701.22(a) by modifying the current promulgate implementing regulations, definition of ‘‘associated borrower,’’ and and FCUs and federally insured, state- NCUA for an updated approval. For these SSAs (and any other SSA that by adding new definitions of ‘‘common chartered credit unions (FISCUs) alike enterprise,’’ ‘‘control,’’ and ‘‘direct 37 seeks to implement its own rule), the are subject to them. An SSA does not benefit’’ to the loan participation rule. have independent ability to interpret the new state MBL rules would need to FCU Act, but under the current rule may reflect the same principles and D. Delayed Implementation make its case to the Board that its incorporate the guidance contained in any final rule, but could be more The Board recognizes that the proposed state rule is consistent with proposed shift to a principles-based rule NCUA’s interpretation of the FCU Act restrictive if the state so chose. A third option (Option C), for which represents a significant change in and Part 723. Until now, the Board has approach that will require a period of chosen to delegate authority to SSAs to comment is solicited, would combine certain provisions of Option A and adjustment for both credit unions and administer a state MBL regulation under examiners. Accordingly, should this the conditions outlined in current Option B. Specifically, Option C would permit SSAs that currently administer a proposal be finalized, the Board will § 723.20. In making this delegation in delay implementation of the final rule any given case, the Board has been 38 The seven states currently operating with focused on whether the state regulation NCUA Board-approved MBL rules are Connecticut, 39 12 CFR 32.5. Illinois, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, Washington, and 40 12 CFR 701.22(a). 37 12 U.S.C. 1757a. Wisconsin. 41 78 FR 37946 (June 25, 2013). VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37912 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules for 18 months, to allow NCUA and state flexibility analysis that describes the subject to § 723.3 and § 723.4 under the supervisory authorities adequate time to impact of a proposed rule on small proposed rule because their level of adjust to the new requirements, entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis activity in commercial lending is including training staff, and for affected is not required, however, if the agency material to their financial and credit unions to make necessary changes certifies that the rule will not have a operational safety and soundness. to their commercial lending policies, significant economic impact on a However, the revised definition of processes, and procedures in substantial number of small entities commercial loan generally excludes compliance with the new rule. (defined for purposes of the RFA to loans secured by vehicles manufactured include credit unions with assets less for household use and 1- to 4-family D. Request for Public Comment 42 than $50 million) and publishes its non-owner occupied residential The Board invites comment on all certification and a short, explanatory issues discussed in this proposal. In property that trigger the safety and statement in the Federal Register soundness provisions of the current particular, the Board solicits specific together with the rule. comment on the proposal’s principles- As of December 2014, of the 4,050 rule. The average member business loan based regulatory approach and on how federally insured credit unions with balance for credit unions with less than best to approach the issue of state total assets less than $50 million, 619 $50 million in assets is only $70,891. regulation of business lending. Further, credit unions hold business loans on Thus, it is likely many of the commenters should not feel constrained their balance sheets, including both outstanding member business loans to limit their comments to the issues member and non-member loans. Among currently held by small credit unions, discussed above. Rather, commenters the 619 credit unions, 317 credit unions and subject to the current rule, would be are encouraged to discuss any other have business loans less than 15 percent exempt under the proposed rule. Thus, relevant MBL issues they believe NCUA of net worth and are not regularly NCUA anticipates fewer than 302 small should consider that are consistent with originating and selling or participating credit unions would actually be subject and permissible under the existing out business loans. Therefore, they to the proposed rule (except for statute. would be exempt from § 723.3 (board of § 723.8—the statutory limit provisions). III. Regulatory Procedures directors and management The 302 credit unions only represent responsibilities) and § 723.4 7% of total credit unions with assets A. Regulatory Flexibility Act (commercial loan policy) under the less than $50 million.43 They hold The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) proposed rule—where the incremental approximately $513 million in business generally requires that, in connection paperwork burden associated with the loans in aggregate, which represents 1% with a notice of proposed rulemaking, transition for this rule stems from. of the total business loans in the credit an agency prepare and make available The remaining 302 credit unions with union industry. for public comment an initial regulatory assets less than $50 million would be 2014 Number of credit unions Percent of total Credit unions with total assets below $50 million ...... 4,050 100 Credit unions with total assets below $50 million and with MBLs ...... 619 15 Credit unions with total assets below $50 million, with MBLs, and are exempted from § 723.3 and § 723.4 ...... 317 8 Credit unions with total assets below $50 million, with MBLs, and are not exempted from § 723.3 and § 723.4 ...... 302 7 The proposed amendments would the operation of these institutions. information collections. NCUA provide federally insured credit unions NCUA has determined and certifies that recognizes that this proposed rule with significant regulatory relief via the proposed rule, if adopted, will not requires credit unions to comply with greater flexibility and individual have a significant economic impact on certain requirements that constitute an autonomy in safely and soundly a substantial number of small credit information collection within the providing commercial and business unions within the meaning of the meaning of the PRA. Under the loans. This is achieved by eliminating RFA.44 proposed rule, credit unions that are the current rule’s prescriptive B. Paperwork Reduction Act engaged in business lending activities underwriting criteria, various limits on and not exempted from § 723.3 and the composition of the commercial loan The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 § 723.4 will need to ensure their loan portfolio, the limit on participations in (PRA) applies to rulemakings in which policies and procedures cohere to these non-member business loans, and the an agency by rule creates a new requirements, including a formal credit associated waiver requirements. What paperwork burden on regulated entities risk rating system to identify and remains in the proposed rule is largely or modifies an existing burden.45 For quantify the level of risk within their consistent with existing fundamental purposes of the PRA, a paperwork commercial loan portfolios. However, regulatory requirements and supervisory burden may take the form of either a by replacing the prescriptive expectations for commercial lending, reporting or a recordkeeping requirements in the current rule with a and therefore not a significant impact on requirement, both referred to as principles-based regulatory approach, 42 Recently, the Board proposed to increase the 43 These credit unions hold $7.8 billion in total 44 5 U.S.C. 601–612. asset threshold used to define small entity under assets and $869 million in total net worth, which 45 44 U.S.C. 3507(d); 5 CFR part 1320. the RFA from $50 million to $100 million. 