Vol. 79 Monday, No. 193 October 6, 2014

Pages 60057–60318

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER

VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:02 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\06OCWS.LOC 06OCWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDWS II Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014

The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. 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 Printing Office. The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6:00 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published and includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202-512-1800 or 866-512-1800 (toll free). E-mail, gpocusthelp.com. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $749 plus postage, or $808, plus postage, for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $165, plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover. Mail to: U.S. Government Printing Office—New Orders, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000; or call toll free 1- 866-512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, see bookstore.gpo.gov. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 77 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.

.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:02 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\06OCWS.LOC 06OCWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDWS III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 193

Monday, October 6, 2014

Administrative Conference of the United States Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES RULES No FEAR Act, 60126–60127 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Agricultural Marketing Service California, Lake County Air Quality Management District; PROPOSED RULES Revisions, 60061–60063 Irish Potatoes Grown in Colorado and Imported Irish California; Imperial County Air Pollution Control District; Potatoes: Revisions, 60070–60073 Area No. 2 Handling and Importation; Relaxation of District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; Approval of Handling and Import, 60117–60119 the Redesignation Requests and Maintenance Plan of the Washington, DC–MD–VA Nonattainment Area, etc., 60081–60087 Agriculture Department Illinois; Amendments to Gasoline Volatility Standards See Agricultural Marketing Service and Motor Vehicle Refinishing Requirements, 60065– See Food and Nutrition Service 60070 See Forest Service Illinois; Chicago 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan; NOTICES Revision, 60073–60075 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Nevada; Las Vegas Valley, Redesignation to Attainment Submissions, and Approvals, 60127–60128 for PM10; Designation of Areas, 60078–60081 Meetings: Ohio; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead and National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 60075–60077 and Economics Advisory Board, 60128 Pennsylvania; Allegheny County’s Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Children and Families Administration Printing and Letterpress Printing, etc., 60059–60061 NOTICES Wisconsin; Revisions to Prevention of Significant Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review Submissions, and Approvals: Programs, 60064–60065 Refugee Assistance Program Estimates, 60170 Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families/National 60087–60090 Directory of New Hires Match Results Report, 60169– PROPOSED RULES 60170 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Civil Rights Commission California, Lake County Air Quality Management District; NOTICES Revisions, 60124 Requests for Nominations: California; Imperial County Air Pollution Control District; State Advisory Committees, 60133–60134 Revisions, 60123–60124 Illinois; Amendments to Gasoline Volatility Standards Coast Guard and Motor Vehicle Refinishing Requirements, 60125 RULES National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Safety Zones: Ferroalloys Production, 60238–60291 NOTICES Delaware River, Delaware City, DE, 60057–60059 Certain New Chemicals: Receipt and Status Information, 60154–60157 Commerce Department Proposed Settlement Agreements under CERCLA: See International Trade Administration Strategic Sciences Removal Site, Sylmar, CA, 60157 See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Executive Office of the President Copyright Royalty Board See Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES Distribution of 2013 DART Sound Recordings Fund Federal Aviation Administration Royalties, 60185–60186 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Education Department Landing Area Proposal, 60230–60231 NOTICES Use of Certain Personal Oxygen Concentrator Devices on Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Board Aircraft, 60231 Submissions, and Approvals: E-Complaint Form, 60149–60150 Federal Communications Commission RULES Energy Department Connect America Fund: See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ETC Annual Reports and Certifications; Correction, 60090 See Western Area Power Administration Medical Body Area Network, 60092–60100

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\06OCCN.SGM 06OCCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS IV Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Contents

Radio Broadcasting Services: Endangered Species; Marine Mammals, 60181–60182 Bruce, MS, 60091–60092 Various Locations, 60090–60091 Food and Nutrition Service NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 60157–60160 Submissions, and Approvals: Radio Broadcasting Services: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, AM or FM Proposals to Change the Community of Infants, and Children Infant and Toddler Feeding License, 60160 Practices Study, 60129–60131

Federal Election Commission Forest Service NOTICES NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 60160 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Lower Yaak, O’Brien, Sheep Project, Kootenai National Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Forest, Lincoln County, MT, 60131–60133 NOTICES Meetings: Combined Filings, 60150–60151 National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Council, 60133 Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Hoopeston Wind, LLC, 60153 Health and Human Services Department Roundtop Energy LLC, 60151 See Children and Families Administration Skylar Resources, LP, 60151–60152 See National Institutes of Health UP Power Marketing, LLC, 60152–60153 NOTICES White Pine Electric Power, LLC, 60152 Report on Carcinogens, Thirteenth Edition, 60169

Federal Highway Administration Homeland Security Department RULES See Coast Guard Environmental Impact and Related Procedures – See U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Programmatic Agreements and Additional Categorical See U.S. Customs and Border Protection Exclusions, 60100–60116 NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Submissions, and Approvals: Lone Star Regional Rail Project; Williamson, Travis, Regulation on Agency Protests, 60178 Bastrop, Hays, Caldwell, Comal, Guadalupe, and Various Contract Related Forms, Acquisition Regulation, Bexar Counties, TX, 60232–60233 60178–60179 Federal Maritime Commission Meetings: NOTICES Homeland Security Academic Advisory Council, 60179– Investigations and Hearings: 60180 Metro Freight Services, Inc., d/b/a Maritime Express Interior Department Lines; Possible Shipping Act Violations, 60161– 60163 See Fish and Wildlife Service Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Applicants, International Trade Administration 60163 NOTICES Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Reissuances, Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, 60163 or Reviews: Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Rescissions of Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s Orders of Revocation, 60163–60164 Republic of China, 60134–60136 Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Revocations Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from and Surrenders, 60164 the People’s Republic of China, 60136–60137 Federal Trade Commission Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instruments, NOTICES 60137 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Quarterly Update to Annual Listing of Foreign Government Submissions, and Approvals, 60164–60165 Subsidies on Articles of Cheese Subject to an In-Quota Proposed Consent Agreements: Rate of Duty, 60137–60138 Norm Thompson Outfitters, Inc., 60165–60167 Wacoal America, Inc., 60167–60169 International Trade Commission NOTICES Federal Transit Administration Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, RULES or Reviews: Environmental Impact and Related Procedures – Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide from China, 60183 Programmatic Agreements and Additional Categorical Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade, 2015 Annual Report, Exclusions, 60100–60116 60183–60184 Fish and Wildlife Service Justice Department NOTICES NOTICES Permits: Proposed Consent Decrees under the Clean Air Act, 60184– Endangered Species, 60182–60183 60185

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\06OCCN.SGM 06OCCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Contents V

Proposed Consent Decrees under the Clean Water Act and License Transfers: the Clean Air Act, 60185 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, Proposed Settlement Agreements under CERCLA, 60185 60192–60197 Petitions: Library of Congress Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Palisades Nuclear Plant, See Copyright Royalty Board 60197 Regulatory Guidance: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Medical Evaluation of Licensed Personnel for Nuclear PROPOSED RULES Power Plants, 60197–60199 Patents and Other Intellectual Property Rights, 60119– 60123 Office of United States Trade Representative See Trade Representative, Office of United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Postal Regulatory Commission Buy American Waivers; Correction, 60233 NOTICES National Institutes of Health New Postal Products, 60199–60200 NOTICES Postal Products; Amendments, 60200 Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 60171–60172, 60175 Postal Service National Cancer Institute, 60171–60174, 60177–60178 NOTICES National Center for Complementary and Alternative Product Changes: Medicine, 60176–60177 Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 60200–60201 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 60173 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Securities and Exchange Commission 60176 NOTICES National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Diseases, 60174–60175 Submissions, and Approvals, 60201–60203 National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 60173, Joint Industry Plans: 60177 BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS Y-Exchange, Inc., Chicago National Institute of Mental Health, 60175–60176 Board Options Exchange, Inc., et al., 60203–60205 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: 60170–60171 Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc., 60211–60212, 60221– Office of the Director, 60173–60174 60223 Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 60205–60207 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration International Securities Exchange, LLC, 60226–60228 NOTICES NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 60207–60211 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, New York Stock Exchange LLC, 60218–60221 Submissions, and Approvals: NYSE Arca, Inc., 60212–60214, 60223–60225 Cooperative Game Fish Tagging Report, 60139 NYSE MKT LLC, 60217–60218 Pacific Albacore Logbook, 60139–60140 Options Clearing Corp., 60214–60217 Southeast Region Bycatch Reduction Device Certification Family of Forms, 60138–60139 Small Business Administration Southeast Region Gear Identification Requirements, NOTICES 60140 Disaster Declarations: Southeast Region Vessel Identification Requirements, Washington, 60228 60140–60141 Meetings: State Department South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 60141– RULES 60142 Exchange Visitor Program –– General Provisions, 60294– Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified 60317 Activities: NOTICES Operation, Maintenance, and Repair of the Northeast Meetings: Gateway Liquefied Natural Gas Port and the Advisory Committee on Private International Law, 60229 Algonquin Pipeline Lateral Facilities in Advisory Committee on Private International Law; Massachusetts Bay, 60142–60149 Electronic Commerce, 60229 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Surface Transportation Board NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Abandonment Exemptions; Discontinuance of Service Submissions, and Approvals, 60186–60188 Exemptions: Guidance: CSX Transportation, Inc., Knoxville, Knox County, TN; Applications for Bioassay for Uranium, 60190–60191 Norfolk Southern Railway Co., Knoxville, Knox Nonmetallic Thermal Insulation for Austenitic Stainless County, TN, 60233–60234 Steel, 60188–60190 License Applications: Trade Representative, Office of United States Standard Format and Content for Independent Spent Fuel NOTICES Storage Installations or a Monitored Retrievable 2014 Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review of Kuwait, 60229– Storage Facilities, 60191–60192 60230

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\06OCCN.SGM 06OCCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS VI Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Contents

Transportation Department Western Area Power Administration See Federal Aviation Administration NOTICES See Federal Highway Administration Rate Formulas; Extensions: See Federal Transit Administration Provo River Project, Rate Order No. WAPA–165, 60153– See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 60154 See Surface Transportation Board U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Separate Parts In This Issue Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Part II Permanent Resident, 60180 Environmental Protection Agency, 60238–60291 U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Part III Meetings: State Department, 60294–60317 U.S. Customs and Border Protection Airport and Seaport Inspections User Fee Advisory Committee, 60180– 60181 Reader Aids Veterans Affairs Department Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this page for NOTICES phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, and notice of recently enacted public laws. Submissions, and Approvals: To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Claim for Reimburse of Travel Expenses, 60234–60235 LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// Requests for Nominations: listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Illnesses, 60235 settings); then follow the instructions.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:29 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\06OCCN.SGM 06OCCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Contents VII

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

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

7 CFR Proposed Rules: 948...... 60117 980...... 60117 14 CFR Proposed Rules: 1245...... 60119 22 CFR 62...... 60294 23 CFR 771...... 60110 33 CFR 165...... 60057 40 CFR 52 (9 documents) ...... 60059, 60061, 60064, 60065, 60070, 60073, 60075, 60078, 60081 81 (2 documents) ...... 60078, 60081 312...... 60087 Proposed Rules: 52 (3 documents) ...... 60123, 60124, 60125 63...... 60238 47 CFR 54...... 60090 73 (2 documents) ...... 60090, 60091 95...... 60092 49 CFR 622...... 60100

VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\06OCLS.LOC 06OCLS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDLS 60057

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 193

Monday, October 6, 2014

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., days after publication in the Federal contains regulatory documents having general Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. Register as any delay encountered in applicability and legal effect, most of which and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, this regulation’s effective date would be are keyed to and codified in the Code of except Federal holidays. contrary to public interest because Federal Regulations, which is published under immediate action is needed to provide 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or for the safety of life and property from The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by email. If you have questions on this the hazards associated with pipe-laying the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of temporary rule, call or email Lieutenant and dredging operations. new books are listed in the first FEDERAL Brennan Dougherty, U.S. Coast Guard, B. Basis and Purpose REGISTER issue of each week. Sector Delaware Bay, Chief Waterways The legal basis for the rule is the Management Division, Coast Guard; Coast Guard’s authority to establish telephone (215) 271–4851, email regulated navigation areas and other DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND [email protected]. If you limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 SECURITY have questions on viewing or submitting U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 material to the docket, call Cheryl Coast Guard U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, Collins, Program Manager, Docket 6.04–6, 160.5; Public Law 107–295, 116 Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. 33 CFR Parts 165 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [Docket Number USCG–2014–0883] Security Delegation No. 0170.1. Table of Acronyms Norfolk Dredging Company has been RIN 1625–AA00 contracted by the Army Corps of DHS Department of Homeland Security Engineers (ACOE) to conduct Safety Zone, Delaware River; Delaware FR Federal Register maintenance dredging in the Delaware City, DE NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking River within New Castle Range in order AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. A. Regulatory History and Information to maintain channel depth. This project requires the placement of floating and ACTION: Temporary final rule. The Coast Guard is issuing this submerged pipeline, along with temporary final rule without prior placement of an anchor barge, within SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is notice and opportunity to comment Pea Patch Island Anchorage No. 5. Due establishing a temporary safety zone pursuant to authority under section 4(a) to the presence of the pipeline, vessels closing Pea Patch Island Anchorage No. of the Administrative Procedure Act are not permitted to anchor within Pea 5 and the upper portion of Reedy Point (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision South Anchorage No. 3 to anchoring Patch Island Anchorage for the duration authorizes an agency to issue a rule of the dredging project. In addition, as operations in order to facilitate dredging without prior notice and opportunity to in New Castle Range in the Delaware the dredging project proceeds south and comment when the agency for good approaches the entrance of the River. This regulation is necessary to cause finds that those procedures are provide for the safety of life on the Chesapeake and Delaware (C & D) Canal, ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary vessels heading north through the navigable waters of Pea Patch Island and to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. Reedy Point South Anchorages. These Delaware River with intent to transit the 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that Canal will be re-directed through the closures are intended to restrict vessel good cause exists for not publishing a anchoring to protect mariners from the upper portion of Reedy Point South notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) Anchorage No. 3. As a result this upper hazards associated with ongoing pipe- with respect to this rule because it is laying and dredging operations. portion of Anchorage No. 3 will be impracticable because immediate action closed for anchoring purposes during DATES: This rule is effective without is necessary to protect the maritime this time. Notice of the closure will be actual notice from October 6, 2014 until public. Publishing an NPRM is broadcast by a Local Notice to Mariners November 15, 2014, unless cancelled impracticable given that the final details and a Broadcast Notice to Mariners at earlier by the Captain of the Port. For for the dredging operation were not the appropriate time. The Captain of the the purposes of enforcement, actual received by the Coast Guard until Port will reopen both anchorages once notice will be used from October 1, September 17, 2014. Vessels attempting all submerged pipeline has been 2014, until October 6, 2014. to anchor in either Pea Patch Island or recovered and dredging operations are ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in the upper portion of Reedy Point South complete. At such time, notice that the this preamble are part of docket [USCG– Anchorages during pipe-laying or temporary closure of the anchorages is 2014–0883]. To view documents dredging operations may be at risk. no longer in effect will be broadcast to mentioned in this preamble as being Delaying this rule to wait for a notice mariners on VHF channel 16. The available in the docket, go to http:// and comment period to run would be Captain of the Port is establishing this www.regulations.gov, type the docket contrary to the public interest as it safety zone to ensure the safety of life number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click would inhibit the Coast Guard’s ability and property of all mariners and vessels ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket to protect the public from the hazards transiting the local area. Folder on the line associated with this associated with pipe-laying and rulemaking. You may also visit the dredging operations. C. Discussion of the Temporary Final Docket Management Facility in Room Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Rule W12–140 on the ground floor of the Guard finds that good cause exists for The Coast Guard Captain of the Port Department of Transportation West making this rule effective less than 30 is temporarily establishing a safety zone

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60058 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

closing Pea Patch Island Anchorage No. with populations of less than 50,000. effect on the States, on the relationship 5 and the upper portion of Reedy Point The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. between the national government and South Anchorage No. 3 to anchoring 605(b) that this rule will not have a the States, or on the distribution of operations from October 1, 2014 to significant economic impact on a power and responsibilities among the November 15, 2014, unless cancelled substantial number of small entities. various levels of government. We have earlier by the Captain of the Port once This rule will affect the following analyzed this rule under that Order and operations are complete. The safety entities, some of which may be small determined that this rule does not have zone will include all waters within the entities: The owners or operators of implications for federalism. boundaries of Pea Patch Island vessels intending to anchor in Pea Patch 6. Protest Activities Anchorage No. 5 and all waters within Island Anchorage No. 5 and the upper a portion of Reedy Point South portion of Reedy Point South Anchorage The Coast Guard respects the First Anchorage No. 3 north of a line drawn No. 3, from October 1, 2014 to Amendment rights of protesters. between positions 39°33′7.5″ N, November 15, 2014, unless cancelled Protesters are asked to contact the 75°33′2.0″ W and 39°33′8.8″ N, earlier by the Captain of the Port once person listed in the FOR FURTHER 75°32′31.8″ W, as charted on NOAA all operations are completed. INFORMATION CONTACT section to chart 12311. Vessels will not be This safety zone will not have a coordinate protest activities so that your permitted to anchor within these areas significant economic impact on a message can be received without of Anchorage No. 5 or Anchorage No. 3. substantial number of small entities for jeopardizing the safety or security of The Captain of the Port or her the following reason: Vessel traffic will people, places or vessels. representative may be contacted via be allowed to pass through the safety 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act VHF channel 16. zone with permission of the Captain of The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act D. Regulatory Analyses the Port or her designated representative, and the safety zone is of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires We developed this rule after limited in size. Sector Delaware Bay Federal agencies to assess the effects of considering numerous statutes and will issue maritime advisories widely their discretionary regulatory actions. In executive orders related to rulemaking. available to users of the Delaware River. particular, the Act addresses actions Below we summarize our analyses that may result in the expenditure by a based on these statutes or executive 3. Assistance for Small Entities State, local, or tribal government, in the orders. Under section 213(a) of the Small aggregate, or by the private sector of 1. Regulatory Planning and Review Business Regulatory Enforcement $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104– more in any one year. Though this rule This rule is not a significant 121), we want to assist small entities in will not result in such expenditure, we regulatory action under section 3(f) of understanding this rule. If the rule do discuss the effects of this rule Executive Order 12866, Regulatory would affect your small business, elsewhere in this preamble. Planning and Review, as supplemented organization, or governmental 8. Taking of Private Property by Executive Order 13563, Improving jurisdiction and you have questions Regulation and Regulatory Review, and concerning its provisions or options for This rule will not cause a taking of does not require an assessment of compliance, please contact the person private property or otherwise have potential costs and benefits under listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION taking implications under Executive section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 CONTACT, above. Order 12630, Governmental Actions and or under section 1 of Executive Order Small businesses may send comments Interference with Constitutionally 13563. The Office of Management and on the actions of Federal employees Protected Property Rights. Budget has not reviewed it under those who enforce, or otherwise determine 9. Civil Justice Reform Orders. Although this regulation will compliance with, Federal regulations to restrict access to the regulated area, the the Small Business and Agriculture This rule meets applicable standards effect of this rule will not be significant Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive because: (i) The Coast Guard will make and the Regional Small Business Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to extensive notification of the Safety Zone Regulatory Fairness Boards. The minimize litigation, eliminate to the maritime public via maritime Ombudsman evaluates these actions ambiguity, and reduce burden. advisories so mariners can alter their annually and rates each agency’s 10. Protection of Children plans accordingly; (ii) vessels may still responsiveness to small business. If you be permitted to transit through the wish to comment on actions by We have analyzed this rule under safety zone with the permission of the employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– Executive Order 13045, Protection of Captain of the Port on a case-by-case 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Children from Environmental Health basis; and (iii) this rule will be enforced Coast Guard will not retaliate against Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not until pipe-laying and dredging small entities that question or complain an economically significant rule and operations have been completed. about this rule or any policy or action does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 2. Impact on Small Entities of the Coast Guard. disproportionately affect children. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 4. Collection of Information 11. Indian Tribal Governments (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, This rule will not call for a new requires federal agencies to consider the collection of information under the This rule does not have tribal potential impact of regulations on small Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 implications under Executive Order entities during rulemaking. The term U.S.C. 3501–3520). 13175, Consultation and Coordination ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small with Indian Tribal Governments, businesses, not-for-profit organizations 5. Federalism because it does not have a substantial that are independently owned and A rule has implications for federalism direct effect on one or more Indian operated and are not dominant in their under Executive Order 13132, tribes, on the relationship between the fields, and governmental jurisdictions Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Federal Government and Indian tribes,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60059