80 FR account for 0.7% of total assets and 0.7% of total 11954 (Mar. 5, 2015). net worth in the credit union industry, respectively. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37913 the proposed rule also relieves credit 160 hour × 142 = 22, 720 responsibilities among the various unions from the current requirement to The total estimated one-time net levels of government. The proposed rule obtain MBL related waivers and paperwork burden for this proposal is may supersede provisions of state law, provides a high degree of flexibility in 43,704 hours, with annual recurring regulation, or approvals. The proposed designing and operating their paperwork burden reduction of 3,864 rule could lead to conflicts between the commercial loan programs. hours. In accordance with the NCUA and state financial institution Currently, NCUA receives a requirements of the PRA, NCUA intends regulators on occasion. Accordingly, significant number of MBL-related to obtain a modification of its OMB NCUA requests comment on ways to waiver requests each year. NCUA Control Number, 3133–0101, to support eliminate, or at least minimize, potential processed 630 and 336 MBL related these changes. Simultaneously with its conflicts in this area. As noted above, waiver requests, in 2013 and 2014 publication of this rule, NCUA is NCUA solicits specific comment on how respectively. The average number of submitting a copy of the proposed rule best to approach the issue of state hours for a credit union to prepare a to OMB, along with an application for regulation of business lending. waiver request is an estimated 8 hours. a modification of the OMB Control Commenters may also wish to provide Accordingly, NCUA expects that the Number. recommendations on the potential use proposed rule will provide an estimated The PRA and OMB regulations of delegated authority, cooperative total of 3,864 hours relief to credit require that the public be provided an decision-making responsibilities, unions, on an annual basis. opportunity to comment on the certification processes of federal Eliminating the waiver requirement: paperwork requirements, including an standards, adoption of comparable Total number of MBL related waivers agency’s estimate of the burden of the programs by states requesting an requested by FICUs annually: 483 paperwork requirements. The Board exemption for their regulated Frequency of response: Annually invites comment on: (1) Whether the institutions, or other ways of meeting Number of hours to prepare 1 waiver paperwork requirements are necessary; the intent of the Executive Order. request: 8 (2) the accuracy of NCUA’s estimates on Total number of hours: 8 hours × 483 = the burden of the paperwork D. Assessment of Federal Regulations 3,864 requirements; (3) ways to enhance the and Policies on Families Under the proposed rule, credit quality, utility, and clarity of the NCUA has determined that this unions that are engaged in business paperwork requirements; and (4) ways rulemaking will not affect family well- lending activities and not exempted to minimize the burden of the being within the meaning of Section 654 from § 723.3 and § 723.4 may need to paperwork requirements. of the Treasury and General revise their loan policies and Comments should be sent to the Government Appropriations Act of procedures. As the end of 2014, there NCUA Contact and the OMB Reviewer 1999.47 were a total of 1,553 federally insured listed below: NCUA Contact: Tracy Crews, National List of Subjects credit unions that may need to revise Credit Union Administration, 1775 their policies. For purposes of this 12 CFR Part 701 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia analysis, NCUA estimates that it will 22314–3428, Fax No. 703–837–2861, Advertising, Aged, Civil rights, Credit, take roughly 16 hours on average for a Email: [email protected]. Credit unions, Fair housing, Individuals credit union to meet this requirement. OMB Contact: Office of Management with disabilities, Insurance, Marital Using these estimates, information and Budget, ATTN: Desk Officer for status discrimination, Mortgages, collection obligations imposed by this the National Credit Union Religious discrimination, Reporting and aspect of the rule are analyzed below: Administration, Office of Information recordkeeping requirements, Sex Revising commercial loan policies and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, discrimination, Signs and symbols, and procedures: DC 20503. Surety bonds. FICUs that are engaged in business lending and are not exempted from C. Executive Order 13132 12 CFR Part 723 § 723.3 and § 723.4: 1,553 Executive Order 13132 encourages Credit, Credit unions, Reporting and Frequency of response: one-time independent regulatory agencies to recordkeeping requirements. Initial hour burden: 16 consider the impact of their actions on × 12 CFR Part 741 16 hour 1,553 = 24,848 state and local interests. In adherence to The proposed rule also requires credit fundamental federalism principles, Bank deposit insurance, Credit unions that are engaged in business NCUA, an independent regulatory unions, Reporting and recordkeeping lending activities and not exempted agency,46 voluntarily complies with the requirements. from § 723.3 and § 723.4 to have a Executive Order. The proposed rule, if By the National Credit Union formal risk rating system to quantify and adopted, will also apply to federally Administration Board on June 18, 2015. manage risks associated with their insured, state-chartered credit unions. Gerard S. Poliquin, business lending activities. The majority By law, these institutions are already Secretary of the Board. of credit unions already have risk rating subject to numerous provisions of For the reasons discussed above, systems in place. Based on a survey of NCUA’s rules, based on the agency’s NCUA proposes to amend 12 CFR parts NCUA field staff, NCUA estimates that role as the insurer of member share 701, 723, and 741 as follows: a total of 142 federally insured credit accounts and the significant interest unions do not currently have a formal NCUA has in the safety and soundness PART 701—ORGANIZATION AND risk rating system. The information of their operations. The proposed rule OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT collection obligations imposed by this may have an occasional direct effect on UNIONS aspect of the rule are analyzed below. the states, the relationship between the Number of FICUs developing a risk national government and the states, or ■ 1. The authority citation for part 701 rating system: 142 on the distribution of power and continues to read as follows: Frequency of response: one-time Initial hour burden: 160 46 44 U.S.C. 3502(5). 