or on the distribution of power and ■ 2. Amend § 165.T05–0883, to read as enforcement of the Safety Zone by responsibilities between the Federal follows: Federal, State, and local agencies. Government and Indian tribes. § 165.T05–0883 Safety Zone, Delaware Dated: September 24, 2014. 12. Energy Effects River; Delaware City, DE K. Moore, This action is not a ‘‘significant (a) Regulated area. The safety zone Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Delaware Bay. energy action’’ under Executive Order will include all waters within the 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations boundaries of Pea Patch Island [FR Doc. 2014–23663 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Anchorage No. 5 and all waters within BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Distribution, or Use. the upper portion of Reedy Point South Anchorage No. 3 north of a line drawn 13. Technical Standards between positions 39°33′7.5″ N, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION This rule does not use technical 75°33′2.0″ W and 39°33′8.8″ N, AGENCY standards. Therefore, we did not 75°32′31.8″ W, as charted on NOAA consider the use of voluntary consensus chart 12311. 40 CFR Part 52 standards. (b) Enforcement period. This section [EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0476; FRL–9917–16– will be enforced from October 1, 2014 Region 3] 14. Environment to November 15, 2014, unless cancelled We have analyzed this rule under earlier by the Captain of the Port once Approval and Promulgation of Air Department of Homeland Security all operations are completed. Quality Implementation Plans; Management Directive 023–01 and (c) Regulations. All persons are Pennsylvania; Allegheny County’s Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, required to comply with the general Adoption of Control Techniques which guide the Coast Guard in regulations governing safety zones in 33 Guidelines for Offset Lithographic complying with the National CFR 165.23. Printing and Letterpress Printing; Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (1) All persons or vessels wishing to Flexible Package Printing; and (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and transit through the Safety Zone must Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations have determined that this action is one request authorization to do so from the for Control of Volatile Organic of a category of actions that do not Captain of the Port or her designated Compound Emissions representative one hour prior to the individually or cumulatively have a AGENCY: Environmental Protection significant effect on the human intended time of transit. Agency (EPA). environment. This rule involves (2) Vessels granted permission to ACTION: Final rule. implementation of regulations within 33 transit must do so in accordance with CFR Part 165, applicable to safety zones the directions provided by the Captain SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection on the navigable waterways. This safety of the Port or her designated Agency (EPA) is approving a State zone will temporarily restrict vessel representative to the vessel. Implementation Plan (SIP) revision traffic from anchoring in Pea Patch (3) To seek permission to transit the submitted by the Commonwealth of Island Anchorage No. 5 and Reedy Point Safety Zone, the Captain of the Port’s Pennsylvania. This SIP revision South Anchorage No. 3. This rule is representative can be contacted via includes amendments to the Allegheny categorically excluded from further marine radio VHF Channel 16. County Health Department (ACHD) review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure (4) This section applies to all vessels Rules and Regulations, Article XXI, Air 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. An wishing to transit through the Safety Pollution Control, and meets the environmental analysis checklist Zone except vessels that are engaged in requirement to adopt Reasonably supporting this determination and a the following operations: Available Control Technology (RACT) Categorical Exclusion Determination are (i) Enforcing laws; for sources covered by EPA’s Control available in the docket where indicated (ii) Servicing aids to navigation, and Techniques Guidelines (CTG) standards under ADDRESSES. We seek any (iii) Emergency response vessels. for the following categories: Offset comments or information that may lead (5) No person or vessel may enter or lithographic printing and letterpress to the discovery of a significant remain in a safety zone without the printing, flexible package printing, and environmental impact from this rule. permission of the Captain of the Port; industrial solvent cleaning operations. (6) Each person and vessel in a safety List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 EPA is approving the revision to the zone shall obey any direction or order Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation of the Captain of the Port; the requirements of the Clean Air Act (7) No person may board, or take or (water), Reporting and recordkeeping (CAA). requirements, Security measures, place any article or thing on board, any DATES: Waterways. vessel in a safety zone without the This final rule is effective on November 5, 2014. For the reasons discussed in the permission of the Captain of the Port; ADDRESSES: EPA has established a preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 and (8) No person may take or place any docket for this action under Docket ID CFR Part 165 as follows: article or thing upon any waterfront Number EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0476. All PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION facility in a safety zone without the documents in the docket are listed in AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS permission of the Captain of the Port. the www.regulations.gov Web site. (d) Definitions. The Captain of the Although listed in the electronic docket, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 Port means the Commander of Sector some information is not publicly continues to read as follows: Delaware Bay or any Coast Guard available, i.e., confidential business Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. commissioned, warrant, or petty officer information (CBI) or other information Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; who has been authorized by the Captain whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. of the Port to act on her behalf. Certain other material, such as 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of (e) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast copyrighted material, is not placed on Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 Guard may be assisted in the patrol and the Internet and will be publicly

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60060 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

available only in hard copy form. 2105.82 in order to: (1) Establish • Is not an economically significant Publicly available docket materials are applicability for offset lithographic regulatory action based on health or available either electronically through printing and letterpress printing, safety risks subject to Executive Order www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for flexible package printing, and industrial 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); public inspection during normal cleaning solvent operations at facilities; • Is not a significant regulatory action business hours at the Air Protection (2) establish exemptions; (3) establish subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Division, U.S. Environmental Protection record-keeping and work practice 28355, May 22, 2001); Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, requirements; and (4) establish emission • Is not subject to requirements of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. limitations. Other specific requirements Section 12(d) of the National Copies of the State submittal are and the rationale for EPA’s proposed Technology Transfer and Advancement available at the Allegheny County action are explained in the NPR and Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Health Department, Bureau of will not be restated here. No public application of those requirements would Environmental Quality, Division of Air comments were received on the NPR. be inconsistent with the CAA; and • Does not provide EPA with the Quality, 301 39th Street, Pittsburgh, III. Final Action Pennsylvania 15201 and at the discretionary authority to address, as Pennsylvania Department of EPA is approving the Commonwealth appropriate, disproportionate human Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air of Pennsylvania SIP revision submitted health or environmental effects, using Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 on November 15, 2013, which consists practicable and legally permissible Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania of amendments to the ACHD Rules and methods, under Executive Order 12898 17105. Regulations, Article XXI, Air Pollution (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Control, and meets the requirement to In addition, this rule does not have FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: adopt RACT for sources located in tribal implications as specified by Irene Shandruk, (215) 814–2166, or by Allegheny County covered by EPA’s Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, email at [email protected]. CTG standards for the following November 9, 2000), because the SIP is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: categories: Offset lithographic printing not approved to apply in Indian country I. Background and letterpress printing, flexible located in the state, and EPA notes that package printing, and industrial solvent it will not impose substantial direct Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides cleaning operations. costs on tribal governments or preempt that SIPs for nonattainment areas must tribal law. include reasonably available control IV. Statutory and Executive Order measures (RACM), including RACT, for Reviews B. Submission to Congress and the sources of emissions. Section A. General Requirements Comptroller General 182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain Under the CAA, the Administrator is The Congressional Review Act, 5 nonattainment areas, states must revise required to approve a SIP submission U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small their SIP to include RACT for sources of that complies with the provisions of the Business Regulatory Enforcement volatile organic compound (VOC) CAA and applicable Federal regulations. Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides emissions covered by a CTG document 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). that before a rule may take effect, the issued after November 15, 1990 and Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, agency promulgating the rule must prior to the area’s date of attainment. In EPA’s role is to approve state choices, submit a rule report, which includes a 2006, EPA developed new CTGs for provided that they meet the criteria of copy of the rule, to each House of the offset lithographic printing and the CAA. Accordingly, this action Congress and to the Comptroller General letterpress printing, flexible package merely approves state law as meeting of the United States. EPA will submit a printing, and industrial solvent cleaning Federal requirements and does not report containing this action and other operations. A formal SIP submission impose additional requirements beyond required information to the U.S. Senate, was submitted by Pennsylvania to EPA those imposed by state law. For that the U.S. House of Representatives, and on November 15, 2013 and on August 1, reason, this action: the Comptroller General of the United 2014 (79 FR 44728), EPA published a • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory States prior to publication of the rule in notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) action’’ subject to review by the Office the Federal Register. A major rule proposing approval of Pennsylvania’s of Management and Budget under cannot take effect until 60 days after it SIP revision for adoption of the CTG Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, is published in the Federal Register. standards for offset lithographic printing October 4, 1993); This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as and letterpress printing, flexible • Does not impose an information defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). package printing, and industrial solvent collection burden under the provisions C. Petitions for Judicial Review cleaning operations in Allegheny of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 County. U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, • petitions for judicial review of this II. Summary of SIP Revision Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a action must be filed in the United States On November 15, 2013, Pennsylvania substantial number of small entities Court of Appeals for the appropriate Department of Environmental Protection under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a (PADEP) submitted to EPA a SIP U.S.C. 601 et seq.); petition for reconsideration by the revision concerning the adoption of the • Does not contain any unfunded Administrator of this final rule does not EPA CTGs for offset lithographic mandate or significantly or uniquely affect the finality of this action for the printing and letterpress printing, affect small governments, as described purposes of judicial review nor does it flexible package printing, and industrial in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act extend the time within which a petition cleaning solvent operations in of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); for judicial review may be filed, and Allegheny County. These regulations are • Does not have Federalism shall not postpone the effectiveness of contained in the ACHD Rules and implications as specified in Executive such rule or action. This action Regulations, Article XXI, Air Pollution Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, pertaining to ACHD’s adoption of CTG Control sections 2105.80, 2105.81, and 1999); standards for offset lithographic printing

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60061

and letterpress printing, flexible Dated: September 15, 2014. Subpart NN—Pennsylvania package printing, and industrial solvent William C. Early, ■ cleaning operations may not be Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph challenged later in proceedings to (c)(2) is amended by: Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended ■ enforce its requirements. (See section a. Under Part E, Subpart 1, revising as follows: 307(b)(2).) the entry for ‘‘2105.11, Graphic Arts Systems’’; and List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 PART 52—APPROVAL AND ■ b. Under Part E, Subpart 7, adding PROMULGATION OF entries for 2105.80, 2105.81, and Environmental protection, Air IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 2105.82 in numerical order. The pollution control, Incorporation by revision and additions read as follows: reference, Ozone, Reporting and ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 recordkeeping requirements, Volatile continues to read as follows: § 52.2020 Identification of plan. organic compounds. * * * * * Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. (c) * * * (2) * * *

State Additional Article XX or Title/subject effective EPA approval date explanation/ XXI citation date § 52.2063 citation

******* Part E—Source Emission and Operating Standards

******* Subpart 1—VOC Sources

******* 2105.11 ...... Graphic Arts Systems ...... 6/8/13 10/6/14 [Insert Federal Register ci- Revision to Exempt tation]. Other, section 2105.11(f).

******* Subpart 7—Miscellaneous VOC Sources

******* 2105.80 ...... Control of VOC Emissions from Offset Lithographic 6/8/13 10/6/14 [Insert Federal Register ci- New Regulation Printing and Letterpress Printing. tation]. 2105.81 ...... Control of VOC Emissions from Flexible Package 6/8/13 10/6/14 [Insert Federal Register ci- New Regulation Printing. tation]. 2105.82 ...... Control of VOC Emissions from Industrial Solvent 6/8/13 10/6/14 [Insert Federal Register ci- New Regulation Cleaning Operations. tation].

*******

* * * * * State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel [FR Doc. 2014–23777 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] revision concerns particulate matter (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection BILLING CODE 6560–50–P (PM) emissions from agricultural Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, compression engines and the definition San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. of hazardous air pollutants (HAP). We Instructions: All comments will be ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION are approving local rules under the included in the public docket without AGENCY Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). change and may be made available 40 CFR Part 52 DATES: This rule is effective on online at www.regulations.gov, December 5, 2014 without further including any personal information [EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0412; FRL–9912–71– notice, unless EPA receives adverse provided, unless the comment includes Region 9] comments by November 5, 2014. If we Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is Revisions to the California State receive such comments, we will publish restricted by statute. Information that Implementation Plan, Lake County Air a timely withdrawal in the Federal you consider CBI or otherwise protected Quality Management District Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect. should be clearly identified as such and AGENCY: Environmental Protection should not be submitted through ADDRESSES: Submit comments, Agency (EPA). www.regulations.gov or email. identified by docket number EPA–R09– ACTION: Direct final rule. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous OAR–2014–0412, by one of the access’’ system, and EPA will not know following methods: SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection your identity or contact information Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: unless you provide it in the body of action to approve a revision to the Lake www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line your comment. If you send email County Air Quality Management District instructions. directly to EPA, your email address will (LCAQMD) portion of the California 2. Email: [email protected]. be automatically captured and included

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60062 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

as part of the public comment. If EPA hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted B. Are there other versions of these rules? cannot read your comment due to material, large maps), and some may not C. What is the purpose of the submitted technical difficulties and cannot contact be publicly available in either location rules? you for clarification, EPA may not be (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? able to consider your comment. materials, please schedule an B. Do the rules meet the evaluation Electronic files should avoid the use of appointment during normal business criteria? special characters, any form of hours with the contact listed in the FOR C. EPA Recommendations To Further encryption, and be free of any defects or FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Improve the Rules viruses. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Public Comment and Final Action Docket: Generally, documents in the Idalia Pe´rez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews docket for this action are available 3248, [email protected]. I. The State’s Submittal electronically at www.regulations.gov SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. What rules did the State submit? and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. Table 1 lists the rules we are California 94105–3901. While all approving with the dates that they were documents in the docket are listed at Table of Contents adopted by the local air agency and www.regulations.gov, some information I. The State’s Submittal submitted by the California Air may be publicly available only at the A. What rules did the State submit? Resources Board.

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED SECTIONS

Section Local agency No. Section title Adopted Submitted

LCAQMD ...... 228 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) ...... 06/23/98 12/23/98 LCAQMD ...... 470 Air Toxics Control Measure for Emissions of Toxic Particulate 09/21/10 04/05/11 Matter from In-Use Agricultural Compression Ignition Engines.

On June 23, 1999, the submittal for local administrative program for 2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting LCAQMD Rule 228 was deemed by registering compression ignition (CI) Common VOC & Other Rule operation of law to meet the stationary engines used in agricultural Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 operations and controlling air emissions August 21, 2001 (the Little Appendix V. On May 6, 2011, EPA from these sources by setting engine tier Bluebook). determined that the submittal for requirements for certain replacement B. Do the rules meet the evaluation LCAQMD Rule 470 met the units. EPA’s technical support criteria? completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 document (TSD) has more information Appendix V, which must be met before about rule 470. We believe these rules are consistent formal EPA review. with the relevant policy and guidance II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action regarding enforceability and SIP B. Are there other versions of these A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? relaxations. The Technical Support rules? Document (TSD) has more information Generally, SIP rules must be There are no previous versions of on our evaluation. Rules 228 or 470 approved into the SIP. enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and must not relax existing C. EPA Recommendations To Further C. What is the purpose of the submitted requirements (see sections 110(l) and Improve the Rule rules? 193). Rule 228 does not set emissions The TSD describes additional rule Section 110(a) of the CAA requires standards thus it does not have to meet revisions that we recommend for the States to submit regulations that control a specific stringency requirement for next time the local agency modifies Rule volatile organic compounds, oxides of emissions. Additionally, LCAQMD 470. nitrogen, PM, and other air pollutants regulates an area that is classified as which harm human health and the attainment for all National Ambient Air D. Public Comment and Final Action environment. Rule 228 was developed Quality Standards (NAAQS) (see 40 CFR As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of as part of the local agency’s program to Part 81.305), so Rule 470 does not have the Act, EPA is fully approving the control these pollutants. It defines HAPs to meet a specific stringency submitted rules because we believe they as ‘‘Those pollutants that are listed in requirement for emissions from this fulfill all relevant requirements. We do the Federal Clean Air Act’s Section source category. not think anyone will object to this 112(b) List of Hazardous Air Guidance and policy documents that approval, so we are finalizing it without Pollutants.’’ we use to evaluate enforceability proposing it in advance. However, in PM contributes to effects that are requirements consistently include the the Proposed Rules section of this harmful to human health and the following: Federal Register, we are simultaneously environment, including premature 1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation proposing approval of the same mortality, aggravation of respiratory and Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and submitted rules. If we receive adverse cardiovascular disease, decreased lung Deviations; Clarification to comments by November 5, 2014, we function, visibility impairment, and Appendix D of November 24, 1987 will publish a timely withdrawal in the damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Federal Register Notice,’’ (Blue Federal Register to notify the public Section 110(a) of the CAA requires Book), notice of availability that the direct final approval will not States to submit regulations that control published in the May 25, 1988 take effect and we will address the PM emissions. Section 470 provides a Federal Register. comments in a subsequent final action

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60063

based on the proposal. If we do not • does not provide EPA with the matter, Reporting and recordkeeping receive timely adverse comments, the discretionary authority to address requirements. disproportionate human health or direct final approval will be effective Dated: May 30, 2014. without further notice on December 5, environmental effects with practical, 2014. This will incorporate the rules appropriate, and legally permissible Jared Blumenfeld, into the federally enforceable SIP. methods under Executive Order 12898 Regional Administrator, Region IX. Please note that if EPA receives (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code adverse comment on an amendment, In addition, these rules do not have of Federal Regulations is amended as paragraph, or section of either of these tribal implications as specified by follows: rules and if that provision may be Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, severed from the remainder of the rules, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is PART 52—APPROVAL AND EPA may adopt as final those provisions not approved to apply in Indian country PROMULGATION OF of the rules that are not the subject of located in the State, and EPA notes that IMPLEMENTATION PLANS an adverse comment. it will not impose substantial direct III. Statutory and Executive Order costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 Reviews The Congressional Review Act, 5 continues to read as follows: Under the Clean Air Act, the U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Administrator is required to approve a Business Regulatory Enforcement SIP submission that complies with the Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Subpart F—California provisions of the Act and applicable that before a rule may take effect, the Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); agency promulgating the rule must ■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submit a rule report, which includes a adding paragraphs (c)(388) (i)(G) and submissions, EPA’s role is to approve copy of the rule, to each House of the (c)(443) to read as follows: State choices, provided that they meet Congress and to the Comptroller General the criteria of the Clean Air Act. of the United States. EPA will submit a § 52.220 Identification of plan. Accordingly, this action merely report containing this action and other * * * * * approves State law as meeting Federal required information to the U.S. Senate, requirements and does not impose the U.S. House of Representatives, and (c) * * * additional requirements beyond those the Comptroller General of the United (388) * * * imposed by State law. For that reason, States prior to publication of the rule in (i) * * * this action: the Federal Register. A major rule • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory cannot take effect until 60 days after it (G) Lake County Air Quality action’’ subject to review by the Office is published in the Federal Register. Management District. of Management and Budget under This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as (1) Lake County Air Quality Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Management District Board of Directors October 4, 1993); Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Resolution 2010–174 adopting Section • does not impose an information Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 470, ‘‘Air Toxics Control Measure for collection burden under the provisions this action must be filed in the United Emissions of Toxic Particulate Matter of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 States Court of Appeals for the from In-Use Agricultural Compression U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); appropriate circuit by December 5, Ignition Engines,’’ adopted on • is certified as not having a 2014. Filing a petition for September 21, 2010, as ‘‘Exhibit A.’’ significant economic impact on a reconsideration by the Administrator of substantial number of small entities this final rule does not affect the finality * * * * * under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 of this action for the purposes of judicial (443) New and amended regulations U.S.C. 601 et seq.); review nor does it extend the time for the following APCDs were submitted • does not contain any unfunded within which a petition for judicial on December 23, 1998 by the Governor’s mandate or significantly or uniquely review may be filed, and shall not Designee. affect small governments, as described postpone the effectiveness of such rule in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act or action. Parties with objections to this (i) Incorporation by Reference. of 1995 (Public Law 104–4); direct final rule are encouraged to file a (A) Lake County Air Quality • does not have Federalism comment in response to the parallel Management District. implications as specified in Executive notice of proposed rulemaking for this (1) Lake County Air Quality Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, action published in the Proposed Rules Management District Board of Directors 1999); section of today’s Federal Register, Resolution 98–195 adopting Section • is not an economically significant rather than file an immediate petition 228, ‘‘Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP),’’ regulatory action based on health or for judicial review of this direct final adopted on June 23, 1998, as ‘‘Exhibit safety risks subject to Executive Order rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); direct final rule and address the A.’’ • is not a significant regulatory action comment in the proposed rulemaking. [FR Doc. 2014–23771 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR This action may not be challenged later BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 28355, May 22, 2001); in proceedings to enforce its • is not subject to requirements of requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Environmental protection, Air application of those requirements would pollution control, Carbon monoxide, be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; Incorporation by reference, and Intergovernmental relations, Particulate

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60064 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION III. What action is EPA taking? IV. Statutory and Executive Order AGENCY IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. Reviews I. What is the background for this Under the CAA, the Administrator is 40 CFR Part 52 action? required to approve a SIP submission [EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0242; FRL–9915–94– On March 12, 2014, the Wisconsin that complies with the provisions of the Region 5] Department of Natural Resources CAA and applicable Federal regulations. (WDNR) submitted a request to EPA to 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Approval and Promulgation of Air Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, Quality Implementation Plans; revise portions of its PSD and NNSR programs. The submittal requested that EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Wisconsin; Revisions to PSD and provided that they meet the criteria of NNSR Programs EPA approve the following revised rules into Wisconsin’s SIP: (1) NR the CAA. Accordingly, this action AGENCY: Environmental Protection 400.02(123m) and (124); (2) NR merely approves state law as meeting Agency (EPA). 405.02(21)(b)5.a. and b. and 6; (3) NR Federal requirements and does not ACTION: Final rule. 405.02(25i)(a); (4) NR 405.02(25i)(ag) impose additional requirements beyond and (ar)1–3; and (5) NR 408.02(20)(e) 5.a those imposed by state law. For that SUMMARY: Pursuant to its authority and b. and 6. On May 2, 2014, EPA reason, this action: • under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), published in the Federal Register (79 Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory the Environmental Protection Agency FR 25063) a proposal to take action on action’’ subject to review by the Office (EPA) is approving a revision to the portions of the March 12, 2014, of Management and Budget under Wisconsin State Implementation Plan submittal that pertained to the Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, (SIP) for the Prevention of Significant definition of ‘‘major modification’’, and October 4, 1993); • Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment explicitly identify oxides of nitrogen Does not impose an information New Source Review (NNSR) programs. (NOX) as a precursor to ozone. collection burden under the provisions DATES: This final rule is effective on Specifically, EPA’s May 2, 2014, of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 November 5, 2014. proposed rulemaking was limited to the U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • ADDRESSES: EPA has established a following provisions: (1) NR Is certified as not having a docket for this action under Docket ID 405.02(21)(b)5.a. and b. and 6; (2) NR significant economic impact on a No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0242. All 405.02(25i)(a); (3)NR substantial number of small entities documents in the docket are listed on 405.02(25i)(ar)(intro) and 1.; and, (4) NR under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); the www.regulations.gov Web site. 408.02(20)(e) 5.a and b. and 6. The • Although listed in the index, some remainder of WDNR’s submission, as it Does not contain any unfunded information is not publicly available, relates to the identification of precursors mandate or significantly or uniquely i.e., Confidential Business Information to particulate matter of less than 2.5 affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (CBI) or other information whose micrometers (PM2.5), and the definition of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); disclosure is restricted by statute. of PM2.5 and particulate matter of less • Certain other material, such as than 10 micrometers, will be addressed Does not have Federalism copyrighted material, is not placed on in a separate rulemaking. implications as specified in Executive the Internet and will be publicly Because the SIP revision was not Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, effective at the state level at the time of 1999); available only in hard copy form. • Publicly available docket materials are the March 12, 2014, submittal, Is not an economically significant available either electronically through Wisconsin requested that EPA parallel regulatory action based on health or www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at process the SIP revision. EPA’s May 2, safety risks subject to Executive Order 2014, proposal was contingent upon 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); the Environmental Protection Agency, • Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 both the effectiveness of amended rules Is not a significant regulatory action West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, at the state level and a formal, fully subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Illinois 60604. This facility is open from adopted SIP revision request. 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through II. Effective Date of Wisconsin’s Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We Section 12(d) of the National Adopted Rule and Formal SIP Technology Transfer and Advancement recommend that you telephone Anthony Submission Maietta, Life Scientist, at (312) 353– Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 8777 before visiting the Region 5 office. On June 30, 2014, revisions to application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wisconsin’s PSD and NNSR rules, as submitted in draft to EPA on March 12, • Does not provide EPA with the Anthony Maietta, Life Scientist, Control discretionary authority to address, as Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 2014, were published in the Wisconsin Administrative Register, and became appropriate, disproportionate human (AR–18J), Environmental Protection health or environmental effects, using Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson effective on July, 1, 2014. On August 11, 2014, Wisconsin formally submitted its practicable and legally permissible Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, methods, under Executive Order 12898 (312) 353–8777, maietta.anthony@ request for EPA to take final action on our May 2, 2014 proposal. (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). epa.gov. In addition, this rule does not have SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: III. What action is EPA taking? tribal implications as specified by Throughout this document whenever EPA is approving revisions to Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean Wisconsin rules NR 405.02(21)(b)5.a. November 9, 2000), because the SIP is EPA. This supplementary information and b. and 6; NR 405.02(25i)(a); NR not approved to apply in Indian country section is arranged as follows: 405.02(25i)(ar)(intro) and 1.; and NR located in the state, and EPA notes that I. What is the background for this action? 408.02(20)(e) 5.a and b. and 6., as it will not impose substantial direct II. Effective Date of Wisconsin’s Adopted submitted by WDNR on August 11, costs on tribal governments or preempt Rule and Formal SIP Submission. 2014, into the Wisconsin SIP. tribal law.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60065