47 Public Law 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998). VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37914 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1755, 1756, Control means a person or entity federally insured natural person credit 1757, 1758, 1759, 1761a, 1761b, 1766, 1767, directly or indirectly, or acting through unions, except that credit unions with 1782, 1784, 1786, 1787, 1789. Section 701.6 or together with one or more persons or both assets less than $250 million and is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 3717. Section entities: total commercial loans less than 15 701.31 is also authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1981 and 3601–3610. (1) Owns, controls, or has the power percent of net worth that are not Section 701.35 is also authorized by 42 to vote 25 percent or more of any class regularly originating and selling or U.S.C. 4311–4312. of voting securities of another person or participating out commercial loans are ■ 2. Amend § 701.22(a) by revising the entity; not subject to § 723.3 and § 723.4 of this definition for Associated borrower and (2) Controls, in any manner, the part. This part does not apply to loans: adding the definitions for Common election of a majority of the directors, (1) Made by a corporate credit union, enterprise, Control, and Direct benefit to trustees, or other persons exercising as defined in part 704 of this chapter; read as follows: similar functions of another person or (2) Made by a federally insured credit entity; or union to another federally insured § 701.22 Loan participations. (3) Has the power to exercise a credit union; * * * * * controlling influence over the (3) Made by a federally insured credit (a) For purposes of this section, the management or policies of another union to a credit union service following definitions apply: person or entity. organization, as defined in part 712 and Associated borrower means any other * * * * * § 741.222 of this chapter; or person or entity with a shared Direct benefit means the proceeds of (4) Fully secured by a lien on a 1- to ownership, investment, or other a loan or extension of credit to a 4- family residential property that is the pecuniary interest in a business or borrower, or assets purchased with borrower’s primary residence. commercial endeavor with the those proceeds, that are transferred to (c) Other regulations that apply. (1) borrower. This means any person or another person or entity, other than in The requirements of § 701.21(a) through entity named as a borrower or debtor in a bona fide arm’s length transaction (g) of this chapter apply to commercial a loan or extension of credit, or any where the proceeds are used to acquire loans granted by a federally insured other person or entity, such as a drawer, property, goods, or services. credit union to the extent they are endorser, or guarantor, engaged in a * * * * * consistent with this part. As required by common enterprise with the borrower, part 741 of this chapter, a federally or deriving a direct benefit from the loan PART 723—MEMBER BUSINESS insured, state-chartered credit union is to the borrower. LOANS; COMMERCIAL LENDING generally not required to comply with Common enterprise means (1) The the provisions of § 701.21(a) through (g) ■ expected source of repayment for each 3. The authority citation for Part 723 of this chapter, except it must comply loan or extension of credit is the same continues to read as follows: with § 701.21(c)(8) of this chapter for each borrower and no individual Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1756, 1757, 1757A, concerning prohibited fees, and borrower has another source of income 1766, 1785, 1789. § 701.21(d)(5) of this chapter concerning from which the loan (together with the ■ 3. Revise §§ 723.1 through 723.8 and nonpreferential loans. borrower’s other obligations) may be add § 723.9 to read as follows: (2) If a federal credit union makes a fully repaid. An employer will not be Sec. commercial loan through a program in treated as a source of repayment because * * * * * which a federal or state agency (or its of wages and salaries paid to an 723.1 Purpose and scope. political subdivision) insures employee, unless the standards 723.2 Definitions. repayment, guarantees repayment, or described in paragraph (2) are met; 723.3 Board of directors and management provides an advance commitment to (2) Loans or extensions of credit are responsibilities. purchase the loan in full, and that made: 723.4 Commercial loan policy. program has requirements that are less 723.5 Collateral and security. restrictive than those required by this (i) To borrowers who are related 723.6 Construction and development loans. directly or indirectly through common 723.7 Prohibited activities. rule, then the federal credit union may control, including where one borrower 723.8 Aggregate member business loan follow the loan requirements of the is directly or indirectly controlled by limit; exclusions and exceptions. relevant guaranteed loan program. A another borrower; and 723.9 Transitional provisions. federally insured, state-chartered credit (ii) Substantial financial * * * * * union that is subject to this part and that interdependence exists between or makes a commercial loan as part of a among the borrowers. Substantial § 723.1 Purpose and scope. loan program in which a federal or state financial interdependence means 50 (a) Purpose. This part is intended to agency (or its political subdivision) percent or more of one borrower’s gross accomplish two broad objectives. First, insures repayment, guarantees receipts or gross expenditures (on an it sets out policy and program repayment, or provides an advance annual basis) are derived from responsibilities that a federally insured commitment to purchase the loan in transactions with another borrower. credit union must adopt and implement full, and that program has requirements Gross receipts and expenditures include as part of a safe and sound commercial that are less restrictive than those gross revenues or expenses, lending program. Second, it required by this rule, then the federally intercompany loans, dividends, capital incorporates the statutory limit on the insured, state-chartered credit union contributions, and similar receipts or aggregate amount of member business may follow the loan requirements of the payments; or loans that a federally insured credit relevant guaranteed loan program, (3) Separate borrowers obtain loans or union may make pursuant to Section provided that its state supervisory extensions of credit to acquire a 107A of the Federal Credit Union Act. authority has determined that it has business enterprise of which those The rule distinguishes between these authority to do so under state law. borrowers will own more than 50 two distinct objectives. (3) The requirements of § 701.23 of percent of the voting securities or voting (b) Credit unions and loans covered this chapter apply to a federal credit interests. by this part. This part applies to union’s purchase, sale, or pledge of a VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37915 commercial loan as an eligible (i) To borrowers who are related the lien is central to the extension of the obligation. directly or indirectly through common credit; that is, the borrower would not (4) The requirements of § 701.22 of control, including where one borrower have been extended credit in the same this chapter apply to a federally insured is directly or indirectly controlled by amount or on terms as favorable without credit union’s purchase of a another borrower; and the lien. A loan is wholly or participation interest in a commercial (ii) Substantial financial substantially secured by a lien on a 1- loan. interdependence exists between or to 4-family residential property if the among the borrowers. Substantial estimated value of the real estate § 723.2 Definitions. financial interdependence means 50 collateral at origination (after deducting For purposes of this part, the percent or more of one borrower’s gross any senior liens held by others) is following definitions apply: receipts or gross expenditures (on an greater than 50 percent of the principal Associated Borrower means any other annual basis) are derived from amount of the loan. person or entity with a shared transactions with another borrower. Loan secured by a vehicle ownership, investment, or other Gross receipts and expenditures include manufactured for household use means pecuniary interest in a business or gross revenues or expenses, a loan that, at origination, is secured commercial endeavor with the intercompany loans, dividends, capital wholly or substantially by a lien on a borrower. This means any person or contributions, and similar receipts or new and used passenger car and other entity named as a borrower or debtor in payments; or vehicle such as a minivan, sport-utility a loan or extension of credit, or any (3) Separate borrowers obtain loans or vehicle, pickup truck, and similar light other person or entity, such as a drawer, extensions of credit to acquire a truck or heavy duty truck generally endorser, or guarantor, engaged in a business enterprise of which those manufactured for personal, family, or common enterprise with the borrower, borrowers will own more than 50 household use and not used as a fleet or deriving a direct benefit from the loan percent of the voting securities or voting vehicle or to carry fare-paying to the borrower. interests. passengers, for which the lien is central Commercial loan means any loan, line Control means a person or entity to the extension of credit. A lien is of credit, or letter of credit (including directly or indirectly, or acting through central to the extension of credit if the any unfunded commitments), and any or together with one or more persons or borrower would not have been extended interest a credit union obtains in such entities: credit in the same amount or on terms loans made by another lender, to (1) Owns, controls, or has the power as favorable without the lien. A loan is individuals, sole proprietorships, to vote 25 percent or more of any class wholly or substantially secured by a lien partnerships, corporations, or other of voting securities of another person or on a vehicle manufactured for business enterprises for commercial, entity; household use if the estimated value of industrial, agricultural, or professional (2) Controls, in any manner, the the collateral at origination (after deducting any senior liens held by purposes, but not for investment or election of a majority of the directors, others) is greater than 50 percent of the personal expenditure purposes. trustees, or other persons exercising similar functions of another person or principal amount of the loan. Excluded from this definition are loans Loan-to-value ratio means, with made by a corporate credit union; loans entity; or (3) Has the power to exercise a respect to any item of collateral, the made by a federally insured credit controlling influence over the aggregate amount of all sums borrowed union to another federally insured management or policies of another and secured by that collateral, including credit union; loans made by a federally person or entity. outstanding balances plus any unfunded insured credit union to a credit union Credit risk rating system means a commitment or line of credit from service organization; loans secured by a formal process that identifies and another lender that is senior to the 1- to 4- family residential property assigns a relative credit risk score to federally insured credit union’s lien (whether or not it is the borrower’s each commercial loan in a federally position, divided by the lesser of the primary residence); any loan(s) to a insured credit union’s portfolio, using purchase price or market value for borrower or an associated borrower, the ordinal ratings to represent the degree of collateral held 12 months or less, and aggregate balance of which is equal to risk. The credit risk score is determined market value for collateral held longer less than $50,000; any loan fully through an evaluation of quantitative than 12 months. The market value of the secured by shares in the credit union factors based on financial performance collateral must be established by making the extension of credit or and qualitative factors based on prudent and accepted commercial deposits in other financial institutions; management, operational, market, and lending practices and comply with all and loans secured by a vehicle business environmental factors. regulatory requirements. For a manufactured for household use. Direct benefit means the proceeds of construction and development loan, the Common enterprise means a loan or extension of credit to a collateral value is the lesser of cost to (1) The expected source of repayment borrower, or assets purchased with complete or prospective market value, for each loan or extension of credit is those proceeds, that are transferred to as determined in accordance with the same for each borrower and no another person or entity, other than in § 723.6 of this part. individual borrower has another source a bona fide arm’s length transaction Net worth means a federally insured of income from which the loan (together where the proceeds are used to acquire credit union’s net worth, as defined in with the borrower’s other obligations) property, goods, or services. part 702 of this chapter. may be fully repaid. An employer will Immediate family member means a Readily marketable collateral means a not be treated as a source of repayment spouse or other family member living in financial instrument or bullion that is because of wages and salaries paid to an the same household. salable under ordinary market employee, unless the standards Loan secured by a 1- to 4-family conditions with reasonable promptness described in paragraph (2) of this residential property means a loan that, at a fair market value determined by definition are met; at origination, is secured wholly or quotations based upon actual (2) Loans or extensions of credit are substantially by a lien on a 1- to 4- transactions on an auction or similarly made: family residential property for which available daily bid and ask price market. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37916 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules Residential property means a house, (i) Underwriting and processing for commercial loans and in any given condominium unit, cooperative unit, the type(s) of commercial lending in category or type of commercial loan and manufactured home (whether which the federally insured credit union to any one borrower or group of completed or under construction), or is engaged; associated borrowers. The policy must unimproved land zoned for 1- to 4- (ii) Overseeing and evaluating the specify that the aggregate dollar amount family residential use. A boat or motor performance of a commercial loan of commercial loans to any one home, even if used as a primary portfolio, including rating and borrower or group of associated residence, or timeshare property is not quantifying risk through a credit risk borrowers may not exceed the greater of residential property. rating system; and 15 percent of the federally insured (iii) Conducting collection and loss credit union’s net worth or $100,000, § 723.3 Board of directors and mitigation activities for the type(s) of plus an additional 10 percent of the management responsibilities. commercial lending in which the credit union’s net worth if the amount Prior to engaging in commercial federally insured credit union is that exceeds the credit unions 15 lending, a federally insured credit union engaged. percent general limit is fully secured at must address the following board (3) Options to meet the required all times with a perfected security responsibilities and operational experience. A federally insured credit interest by readily marketable collateral requirements: union may meet the experience as defined in section 723.2 of this part. (a) Board of directors. A federally requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) and (d) Qualifications and experience insured credit union’s board of (2) of this section by conducting internal requirements for personnel involved in directors, at a minimum, must: training and development, hiring underwriting, processing, approving, (1) Approve a commercial loan policy qualified individuals, or using a third- administering, and collecting that complies with § 723.4 of this part. party, such as an independent commercial loans. The board must review its policy on an contractor or a credit union service (e) Loan approval processes, annual basis, prior to any material organization. However, with respect to including establishing levels of loan change in the federally insured credit the qualified lending personnel approval authority commensurate with union’s commercial lending program or requirements in paragraph (b)(2) of this the individual’s or committee’s related organizational structure, and in section, use of a third-party is proficiency in evaluating and response to any material change in permissible only if the following understanding commercial loan risk, portfolio performance or economic conditions are met: when considered in terms of the level of conditions, and update it when (i) The third-party has no affiliation or risk the borrowing relationship poses to warranted. contractual relationship with the the federally insured credit union. (2) Ensure the federally insured credit borrower or any associated borrowers; (f) Underwriting standards union appropriately staffs its (ii) The actual decision to grant a loan commensurate with the size, scope and commercial lending program in must reside with the federally insured complexity of the commercial lending compliance with paragraph (b) of this credit union; activities and borrowing relationships section. (iii) Qualified federally insured credit contemplated. The standards must, at a (3) Understand and remain informed, union staff exercises ongoing oversight minimum, address the following: through periodic briefings from over the third party by regularly (1) The level and depth of financial responsible staff and other methods, evaluating the quality of any work the analysis necessary to evaluate the about the nature and level of risk in the third party performs for the federally financial trends and condition of the federally insured credit union’s insured credit union; and borrower and the ability of the borrower commercial loan portfolio, including its (iv) The third-party arrangement must to meet debt service requirements; potential impact on the federally otherwise comply with § 723.7 of this (2) Thorough due diligence of the insured credit union’s earnings and net part. principal(s) to determine whether any worth. related interests of the principal(s) (b) Required expertise and experience. § 723.4 Commercial loan policy. might have a negative impact or place A federally insured credit union Prior to engaging in commercial an undue burden on the borrower and making, purchasing, or holding any lending, a federally insured credit union related interests with regard to meeting commercial loan must internally must adopt and implement a the debt obligations with the credit possess the following experience and comprehensive written commercial loan union; competencies: policy and establish procedures for (3) Requirements of a borrower- (1) Senior executive officers. A commercial lending. The board prepared projection when historic federally insured credit union’s senior approved policy must ensure the performance does not support projected executive officers overseeing the federally insured credit union’s debt payments. The projection must be commercial lending function must commercial lending activities are supported by reasonable rationale and, understand the federally insured credit performed in a safe and sound manner at a minimum, must include a projected union’s commercial lending activities. by providing for ongoing control, balance sheet and income and expense At a minimum, senior executive officers measurement, and management of the statement; must have a comprehensive federally insured credit union’s (4) The financial statement quality understanding of the role of commercial commercial lending activities. At a and the degree of