The Congressional Review Act, 5 Deterioration and Nonattainment New 4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Source Review rules. Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Business Regulatory Enforcement (i) Incorporation by reference. Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (A) Wisconsin Administrative Code, Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson that before a rule may take effect, the NR 405.02(21)(b)5.a. and b. and 6; NR Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. agency promulgating the rule must 405.02(25i)(a); NR 405.02(25i)(ar)(intro) 5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, submit a rule report, which includes a and 1., as published in the Wisconsin Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air copy of the rule, to each House of the Administrative Register July 2014, No. Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Congress and to the Comptroller General 703, effective August 1, 2014. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 of the United States. EPA will submit a (B) Wisconsin Administrative Code, West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, report containing this action and other NR 408.02(20)(e) 5.a and b. and 6., as Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only required information to the U.S. Senate, published in the Wisconsin accepted during the Regional Office the U.S. House of Representatives, and Administrative Register July 2014, No. normal hours of operation, and special the Comptroller General of the United 703, effective August 1, 2014. arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The States prior to publication of the rule in [FR Doc. 2014–23769 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Regional Office official hours of the Federal Register. A major rule BILLING CODE 6560–50–P cannot take effect until 60 days after it business are Monday through Friday, is published in the Federal Register. 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Federal holidays. defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). AGENCY Instructions: Direct your comments to Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2013– petitions for judicial review of this 40 CFR Part 52 0273. EPA’s policy is that all comments action must be filed in the United States received will be included in the public Court of Appeals for the appropriate [EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0273; FRL–9914–97– docket without change and may be Region 5] circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any petition for reconsideration by the Approval and Promulgation of Air Administrator of this final rule does not personal information provided, unless Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; the comment includes information affect the finality of this action for the Amendments to Gasoline Volatility purposes of judicial review nor does it claimed to be Confidential Business Standards and Motor Vehicle Information (CBI) or other information extend the time within which a petition Refinishing Requirements for Illinois for judicial review may be filed, and whose disclosure is restricted by statute. shall not postpone the effectiveness of AGENCY: Environmental Protection Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise such rule or action. This action may not Agency (EPA). protected through www.regulations.gov be challenged later in proceedings to ACTION: Direct final rule. or email. The www.regulations.gov Web enforce its requirements. (See section site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 307(b)(2).) SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving state which means EPA will not know your List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 implementation plan (SIP) revisions identity or contact information unless Environmental protection, Air submitted by the Illinois Environmental you provide it in the body of your pollution control, Incorporation by Protection Agency (IEPA) on March 19, comment. If you send an email reference, Intergovernmental relations, 2013, concerning the state’s gasoline comment directly to EPA without going Lead, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting volatility standards. The SIP revisions through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically captured and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur also include amendments to the state’s and included as part of the comment oxides. motor vehicle refinishing regulations to that is placed in the public docket and Dated: August 19, 2014. allow for the alternative use of a high volume, low pressure (HVLP) equivalent made available on the Internet. If you Susan Hedman, coating applicator in motor vehicle submit an electronic comment, EPA Regional Administrator, Region 5. refinishing operations, and repeal a recommends that you include your name and other contact information in 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: registration program under these regulations that overlaps with Federal the body of your comment and with any PART 52—APPROVAL AND registration requirements. disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to PROMULGATION OF DATES: This direct final rule is effective IMPLEMENTATION PLANS technical difficulties and cannot contact December 5, 2014, unless EPA receives you for clarification, EPA may not be adverse comments by November 5, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 able to consider your comment. 2014. If adverse comments are received, continues to read as follows: Electronic files should avoid the use of EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of special characters, any form of Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. the direct final rule in the Federal encryption, and be free of any defects or ■ 2. Section 52.2570 is amended by Register informing the public that the viruses. adding paragraph (c)(131) to read as rule will not take effect. Docket: All documents in the docket follows: ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, are listed in the www.regulations.gov identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– index. Although listed in the index, § 52.2570 Identification of plan. OAR–2013–0273, by one of the some information is not publicly * * * * * following methods: available, e.g., CBI or other information (c) * * * 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the whose disclosure is restricted by statute. (131) On August 11, 2014, the on-line instructions for submitting Certain other material, such as Wisconsin Department of Natural comments. copyrighted material, will be publicly Resources submitted a request to revise 2. Email: [email protected]. available only in hard copy. Publicly Wisconsin’s Prevention of Significant 3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. available docket materials are available

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60066 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

either electronically in requirements established maximum 218.585 for the Chicago ozone NAA, www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi and Section 219.585 for the Metro-East the Environmental Protection Agency, (depending on the state, the month, and St. Louis ozone NAA. Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 the area’s initial ozone attainment On April 6, 1990, and May 4, 1990, West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, designation with respect to the 1-hour Illinois submitted to EPA a regulation Illinois 60604. This facility is open from ozone national ambient air quality which reduced the maximum allowable 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through standards (NAAQS)). Phase II is volatility for gasoline sold in Illinois Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We applicable to 1992 and subsequent during July and August 1990 to 9.5 psi recommend that you telephone years. RVP. EPA approved this regulation on Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source The 1990 CAA Amendments July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29200). On January Program Manager, at (312) 886–6061 established a new section, 211(h), to 10, 1991, the state adopted amendments before visiting the Region 5 office. address fuel volatility. Section 211(h)(1) further limiting the maximum allowable FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: requires EPA to promulgate regulations volatility for gasoline sold in Illinois Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, during June 1 through September 15, 1 Program Manager, Control Strategies dispense, supply, offer for supply, 1991 to 9.0 psi RVP. On July 25, 1991 Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), transport, or introduce into commerce and September 9, 1993 the state adopted Environmental Protection Agency, gasoline with an RVP level in excess of changes to Illinois’ volatility regulations Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 9.0 psi during the high ozone season. limiting the volatility of gasoline sold in Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6061, Section 211(h)(2) prohibits EPA from the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis [email protected]. establishing a volatility standard more ozone NAAs to 9.0 psi RVP and stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment lengthened the regulatory control period SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: area, except that the Agency may to May 1 through September 15. EPA Throughout this document whenever impose a lower (more stringent) approved this regulation on September ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean standard in any former ozone 9, 1994 (59 FR 46562). On October 25, EPA. This supplementary information nonattainment area (NAA) redesignated 1994, Illinois submitted to EPA a section is arranged as follows: to attainment. regulation that reduces the maximum I. What is the background for the gasoline On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), allowable volatility for gasoline sold in volatility standards portion of this EPA modified the Phase II volatility the Illinois portion of the Metro-East St. action? regulations to be consistent with section Louis ozone NAA, which includes II. What changes have been made to Illinois’ 211(h) of the CAA. The modified gasoline volatility standards? Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair regulations prohibited the sale of Counties, to 7.2 psi RVP during the III. What is the background for the motor gasoline with an RVP above 9.0 psi in vehicle refinishing standards portion of summer control period. EPA approved this action? all areas designated attainment for this regulation on March 23, 1995 (60 IV. What changes have been made to Illinois’ ozone, beginning in 1992. For areas FR 15233). On May 14, 1996, Illinois motor vehicle refinishing standards? designated as nonattainment, the submitted an amendment to its RVP rule V. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s regulations retained the original Phase II to EPA which adjusts the summer submittal? standards published on June 11, 1990 regulatory control period of the Metro- VI. What action is EPA taking? (55 FR 23658), which included the 7.8 East St. Louis RVP program to make it VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. psi ozone season limitation for certain consistent with the national RVP I. What is the background for the areas. regulation. EPA approved this Section 211(k) of the CAA requires gasoline volatility standards portion of regulation on August 12, 1997 (62 FR the use of reformulated gasoline (RFG) this action? 43100). in the nine ozone NAAs having a 1980 Under section 211(c) of the Clean Air population in excess of 250,000 and II. What changes have been made to Act (CAA), EPA promulgated having the highest ozone design value Illinois’ gasoline volatility standards? regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR during the period 1987 through 1989. The State of Illinois has repealed its 11868) that set maximum limits for the The Chicago ozone NAA was designated gasoline volatility standards at 35 Ill. Reid vapor pressure (RVP) of gasoline as one of these areas. See 40 CFR Adm. Code Section 215.585 for the sold during the regulatory control 80.70(f). The use of RFG was required in state’s ozone attainment area, Section periods that were established on a state- the Chicago ozone NAA beginning in 218.585 for the Chicago ozone NAA, by-state basis in the final rule. The 1995 when Phase I of the RFG program and Section 219.585 for the Metro-East regulatory control periods addressed the went into effect. Phase II of the RFG St. Louis ozone NAA. The state gasoline portion of the year when peak ozone program went into effect in 2000. In volatility regulations have essentially concentrations were expected. Peak addition to these areas which are been superseded by Federal regulations ozone concentrations are expected required to market RFG, state Governors promulgated under Section 211(c) and during the summertime. These can petition EPA for the inclusion of later under Sections 211(h) and 211(k) regulations constituted Phase I of a two other NAAs in the RFG program. of the CAA. For this reason and to phase nationwide program, which was Accordingly, the State of Illinois relieve the administrative burden designed to reduce the volatility of requested EPA to extend the associated with the development of commercial gasoline during the high requirement for the sale of RFG for the waivers during periods of fuel supply ozone season. Depending on the state Illinois portion of the Metro-East St. shortages, the Illinois Pollution Control and month, gasoline RVP was not to Louis ozone NAA in July 2006 with the exceed 10.5 pounds per square inch program becoming effective in July 1 EPA proposed to approve this regulation on (psi), 9.5 psi, or 9.0 psi. Phase I was 2007. June 7, 1991 (66 FR 26359). On April 28, 1992, applicable to calendar years 1989 Illinois enacted state specific limits to IEPA requested that EPA place the SIP revision on through 1991. On June 11, 1990 (55 FR address the summertime volatility of the inactive status since IEPA would not be able to take emission reduction credits for an ‘‘early’’ 23658), EPA promulgated more gasoline through regulations at 35 Ill. reduction in RVP one year ahead of the Federal stringent volatility controls as Phase II Adm. Code Section 215.585 for the requirement. Consequently, EPA did not approve of the volatility control program. These Illinois ozone attainment area, Section this regulation.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60067

Board repealed the state regulations. these areas. See 40 CFR 80.70(f). The severe storm at a Metro-East St. Louis The Board also approved clean-up use of RFG was required in the Chicago area refinery. In these instances, EPA amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts ozone NAA beginning in 1995 when granted a short-term waiver from the 211, 215, 218, and 219 to update Phase I of the RFG program went into RFG regulations, but due to the references and to be consistent with the effect. Phase II of the RFG program went existence of the state Chicago NAA repeal of the state gasoline volatility into effect in 2000 and requires a 27.4 gasoline volatility standards, Illinois standards. percent (averaging) reduction in had to issue a provisional variance to the regulation in order for the EPA a. State Ozone Attainment Area summertime (May 1 through September 15) VOC emissions from RFG in VOC waiver to achieve its intended effect. 35 Ill. Adm. Code Section 215.585 control region 2 areas (northern areas), Repealing the existing Chicago NAA applied only to the year 1991 in the which includes Chicago. Compliance gasoline volatility standards, which are state’s ozone attainment area and with the RFG standards is measured by less stringent than the RFG standards, limited the RVP of gasoline sold, offered inputting specific gasoline characteristic would result in no loss of emissions for sale, dispensed, supplied, offered for parameters into a performance reductions benefits, and in times of supply or transported for use in Illinois standards model known as the regional fuel supply shortages, would between June 1 and September 15 to 9.0 ‘‘complex model’’. The fuel parameters eliminate the RVP SIP waiver and psi. Ethanol blend gasoline containing 9 used in the complex model include provisional variance processes, allowing to 10 percent ethanol by volume were RVP, oxygen, sulfur, aromatics, olefins, other fuel to be marketed in the affected allowed to have an RVP up to 10.0 psi. benzene, and a percent of fuel region in a more efficient manner. Pursuant to Section 211(c) of the evaporated at 200 and 300 degrees CAA, EPA adopted national gasoline c. Metro-East St. Louis Ozone Fahrenheit (E200 and E300, Nonattainment Area volatility standards which set maximum respectively). The model evaluates the RVP limits for gasoline sold during the emissions from the RFG blend The state gasoline volatility regulation May 1 to September 15 control period. compared to the 27.4 percent reduction affecting the Metro-East St. Louis ozone See 40 CFR 80.27. Beginning in 1992, baseline. Although the RVP of the fuel NAA is found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code these regulations limited the RVP of is an important characteristic in Section 219.585. The Illinois portion of gasoline sold in Illinois to 9.0 psi. These determining the emissions from the fuel the Metro-East St. Louis ozone NAA regulations also allowed an additional blend, the RFG standards do not includes Madison, Monroe, St. Clair and Jersey Counties. Section 182(b)(1) of the 1.0 psi for ethanol blend gasoline establish a maximum volatility. Rather, CAA requires all moderate and above containing 9 to 10 percent ethanol by a refiner or blender can vary the specific ozone NAAs to achieve a 15 percent volume. parameters as long as the resultant Since Section 215.585 was only in reduction of 1990 emissions of VOC by blend meets the overall emission force in 1991, and the Federal RVP 1996. The Metro-East St. Louis area reduction specification provided by the standards now apply to the attainment ozone NAA was subject to this complex model. The result is an areas of the state, IEPA believes that requirement and in order to meet the equivalent percentage reduction in VOC there is no longer any need in CAA 15 percent Rate of Progress emissions as would be achieved if a fuel maintaining the state gasoline volatility emissions requirement and to strive for RVP of 6.7 psi was utilized. Even standard and the Illinois Pollution consistency in the fuel across the St. though the RFG requirements do not Control Board repealed this section. Louis metropolitan area, IEPA proposed, specifically establish an RVP limit, and the Illinois Pollution Control Board b. Chicago Ozone Nonattainment Area historical data indicates that RVP of adopted, a more stringent gasoline The state gasoline volatility standards RFG sold during the summertime (high volatility regulation in 1994. This affecting the Chicago ozone NAA are ozone season) in the Chicago ozone regulation limits the RVP of gasoline found at 35 Ill. Adm. Code 218.585. The NAA is considerably less than the RVP sold, offered for sale, dispensed, Illinois portion of the Chicago ozone limits established in the Federal and supplied, offered for supply or NAA includes Cook, DuPage, Kane, state gasoline volatility standards, and transported for use in the Metro-East St. Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties and has a range of averages from 6.7 to 7.2 Louis ozone NAA during May 1 through Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships psi, well below the maximum limits the September 15 control period to 7.2 in Grundy County and Oswego established in Section 218.585. psi. A 1.0 psi allowance is granted for Township in Kendall County. This Therefore, since the Federal RFG ethanol blend gasoline having at least 9 regulation limits the RVP of gasoline requirements are more stringent than percent but not more than 10 percent sold, offered for sale, dispensed, the Chicago ozone NAA gasoline ethyl alcohol by volume. The Illinois supplied, offered for supply or volatility regulations in Section 218.585, Pollution Control Board adopted an transported for use in the Chicago ozone these regulations are no longer amendment to this regulation which NAA area during May 1 through the necessary. changed the start of regulatory control September 15 control period to 9.0 psi. The existence of the Chicago NAA period from May 1 to June 1 to be A 1.0 psi allowance is granted for gasoline volatility standards can also consistent with the Federal compliance ethanol blend gasoline containing 9 to become an obstacle in times of dates. On March 23, 1995, EPA 10 percent ethanol by volume. On emergency fuel shortages. In the event approved the regulation with the May 1 September 9, 1994, EPA approved this of a regional fuel shortage, Section date as part of the Illinois SIP. 60 FR regulation as part of the Illinois SIP. 59 211(c)(4)(C) of the CAA allows EPA, 15233 (March 23, 1995). On August 12, FR 46562 (September 9, 1994). with the concurrence of the Department 1997, EPA approved the revision As stated above, Section 211(k) of the of Energy, to temporarily waive fuel relating to the change in the regulatory CAA requires the use of RFG in the nine requirements in order that other fuel can control period to June 1 as part of the ozone NAAs having a 1980 population be brought into the area and sold. EPA Illinois SIP. 62 FR 43100 (August 12, in excess of 250,000 and having the has issued two such emergency fuel 1997). highest ozone design value during the waivers since 2005, one due to the As stated above, Section 211(k) of the period 1987 through 1989. The Chicago impact of Hurricane Katrina, and a CAA requires the use of RFG in the nine ozone NAA was designated as one of second due to damage caused by a ozone NAAs having a 1980 population

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60068 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

in excess of 250,000 and having the repealed, and is also defined in 35 Ill. 2008, 73 FR 1738). These standards are highest ozone design value during the Adm. Code Part 211. IEPA also removed found at 40 CFR 63, subpart HHHHHH. period 1987 through 1989. In addition ASTM D 323–82, ASTM D 4057, ASTM As it relates to surface coating of motor to these areas which are required to D 4177, and 40 CFR 80, appendices D, vehicles and mobile equipment, this market RFG, state Governors can E, and F contained in Section 215.105 NESHAP requires that all subject petition EPA for the inclusion of other because these incorporations by surface coating operations apply NAAs in the RFG program. Accordingly, reference are only found in Section coatings with a HVLP spray gun, the State of Illinois requested EPA to 215.585, are outdated, and are no longer electrostatic spray gun, airless spray extend the requirement for the sale of necessary with a repeal of the state’s gun, air-assisted airless spray gun, or an RFG for the Illinois portion of the gasoline volatility standards. equivalent technology demonstrated to Metro-East St. Louis ozone NAA in July Further, Illinois removed 40 CFR 80 be equal in transfer efficiency to one of 2006. On April 24, 2007, EPA issued a and 40 CFR 80, appendices D, E, and F these spray guns. 40 CFR 63.11173(e)(3). final rule requiring the sale of RFG in contained in Sections 218.112 and In addition, this NESHAP requires these the Illinois portion of the Metro-East St. 219.112 (Incorporations by Reference) operations to submit an initial Louis ozone NAA. 72 FR 20237 (April because this Part is no longer necessary registration notification, an annual 24, 2007). The required use of RFG for with a repeal of Sections 218.585 and notification of changes, and also VOC control region 1 (southern areas) in 219.585, and the appendices have contains recordkeeping requirements. the Illinois portion of the Metro-East St. already been repealed. Also, IEPA has 40 CFR 63.11175, 63.11176, 63.11177. Louis ozone NAA would achieve updated the reference to ASTM D–323 Proper registration includes providing additional emissions reductions beyond in Sections 218.112, 218.128, 219.112, source contact information, a the 7.2 psi RVP limit for the Metro-East and 219.128 to its current version, description of coating operations, and St. Louis ozone NAA and would ASTM D–323–08, for measuring vapor certain certifications. 40 CFR 63.11175. harmonize the fuel requirements across pressure. In Illinois, these registration notifications are submitted to IEPA the region as Missouri had opted-in the III. What is the background for the because it has been delegated authority RFG program for the St. Louis portion motor vehicle refinishing portion of this to implement and enforce this NESHAP. of the ozone NAA in 1999. action? Similar to the situation in Chicago, This NESHAP targets sources that the when regional fuel supply shortages In 1993, the Chicago and Metro-East state’s motor vehicle refinishing rules occurred and EPA issued a waiver from St. Louis areas were classified as Severe target. Irrespective of the NESHAP’s the RFG requirements to allow the flow and Moderate nonattainment, registration requirements, subject of other fuels into the regions, the state respectively, and as such were subject to sources must comply with the had to issue a provisional variance to the requirement under Section 182(b)(1) substantive portion of this NESHAP, the volatility regulations for the Metro- of the CAA to reduce VOC emissions which include, among other things, East St. Louis ozone NAA in order for within six years after November 15, extensive training, coating preparation the EPA waiver to achieve its intended 1990 by at least 15 percent from and application requirements, coating effect. Repealing the existing gasoline baseline emissions. Illinois reviewed applicator requirements, management volatility standards for the Metro-East available control measures that could practices, maintenance of equipment St. Louis ozone NAA, which are less provide reductions by 1996 and requirements and recordkeeping. stringent than the RFG standards, included motor vehicle refinishing IV. What changes have been made to results in no loss of emissions operations in the 15 percent rate of Illinois’ motor vehicle refinishing reductions benefits, and, in times of progress plan for both areas. standards? regional fuel shortage, would eliminate Illinois’ motor vehicle refinishing the RVP SIP waiver and provisional regulations are found at Subpart HH of The State of Illinois submitted variance processes, allowing other fuels 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts 218 and 219. amendments to Subpart HH, Motor to be marketed in the affected area in a The regulations require the use of either Vehicle Refinishing, at 35 Ill. Adm. more efficient manner. an electrostatic spray gun or a HVLP Code Sections 218.784 and 219.784 to spray gun. In addition, these regulations allow the use of a new spray gun that d. Clean-up Amendments and Update of require affected sources to register with is demonstrated to achieve transfer Technical References the state. Registration includes efficiency comparable to a HVLP spray IEPA has also submitted clean-up providing source contact information, gun. The regulations in Sections amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts descriptions of coating operations, and 218.784 and 219.784 require the 211, 215, 218 and 219 to update certain certifications. Irrespective of the equivalent coating applicator references and to be consistent with the registration program, motor vehicle technology to be approved by EPA and repeal of the state’s gasoline volatility refinishing operations are required to documentation of EPA’s approval to be standards. IEPA updated the reference meet the substantive provisions of maintained at the motor vehicle to ASTM D 323 to its current version, Subpart HH, which include, among refinishing operation. This will provide ASTM D 323–08, in Section 211.101, other things, VOC content limitations, flexibility to affected sources by and also in the definitions of Heavy coating preparation and applicator allowing them to choose an alternate Liquid, Section 211.2870, and RVP, requirements, and work practices. EPA means of compliance that is approved Section 211.5510. In addition, IEPA approved the motor vehicle refinishing by EPA. Illinois also repealed the removed the reference to Section regulations at Subpart HH of 35 Ill. registration program at 35 Ill. Adm. 215.105 in the definition of Heavy Adm. Code Parts 218 and 219 as part of Code Sections 218.792 and 219.792 due Liquid, Section 211.2870, because IEPA the Illinois SIP on July 25, 1996. 61 FR to the corresponding, overlapping removed ASTM D 323–82 from Part 215 38577 (July 25, 1996). Federal NESHAP registration program with this revision. In 2008, EPA promulgated National already in place. This will streamline IEPA also removed the definition of Emission Standards for Hazardous Air the registration of motor vehicle RVP contained in Section 215.104 Pollutants (NESHAP) for Paint Stripping refinishing operations and eliminate because this term is only used in and Miscellaneous Surface Coating source confusion over multiple Section 215.585, which has been Operations at Area Sources (January 9, registrations.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60069

The NESHAP at 40 CFR part 63, specification changes to Illinois’ motor effective December 5, 2014 without subpart HHHHHH targets the sources vehicle refinishing requirements under further notice unless we receive relevant that Illinois’ motor vehicle registration Sections 218.784 and 219.784 provide adverse written comments by November program targets and the registration flexibility to affected sources while not 5, 2014. If we receive such comments, programs are very similar in what they increasing emissions by allowing the we will withdraw this action before the require. The NESHAP’s registration use of new spray guns that have been effective date by publishing a program is more stringent than Illinois’ demonstrated to achieve transfer subsequent document that will registration program in that it requires efficiency comparable to HVLP spray withdraw the final action. All public an annual notification of any change guns and that have been approved by comments received will then be from the initial registration, which the EPA. Finally, the removal of the state’s addressed in a subsequent final rule state’s registration program does not registration requirements for motor based on the proposed action. EPA will require. 40 CFR 63.11176 (2010). vehicle refinishing operations is not a not institute a second comment period. Moreover, irrespective of the existence relaxation, since the Federal NESHAP Any parties interested in commenting of either registration program, subject includes a registration provision on this action should do so at this time. motor vehicle refinishing operations requesting similar and additional Please note that if EPA receives adverse must comply with the substantive information than what was required in comment on an amendment, paragraph, provisions of both the NESHAP and Illinois’ rules. The deletion of the state or section of this rule and if that Illinois’ motor vehicle refinishing requirement basically removes a provision may be severed from the requirements which contain the duplicative regulation and decreases the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt applicable control requirements that administrative burden on such sources as final those provisions of the rule that limit emissions from such operations. while still providing all the necessary are not the subject of an adverse Repealing Illinois’ registration program information to IEPA. As noted above, all comment. If we do not receive any and the continued applicability of the registration notifications under the comments, this action will be effective NESHAP registration program will NESHAP are submitted to IEPA because December 5, 2014. streamline registration for motor vehicle it has been delegated authority to refinishing sources and avoid confusion implement and enforce the NESHAP. VII. Statutory and Executive Order over two separate registration Reviews VI. What action is EPA taking? requirements. Under the CAA, the Administrator is EPA is approving the revisions to the required to approve a SIP submission V. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s Illinois ozone SIP submitted on March submittal? that complies with the provisions of the 19, 2013, concerning the state’s gasoline CAA and applicable Federal regulations. Our primary consideration for volatility standards at Section 218.585 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). determining the approvability of the for the Chicago ozone NAA and Section Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, Illinois revisions to remove gasoline 219.585 for the Metro-East St. Louis EPA’s role is to approve state choices, volatility standards from the SIP is ozone NAA. Since EPA did not approve provided that they meet the criteria of whether these revisions comply with the gas volatility standard for 1991 in the CAA. Accordingly, this action section 110(l) of the CAA. Section 110(l) Section 215.585 as part of the Federally merely approves state law as meeting of the CAA provides that EPA cannot enforceable SIP, EPA cannot approve a Federal requirements and does not approve a SIP revision if that revision SIP revision that repeals this section. impose additional requirements beyond interferes with any applicable Thus, EPA is taking no action on the gas those imposed by state law. For that requirement regarding attainment and volatility standard for 1991. EPA is also reason, this action: reasonable further progress or any other approving amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. • requirement established in the CAA. Code Parts 211, 215, 218, and 219 to Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory The EPA can, however, approve a SIP make necessary updates. EPA is also action’’ subject to review by the Office revision that removes or modifies approving amendments to Subpart HH, of Management and Budget under control measures in the SIP once the Motor Vehicle Refinishing, at 35 Ill. Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); state makes a ‘‘noninterference’’ Adm. Code Sections 218.784 and • demonstration that such removal or 219.784 to allow for the use of HVLP- Does not impose an information modification will not interfere with equivalent spray guns in motor vehicle collection burden under the provisions attainment of the NAAQS, or any other refinishing operations, and the repeal of of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 CAA requirement. Illinois has evaluated the registration program at 35 Ill. Adm. U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • the impacts of approving these Code Sections 218.792 and 219.792 due Is certified as not having a revisions. The repeal of the ozone to overlapping Federal registration significant economic impact on a attainment area gasoline volatility requirements. EPA finds that the substantial number of small entities standards in Section 215.585 would revisions will not interfere with any under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 result in no loss of emissions reductions applicable requirement concerning U.S.C. 601 et seq.); since this section applied to 1991 only. attainment, reasonable further progress • Does not contain any unfunded The intent of the rule has been fulfilled or any other applicable CAA mandate or significantly or uniquely through EPA’s volatility standards requirement. affect small governments, as described adopted pursuant to section 211(k) of We are publishing this action without in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act the CAA. The repeal of the Chicago and prior proposal because we view this as of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Metro-East St. Louis gasoline volatility a noncontroversial amendment and • Does not have Federalism standards under Sections 218.585 and anticipate no adverse comments. implications as specified in Executive 219.585, respectively, would result in However, in the proposed rules section Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, no loss of emissions reductions as the of this Federal Register publication, we 1999); current Federal RFG standards in place are publishing a separate document that • Is not an economically significant in both areas achieve additional will serve as the proposal to approve the regulatory action based on health or emissions reductions benefits beyond state plan if relevant adverse written safety risks subject to Executive Order the state standards. The equipment comments are filed. This rule will be 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60070 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

• Is not a significant regulatory action not be challenged later in proceedings to 218.784 and 219.784, and to repeal the subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR enforce its requirements. (See section motor vehicle refinishing registration 28355, May 22, 2001); 307(b)(2).) requirements at 35 Ill. Adm. Code • Is not subject to requirements of 218.792 and 219.792. Section 12(d) of the National List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 (i) Incorporation by reference. Technology Transfer and Advancement Environmental protection, Air (A) Illinois Administrative Code, Title Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because pollution control, Incorporation by 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle application of those requirements would reference, Oxides of Nitrogen, Ozone, B: Air Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution be inconsistent with the CAA; and Volatile organic compounds. Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission • Does not provide EPA with the Dated: July 29, 2014. Standards and Limitations for discretionary authority to address, as Stationary Sources, Part 211, Definitions Susan Hedman, appropriate, disproportionate human and General Provisions, Sections health or environmental effects, using Regional Administrator, Region 5. 211.101 Incorporations by Reference, practicable and legally permissible 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 211.2870 Heavy Liquid, and 211.5510 methods, under Executive Order 12898 Reid Vapor Pressure. Effective January (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). PART 52—APPROVAL AND 28, 2013. In addition, this rule does not have PROMULGATION OF (B) Illinois Administrative Code, Title tribal implications as specified by IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, B: Air Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution ■ November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 1. The authority citation for part 52 Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission not approved to apply in Indian country continues to read as follows: Standards and Limitations for located in the state, and EPA notes that Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Stationary Sources, Part 215, Organic it will not impose substantial direct ■ 2. Section 52.720 is amended by Material Emission Standards and costs on tribal governments or preempt adding paragraphs (c)(101)(i)(A)(3), Limitations, Sections 215.104 tribal law. (c)(101)(i)(B)(3), (c)(109)(i)(D), Definitions, and 215.105 Incorporation The Congressional Review Act, 5 by Reference. Effective January 28, 2013. U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small (c)(120)(i)(D), and (c)(201) to read as follows: (C) Illinois Administrative Code, Title Business Regulatory Enforcement 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides § 52.720 Identification of plan. B: Air Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution that before a rule may take effect, the * * * * * Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission agency promulgating the rule must (c) * * * Standards and Limitations for submit a rule report, which includes a (101) * * * Stationary Sources, Part 218, Organic copy of the rule, to each House of the (i) * * * Material Emission Standards and Congress and to the Comptroller General (A) * * * Limitations for the Chicago Area, of the United States. EPA will submit a (3) Section 218.585 was repealed in Sections 218.112 Incorporations by report containing this action and other 2013 and is removed without Reference, 218.128 Monitoring VOL required information to the U.S. Senate, replacement; see paragraph (c)(201) of Operations, and 218.784 Equipment the U.S. House of Representatives, and this section. Specifications. Effective January 28, the Comptroller General of the United (B) * * * 2013. States prior to publication of the rule in (3) Section 219.585 was repealed in (D) Illinois Administrative Code, Title the Federal Register. A major rule 2013 and is removed without 35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle cannot take effect until 60 days after it replacement; see paragraph (c)(201) of B: Air Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution is published in the Federal Register. this section. Control Board, Subchapter c: Emission This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as * * * * * Standards and Limitations for defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Stationary Sources, Part 219, Organic Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, (109) * * * (i) * * * Material Emission Standards and petitions for judicial review of this Limitations for the Metro East Area, action must be filed in the United States (D) Section 219.585 was repealed in 2013 and is removed without Sections 219.112 Incorporations by Court of Appeals for the appropriate Reference, 219.128 Monitoring VOL circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a replacement; see paragraph (c)(201) of this section. Operations, and 219.784 Equipment petition for reconsideration by the Specifications. Effective January 28, * * * * * Administrator of this final rule does not 2013. affect the finality of this action for the (120) * * * purposes of judicial review nor does it (i) * * * [FR Doc. 2014–23767 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] extend the time within which a petition (D) Sections 218.792 and 219.792 BILLING CODE 6560–50–P for judicial review may be filed, and were repealed in 2013 and are removed shall not postpone the effectiveness of without replacement; see paragraph ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION such rule or action. Parties with (c)(201) of this section. AGENCY objections to this direct final rule are * * * * * encouraged to file a comment in (201) On March 19, 2013, the Illinois 40 CFR Part 52 response to the parallel notice of Environmental Protection Agency proposed rulemaking for this action submitted a request to repeal the [EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0592; FRL–9917–02- published in the proposed rules section gasoline volatility standards at 35 Ill. Region 9] of today’s Federal Register, rather than Adm. Code 215.585, 218.585, and Revisions to the California State file an immediate petition for judicial 219.585, including other related Implementation Plan, Imperial County review of this direct final rule, so that revisions to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Parts 211, Air Pollution Control District EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 215, 218, and 219, to revise the motor and address the comment in the vehicle refinishing equipment AGENCY: Environmental Protection proposed rulemaking. This action may specifications at 35 Ill. Adm. Code Agency (EPA).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60071

ACTION: Direct final rule. change and may be made available material, large maps), and some may not online at www.regulations.gov, be publicly available in either location SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection including any personal information (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy Agency (EPA) is taking direct final provided, unless the comment includes materials, please schedule an action to approve revisions to the Confidential Business Information (CBI) appointment during normal business Imperial County Air Pollution Control or other information whose disclosure is hours with the contact listed in the FOR District (ICAPCD) portion of the restricted by statute. Information that FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. California State Implementation Plan you consider CBI or otherwise protected FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (SIP). These revisions concern oxides of should be clearly identified as such and Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– nitrogen (NOX ) emissions from should not be submitted through wallboard kilns and internal www.regulations.gov or email. 3248, [email protected]. combustion engines. We are approving www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: local rules that regulate these emission access’’ system, and EPA will not know Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA your identity or contact information and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. or the Act). unless you provide it in the body of DATES: This rule is effective on your comment. If you send email Table of Contents December 5, 2014 without further directly to EPA, your email address will I. The State’s Submittal notice, unless EPA receives adverse be automatically captured and included A. What rules did the State submit? comments by November 5, 2014. If we as part of the public comment. If EPA B. Are there other versions of these rules? receive such comments, we will publish cannot read your comment due to C. What is the purpose of the submitted a timely withdrawal in the Federal technical difficulties and cannot contact rules? Register to notify the public that this you for clarification, EPA may not be II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? direct final rule will not take effect. able to consider your comment. B. Do the rules meet the evaluation ADDRESSES: Submit comments, Electronic files should avoid the use of criteria? identified by docket number EPA–R09– special characters, any form of C. EPA Recommendations To Further OAR–2014–0592, by one of the encryption, and be free of any defects or Improve the Rules following methods: viruses. D. Public Comment and Final Action 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: Docket: Generally, documents in the III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line docket for this action are available instructions. electronically at www.regulations.gov I. The State’s Submittal 2. Email: [email protected]. and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 A. What rules did the State submit? 3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, (Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection California 94105–3901. While all Table 1 lists the rules we are Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, documents in the docket are listed at approving with the dates that they were San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. www.regulations.gov, some information adopted by the local air agency and Instructions: All comments will be may be publicly available only at the submitted by the California Air included in the public docket without hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted Resources Board (CARB).

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted

ICAPCD ...... 400.3 Internal Combustion Engine(s) ...... 10/22/13 02/10/14 ICAPCD ...... 400.4 Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Wallboard Kilns ...... 10/22/13 02/10/14

On April 9, 2014, EPA determined 400.4 regulates emissions of NOX from regulates an ozone nonattainment area that the submittal for ICAPCD Rules kilns with a heat input rating of classified as moderate for the 8-hour 400.3 and 400.4 met the completeness MMBtu/hour or larger that operate at ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 81.305), so criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, wallboard production facilities. EPA’s Rule 400.3 and 400.4 must fulfill RACT which must be met before formal EPA technical support documents (TSD) if the District has major sources in these review. have more information about these categories. rules. Guidance and policy documents that B. Are there other versions of these we use to evaluate enforceability and rules? II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action RACT requirements consistently There are no previous versions of A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? include the following: Rules 400.3 and 400.4. 1. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General Generally, SIP rules must be Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of C. What is the purpose of the submitted enforceable (see section 110(a) of the rules? the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 Act), must require Reasonably Available FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 NOX helps produce ground-level Control Technology (RACT) for each (April 28, 1992). ozone, smog and particulate matter, category of sources covered by a Control 2. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen which harm human health and the Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA as well as each NO or VOC major Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 X Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,’’ requires States to submit regulations source in ozone nonattainment areas (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620, that control NOX emissions. Rule 400.3 classified as moderate or above (see November 25, 1992. regulates emissions of NOX from sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)), and must 3. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation internal combustion engines with a not relax existing requirements (see Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ brake horsepower greater than 50. Rule sections 110(l) and 193). The ICAPCD EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60072 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

4. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting III. Statutory and Executive Order costs on tribal governments or preempt Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ Reviews tribal law. EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). Under the Clean Air Act, the The Congressional Review Act, 5 5. ‘‘Alternative Control Techniques Administrator is required to approve a U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Document—NOX Emissions from Stationary SIP submission that complies with the Business Regulatory Enforcement Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines,’’ provisions of the Act and applicable Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides U.S. EPA, July 1993. Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); that before a rule may take effect, the 6. ‘‘Determination of Reasonably Available 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP agency promulgating the rule must Control Technology and Best Available submissions, EPA’s role is to approve Retrofit Control Technology for Stationary submit a rule report, which includes a State choices, provided that they meet copy of the rule, to each House of the Spark-Ignited Internal Combustion Engines,’’ the criteria of the Clean Air Act. CARB, November 2001. Congress and to the Comptroller General Accordingly, this action merely of the United States. EPA will submit a B. Do the rules meet the evaluation approves State law as meeting Federal report containing this action and other criteria? requirements and does not impose required information to the U.S. Senate, additional requirements beyond those the U.S. House of Representatives, and imposed by State law. For that reason, We believe these rules are consistent the Comptroller General of the United with the relevant policy and guidance this action: States prior to publication of the rule in regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory the Federal Register. A major rule relaxations. Since there are no major action’’ subject to review by the Office cannot take effect until 60 days after it sources subject to Rule 400.3 that are of Management and Budget under required to meet RACT, Rule 400.3 is Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, is published in the Federal Register. not required to implement RACT October 4, 1993); This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as requirements and at this time we are not • does not impose an information defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). making a determination of its ability to collection burden under the provisions Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean implement RACT. The TSDs have more of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Air Act, petitions for judicial review of information on our evaluation. Rule U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); this action must be filed in the United • 400.4 implements RACT. is certified as not having a States Court of Appeals for the significant economic impact on a appropriate circuit by December 5, C. EPA Recommendations To Further substantial number of small entities Improve the Rules 2014. Filing a petition for under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 reconsideration by the Administrator of U.S.C. 601 et seq.); The TSDs describe additional rule this final rule does not affect the finality • does not contain any unfunded revisions that we recommend for the mandate or significantly or uniquely of this action for the purposes of judicial next time the local agency modifies the affect small governments, as described review nor does it extend the time rules. in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act within which a petition for judicial D. Public Comment and Final Action of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); review may be filed, and shall not • does not have Federalism postpone the effectiveness of such rule As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of implications as specified in Executive or action. Parties with objections to this the Act, EPA is fully approving the Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, direct final rule are encouraged to file a submitted rules because we believe they 1999); comment in response to the parallel fulfill all relevant requirements. We do • is not an economically significant notice of proposed rulemaking for this not think anyone will object to this regulatory action based on health or action published in the Proposed Rules approval, so we are finalizing it without safety risks subject to Executive Order section of this Federal Register, rather proposing it in advance. However, in 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); than file an immediate petition for the Proposed Rules section of this • is not a significant regulatory action judicial review of this direct final rule, Federal Register, we are simultaneously subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR so that EPA can withdraw this direct proposing approval of the same 28355, May 22, 2001); final rule and address the comment in submitted rules. If we receive adverse • is not subject to requirements of the proposed rulemaking. This action comments by November 5, 2014, we Section 12(d) of the National may not be challenged later in will publish a timely withdrawal in the Technology Transfer and Advancement Federal Register to notify the public proceedings to enforce its requirements Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because (see section 307(b)(2)). that the direct final approval will not application of those requirements would take effect and we will address the be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 comments in a subsequent final action and based on the proposal. If we do not • does not provide EPA with the Environmental protection, Air receive timely adverse comments, the discretionary authority to address pollution control, Carbon monoxide, direct final approval will be effective disproportionate human health or Incorporation by reference, without further notice on December 5, environmental effects with practical, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 2014. This will incorporate these rules appropriate, and legally permissible dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and into the federally enforceable SIP. methods under Executive Order 12898 recordkeeping requirements. Please note that if EPA receives (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Dated: August 20, 2014. adverse comment on an amendment, In addition, this rule does not have Jared Blumenfeld, paragraph, or section of this rule and if tribal implications as specified by Regional Administrator, Region IX. that provision may be severed from the Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt November 9, 2000), because the SIP is Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code as final those provisions of the rule that not approved to apply in Indian country of Federal Regulations is amended as are not the subject of an adverse located in the State, and EPA notes that follows: comment. it will not impose substantial direct