verification sufficient lending in the federally insured credit minimum, a federally insured credit to support an accurate financial analysis union’s overall business model and union’s commercial loan policy must and risk assessment; establish risk management processes address each of the following: (5) The methods to be used in and controls necessary to safely conduct (a) Type(s) of commercial loans collateral evaluation, for all types of commercial lending. permitted. collateral authorized, including loan-to- (2) Qualified lending personnel. A (b) Trade area. value ratio limits. Such methods must federally insured credit union must (c) Maximum amount of assets, in be appropriate for the particular type of employ qualified staff with experience relation to net worth, allowed in collateral. The means to secure various in the following areas: secured, unsecured, and unguaranteed types of collateral, and the measures VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37917 taken for environmental due diligence means any financing arrangement to costs for related parties, such as must also be appropriate for all enable the borrower to acquire property developer fees, leasing expenses, authorized collateral; and or rights to property, including land or brokerage commissions, and (6) Other appropriate risk assessment structures, with the intent to construct management fees, are included in including analysis of the impact of or renovate an income producing qualifying costs only if reasonable in current market conditions on the property, such as residential housing for comparison to the cost of similar borrower and associated borrowers. rental or sale, or a commercial building, services from a third party. Qualifying (g) Risk management processes such as may be used for commercial, costs exclude interest or preferred commensurate with the size, scope and agricultural, industrial, or other similar returns payable to equity partners or complexity of the federally insured purposes. It also means a financing subordinated debt holders, the credit union’s commercial lending arrangement for the construction, major developer’s general corporate overhead, activities and borrowing relationships. expansion or renovation of the property and selling costs to be funded out of These processes must, at a minimum, types referenced in this section. The sales proceeds such as brokerage address the following: collateral valuation for securing a commissions and other closing costs. (1) Use of loan covenants, if construction or development loan (2) For the purposes of this section, appropriate, including frequency of depends on the satisfactory completion prospective market value means the borrower and guarantor financial of the proposed construction or market value opinion determined by an reporting; renovation where the loan proceeds are independent appraiser in compliance (2) Periodic loan review, consistent disbursed in increments as the work is with the relevant standards set forth in with loan covenants and sufficient to completed. A loan to finance the Uniform Standards of Professional conduct portfolio risk management. maintenance, repairs, or improvements Appraisal Practice. Prospective value This review must include a periodic to an existing income producing opinions are intended to reflect the reevaluation of the value and property that does not change its use or current expectations and perceptions of marketability of any collateral; materially impact the property is not a (3) A credit risk rating system. Credit market participants, based on available construction or development loan. data. Two prospective value opinions risk ratings must be assigned to (b) A federally insured credit union commercial loans at inception and may be required to reflect the time that elects to make a construction or frame during which development, reviewed as frequently as necessary to development loan must ensure that its satisfy the federally insured credit construction, and occupancy occur. The commercial loan policy includes prospective market value ‘‘as- union’s risk monitoring and reporting adequate provisions by which the policies, and to ensure adequate completed’’ reflects the property’s collateral value associated with the market value as of the time that reserves as required by generally project is properly determined and accepted accounting principles (GAAP); development is to be completed. The established. For a construction or prospective market value ‘‘as-stabilized’’ and development loan, collateral value is the (4) A process to identify, report, and reflects the property’s market value as of lesser of the project’s cost to complete the time the property is projected to monitor loans approved as exceptions to or its prospective market value. achieve stabilized occupancy. For an the credit union’s loan policy. (1) For the purposes of this section, income producing property, stabilized § 723.5 Collateral and security. cost to complete means the sum of all qualifying costs necessary to complete a occupancy is the occupancy level that a (a) A federally insured credit union property is expected to achieve after the must require collateral commensurate construction project and documented in an approved construction budget. property is exposed to the market for with the level of risk associated with the lease over a reasonable period of time size and type of any commercial loan. Qualifying costs generally include on- or off-site improvements, building and at comparable terms and conditions Collateral must be sufficient to ensure to other similar properties. adequate loan balance protection along construction, other reasonable and customary costs paid to construct or (c) A federally insured credit union with appropriate risk sharing with the that elects to make a construction and borrower and principal(s). A federally improve a project, including general contractor’s fees, and other expenses development loan must also assure its insured credit union making an commercial loan policy meets the unsecured loan must determine and normally included in a construction contract such as bonding and contractor following conditions: document in the loan file that mitigating (1) Qualified personnel representing factors sufficiently offset the relevant insurance. Qualifying costs include the value of the land, determined as the the interests of the federally insured risk. credit union must conduct a review and (b) A federally insured credit union lesser of appraised market value or purchase price for land held less than approval of any line item construction that does not require the full and budget prior to closing the loan; unconditional personal guarantee from 12 months, and as the appraised market (2) A credit union approved the principal(s) of the borrower who has value for land held longer than 12 requisition and loan disbursement a controlling interest in the borrower months. Qualifying costs also include process is established; must determine and document in the interest, a contingency account