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60073

PART 52—APPROVAL AND ADDRESSES: EPA has established a allows the MVEB to be changed as long PROMULGATION OF docket for this action under Docket ID as the total level of emissions from all IMPLEMENTATION PLANS No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0274. All sources remains below the attainment documents in the docket are listed on levels. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 the www.regulations.gov Web site. On March 28, 2014, Illinois submitted continues to read as follows: Although listed in the index, some a SIP revision to the 1997 8-hour ozone Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. information is not publicly available, maintenance plan for the Illinois i.e., Confidential Business Information portion of the Greater Chicago Area. Subpart F—California (CBI) or other information whose This SIP revision establishes new disclosure is restricted by statute. MVEBs for VOC and NOX for the year ■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by Certain other material, such as 2025. Illinois allocated a portion of the adding paragraph (c)(442) (i)(A)(2) and copyrighted material, is not placed on safety margin for VOC and NOX in the (3) to read as follows: the Internet and will be publicly ozone maintenance plan to the 2025 § 52.220 Identification of plan. available only in hard copy form. MVEBs. Total year 2025 emissions of VOC and NO for the area will remain * * * * * Publicly available docket materials are X available either electronically through below the attainment levels required by (c) * * * the transportation conformity (442) * * * www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, regulations. (i) * * * On May 22, 2014, EPA published (A) * * * Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, proposed (79 FR 29395) and direct final (2) Rule 400.3, ‘‘Internal Combustion (79 FR 29324) rules approving a revision Engine(s),’’ adopted on October 22, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through to the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance 2013. plan for the Illinois portion of the (3) Rule 400.4, ‘‘Emissions of Oxides Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Michael Greater Chicago Area. EPA subsequently of Nitrogen from Wallboard Kilns,’’ received adverse comments on the adopted on October 22, 2013. Leslie, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353–6680 before visiting the Region 5 direct final rule and withdrew it on June * * * * * office. 26, 2014 (79 FR 36220). The proposal [FR Doc. 2014–23788 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] was not withdrawn. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Leslie, Environmental II. What is EPA’s response to Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air comments? ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Programs Branch (AR–18J), EPA received one supportive and one AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency, adverse comment on the May 22, 2014 Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, (79 FR 29324) proposed approval of the 40 CFR Part 52 Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680, Illinois SIP revision. The adverse [EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0274; FRL 9917–33– [email protected]. comment was submitted by Robert Region 5] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Ukeiley. Throughout this document whenever Comment from Robert Ukeiley: The Approval and Promulgation of Air ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean commenter contends that EPA’s Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION approval of an increase in mobile source Revision to the Chicago 8-Hour Ozone section is arranged as follows: NOX and VOC emissions will interfere Maintenance Plan I. What is the background for this action? with attainment the 2008 ozone NAAQS II. What is EPA’s response to comments? as expeditiously as possible and will AGENCY: Environmental Protection III. What action is EPA taking? also interfere with reasonable further Agency. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews progress in violation of Clean Air Act ACTION: Final rule. Section 110(l). The comment provides I. What is the background for this no support for or explanation of the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection action? basis for these claims. Agency (EPA) is approving the State of On August 13, 2012 (77 FR 48062), Response to Robert Ukeiley: Clean Air Illinois’ March 28, 2014, revision to the EPA approved a request from the State Act (Act) Section 110(l) provides in state implementation plan (SIP) for the of Illinois to redesignate the Illinois part: ‘‘The Administrator shall not 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for portion of the Greater Chicago Area to approve a revision of a plan if the the Illinois portion of the Chicago-Gary- attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone revision would interfere with any Lake County, Illinois-Indiana area (the national ambient air quality standard applicable requirement concerning Greater Chicago Area). This SIP revision (NAAQS). In addition to approving the attainment and reasonable further establishes new Motor Vehicle ozone redesignation request, EPA progress or any other applicable Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for volatile approved the State’s plan for requirement of this chapter.’’ As a organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone general matter, EPA must and does nitrogen (NOX) for the year 2025. EPA NAAQS in the Illinois portion of the consider section 110(l) requirements for is approving the allocation of a portion Greater Chicago Area through 2025. The every SIP revision, including whether of the safety margin for VOC and NOX ozone maintenance plan established the revision would ‘‘interfere with’’ any in the ozone maintenance plan to the MVEBs for VOC and NOX for the year applicable requirement. See, e.g., 70 FR 2025 MVEBs. Total year 2025 emissions 2025. 53, 57 (January 3, 2005); 70 FR 17029, of VOC and NOX for the area will MVEBs are the projected levels of 17033 (April 4, 2005); 70 FR 28429, remain below the attainment levels as controlled emissions from the 28431 (May 18, 2005); and 70 FR 58119, required by the transportation transportation sector (mobile sources) 58134 (October 5, 2005). conformity regulations. that are estimated in the SIP to provide At this time, the Greater Chicago Area DATES: This final rule is effective on for maintenance of the ozone NAAQS. is marginal nonattainment for the 2008 November 5, 2014. The transportation conformity rule ozone NAAQS. Marginal areas have an

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60074 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

attainment date of December 31, 2015. maintenance plan for the area emissions is the level of emissions Marginal areas do not have any demonstrates that a ‘‘safety margin’’ during one of the years in which the reasonable further progress exists. A safety margin, as defined in the area met the NAAQS. This maintenance requirements under section 171 of the transportation conformity rule, is the plan update establishes new MVEBs for Act. amount by which the total projected VOC and NOX for the year 2025 by The Illinois maintenance plan update emissions from all sources of a given allocation of a portion of the safety for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS does pollutant are less than the total margin for VOC and NOX from the not revise or remove any existing emissions that would satisfy the approved 1997 8-hour ozone emissions limit for any source. The applicable requirement for reasonable maintenance plan. The safety margin for transportation conformity process, further progress, attainment, or the Illinois portion of the Greater found at 40 CFR part 93 subpart A, allows areas to modify existing MVEBs maintenance. (40 CFR 93.101) This Chicago Area is 175.60 tons/day of VOC by adding a ‘‘safety margin’’ to the concept is further described in 40 CFR and 469.65 tons/day of NOX as shown budgets provided that, in this case, the 93.124(a). The attainment level of in Table 1 below.

TABLE 1—SAFETY MARGIN FOR CHICAGO’S 1997 8-HOUR OZONE MAINTENANCE PLAN

2025 Projected 2008 Attainment year mainte- Safety margin Pollutant year emissions nance emissions (tons/day) (tons/day) (tons/day)

VOC ...... 787.45 611.95 175.60 NOX ...... 896.76 427.11 469.65

Illinois has requested the allocation of 2025 MVEBs. Table 2 shows the of emissions from the safety margin 12 tons/day of the VOC and 25 tons/day approved 1997 8-hour ozone allocated to the new MVEBs, and new of NOX from the safety margins to the maintenance plan MVEBs, the amount MVEBs.

TABLE 2—APPROVED AND NEW MVEBS FOR CHICAGO’S 1997 8-HOUR OZONE MAINTENANCE PLAN

Approved 2025 Safety margin New 2025 Pollutant MVEB allocation MVEB (tons/day) (tons/day) (tons/day)

VOC ...... 48.13 12.00 60.13 NOX ...... 125.27 25.00 150.27

Tables 1 and 2 show that the total will not relax the currently applicable revision will keep the total emissions year 2025 emissions of VOC and NOX MVEB that is used for any analysis year for the area at or below the attainment for the area will remain below the prior to 2025, nor will the maintenance levels required by law. This action will attainment level required by the plan update alter the status quo of the allow State or local agencies to continue transportation conformity regulations. air quality, at least through 2025. As to maintain air quality while allowing On this basis, EPA concludes that the stated above, this area’s attainment date planned transportation projects to maintenance plan update does not for the 2008 ozone NAAQS is December proceed. interfere with attainment or 31, 2015. We believe they will attain (or maintenance of any air quality NAAQS. adopt a strategy to attain) the ozone IV. Statutory and Executive Order The revised MVEBs will be used to NAAQS well before 2025, so the change Reviews show that the area’s transportation plan to the 2025 budget should not interfere Under the CAA, the Administrator is and transportation improvement with the attainment of the 2008 ozone required to approve a SIP submission program conform to the SIP for any NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable. that complies with the provisions of the required analysis year starting with Accordingly, EPA finds no basis under 2025 through the last year of the area’s section 110(l) for EPA to disapprove the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. transportation plan. This revision to the SIP revision. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). MVEBs has no impact on transportation Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, III. What action is EPA taking? conformity requirements for any year EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of prior to 2025. EPA is approving a revision to the the Act. Accordingly, this action merely The commenter does not provide any 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for approves state law as meeting Federal information to demonstrate that the Illinois portion of the Greater requirements and does not impose approval of this maintenance plan Chicago Area. The revision will change additional requirements beyond those update would have any impact on the the MVEBs for VOC and NOX that are area’s ability to comply with the 2008 used for transportation conformity imposed by state law. For that reason, ozone NAAQS. In fact, the maintenance purposes. The new 1997 8-hour ozone this action: plan update provided with the State’s maintenance plan MVEBs for the • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory submission demonstrates a decline in Illinois portion of the Greater Chicago action’’ subject to review by the Office ozone precursor emissions over the Area are 60.13 tons/day of VOC of Management and Budget under timeframe of the initial maintenance emissions and 150.27 tons/day of NOX Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, period. The maintenance plan update emissions for the year 2025. The October 4, 1993);

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60075

• Does not impose an information action must be filed in the United States ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION collection burden under the provisions Court of Appeals for the appropriate AGENCY of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); petition for reconsideration by the 40 CFR Part 52 • Is certified as not having a Administrator of this final rule does not [EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0888; EPA–R05– significant economic impact on a affect the finality of this action for the OAR–2012–0991; FRL 9917–32–Region 5] substantial number of small entities purposes of judicial review nor does it under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 extend the time within which a petition Approval and Promulgation of Air U.S.C. 601 et seq.); for judicial review may be filed, and Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; • Does not contain any unfunded shall not postpone the effectiveness of Infrastructure SIP Requirements for mandate or significantly or uniquely the 2008 Lead and 2010 NO2 NAAQS affect small governments, as described such rule or action. This action may not in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act be challenged later in proceedings to AGENCY: Environmental Protection of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); enforce its requirements. (See section Agency. • Does not have Federalism 307(b)(2).) ACTION: Final rule. implications as specified in Executive List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 1999); Environmental protection, Air approve elements of state • Is not an economically significant pollution control, Incorporation by implementation plan (SIP) submissions regulatory action based on health or reference, Oxides of Nitrogen, Ozone, from Ohio regarding the infrastructure safety risks subject to Executive Order Volatile organic compounds. requirements of section 110 of the Clean 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 lead (Pb) and • Is not a significant regulatory action Dated: September 22, 2014. 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO ) National subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Susan Hedman, 2 Ambient Air Quality Standards 28355, May 22, 2001); Regional Administrator, Region 5. • Is not subject to requirements of (NAAQS). The infrastructure Section 12(d) of the National 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: requirements are designed to ensure that Technology Transfer and Advancement the structural components of each Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because PART 52—APPROVAL AND state’s air quality management program application of those requirements would PROMULGATION OF are adequate to meet the state’s responsibilities under the CAA. The be inconsistent with the CAA; and IMPLEMENTATION PLANS • Does not provide EPA with the proposed rulemaking associated with this final action was published on July discretionary authority to address, as ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 25, 2014, and EPA received no appropriate, disproportionate human continues to read as follows: health or environmental effects, using comments pertaining to infrastructure practicable and legally permissible Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. for the 2008 Pb or 2010 NO2 NAAQS methods, under Executive Order 12898 during the comment period, which ■ 2. Section 52.726 is amended by (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). ended on August 25, 2014. The 2008 In addition, this rule does not have adding paragraph (oo) to read as ozone and 2010 SO2 infrastructure SIPs tribal implications as specified by follows: were also addressed in the proposed rulemaking but will be addressed in a Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, § 52.726 Control strategy: Ozone. November 9, 2000), because the SIP is separate final rulemaking. not approved to apply in Indian country * * * * * DATES: This final rule is effective on located in the state, and EPA notes that (oo) Approval—On March 28, 2014, November 5, 2014. it will not impose substantial direct the State of Illinois submitted a revision ADDRESSES: EPA has established dockets costs on tribal governments or preempt to its State Implementation Plan for the for this action under Docket ID No. tribal law. Illinois portion of the Chicago-Gary- EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0888 (2008 Pb The Congressional Review Act, 5 Lake County, Illinois-Indiana area (the infrastructure SIP elements) and Docket U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Greater Chicago Area). The submittal ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0991 Business Regulatory Enforcement established new Motor Vehicle (2010 NO2 infrastructure SIP elements). Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for Volatile All documents in the docket are listed that before a rule may take effect, the Organic Compounds (VOC) and Oxides in the www.regulations.gov index. agency promulgating the rule must of Nitrogen (NO ) for the year 2025. The Although listed in the index, some X information is not publicly available, submit a rule report, which includes a MVEBs for the Illinois portion of the e.g., Confidential Business Information copy of the rule, to each House of the Greater Chicago Area are: 60.13 tons/ Congress and to the Comptroller General or other information whose disclosure is day of VOC emissions and 150.27 tons/ of the United States. EPA will submit a restricted by statute. Certain other day of NO emissions for the year 2025. report containing this action and other X material, such as copyrighted material, required information to the U.S. Senate, [FR Doc. 2014–23795 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] will be publicly-available only in hard the U.S. House of Representatives, and BILLING CODE 6560–50–P copy. Publicly-available docket the Comptroller General of the United materials are available either States prior to publication of the rule in electronically in www.regulations.gov or the Federal Register. A major rule in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental cannot take effect until 60 days after it Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and is published in the Federal Register. Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding petitions for judicial review of this Federal holidays. We recommend that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60076 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

you telephone Sarah Arra at (312) 886– submission of this type arises out of provisions for PSD programs that may 9401 before visiting the Region 5 office. CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to be inconsistent with current FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final NSR Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, submissions ‘‘within 3 years (or such Improvement Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 Attainment Planning and Maintenance shorter period as the Administrator may (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), prescribe) after the promulgation of a FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (‘‘NSR U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, national primary ambient air quality Reform’’). Instead, EPA has the Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, standard (or any revision thereof),’’ and authority to address each one of these Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–9401, these SIP submissions are to provide for substantive areas in separate [email protected]. the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and rulemaking. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The In addition, EPA is not acting on Throughout this document whenever statute directly imposes on states the portions of section 110(a)(2)(J)— ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean duty to make these SIP submissions, visibility protection for 2010 NO2 and EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION and the requirement to make the portions of Ohio’s submission section is arranged as follows: submissions is not conditioned upon addressing the prevention of significant EPA’s taking any action other than deterioration, sections 110(a)(2)(C), I. What is the background of these SIP promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. submissions? (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and the prevention of A. What State SIP submissions does this Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of significant deterioration (PSD) portion rulemaking address? specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such of (J) for 2008 Pb and 2010 NO2. EPA is B. Why did the State make these SIP plan’’ submission must address. also not acting on section 110(a)(2)(I)— submissions? EPA has historically referred to these Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan C. What is the scope of this rulemaking? SIP submissions made for the purpose Revisions Under Part D, in its entirety. II. What action is EPA taking? of satisfying the requirements of CAA The rationale for not acting on elements III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as of these requirements was included in I. What is the background of these SIP ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. EPA’s July 25, 2014 proposed submissions? Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ rulemaking. does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses A. What State SIP submissions does this the term to distinguish this particular II. What action is EPA taking? rulemaking address? type of SIP submission from The proposed rulemaking associated This rulemaking addresses submissions that are intended to satisfy with this final action was published on submissions from the Ohio other SIP requirements under the CAA, July 25, 2014 (79 FR 43338), and EPA Environmental Protection Agency. The such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or received no comments pertaining to state submitted the infrastructure SIP for ‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to infrastructure for 2008 Pb or 2010 NO2 the 2008 Pb NAAQS on October 12, address the nonattainment planning NAAQS during the comment period, 2011, supplemented on June 7, 2013; requirements of part D of title I of the which ended on August 25, 2014. The and submitted the infrastructure SIP for CAA, ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions 2008 ozone and 2010 SO2 infrastructure the 2010 NO2 NAAQS on February 8, required by EPA rule to address the SIPs were also addressed in the 2013, supplemented on February 25, visibility protection requirements of proposed rulemaking but will be 2013 and June 7, 2013. CAA section 169A, and nonattainment addressed in a separate final new source review (NNSR) permit B. Why did the State make these SIP rulemaking. program submissions to address the For the reasons discussed in our submissions? permit requirements of CAA, title I, part proposed rulemaking and since no Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the D. public comments were received, EPA is CAA, states are required to submit A detailed rationale, history, and taking final action to approve, as infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their interpretation related to infrastructure proposed, Ohio’s infrastructure SIPs for SIPs provide for implementation, SIP requirements can be found in our the 2008 Pb and 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Our maintenance, and enforcement of the May 13, 2014, proposed rule entitled, final actions by element of section NAAQS, including the 2008 Pb and ‘‘Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 110(a)(2) and NAAQS, are contained in 2010 NO2 NAAQS. These submissions 2008 Lead NAAQS’’ in the section, the table below. must contain any revisions needed for ‘‘What is the scope of this rulemaking?’’ (see 79 FR 27241 at 27242–27245). meeting the applicable SIP requirements Element 2008 2010 of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that This rulemaking will not cover three Pb NO2 their existing SIPs for the NAAQS substantive areas that are not integral to (A): Emission limits and other A A already meet those requirements. acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP submission: (i) Existing provisions control measures. EPA has highlighted this statutory (B): Ambient air quality moni- A A requirement in multiple guidances, the related to excess emissions during toring and data system. most recent guidance document entitled periods of start-up, shutdown, or (C)1: Enforcement of SIP A A ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State malfunction at sources, that may be measures. Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements contrary to the CAA and EPA’s policies (C)2: PSD program for Pb ...... NA NA under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) addressing such excess emissions (C)3: NOX as a precursor to NA NA and (2)’’ on September 13, 2013. (‘‘SSM’’); (ii) existing provisions related ozone for PSD. to ‘‘director’s variance’’ or ‘‘director’s (C)4: PM2.5 Precursors/PM2.5 NA NA C. What is the scope of this rulemaking? discretion’’ that purport to permit and PM10 condensables for EPA is acting upon the SIP revisions to SIP approved emissions PSD. (C)5: PM2.5 Increments ...... NA NA submission from Ohio that address the limits with limited public process or (C)5: GHG permitting thresh- NA NA infrastructure requirements of CAA without requiring further approval by olds in PSD regulations. sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (D)1: Contribute to nonattain- A A 2008 Pb and 2010 NO2 NAAQS. The (collectively referred to as ‘‘director’s ment/interfere with mainte- requirement for states to make a SIP discretion’’); and, (iii) existing nance of NAAQS.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60077