to fund (3) Release or disbursement of loan loan file that mitigating factors unanticipated overruns, and other funds occurs only after on-site sufficiently offset the relevant risk. development costs such as fees and related pre-development expenses. inspections, documented in a written § 723.6 Construction and development Interest expense is a qualifying cost only report by qualified personnel loans. to the extent it is included in the representing the interests of the In addition to the foregoing, the construction budget and is calculated federally insured credit union, following requirements apply to a based on the projected changes in the certifying that the work requisitioned construction and development loan loan balance up to the expected ‘‘as- for payment has been satisfactorily made by any federally insured credit complete’’ date for owner-occupied non- completed, and the remaining funds union. income producing commercial real available to be disbursed from the (a) For the purposes of this section, a estate or the ‘‘as-stabilized’’ date for construction and development loan is construction or development loan income producing real estate. Project sufficient to complete the project; and VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 37918 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules (4) Each loan disbursement is subject § 723.8 Aggregate member business loan Membership Access Act of 1998 had a to confirmation that no intervening liens limit; exclusions and exceptions. history of primarily making commercial have been filed. This section incorporates the statutory loans, is exempt from compliance with limits on the aggregate amount of the aggregate member business loan § 723.7 Prohibited activities. member business loans that may be held limits in this section. (a) Ineligible borrowers. A federally by a federally insured credit union and (e) Method of calculation for net insured credit union may not grant a establishes the method for calculating a member business loan balance. For the commercial loan to the following: federally insured credit union’s net purposes of NCUA form 5300 reporting, (1) Any senior management employee, member business loan balance for a federally insured credit union’s net including the federally insured credit purposes of the statutory limits and member business loan balance is union ’s chief executive officer, any NCUA form 5300 reporting. determined by calculating the assistant chief executive officers, and (a) Statutory limits. The aggregate outstanding loan balance plus any the chief financial officer (i.e., limit on a federally insured credit unfunded commitments, reduced by any comptroller), and any of their union’s net member business loan portion of the loan that is secured by immediate family members; balances is the lesser of 1.75 times the shares in the credit union, or by shares (2) Any person meeting the definition actual net worth of the credit union, or or deposits in other financial of an associated borrower with respect 1.75 times the minimum net worth institutions, or by a lien on the to persons identified in paragraph (a)(1) required under section 1790d(c)(1)(A) of member’s primary residence, or insured of this section; or the Federal Credit Union Act. or guaranteed by any agency of the (3) Any compensated director, unless (b) Definition. For the purposes of this federal government, a state or any the federally insured credit union’s section, member business loan means political subdivision of such state, or board of directors approves granting the any commercial loan as defined in 723.2 subject to an advance commitment to loan and the compensated director was of this part, except that the following purchase by any agency of the federal recused from the board’s decision commercial loans are not member government, a state or any political making process. business loans and are not counted subdivision of such state, or sold as a (b) Equity agreements/joint ventures. toward the aggregate limit on a federally participation interest without recourse A federally insured credit union may insured credit union’s member business and qualifying for true sales accounting not grant a commercial loan if any loans: under generally accepted accounting additional income received by the (1) Any loan in which a federal or principles. federally insured credit union or its state agency (or its political subdivision) senior management employees is tied to fully insures repayment, fully § 723.9 Transitional provisions. the profit or sale of any business or guarantees repayment, or provides an This section governs circumstances in commercial endeavor that benefits from advance commitment to purchase the which, as of the effective date of this the proceeds of the loan. loan in full; and part, a federally insured credit union is (c) Conflicts of interest. Any third (2) Any non-member commercial loan operating in accordance with an party used by a federally insured credit or non-member participation interest in approved waiver from NCUA or is union to meet the requirements of this a commercial loan made by another subject to any enforcement constraint part must be independent from the lender, provided the federally insured relative to its commercial lending commercial loan transaction and may credit union acquired the non-member activities. not have a participation interest in a loans and participation interests in (a) Waivers. Upon the effective date of loan or an interest in any collateral compliance with all relevant laws and this part, any waiver approved by securing a loan that the third party is regulations and it is not, in conjunction NCUA concerning a federally insured responsible for reviewing, or an with one or more other credit unions, credit union’s commercial lending expectation of receiving compensation trading member business loans to activity is rendered moot except for of any sort that is contingent on the circumvent the aggregate limit. waivers granted for borrowing closing of the loan, with the following (c) Exceptions. Any loan secured by a relationships limits as required in exceptions: lien on a 1- to 4-family residential section 723.8 of the previous rule or (1) A third party may provide a property that is not the borrower’s similar provision in a grandfathered service to the federally insured credit primary residence, and any loan secured state rule. Borrowing relationships union that is related to the transaction, by a vehicle manufactured for granted a waiver from that provision such as loan servicing. household use that will be used for a will be grandfathered however the debt (2) The third party may provide the commercial, corporate, or other business associated with those relationships may requisite experience to a federally investment property or venture, or not be increased insured credit union and purchase a agricultural purpose, is not a (b) Enforcement Constraints. loan or a participation interest in a loan commercial loan but it is a member Limitations or other conditions imposed