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Element 2008 2010 Pb NO2 1999); Environmental protection, Air • is not an economically significant (D)2: PSD ...... NA NA pollution control, Incorporation by (D)3: Visibility Protection ...... A NA regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order reference, Intergovernmental relations, (D)4: Interstate Pollution A A Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and Abatement. 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); recordkeeping requirements. (D)5: International Pollution A A • is not a significant regulatory action Abatement. subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Dated: September 22, 2014. (E): Adequate resources ...... A A 28355, May 22, 2001); Susan Hedman, (E): State boards ...... A A • (F): Stationary source moni- A A is not subject to requirements of Regional Administrator, Region 5. Section 12(d) of the National toring system. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: (G): Emergency power ...... A A Technology Transfer and Advancement (H): Future SIP revisions ...... A A Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because PART 52—APPROVAL AND (I): Nonattainment area plan NA NA application of those requirements would or plan revisions under part PROMULGATION OF be inconsistent with the CAA; and IMPLEMENTATION PLANS D. • (J)1: Consultation with govern- A A does not provide EPA with the ment officials. discretionary authority to address, as ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 appropriate, disproportionate human (J)2: Public notification ...... A A continues to read as follows: (J)3: PSD ...... NA NA health or environmental effects, using (J)4: Visibility protection ...... + + practicable and legally permissible Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. (K): Air quality modeling and A A methods, under Executive Order 12898 ■ data. (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 2. Section 52.1891 is amended by (L): Permitting fees ...... A A adding paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as In addition, this rule does not have (M): Consultation and partici- A A follows: pation by affected local enti- Tribal implications as specified by ties. Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, § 52.1891 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure November 9, 2000), because the SIP is requirements. In the above table, the key is as follows: not approved to apply in Indian country * * * * * A Approve located in the State, and EPA notes that NA No Action/Separate Rulemaking it will not impose substantial direct (e) Approval—In a October 12, 2011, + Not germane to infrastructure SIPs costs on Tribal governments or preempt submittal, supplemented on June 7, Tribal law. 2013, Ohio certified that the State has III. Statutory and Executive Order satisfied the infrastructure SIP Reviews The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) Under the CAA, the Administrator is Business Regulatory Enforcement through (H), and (J) through (M) for the required to approve a SIP submission Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 2008 Lead NAAQS. We are not that complies with the provisions of the that before a rule may take effect, the finalizing action on submissions CAA and applicable Federal regulations. agency promulgating the rule must addressing the prevention of significant 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). submit a rule report, which includes a deterioration requirements in sections Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, copy of the rule, to each House of the 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and the EPA’s role is to approve State choices, Congress and to the Comptroller General prevention of significant deterioration provided that they meet the criteria of of the United States. EPA will submit a (PSD) portion of (J). the CAA. Accordingly, this action report containing this action and other merely approves State law as meeting (f) Approval—In a February 8, 2013 required information to the U.S. Senate, Federal requirements and does not submittal, supplemented on February the U.S. House of Representatives, and impose additional requirements beyond 25, 2013, and June 7, 2013, Ohio the Comptroller General of the United those imposed by State law. For that certified that the State has satisfied the States prior to publication of the rule in reason, this action: infrastructure SIP requirements of the Federal Register. A major rule • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) cannot take effect until 60 days after it action’’ subject to review by the Office is published in the Federal Register. through (M) for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. of Management and Budget under This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as We are not finalizing action on the Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). visibility protection requirements of October 4, 1993); (D)(i)(II) or the prevention of significant • Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, does not impose an information deterioration requirements in sections collection burden under the provisions petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and the of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 prevention of significant deterioration U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Court of Appeals for the appropriate • is certified as not having a circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a (PSD) portion of (J). significant economic impact on a petition for reconsideration by the [FR Doc. 2014–23798 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] substantial number of small entities Administrator of this final rule does not BILLING CODE 6560–50–P under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 affect the finality of this action for the U.S.C. 601 et seq.); purposes of judicial review nor does it • does not contain any unfunded extend the time within which a petition mandate or significantly or uniquely for judicial review may be filed, and affect small governments, as described shall not postpone the effectiveness of in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act such rule or action. This action may not of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); be challenged later in proceedings to • does not have Federalism enforce its requirements. (See section implications as specified in Executive 307(b)(2).)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60078 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection the Las Vegas Valley PM10 AGENCY Agency, Region IX, (775) 434–8176, nonattainment area with respect to [email protected]. section 110 and part D of the CAA; and, 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: based on our proposed approval as [EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0735; FRL–9917–23– Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ described above, that the Las Vegas Region 9] or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan meets SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is the requirements for maintenance plans Approval of Implementation Plans and arranged as follows: under section 175A of the CAA; and Designation of Areas for Air Quality that, therefore, the State of Nevada has Planning Purposes; Las Vegas Valley, Table of Contents met the criteria for redesignation under Nevada; Redesignation to Attainment I. Proposed Actions CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the Las for PM10 II. Public Comments Vegas Valley PM10 nonattainment area. III. Final Action Next, we proposed to approve certain AGENCY: Environmental Protection IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews fugitive dust rules (i.e., Clark County Agency (EPA). Air Quality Regulations sections 41, and I. Proposed Actions ACTION: Final rule. 90 through 93) that Clark County has On July 21, 2014 (79 FR 42258), under amended to ensure their continued SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) section applicability after the area is Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 110(k)(3), EPA proposed to approve a redesignated to attainment and that approve a revision to the Nevada state submittal from the Nevada Division of NDEP submitted to us (on May 27, 2014) implementation plan that provides for Environmental Protection (NDEP) dated as a revision to the Nevada SIP. the maintenance of the national ambient September 7, 2012 of the Redesignation Lastly, we proposed to delete the area air quality standard for particulate Request and Maintenance Plan for designation for Las Vegas Valley for the matter with an aerodynamic diameter Particulate Matter (PM10), Clark County, revoked NAAQS for total suspended less than or equal to a nominal ten Nevada (August 2012) (‘‘Las Vegas particulate. micrometers (PM10) in Las Vegas Valley Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan’’) as a Please see our July 21, 2014 proposed for the next ten years and to approve the revision to the Nevada state rule for a detailed discussion of the related motor vehicle emissions implementation plan (SIP). In so doing, background for these actions, and the budgets. Based in part on the approval we found that the Las Vegas Valley rationale for approval of the Las Vegas of the PM10 maintenance plan, EPA is PM10 Maintenance Plan adequately Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan, for also taking final action to grant the State demonstrates that the area will maintain granting NDEP’s request for of Nevada’s request for redesignation of the PM10 national ambient air quality redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to Las Vegas Valley to attainment for the standard (NAAQS or ‘‘standard’’) for 10 attainment, for approving Clark PM10 standard. Consistent with the years beyond redesignation and County’s amended fugitive dust rules, assumptions of the maintenance plan, includes sufficient contingency and for deleting the TSP designation for EPA is approving revisions to certain provisions to promptly correct any Las Vegas Valley. local fugitive dust rules to ensure their violation of the PM10 standard which II. Public Comments continued applicability after occurs after redesignation and thereby redesignation of the area to attainment. meets the requirements for maintenance Our July 21, 2014 proposed rule Lastly, EPA is taking final action to plans under CAA section 175A. We also provided a 30-day public comment delete the area designation for Las Vegas proposed to approve the motor vehicle period, which closed on August 20, Valley for the revoked national standard emissions budgets (MVEBs) in the Las 2014. We received no comments on our proposal during this period. for total suspended particulate because Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan the designation is no longer necessary. because we found they meet the III. Final Action applicable transportation conformity DATES: This rule is effective on Under CAA section 110(k)(3), and for requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e). November 5, 2014. the reasons set forth in our July 21, 2014 In our July 21, 2014 proposed rule, ADDRESSES: EPA has established a proposed rule, EPA is taking final action under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), we docket for this action under Docket ID to approve NDEP’s submittal dated proposed to grant NDEP’s request to Number EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0735. September 7, 2012 of the Redesignation redesignate the Las Vegas Valley PM Generally, documents in the docket for 10 Request and Maintenance Plan for nonattainment area from this action are available electronically at Particulate Matter (PM10), Clark County, ‘‘nonattainment’’ to ‘‘attainment’’ for the www.regulations.gov and in hard copy Nevada (August 2012) (‘‘Las Vegas PM standard. We proposed to do so at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 10 Valley PM Maintenance Plan’’) as a based on our conclusion that the Las 10 San Francisco, California. While all revision to the Nevada SIP. EPA finds Vegas Valley has attained the PM documents in the docket are listed at 10 that the maintenance demonstration standard; 1 that the relevant portions of www.regulations.gov, some information showing how the area will continue to the Nevada SIP are fully approved; that may be publicly available only at the attain the 24-hour PM NAAQS for 10 the improvement in air quality is due to 10 hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted years beyond redesignation, and the permanent and enforceable emissions material, large maps), and some may not contingency provisions describing the reductions; that the State of Nevada has be publicly available in either location actions that Clark County will take in met all of the requirements applicable to (e.g., confidential business information the event of a future monitored or ‘‘CBI’’). To inspect the hard copy 1 In our proposed approval, EPA stated that violation, meet all applicable materials, please schedule an ‘‘SLAMS data for 2014 are not yet available . . . but requirements for maintenance plans and appointment during normal business will be reviewed prior to final action to ensure that related contingency provisions in CAA hours with the contact listed in the FOR they are consistent with continued attainment.’’ 79 section 175A. EPA is also finding FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FR at 42263. We have now reviewed 2014 data, submitted to AQS as of September 12, 2014, and adequate and approving the motor FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: have found it to be consistent with continued vehicle emissions budgets in the Las Karina O’Connor, Air Planning Office attainment. Vegas Valley PM10 Maintenance Plan

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60079

(i.e., 141.14 tons per day in 2008, 2015, 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the In addition, this rule does not have and 2023) because we find they meet status of a geographical area and do not Tribal implications as specified by the applicable transportation conformity impose any additional regulatory Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e). requirements on sources beyond those November 9, 2000), because the SIP is Second, under CAA section imposed by State law. Redesignation to not approved to apply in Indian country 107(d)(3)(D), we are taking final action attainment does not in and of itself located in the State, and EPA notes that to grant NDEP’s request, which create any new requirements, but rather it will not impose substantial direct accompanied the submittal of the results in the applicability of costs on Tribal governments or preempt maintenance plan, to redesignate the requirements contained in the CAA for Tribal law. Nonetheless, EPA has Las Vegas Valley PM10 nonattainment areas that have been redesignated to discussed the action with the one Tribe, attainment. Moreover, the Administrator area to attainment for the 24-hour PM10 the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, located is required to approve a SIP submission NAAQS. We are doing so based on our within the Las Vegas Valley PM conclusion that the area has met the five that complies with the provisions of the 10 nonattainment area. criteria for redesignation under CAA Act and applicable Federal regulations. section 107(d)(3)(E). Our conclusion in 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). The Congressional Review Act, 5 this regard is in turn based on our Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small determination that the area has attained EPA’s role is to approve State choices, Business Regulatory Enforcement the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS, that relevant provided that they meet the criteria of Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides portions of the Nevada SIP are fully the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, these that before a rule may take effect, the approved, that the improvement in air actions merely approve a State plan and agency promulgating the rule must quality is due to permanent and redesignation request as meeting submit a rule report, which includes a enforceable reductions in emissions, Federal requirements and do not impose copy of the rule, to each House of the that Nevada has met all requirements additional requirements beyond those Congress and to the Comptroller General applicable to the Las Vegas Valley PM10 by State law. For these reasons, these of the United States. EPA will submit a nonattainment area with respect to actions: • report containing this action and other section 110 and part D of the CAA, and Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory required information to the U.S. Senate, based on our approval as part of this action’’ subject to review by the Office the U.S. House of Representatives, and of Management and Budget under action of the Las Vegas Valley PM10 the Comptroller General of the United Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Maintenance Plan. Our determination States prior to publication of the rule in October 4, 1993) and Executive Order that the area has attained the 24-hour the Federal Register. A major rule PM NAAQS is based in part on our 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); 10 • cannot take effect until 60 days after it concurrence with Clark County DAQ Do not impose an information is published in the Federal Register. that the exceedances monitored in Las collection burden under the provisions This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as Vegas Valley on July 3, 2011 were of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 caused by a high wind exceptional U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). • event and our related exclusion of the Are certified as not having a Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, exceedances from the attainment significant economic impact on a petitions for judicial review of this determination. substantial number of small entities action must be filed in the United States Third, EPA is taking final action to under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Court of Appeals for the appropriate approve revisions to Clark County U.S.C. 601 et seq.); circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a • Do not contain any unfunded fugitive dust rules sections 41, and 90 petition for reconsideration by the mandate or significantly or uniquely through 93 that were submitted on May Administrator of this final rule does not 27, 2014 as a revision to the Nevada SIP affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act affect the finality of this action for the because we find that they ensure purposes of judicial review nor does it continued implementation of the rules of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • Do not have Federalism extend the time within which a petition after redesignation of Las Vegas Valley implications as specified in Executive for judicial review may be filed, and to attainment and because they meet all Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, shall not postpone the effectiveness of other applicable requirements.2 1999); such rule or action. This action may not Lastly, EPA is taking final action to • Are not an economically significant be challenged later in proceedings to delete the area designation for Las Vegas regulatory action based on health or enforce its requirements. (See section Valley for the revoked national standard safety risks subject to Executive Order 307(b)(2)). for total suspended particulate because 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); the designation is no longer necessary. • Are not a significant regulatory List of Subjects IV. Statutory and Executive Order action subject to Executive Order 13211 40 CFR Part 52 Reviews (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Are not subject to requirements of Environmental protection, Air Under the CAA, redesignation of an Section 12(d) of the National pollution control, Incorporation by area to attainment and the Technology Transfer and Advancement reference, Intergovernmental relations, accompanying approval of a Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because maintenance plan under section Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, application of those requirements would Reporting and recordkeeping be inconsistent with the CAA; and 2 Approval of Clark County amended sections 41, • requirements, Sulfur dioxide. and 90 through 93 will supersede the following Do not provide EPA with the existing rules in the applicable Nevada SIP: Section discretionary authority to address 40 CFR Part 81 41 as approved at 46 FR 43141 (August 27, 1981); disproportionate human health or section 90 as approved at 71 FR 63250 (October 30, environmental effects with practical, Environmental protection, Air 2006); section 91 as approved at 69 FR 32272 (June appropriate, and legally permissible pollution control, National parks, 9, 2004); section 92 as approved at 71 FR 63250 Wilderness areas. (October 30, 2006); and section 93 as approved at methods under Executive Order 12898 71 FR 63250 (October 30, 2006). (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60080 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: September 17, 2014. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Request and Maintenance Plan for Jared Blumenfeld, Particulate Matter (PM10), Clark County, Subpart DD—Nevada Regional Administrator, Region IX. Nevada (August 2012)’’ after the entry for ‘‘Pages 4–125 and 4–126 and Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of ■ 2. Section 52.1470 is amended: ■ a. In paragraph (c), Table 3, by appendix R (of the PM–10 State Federal Regulations is amended as Implementation Plan for Clark follows: revising the entries for ‘‘Section 41: Subsections 41.1–41.4,’’ ‘‘Section 90,’’ County).’’ PART 52—APPROVAL AND ‘‘Section 91,’’ ‘‘Section 92,’’ and The revisions and additions read as PROMULGATION OF ‘‘Section 93’’; and follows: IMPLEMENTATION PLANS ■ b. By adding in paragraph (e), under § 52.1470 Identification of plan. the table heading ‘‘Air Quality ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 Implementation Plan for the State of * * * * * continues to read as follows: Nevada’’ an entry for ‘‘Redesignation (c) * * *

TABLE 3—EPA-APPROVED CLARK COUNTY REGULATIONS

County County citation Title/Subject effective date EPA Approval date Additional explanation

******* Section 41 ...... Fugitive Dust ...... 4/29/14 [Insert Federal Adopted by Clark County on April 15, Register citation], 2014 and submitted by NDEP on May 10/6/14. 27, 2014.

******* Section 90 ...... Fugitive Dust from Open Areas and Va- 4/29/14 [Insert Federal Adopted by Clark County on April 15, cant Lots. Register citation], 2014 and submitted by NDEP on May 10/6/14. 27, 2014. Section 91 ...... Fugitive Dust from Unpaved Roads, Un- 4/29/14 [Insert Federal Adopted by Clark County on April 15, paved Alleys, and Unpaved Ease- Register citation], 2014 and submitted by NDEP on May ment Roads. 10/6/14. 27, 2014. Section 92...... Fugitive Dust from Unpaved Parking 4/29/14 [Insert Federal Adopted by Clark County on April 15, Lots, Material Handling & Storage Register citation], 2014 and submitted by NDEP on May Yards, & Vehicle & Equipment Stor- 10/6/14. 27, 2014. age Yards. Section 93...... Fugitive Dust from Paved Roads & 4/29/14 [Insert Federal Adopted by Clark County on April 15, Street Sweeping Equipment. Register citation], 2014 and submitted by NDEP on May 10/6/14. 27, 2014.

*******

* * * * * (e) ** *

EPA-APPROVED NEVADA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES

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

Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada 1

******* Redesignation Request and Mainte- Las Vegas Valley, 9/7/12 [Insert Federal Excludes appendix B (‘‘Documentation nance Plan for Particulate Matter Clark County. Register cita- of the Public Review Process’’). (PM10), Clark County, Nevada (August tion], 10/6/14. 2012).

******* ******* 1 The organization of this table generally follows from the organization of the State of Nevada’s original 1972 SIP, which was divided into 12 sections. Nonattainment and maintenance plans, among other types of plans, are listed under Section 5 (Control Strategy). Lead SIPs and Small Business Stationary Source Technical and Environmental Compliance Assistance SIPs are listed after Section 12 followed by nonregulatory or quasi-regulatory statutory provisions approved into the SIP. Regulatory statutory provisions are listed in 40 CFR 52.1470(c).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60081

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment ■ b. Revising in the table under FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING Status Designations ‘‘Nevada—PM–10,’’ the entry for ‘‘Clark PURPOSES County’’ to read as follows: ■ 4. Section 81.329 is amended by: ■ a. Removing in the table under § 81.329 Nevada. ■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 ‘‘Nevada—TSP,’’ the entry for ‘‘Las * * * * * continues to read as follows: Vegas Valley (212) (15–24S, 56–64E)’’; Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. and

NEVADA—PM–10

Designation Classification Designated area Date Type Date Type

******* Clark County: Las Vegas planning area ...... November 5, 2014 Attainment ...... Hydrographic area 212 ......

*******

* * * * * maintenance plan includes motor FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 2014–23623 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for Emlyn Ve´lez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the by email at [email protected]. Area for the 1997 annual PM2.5 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: standard, which EPA is approving for I. Background ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION transportation conformity purposes. AGENCY These actions are being taken under the The District of Columbia Department Clean Air Act (CAA). of the Environment (DDOE), the 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 Maryland Department of the [EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0148; FRL–9917–39– DATES: This final rule is effective on Environment (MDE), and the Virginia Region–3] November 5, 2014. Department of Environmental Quality ADDRESSES: (VADEQ) worked together in developing Approval and Promulgation of Air EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID a combined document to address the Quality Implementation Plans; District requirements for the redesignation to of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; Number EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0148. All documents in the docket are listed in attainment of the Washington Area for Approval of the Redesignation the 1997 annual PM NAAQS. The the www.regulations.gov Web site. 2.5 Requests and Maintenance Plan of the States also developed a common Although listed in the electronic docket, Washington, DC–MD–VA maintenance plan as a revision to their some information is not publicly Nonattainment Area for the 1997 respective SIPs to ensure continued available, i.e., confidential business Annual Fine Particulate Matter attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 Standard information (CBI) or other information standard in the Washington Area whose disclosure is restricted by statute. throughout 2025. The 1997 annual PM AGENCY: Environmental Protection Certain other material, such as 2.5 Agency. redesignation requests and maintenance copyrighted material, is not placed on plans for the Washington Area were ACTION: Final rule. the Internet and will be publicly submitted to EPA by DDOE on June 3, SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection available only in hard copy form. 2013, by MDE on July 10, 2013, and by Agency (EPA) is approving the requests Publicly available docket materials are VADEQ on June 3, 2013. The emissions from the District of Columbia (the available either electronically through inventories included in the Washington District), the State of Maryland www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for Area maintenance plans were (Maryland), and the Commonwealth of public inspection during normal subsequently supplemented by the Virginia (Virginia) (collectively ‘‘the business hours at the Air Protection States to provide for emissions estimates States’’) to redesignate to attainment Division, U.S. Environmental Protection of VOC and ammonia. The their respective portions of the Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, supplemental inventories were Washington, DC–MD–VA Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. submitted to EPA on July 22, 2013 by nonattainment area (hereafter ‘‘the Copies of the State submittals are DDOE, on July 26, 2013 by MDE, and on Washington Area’’ or ‘‘the Area’’) for the available at District of Columbia, July 17, 2013 by VADEQ. In addition, 1997 annual fine particulate matter Department of the Environment, Air the maintenance plan includes the 2017 (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Quality Division, 1200 1st Street NE., and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs used Standard (NAAQS or standard). EPA is 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20002; for transportation conformity purposes also approving, as a revision to their Maryland Department of the for the entire Washington Area for the respective State Implementation Plans Environment, 1800 Washington 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. (SIPs), the common maintenance plan Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, On August 8, 2014 (79 FR 45735), submitted by the States to show Maryland 21230; and Virginia EPA published a notice of proposed maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5 Department of Environmental Quality, rulemaking (NPR), proposing to take NAAQS through 2025 for the 629 East Main Street, Richmond, several rulemaking actions related to the Washington Area. The Washington Area Virginia 23219, respectively. redesignation of the Washington Area to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60082 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 violations pursuant to a voluntary statutes will not preclude the NAAQS. First, EPA proposed to find compliance evaluation and voluntarily Commonwealth from enforcing its that the States met the requirements for discloses such violations to the program consistent with the Federal redesignation of the Washington Area Commonwealth and takes prompt and requirements. In any event, because for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS appropriate measures to remedy the EPA has also determined that a state under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. violations. Virginia’s Voluntary audit privilege and immunity law can Second, EPA proposed to approve the Environmental Assessment Privilege affect only state enforcement and cannot Washington Area’s maintenance plan Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides have any impact on Federal for the Area as a revision to the District, a privilege that protects from disclosure enforcement authorities, EPA may at Virginia, and Maryland SIPs for the documents and information about the any time invoke its authority under the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Third, EPA content of those documents that are the CAA, including, for example, sections proposed to approve the MVEBs for product of a voluntary environmental 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the PM2.5 and NOX emissions for the 1997 assessment. The Privilege Law does not requirements or prohibitions of the state annual PM2.5 standard, which are extend to documents or information plan, independently of any state included as part of the Washington that: (1) Are generated or developed enforcement effort. In addition, citizen Area’s maintenance plan. Finally, EPA before the commencement of a enforcement under section 304 of the proposed to find that the Washington voluntary environmental assessment; (2) CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or Area continues to attain the 1997 annual are prepared independently of the any, state audit privilege or immunity PM2.5 standard. assessment process; (3) demonstrate a law. In the August 8, 2014 NPR, EPA clear, imminent and substantial danger considered the effects of three legal to the public health or environment; or III. Final Action decisions on the approval of the (4) are required by law. EPA is approving the requests redesignation requests and maintenance On January 12, 1998, the submitted by the District of Columbia, plan: (1) Collectively, the decisions in Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. Attorney General provided a legal State of Maryland to redesignate from EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), rev’d, opinion that states that the Privilege nonattainment to attainment their No. 12–1182 (S. Ct. April 29, 2014) from law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, precludes respective portions of the Washington the United States Court of Appeals for granting a privilege to documents and Area for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit information ‘‘required by law,’’ EPA has evaluated the States’ Court) and the United States Supreme including documents and information redesignation requests and determined Court with respect to the Cross-State Air ‘‘required by Federal law to maintain that they meet the redesignation criteria Pollution Rule (CSAPR); and (2) the program delegation, authorization or set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the January 4, 2013, D.C. Circuit decision approval,’’ since Virginia must ‘‘enforce CAA for the 1997 annual PM2.5 remanding to EPA the ‘‘Final Clean Air Federally authorized environmental standard. In this final rulemaking Fine Particle Implementation Rule’’ (72 programs in a manner that is no less action, EPA finds that the Washington FR 20586, April 25, 2007) and the stringent than their Federal Area is attaining and will continue to ‘‘Implementation of the New Source counterparts. * * *’’ The opinion attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Review (NSR) Program for Particulate concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding § 10.1–1198, EPA is also approving the common Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers therefore, documents or other maintenance plan for the Washington (PM2.5)’’ final rule (73 FR 28321, May information needed for civil or criminal Area submitted by the States as 16, 2008) (collectively, ‘‘1997 PM2.5 enforcement under one of these revisions to their respective SIPs for the Implementation Rule’’). Natural programs could not be privileged 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, as the plan Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. because such documents and meets the requirements of CAA section EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). information are essential to pursuing 175A for the standard. Furthermore, Specific details of the States’ enforcement in a manner required by EPA is approving the 2017 and 2025 submittals and the rationale for EPA’s Federal law to maintain program MVEBs for PM and NO submitted by proposed actions are explained in the 2.5 X delegation, authorization or approval.’’ the States for the Washington Area for NPR and will not be restated here. No Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code transportation conformity adverse public comments were received Sec. 10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the determinations with respect to the 1997 on the NPR. extent consistent with requirements annual PM NAAQS. Final approval of imposed by Federal law,’’ any person 2.5 II. General Information Pertaining to the redesignation requests will change making a voluntary disclosure of SIP Submittals From the the official designations of the information to a state agency regarding Washington Area, from nonattainment Commonwealth of Virginia a violation of an environmental statute, to attainment as found at 40 CFR part In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation regulation, permit, or administrative 81, for each of the States for the 1997 that provides, subject to certain order is granted immunity from conditions, for an environmental administrative or civil penalty. The annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and will assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for Attorney General’s January 12, 1998 incorporate into the States SIPs the voluntary compliance evaluations opinion states that the quoted language maintenance plan ensuring continued