originated by the federally insured business loan (if the outstanding on a federally insured credit union in credit union that the third party aggregate net member business loan any written directive from NCUA, reviewed. balance is greater than $50,000) and including but not limited to items (3) A federally insured credit union must be counted toward the aggregate specified in any Document of may use the services of a credit union limit on a federally insured credit Resolution, any published or service organization that otherwise union’s member business loans. unpublished Letter of Understanding meets the requirements of § 723.3(b)(3) (d) Statutory exemptions. A federally and Agreement, Regional Director of this part even if the credit union insured credit union that has a low- Letter, Preliminary Warning Letter, or service organization is not independent income designation, or participates in formal enforcement action, are from the transaction, provided the the Community Development Financial unaffected by the adoption of this part. federally insured credit union has a Institutions program, or was chartered Included within this paragraph are any controlling financial interest in the for the purpose of making member constraints or conditions embedded credit union service organization as business loans, or which as of the date within any waiver issued by NCUA. As determined under GAAP. of enactment of the Credit Union of the effective date of this part, all such VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules 37919 limitations or other conditions remain Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1757, 1766(a), 1781– (a) Adhere to the requirements stated in place until such time as they are 1790, and 1790d; 31 U.S.C. 3717. in part 723 of this chapter concerning modified by NCUA. commercial lending and member Subpart B—[Amended] business loans, § 701.21(c)(8) of this PART 741—REQUIREMENTS FOR chapter concerning prohibited fees, and ■ 6. Amend § 741.203 by revising INSURANCE § 701.21(d)(5) of this chapter concerning paragraph (a) to read as follows: non-preferential loans; and ■ 5. The authority citation for part 741 § 741.203 Minimum loan policy * * * * * continues to read as follows: requirements. [FR Doc. 2015–15466 Filed 6–30–15; 8:45 am] * * * * * BILLING CODE 7535–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:08 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\01JYP4.SGM 01JYP4 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 i Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 80, No. 126 Wednesday, July 1, 2015 CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING JULY 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. Presidential Documents Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 Other Services Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH World Wide Web Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications is located at: www.fdsys.gov. Federal Register information and research tools, including Public Inspection List, indexes, and Code of Federal Regulations are located at: www.ofr.gov. E-mail FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and PDF links to the full text of each document. To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot respond to specific inquiries. Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the Federal Register system to: [email protected] The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or regulations. CFR Checklist. Effective January 1, 2009, the CFR Checklist no longer appears in the Federal Register. This information can be found online at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/. FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, JULY 37529–37920 ...... 1 VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:46 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\01JYCU.LOC 01JYCU tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CU ii Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Reader Aids in today’s List of Public enacted public laws. To Laws. subscribe, go to http:// LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Public Laws Electronic listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ Last List June 18, 2015 Notification Service publaws-l.html (PENS) Note: No public bills which Note: This service is strictly have become law were for E-mail notification of new received by the Office of the PENS is a free electronic mail laws. The text of laws is not Federal Register for inclusion notification service of newly available through this service. PENS cannot respond to specific inquiries sent to this address. VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:46 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\01JYCU.LOC 01JYCU tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CU Federal Register / Vol. 80 No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 2015 / Reader Aids iii TABLE OF EFFECTIVE DATES AND TIME PERIODS—JULY 2015 This table is used by the Office of the dates, the day after publication is A new table will be published in the Federal Register to compute certain counted as the first day. first issue of each month. dates, such as effective dates and When a date falls on a weekend or comment deadlines, which appear in holiday, the next Federal business day agency documents. In computing these is used. (See 1 CFR 18.17) DATE OF FR 15 DAYS AFTER 21 DAYS AFTER 30 DAYS AFTER 35 DAYS AFTER 45 DAYS AFTER 60 DAYS AFTER 90 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION PUBLICATION PUBLICATION PUBLICATION PUBLICATION PUBLICATION PUBLICATION PUBLICATION July 1 Jul 16 Jul 22 Jul 31 Aug 5 Aug 17 Aug 31 Sep 29 July 2 Jul 17 Jul 23 Aug 3 Aug 6 Aug 17 Aug 31 Sep 30 July 6 Jul 21 Jul 27 Aug 5 Aug 10 Aug 20 Sep 4 Oct 5 July 7 Jul 22 Jul 28 Aug 6 Aug 11 Aug 21 Sep 8 Oct 5 July 8 Jul 23 Jul 29 Aug 7 Aug 12 Aug 24 Sep 8 Oct 6 July 9 Jul 24 Jul 30 Aug 10 Aug 13 Aug 24 Sep 8 Oct 7 July 10 Jul 27 Jul 31 Aug 10 Aug 14 Aug 24 Sep 8 Oct 8 July 13 Jul 28 Aug 3 Aug 12 Aug 17 Aug 27 Sep 11 Oct 13 July 14 Jul 29 Aug 4 Aug 13 Aug 18 Aug 28 Sep 14 Oct 13 July 15 Jul 30 Aug 5 Aug 14 Aug 19 Aug 31 Sep 14 Oct 13 July 16 Jul 31 Aug 6 Aug 17 Aug 20 Aug 31 Sep 14 Oct 14 July 17 Aug 3 Aug 7 Aug 17 Aug 21 Aug 31 Sep 15 Oct 15 July 20 Aug 4 Aug 10 Aug 19 Aug 24 Sep 3 Sep 18 Oct 19 July 21 Aug 5 Aug 11 Aug 20 Aug 25 Sep 4 Sep 21 Oct 19 July 22 Aug 6 Aug 12 Aug 21 Aug 26 Sep 8 Sep 21 Oct 20 July 23 Aug 7 Aug 13 Aug 24 Aug 27 Sep 8 Sep 21 Oct 21 July 24 Aug 10 Aug 14 Aug 24 Aug 28 Sep 8 Sep 22 Oct 22 July 27 Aug 11 Aug 17 Aug 26 Aug 31 Sep 10 Sep 25 Oct 26 July 28 Aug 12 Aug 18 Aug 27 Sep 1 Sep 11 Sep 28 Oct 26 July 29 Aug 13 Aug 19 Aug 28 Sep 2 Sep 14 Sep 28 Oct 27 July 30 Aug 14 Aug 20 Aug 31 Sep 3 Sep 14 Sep 28 Oct 28 July 31 Aug 17 Aug 21 Aug 31 Sep 4 Sep 14 Sep 29 Oct 29 VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:47 Jun 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4201 Sfmt 4701 E:\FR\FM\01JYEF.LOC 01JYEF tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with EF