performed by a regulated entity. The renders this statute inapplicable to attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 legislation further addresses the relative enforcement of any Federally authorized NAAQS in the Area for the next 10 burden of proof for parties either programs, since ‘‘no immunity could be years, until 2025. asserting the privilege or seeking afforded from administrative, civil, or IV. Statutory and Executive Order disclosure of documents for which the criminal penalties because granting Reviews privilege is claimed. Virginia’s such immunity would not be consistent legislation also provides, subject to with Federal law, which is one of the A. General Requirements certain conditions, for a penalty waiver criteria for immunity.’’ Under the CAA, redesignation of an for violations of environmental laws Therefore, EPA has determined that area to attainment and the when a regulated entity discovers such Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity accompanying approval of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60083

maintenance plan under CAA section • is not subject to requirements of purposes of judicial review nor does it 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the Section 12(d) of the National extend the time within which a petition status of geographical area and do not Technology Transfer and Advancement for judicial review may be filed, and impose any additional regulatory Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because shall not postpone the effectiveness of requirements on sources beyond those application of those requirements would such rule or action. This action, in required by state law. A redesignation to be inconsistent with the CAA; and which EPA is approving the attainment does not in and of itself • does not provide EPA with the redesignation requests and maintenance impose any new requirements, but discretionary authority to address, as plan submitted by the District of rather results in the application of appropriate, disproportionate human Columbia, the Commonwealth of requirements contained in the CAA for health or environmental effects, using Virginia, and the State of Maryland for areas that have been redesignated to practicable and legally permissible the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS attainment. Moreover, the Administrator methods, under Executive Order 12898 Washington Area, may not be is required to approve a SIP submission (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). challenged later in proceedings to that complies with the provisions of the In addition, this rule does not have enforce its requirements. (See section Act and applicable Federal regulations. tribal implications as specified by 307(b)(2).) 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, List of Subjects Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is EPA’s role is to approve state choices, not approved to apply in Indian country 40 CFR Part 52 located in the state, and EPA notes that provided that they meet the criteria of Environmental protection, Air it will not impose substantial direct the CAA. Accordingly, this action pollution control, Incorporation by costs on tribal governments or preempt merely approves state law as meeting reference, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate tribal law. Federal requirements and does not matter, Reporting and recordkeeping impose additional requirements beyond B. Submission to Congress and the requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile those imposed by state law. For that Comptroller General organic compounds. reason, this action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory The Congressional Review Act, 5 40 CFR Part 81 action’’ subject to review by the Office U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Air pollution control, National parks, of Management and Budget under Wilderness areas. Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides October 4, 1993); that before a rule may take effect, the Dated: September 15, 2014. • does not impose an information agency promulgating the rule must William C. Early, collection burden under the provisions submit a rule report, which includes a Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 copy of the rule, to each House of the 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Congress and to the Comptroller General as follows: • is certified as not having a of the United States. EPA will submit a significant economic impact on a report containing this action and other PART 52—APPROVAL AND substantial number of small entities required information to the U.S. Senate, PROMULGATION OF under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 the U.S. House of Representatives, and IMPLEMENTATION PLANS U.S.C. 601 et seq.); the Comptroller General of the United • does not contain any unfunded States prior to publication of the rule in ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 mandate or significantly or uniquely the Federal Register. A major rule continues to read as follows: affect small governments, as described cannot take effect until 60 days after it Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act is published in the Federal Register. of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as Subpart J—District of Columbia • does not have Federalism defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). implications as specified in Executive ■ C. Petitions for Judicial Review 2. In § 52.470, the table in paragraph Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, (e) is amended by adding an entry for 1999); Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance • is not an economically significant petitions for judicial review of this Plan for the District of Columbia Portion regulatory action based on health or action must be filed in the United States of the Washington, DC–MD–VA Area at safety risks subject to Executive Order Court of Appeals for the appropriate the end of the table to read as follows: 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a • is not a significant regulatory action petition for reconsideration by the § 52.470 Identification of plan. subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Administrator of this final rule does not * * * * * 28355, May 22, 2001); affect the finality of this action for the (e) * * *

State Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic submittal EPA approval date Additional area date explanation

******* Maintenance plan for the District of Columbia Por- District of Columbia ...... 06/03/13 10/6/14 [ Insert Federal See § 52.477(b). tion of the Washington, DC–MD–VA Nonattain- 07/22/13 Register Citation]. ment Area for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60084 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

■ 3. Section 52.477 is revised to read as to submit an attainment demonstration PM2.5 NAAQS submitted by the District follows: and associated reasonably available of Columbia for the entire Area on June control measures, a reasonable further 3, 2013 and supplemented on July 22, § 52.477 Control strategy: Particular progress plan, contingency measures, matter. 2013. The MVEBs are based on a tiered and other planning SIPs related to approach: Tier 1 MVEBs are effective as (a) Determination of Attainment. EPA attainment of the standard for as long as EPA has determined them adequate for has determined, as of January 12, 2009, the area continues to attain the 1997 transportation conformity purposes; that the District of Columbia portion of PM2.5 NAAQS. Tier 2 mobile budgets will become the Metropolitan Washington, DC–MD– (b) Maintenance Plan and effective upon the completion of the VA nonattainment area for the 1997 Transportation Conformity Budgets. interagency consultation process and PM NAAQS has attained the 1997 EPA approves the maintenance plan for 2.5 fully documented within the first PM2.5 NAAQS. This determination, in the District of Columbia portion of the accordance with 40 CFR 52.1004(c), Washington, DC–MD–VA conformity analysis that uses the Tier 2 suspends the requirements for this area nonattainment area for the 1997 annual MVEBs.

WASHINGTON, DC–MD–VA PM2.5 AREA’S TIER 1 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS, (TPY)

Effective Type of control strategy SIP Year NOX PM2.5 date of SIP approval

Maintenance Plan ...... 2017 41,709 1,787 11/5/14 2025 27,400 1,350

WASHINGTON, DC–MD–VA PM2.5 AREA’S TIER 2 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS, (TPY)

Type of control strategy SIP Year NOX PM2.5 Effective date of SIP approval

Maintenance Plan...... 2017 50,051 2,144 Contingent and effective upon interagency consultation. 2025 32,880 1,586

Subpart V—Maryland the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance § 52.1070 Identification of plan. Plan for the Maryland portion of the * * * * * ■ 4. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph Washington, DC–MD–VA Area at the (e) * * * (e) is amended by adding an entry for end of the table to read as follows:

State Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic submittal EPA approval date Additional area date explanation

******* Maintenance plan for the Maryland Portion of the Statewide ...... 07/10/13 10/6/14 [ Insert Federal See § 52.1081(d). Washington, DC–MD–VA Nonattainment Area for 07/26/13 Register Citation]. the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

* * * * * Washington, DC–MD–VA Area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. The ■ 5. Section 52.1081 is amended by nonattainment area for the 1997 annual MVEBs are based on a tiered approach: adding paragraph (d) to read as follows: PM2.5 NAAQS submitted by the State of Tier 1 MVEBs are effective as EPA has Maryland for the entire Area on July 10, determined them adequate for § 52.1081 Control strategy: Particular 2013 and supplemented on July 26, transportation conformity purposes; matter. 2013. The maintenance plan includes Tier 2 mobile budgets will become * * * * * motor vehicle emission budgets effective upon the completion of the (d) Maintenance Plan and (MVEBs) to be applied to all future interagency consultation process and Transportation Conformity Budgets. transportation conformity fully documented within the first EPA approves the maintenance plan for determinations and analyses for the conformity analysis that uses the Tier 2 the Maryland portion of the entire Washington, DC–MD–VA PM2.5 MVEBs.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60085

WASHINGTON, DC–MD–VA PM2.5 AREA’S TIER 1 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS, (TPY)

Effective Type of control strategy SIP Year NOX PM2.5 date of SIP approval

Maintenance Plan ...... 2017 41,709 1,787 11/5/14 2025 27,400 1,350

WASHINGTON, DC–MD–VA PM2.5 AREA’S TIER 2 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS, (TPY)

Type of control strategy SIP Year NOX PM2.5 Effective date of SIP approval

Maintenance Plan...... 2017 50,051 2,144 Contingent and effective upon interagency consultation. 2025 32,880 1,586

Subpart VV—Virginia the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance § 52.2420 Identification of plan. Plan for the Virginia Portion of the * * * * * ■ 6. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph Washington, DC–MD–VA Area at the (e) * * * (e) is amended by adding an entry for end of the table to read as follows:

State Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic submittal EPA approval date Additional area date explanation

******* Maintenance plan for the Virginia Portion of the Statewide ...... 06/03/13 10/6/14 [ Insert Federal See § 52.2429(b). Washington, DC–MD–VA Nonattainment Area for 07/17/13 Register Citation]. the 1997 Annual PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

* * * * * the Virginia portion of the Washington, PM2.5 Area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. ■ 7. Section 52.2429 is amended by DC–MD–VA nonattainment area for the The MVEBs are based on a tiered designating the existing text as 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS submitted approach: Tier 1 MVEBs are effective as paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b). by the Commonwealth of Virginia for EPA has determined them adequate for The addition reads as follows: the entire Area on June 6, 2013 and transportation conformity purposes; § 52.2429 Control strategy: Particular supplemented on July 17, 2013. The Tier 2 mobile budgets will become matter. maintenance plan includes motor effective upon the completion of the * * * * * vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) to be interagency consultation process and (b) Maintenance Plan and applied to all future transportation fully documented within the first Transportation Conformity Budgets. conformity determinations and analyses conformity analysis that uses the Tier 2 EPA approves the maintenance plan for for the entire Washington, DC–MD–VA MVEBs.

WASHINGTON, DC–MD–VA PM2.5 AREA’S TIER 1 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS, (TPY)

Effective Type of control strategy SIP Year NOX PM2.5 date of SIP approval

Maintenance Plan ...... 2017 41,709 1,787 11/5/14 2025 27,400 1,350

WASHINGTON, DC–MD–VA PM2.5 AREA’S TIER 2 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS, (TPY)

Type of control strategy SIP Year NOX PM2.5 Effective date of SIP approval

Maintenance Plan...... 2017 50,051 2,144 Contingent and effective upon interagency consultation. 2025 32,880 1,586

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60086 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. § 81.309 District of Columbia. FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING ■ * * * * * PURPOSES 9. In § 81.309, revise the table for ‘‘District of Columbia—1997 Annual ■ 8. The authority citation for part 81 PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary]’’ continues to read as follows: to read as follows:

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary]

Designation a Classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date Type

Washington, DC–MD–VA: District of Columbia ...... 10/6/14 Attainment ******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * * removing footnote number 2 in the table § 81.321 Maryland. ■ 10. In § 81.321, the table for and revising the entries for the * * * * * Maryland—1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS Washington, DC–MD–VA Area to read [Primary and secondary] is amended by as follows:

MARYLAND—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary]

Designation a Classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date Type

******* Washington, DC–MD–VA: Charles County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Frederick County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Montgomery County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Prince George’s County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * * and secondary] is amended by removing § 81.347 Virginia. footnote number 2 in the table and ■ 11. In § 81.347, the table for Virginia— * * * * * revising the entries for the Washington, 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary DC–MD–VA Area to read as follows:

VIRGINIA—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS [Primary and secondary]

Designation a Classification Designated area Date1 Type Date Type

Washington, DC–MD–VA: Arlington County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Fairfax County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Loudoun County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Prince William County ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Alexandria City ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Fairfax City ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Falls Church City ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Manassas City ...... 10/6/14 Attainment Manassas Park City ...... 10/6/14 Attainment

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:53 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60087

* * * * * NW., Washington, DC 20460–0002, 202– brownfields site assessment grants. A [FR Doc. 2014–23624 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 566–2774, [email protected]. summary of the potentially affected BILLING CODE 6560–50–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: industry sectors (by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Table of Contents codes) is displayed in the table below. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION I. Regulated Entities AGENCY II. Statutory Authority Industry category NAICS code III. Background 40 CFR Part 312 IV. Summary of Comments and EPA Real Estate ...... 531 [EPA–HQ–SFUND–2014–0474; FRL–9917– Responses Insurance ...... 52412 28–OSWER] V. Overview of Today’s Action Banking/Real Es- 52292 VI. Effective Date of Final Action tate Credit. Amendment to Standards and VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Environmental 54162 Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries I. Regulated Entities Consulting Services. AGENCY: Environmental Protection The EPA is removing the reference to State, Local and 926110, 925120 Agency. the 2005 ASTM standard in the All Tribal Govern- ment. ACTION: Final rule. Appropriate Inquiries Rule at 40 CFR part 312 (70 FR 66070, as amended). In Federal Govern- 925120, 921190, 924120 SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection November 2013, ASTM International ment. Agency (EPA) is amending the replaced its 2005 standard (ASTM standards and practices for conducting E1527–05 ‘‘Standard Practice for The list of potentially affected persons all appropriate inquiries under the Environmental Site Assessments: Phase in the above table may not be Comprehensive Environmental I Environmental Site Assessment exhaustive. Our aim is to provide a Response, Compensation and Liability Process’’) with an updated standard, guide for readers regarding those Act (CERCLA) to remove the reference ASTM E1527–13 ‘‘Standard Practice for entities that EPA is aware potentially to ASTM International’s E1527–05 Environmental Site Assessments: Phase could be affected by this action. standard practice. This 2005 standard I Environmental Site Assessment practice was replaced with an updated Process.’’ The updated 2013 standard is II. Statutory Authority standard, the E1527–13, by ASTM a currently recognized industry International, a widely recognized consensus-based standard to conduct all Today’s action, which amends the standards development organization. appropriate inquiries as provided under AAI Rule at 40 CFR part 312 setting Specifically, EPA is amending the ‘‘All CERCLA. In December 2013, EPA Federal standards for the conduct of ‘‘all Appropriate Inquiries Rule’’ to remove published a final rule indicating that appropriate inquiries,’’ is authorized the reference to ASTM International’s parties who acquire potentially under section 101(35)(B) of CERCLA (42 E1527–05 ‘‘Standard Practice for contaminated properties and U.S.C. 9601), as amended by the Small Environmental Site Assessments: Phase brownfields grantees using EPA Business Liability Relief and I Environmental Site Assessment brownfield grant funding to conduct site Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002. characterizations and assessments may Process.’’ III. Background use the ASTM E1527–13 standard DATES: The effective date for this action practice when conducting all is October 6, 2015. On January 11, 2002, President Bush appropriate inquiries pursuant to signed the Small Business Liability ADDRESSES: Publicly available docket CERCLA (78 FR 79319). Today’s rule Relief and Brownfields Revitalization materials are available either does not include any changes to the Act, Public Law 107–118 (‘‘the electronically in www.regulations.gov or standards and practices included in the Brownfields Amendments’’), which in hard copy at the HQ EPA Docket All Appropriate Inquiries Rule (AAI Center, EPA/DC, EPA WJC West, Room amended CERCLA. In general, the Rule). Any party who wants to meet the Brownfields Amendments provide 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., provisions under CERCLA to conduct funds to assess and clean up Washington, DC. The Public Reading all appropriate inquiries may follow the brownfields sites; clarify CERCLA Room at this docket facility is open from standards and procedures set forth in liability provisions related to certain 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through the AAI Rule at 40 CFR part 312 or use purchasers of contaminated properties; Friday, excluding Federal holidays. The the new ASTM E1527–13 standard, as telephone number for the Public provided in the AAI Rule. and provide funding to enhance state Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and Persons potentially affected by this and tribal cleanup programs. Subtitle B the telephone number for the Superfund action are those who perform all of the Brownfields Amendments added Docket is (202) 566–9744. appropriate inquiries, including public new limitations on CERCLA liability FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For and private entities who intend to claim under section 107 for bona fide general information, contact the protection from CERCLA liability as prospective purchasers and contiguous CERCLA Call Center at 800–424–9346 or bona fide prospective purchasers, property owners and clarified the TDD 800–553–7672 (hearing impaired). contiguous property owners, or requirements necessary to establish the In the Washington, DC metropolitan innocent landowners. In addition, any innocent landowner defense under area, call 703–412–9810 or TDD 703– person conducting a site CERCLA. The Brownfields Amendments 412–3323. For more detailed characterization or assessment on a also revised section 101(35) of CERCLA information on specific aspects of this property with a brownfields grant to provide that parties acquiring rule, contact Patricia Overmeyer, Office awarded under CERCLA section contaminated or potentially of Brownfields and Land Revitalization 104(k)(2)(B)(ii) may be affected by contaminated property must undertake (5105T), U.S. Environmental Protection today’s action. This includes state, local ‘‘all appropriate inquiries’’ into prior Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue and tribal governments that receive ownership and use of the property prior

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:53 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60088 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

to acquisition to qualify for protection requirement to identify all indications business practices for conducting all from CERCLA liability. of releases and threatened releases of appropriate inquiries, so long as they The Brownfields Amendments further hazardous substances, or ‘‘recognized comply with the standards and practices directed EPA to develop regulations environmental conditions (RECs),’’ set forth in the AAI Rule. Instead, establishing standards and practices for including indications of vapor migration today’s proposed action removes the conducting all appropriate inquiries. On or vapor releases. With the updates reference to a standard that ASTM November 1, 2005, EPA promulgated included in the 2013 version of the International no longer recognizes as regulations that established standards ASTM E1527 standard, ASTM modified current since it no longer represents the and practices for all appropriate the definition of migration to most recent consensus-based standard. inquiries (70 FR 66070). In the AAI specifically include vapor migration and EPA is taking this action because the Rule, EPA referenced the existing ASTM remove any confusion regarding the Agency wants to reduce any confusion E1527–05 ‘‘Standard Practice for need to identify all RECs, or all associated with the regulatory reference Environmental Site Assessments: Phase indications of releases or threatened to a historical standard that is no longer I Environmental Site Assessment releases of hazardous substances, when recognized by its originating Process’’ and authorized its use to conducting an AAI investigation. organization as meeting its standards for comply with the rule. On December 23, Two of the commenters who good customary business practice. In 2008, EPA revised the AAI Rule to supported EPA’s proposed rule addition, we believe that today’s final recognize another ASTM International recommended in their comments that rule will promote the use of the 2013 standard as compliant with the EPA delay the effective date of the final standard currently recognized by ASTM standards and practices set forth in the rule until six months after the International as the consensus-based, AAI Rule, ASTM E2247–08 ‘‘Standard publication date, rather than the one good customary business standard. Practice for Environmental Site year delay proposed by EPA. Although Today’s action includes no further Assessments: Phase I Environmental EPA agrees with the commenters’ changes to the AAI Rule other than to Site Assessment Process for Forestland statements that most environmental remove the reference to the historical or Rural Property’’ (73 FR 78716). professionals are likely already using ASTM E1527–05 standard. It does not In November 2013, ASTM the updated E1527–13 standard, the impact the reference to the recently International published ASTM E1527– Agency believes it is prudent to provide revised ASTM standard, E1527–13 in 13, ‘‘Standard Practice for for the one year delay in the effective the AAI Rule. It also does not impact Environmental Site Assessments: Phase date. The AAI Rule requires that AAI parties who acquired properties I Environmental Site Assessment investigations be conducted within one between November 1, 2005 and the Process.’’ In early 2013, at ASTM year prior to the date of acquisition of effective date of this final rule and used International’s request, EPA reviewed the subject property (see 40 CFR the 2005 ASTM standard (ASTM this standard and determined that a 312.20(a)). In addition, the AAI Rule E1527–05) to comply with the AAI Rule, person’s use of the standard would be requires that certain aspects of the AAI as it was in effect at the time the compliant with the AAI Rule. investigation be conducted or updated property was acquired. On December 30, 2013, EPA within 180 days prior to the date of VI. Effective Date of Final Action published a final rule which provided acquisition of the subject property (40 that persons conducting all appropriate CFR 312.20(b)). Given these Today’s action is a final rule. The EPA inquiries may use the procedures requirements, EPA determined that anticipates that some parties, at this included in ASTM E1527–13 to comply delaying the effective date for the final time may still be using the historical with the AAI Rule (78 FR 79319). On rule by only six months may be standard (ASTM E1527–05) to comply June 17, 2014, EPA published a burdensome for some parties. Therefore, with the provisions of the AAI Rule. proposed rule (79 FR 34480) proposing the effective date for this final rule, Therefore, the Agency is delaying the to amend the AAI Rule to remove the which removes the reference to the effective date of today’s final action for reference to ASTM E1527–05 Phase I ASTM E1527–05 standard, will be one year to provide parties with an Environmental Site Assessment October 6, 2015 allowing sufficient time adequate opportunity to complete AAI Standard. for AAI investigations initiated or on- investigations that may be ongoing and going at the time of publication of to become familiar with the updated IV. Summary of Comments and EPA industry standard (ASTM E1527–13). Responses today’s rule to be completed or updated prior to the effective date. The effective date of today’s final rule, In response to the June 17, 2014 which will remove the reference to proposed rule (79 FR 34480), EPA V. Overview of Today’s Action ASTM E1527–05 in the AAI rule, is received five comments. Four of the EPA is amending the AAI Rule at 40 October 6, 2015. comments were supportive of the CFR 312 to remove the reference to VII. Statutory and Executive Order proposed rule. The sole negative ASTM International’s E1527–05 Reviews comment asserted that the principal ‘‘Standard Practice for Environmental difference between the E1527–05 Site Assessments: Phase I A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory standard and the E1527–13 standard is Environmental Site Assessment Planning and Review the inclusion of a requirement to Process.’’ In November 2013, ASTM This action is not a ‘‘significant evaluate the potential presence of vapor International designated this standard a regulatory action’’ under Executive releases under the E1527–13 standard. ‘‘historical standard’’ and replaced it Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October The commenter further stated that with the updated ASTM E1527–13 4, 1993), and is therefore not subject to because vapor releases are not by ‘‘Standard Practice for Environmental review under Executive Orders 12866 themselves a CERCLA concern, EPA Site Assessments: Phase I and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, should continue to allow for the use of Environmental Site Assessment 2011). the E1527–05 standard. EPA disagrees Process.’’ with this comment. The scope of the Today’s action does not prevent B. Paperwork Reduction Act AAI Rule and the ASTM E1527–05 parties from continuing to use other This action will not impose an standard always included the standards, methods, or customary information collection burden under the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60089

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction on the relationship between the national U.S.C. 272) apply. The NTTAA was Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is government and the states, or on the signed into law on March 7, 1996 and, defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). The current distribution of power and among other things, directs the National regulation does not have an information responsibilities among the various Institute of Standards and Technology collection burden and today’s action’s levels of government, as specified in EO (NIST) to bring together federal agencies only change to the regulation is to delete 13132. Thus, EO 13132 does not apply as well as state and local governments the reference to a historical standard to this rule. to achieve greater reliance on voluntary that recently was replaced with an standards and decreased dependence on F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation updated version of the standard. A final in-house standards. It states that use of and Coordination With Indian Tribal rule referencing the updated version of such standards, whenever practicable Governments the standard was published by EPA on and appropriate, is intended to achieve December 30, 2013 (78 FR 79319). This action does not have tribal the following goals: (a) Eliminate the implications, as specified in EO 13175 cost to the government of developing its C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This own standards and decrease the cost of The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) action merely removes a reference to a goods procured and the burden of generally requires an agency to prepare historical voluntary consensus standard. complying with agency regulation; (b) a regulatory flexibility analysis for any Today’s final rule does not change any provide incentives and opportunities to rule subject to notice and comment current regulatory requirements and establish standards that serve national rulemaking requirements under the therefore will not impose any impacts needs; (c) encourage long-term growth Administrative Procedure Act or any upon tribal entities. Thus, EO 13175 for U.S. enterprises and promote other statute; unless the agency certifies does not apply to this action. efficiency and economic competition that the rule will not have a significant through harmonization of standards; G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of economic impact on a substantial and (d) further the policy of reliance number of small entities. Small entities Children From Environmental Health upon the private sector to supply include small business, small Risks and Safety Risks Government needs for goods and organizations, and small governmental EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR services. The Act requires that federal jurisdictions. 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only agencies adopt private sector standards, Today’s action does not change the to those regulatory actions that concern particularly those developed by current regulatory status quo and does health or safety risks, such that the standards developing organizations not impose any regulatory requirements. analysis required under section 5–501 of (SDOs), wherever possible in lieu of After considering the economic impacts the EO has the potential to influence the creating proprietary, non-consensus of today’s final rule on small entities, I regulation. This action is not subject to standards. certify that this action will not have a EO 13045 because it does not establish Today’s final rule complies with the significant economic impact on a an environmental standard intended to NTTAA as it allows persons conducting substantial number of small entities. mitigate health or safety risks. all appropriate inquiries to use the procedures included in the updated D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act H. Executive Order 13211: Actions ASTM International standard known as This action contains no Federal Concerning Regulations That Standard E1527–13 and entitled mandates under the provisions of Title Significantly Affect Energy Supply, ‘‘Standard Practice for Environmental II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Distribution, or Use Site Assessments: Phase I Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– Today’s final rule is not subject to EO Environmental Site Assessment 1538 for state, local, or tribal 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), Process’’ to comply with the AAI Rule. governments or the private sector. This because it is not a significant regulatory The rule also deletes reference to a action imposes no enforceable duty on action under EO 12866. standard that is no longer recognized as any state, local or tribal governments or current by the standards developing I. National Technology Transfer and the private sector. This action merely organization responsible for its Advancement Act removes a reference to a historical development. voluntary consensus standard. The final Section 12(d) of the National J. Executive Order 12898: Federal rule imposes no new regulatory Technology Transfer and Advancement Actions To Address Environmental requirements and will result in no Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– Justice in Minority Populations and additional burden to any entity. 113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs Low-Income Populations Therefore, this action is not subject to EPA to use voluntary consensus the requirements of sections 202 or 205 standards in its regulatory activities Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, of UMRA. unless to do so would be inconsistent Feb. 16, 1994), establishes federal As stated above, this final rule also is with applicable law or otherwise executive policy on environmental not subject to the requirements of impractical. Voluntary consensus justice. Its main provision directs section 203 of UMRA because it standards are technical standards (e.g., federal agencies, to the greatest extent contains no new regulatory materials specifications, test methods, practicable and permitted by law, to requirements that might significantly or sampling procedures, and business make environmental justice part of their uniquely affect small governments. practices) that are developed or adopted mission by identifying and addressing, by voluntary consensus standards as appropriate, disproportionately high E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to and adverse human health or This action does not have federalism provide Congress, through OMB, environmental effects of their programs, implications. Today’s final rule will not explanations when the Agency decides policies, and activities on minority substantially change the current not to use available and applicable populations and low-income regulation; it merely removes a voluntary consensus standards. populations in the United States. reference to a historical voluntary This action involves technical EPA has determined that this final consensus standard. It will not have standards. Therefore, the requirements rule will not have disproportionately substantial direct effects on the states, of section 12(d) of the NTTAA (15 high and adverse human health or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60090 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

environmental effects on minority or FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS low-income populations because it does COMMISSION COMMISSION not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 47 CFR Part 54 47 CFR Part 73 environment. Today’s action merely [DA 14–1357] removes a reference to a historical [WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58; FCC 14– voluntary consensus standard and does 98] Radio Broadcasting Services; Various not impose any new requirements. Locations Connect America Fund, ETC Annual K. Congressional Review Act Reports and Certifications AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. The Congressional Review Act, as AGENCY: Federal Communications added by the Small Business Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Final rule. Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, ACTION: Final rule, correction. SUMMARY: The Audio Division amends generally provides that before a rule the FM Table of Allotments, to remove may take effect, the agency SUMMARY: This document corrects errors certain vacant FM allotments that were promulgating the rule must submit a in the supplementary information auctioned in FM Auction 91 that are rule report, which includes a copy of portion of a Federal Register document currently considered authorized the rule, to each House of the Congress finalizing decisions to use, on a limited stations. FM assignments for authorized and to the Comptroller General of the scale, Connect America funding for stations and reserved facilities will be United States. EPA will submit a report rural broadband experiments in price reflected solely in Media Bureau’s containing this rule and other required cap areas that will deploy new, robust Consolidated Database System (CDBS). broadband to consumers. The information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. DATES: Commission will use these rural Effective October 6, 2014. House of Representatives, and the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Comptroller General of the United broadband experiments to explore how to structure the Phase II competitive Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202) States prior to publication of the rule in 418–2700. the Federal Register. A major rule bidding process in price cap areas and to gather valuable information about SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a cannot take effect until 60 days after it interest in deploying next generation summary of the Report and Order, DA is published in the Federal Register. networks in high-cost areas. The 14–1357, adopted September 18, 2014, This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as summary was published in the Federal and released September 19, 2014. The defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule is Register on August 6, 2014. full text of this document is available for effective on October 6, 2015. DATES: Effective October 6, 2014. inspection and copying during normal business hours in the Commission’s List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 312 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reference Center 445 12th Street SW., Environmental protection, Alexander Minard, Wireline Washington, DC 20554. The complete Administrative practice and procedure, Competition Bureau, (202) 418–7400. text of this document may also be Hazardous substances. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This purchased from the Commission’s summary contains corrections to the Dated: September 19, 2014. duplicating contractor, Best Copy and supplementary information portion of a Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Mathy Stanislaus, Federal Register summary, 79 FR 45705 Room CY–B402, Washington, DC, Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste (August 6, 2014). The full text of the 20054, telephone 1–800–378–3160 or and Emergency Response. Commission’s Report and Order in WC www.BCPIWEB.com. The Commission Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58; FCC 14–98, For the reasons set out in the will not send a copy of this Report and released on July 14, 2014 is available for Order pursuant to the Congressional preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the Code public inspection during regular of Federal Regulations is amended as Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), business hours in the FCC Reference because the adopted rules are rules of follows: Center, Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street particular applicability. This document SW., Washington, DC 20554. PART 312—INNOCENT does not contain information collection LANDOWNERS, STANDARDS FOR In Final rule FR Doc. 2014–18328, requirements subject to the Paperwork published August 6, 2014 (79 FR CONDUCTING ALL APPROPRIATE Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104– 45705), make the following corrections. INQUIRIES 13. In addition, therefore, it does not 1. On page 45711, in the first column, contain any proposed information in paragraph 44, third and fourth lines, ■ collection burden ‘‘for small business 1. The authority citation for part 312 replace ‘‘eligible locations determined concerns with fewer than 25 continues to read as follows: by the model’’ with ‘‘funded locations employees,’’ pursuant to the Small Authority: Section 101(35)(B) of CERCLA, and extremely high-cost locations.’’ Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9601(35)(B). 2. On page 45726, in the first column, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. in paragraph 155, eleventh and twelfth 3506(c)(4). Subpart B—Definitions and References lines, replace ‘‘eligible locations List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 determined by the model’’ with ‘‘funded § 312.11 [Amended] locations and extremely high-cost Radio, Radio broadcasting. ■ 2. Section 312.11 is amended by locations.’’ Federal Communications Commission. removing paragraph (a) and Federal Communications Commission. Nazifa Sawez, redesignating paragraphs (b) and (c) as Marlene H. Dortch, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media paragraphs (a) and (b). Secretary. Bureau. [FR Doc. 2014–23399 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2014–23781 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] For the reasons discussed in the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P BILLING CODE 6712–01–P preamble, the Federal Communications

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60091

Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as and 284C3; Fallon Station, Channel 284A for vacant Channel 233A for follows: 287C; Goldfield, Channel 262C1; and failure to comply with the Pahrump, Channel 272C3. Commission’s rules, and the associated PART 73—RADIO BROADCASTING ■ t. Remove Alamogordo, under New ‘‘hybrid’’ application (‘‘Application’’) SERVICES Mexico, Channel 240C2 and Clayton, for Station WTNM (FM) to operate on Channel 248C1. Channel 234A rather than Channel ■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 ■ u. Remove Celoron, under New York, 288A at Water Valley, Mississippi. We continues to read as follows: Channel 237A; and Montauk, Channel also dismiss the Counterproposal filed Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336 235A. by Elijah Mondy, proposing the and 339. ■ v. Remove Lone Wolf, under allotment of Channel 284A at New § 73.202 [Amended] Oklahoma, Channel 224A; Muldrow, Houlka, Mississippi, as the community’s Channel 286A; and Valliant, Channel first local service, for failure to comply ■ 2. Amend § 73.202(b), the Table of FM 234C3. with the Commission’s rules. Allotments, as follows: ■ w. Remove Butte Falls, under Oregon, ■ DATES: Effective October 6, 2014. a. Remove Coosada, under Alabama, Channel 290A; Clatskanie, Channel Channel 226A; and Livingston, Channel ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal 225C3; Diamond Lake, Channel 299A; Communications Commission, 445 12th 242A. Netarts, Channel 232C3; and Channel ■ b. Remove Palmer, under Alaska, Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. 299C3 at Prineville. Channel 238C1. ■ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ■ c. Remove Ajo, under Arizona, x. Remove Lawrence Park, under Pennsylvania, Channel 224A. Rolanda F. Smith, Media Bureau, (202) Channel 295A. ■ 418–2700. ■ y. Remove Williston, under South d. Remove Clarendon, under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a Arkansas, Channel 281A; Gassville, Carolina, Channel 260A. ■ synopsis of the Commission’s Report Channel 224A. z. Remove Channel 246A, under ■ Texas, Big Lake; Blanket, Channel 284A; and Order, MB Docket No. 13–282, DA e. Remove Cedarville, under 14–1014, adopted July 17, 2014, and California, Channel 260A; Coachella, Blossom, Channel 224C2; Colorado City, Channel 257A; Channel 289A at Cotulla; released July 18, 2014. The full text of Channel 278A; Kerman, Channel 224A; this document is available for King City, Channel 275A; Tecopa, Dilley, Channel 291A; Elkhart, Channel 265A; Marquez, Channel 296A; Channel inspection and copying during normal Channel 288A; Trona, Channel 247A; business hours in the FCC’s Reference Twentynine Palms, Channel 270A; and 287C3 at Menard; O’Brien, Channel 261A; Ozona, Channel 275C3; Information Center at Portals II, CY– Waterford, Channel 294A. A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, ■ f. Remove Blanca, under Colorado, Panhandle, Channel 291C3; Rotan, DC 20554. This document may also be Channel 249C2; Crested Butte, Channel Channel 290A; Shamrock, Channel purchased from the Commission’s 246C3; Channel 299C3 at Gunnison; 271A; Snyder, Channel 235C3; duplicating contractors, Best Copy and Orchard Mesa, Channel 249C3; and Stamford, Channel 233A; Wellington, Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Silverton, Channel 281A. Channel 248A; and Wheeler, Channel ■ g. Remove Daytona Beach Shores, 280C2. Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554, under Florida, Channel 258A; ■ aa. Remove Albany, under Vermont, telephone 1–800–378–3160 or via the Islamorada, Channel 283C2; and Key Channel 233A. Web site www.BCPIWEB.com. This Largo, Channel 237C3. ■ bb. Remove Wardensville, under West document does not contain information ■ h. Remove Calhoun, under Georgia, Virginia, Channel 239A. collection requirements subject to the Channel 233A. ■ cc. Remove Basin, under Wyoming, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ■ i. Remove Kihei, under Hawaii, Channel 300C3; and Ten Sleep, Channel Public Law 104–13. Channel 264C2. 267A. Synopsis ■ l. Remove Worthington, under ■ dd. Remove Dededo, under Guam, Indiana, Channel 231A. Channel 243C1. The Petition requested the ■ k. Remove Dulac, under Louisiana, [FR Doc. 2014–23657 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] substitution of Channel 284A for vacant Channel 230A; and St. Joseph, Channel BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Channel 233A at Bruce, Mississippi. 257C3. Channel 233A at Bruce, Mississippi, a ■ l. Remove Adams, under vacant allotment resulting from the Massachusetts, Channel 255A; East FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS cancellation of the license for Station Harwich, Channel 254A; and Nantucket, COMMISSION WCMR–FM, is not currently listed in Channel 249A. the FM Table of Allotment. ■ m. Remove Ferrysburg, under 47 CFR Part 73 Accordingly, we reinstate Channel 233A Michigan, Channel 226A; Onaway, [MB Docket No. 13–282; RM–11706; DA 14– at Bruce, Mississippi in the FM Table of Channel 292C2; and Pentwater, Channel 1014] the Allotments. This action constitutes 280A. an editorial change in the FM Table of ■ n. Remove Red Lake, under Radio Broadcasting Services; Bruce, Allotments. The reference coordinates Minnesota, Channel 231C1. Mississippi for Channel 233A at Bruce, Mississippi ■ o. Remove Vaiden, under Mississippi, are 34–01–17 NL and 89–20–06 WL. Channel 271A. AGENCY: Federal Communications ■ p. Remove Bourbon, under Missouri, Commission. List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Channel 231A. ACTION: Final rule. Radio, Radio broadcasting. ■ q. Remove Charlo, under Montana, Federal Communications Commission. Channel 251C3; and Whitehall, Channel SUMMARY: The Audio Division is Nazifa Sawez, 274A. reinstating Channel 233A in Bruce, ■ r. Remove Humboldt, under Nebraska, Mississippi, and dismissing the Petition Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Channel 272C3. for Rule Making (‘‘Petition’’) filed by Bureau. ■ s. Remove Beatty, under Nevada, Telesouth Communications, Inc., For the reasons discussed in the Channel 259A; Elko, Channels 274C3 proposing the substitution of Channel preamble, the Federal Communications

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60092 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as (202) 418–2702, [email protected], By limiting the types (and, thus, the follows: Office of Engineering and Technology. numbers) of medical institutions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 2360–2390 MHz band, the Commission PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST summary of the Commission’s Order on intended to make it easier for both the SERVICES Reconsideration and Second Report and MBAN and AMT coordinators to Order, ET Docket No. 08–59, FCC 14– establish, implement and enforce ■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 124, adopted August 20, 2014 and efficient and effective coordination continues to read as follows: released August 21, 2014. The full text procedures. Further, it found that Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336. of this document is available for limiting potential locations would simplify their efforts to identify and § 73.202 [Amended] inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference remedy any harmful interference in the ■ 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th extremely unlikely event it occurs. Allotments under Mississippi, is Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The 3. Although GE Healthcare, Phillips amended by adding Bruce, Channel complete text of this document also may Healthcare, and the Aerospace and 233A. be purchased from the Commission’s Flight Test Radio Coordinating Council [FR Doc. 2014–23779 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, (AFTRCC) (the’’ Joint Parties’’) had suggested this approach as part of their BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room, CY– B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full comprehensive set of proposed rules, text may also be downloaded at: they had not discussed the rationale for FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS www.fcc.gov. People with Disabilities: this limitation until the filing of their COMMISSION To request materials in accessible Petition for Reconsideration. Because formats for people with disabilities the Petition for Reconsideration stated 47 CFR Part 95 (braille, large print, electronic files, with particularity the reasons why the Commission should adopt their [ET Docket No. 08–59; FCC 14–124] audio format), send an email to fcc504@ fcc.gov or call the Consumer & proposed authorized locations Medical Body Area Network Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202– definition, it found that the public 418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty). interest would be it served by taking the AGENCY: Federal Communications Joint Parties’ facts and arguments into Commission. Summary of Order on Reconsideration consideration. ACTION: Final rule. 1. In the Order on Reconsideration 4. As part of this decision, the and Second Report and Order, the Commission determined that, because SUMMARY: This document addresses an Commission took further actions to the existing MBAN standard will Order on Reconsideration and Second foster the development and deployment support numerous patients in the 2390– Report and Order in which the of new and innovative Medical Body 2400 MHz band, and because frequency Commission takes further actions to Area Network (MBAN) devices. MBAN reuse techniques can augment that foster the development and deployment technology provides a platform for the capacity in many situations, no health of new and innovative Medical Body wireless networking of multiple body- care facilities—including those that do Area Network (MBAN) devices. In worn sensors used for measuring and not qualify for use of the 2360–2390 addressing petitions for reconsideration recording physiological parameters and MHz band—will be precluded from of the First Report and Order in this other patient information or for operating MBAN systems. For this proceeding, the Commission provides performing diagnostic or therapeutic reason, the Commission disagreed with MBAN users with additional flexibility functions, primarily in health care SmartEdgeNet that health care providers to enable the implementation of facilities. By addressing petitions for will be ‘‘denied the benefits of MBAN’’ technical standards being developed for reconsideration of the First Report and if the Commission limited the MBAN devices, and clarify and modify Order in this proceeding, we provided authorized locations as requested. portions of its rules to facilitate the MBAN users with additional flexibility 5. Antenna Locations. In their Petition coordination, deployment, and use of to enable the implementation of for Reconsideration, the Joint Parties MBAN systems. In the Second Report technical standards being developed for claimed that § 95.1213, titled and Order portion in this proceeding, MBAN devices, and clarified and ‘‘Antennas,’’ appeared to exclude the the Commission finalizes the process for modified portions of our rules to installation of outdoor antennas for the selecting a MBAN Coordinator. This facilitate the coordination, deployment, 2390–2400 MHz band at locations above coordinator will facilitate use of the and use of MBAN systems. a building’s first floor, such as balconies and roof terraces, and that this was not MBAN frequencies, which operate in Authorized Locations shared-use bands. Collectively, our the intent of the rule. Upon actions will allow the development of 2. Health Care Facilities. The reconsideration, the Commission agreed new and innovative health care Commission revised § 95.1203 of its and expressly found that it was not applications. rules to limit use of the 2360–2390 MHz necessary to apply antenna height band to hospitals and other restrictions—which were originally DATES: Effective November 5, 2014, establishments that offer services, intended as a constraint on temporary except for § 95.1225(c), which contains facilities and beds for use beyond a 24- outdoor use of MedRadio antennas information collection requirements that hour period in rendering medical regardless of the band in which the have not been approved by the Office of treatment. It eliminated a portion of the transmitter operated—to antennas used Management and Budget (OMB). The definition that included institutions and for MedRadio transmitters operating in Commission will publish a document in organizations regularly engaged in the 2390–2400 MHz band. the Federal Register announcing the providing medical services through 6. The Commission concluded that, effective date of § 95.1225(c). clinics, public health facilities, and based on the permissible outdoor use in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: similar establishments, including this band and the relatively low power Jamison Prime, (202) 418–7474, government entities and agencies such operations of MBAN transmitters [email protected] or Brian Butler as Veterans Administration hospitals. (which effectively limits any gain in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60093

coverage that is often associated with 10. The Commission modified under the existing rules and that no rule increased antenna height), there is no existing rule § 95.1209(g) to provide an modifications were necessary. need to prescribe a specific antenna exception to permit communications 13. 2390–2400 MHz band. The height limit (for either permanent or between programmer/control Commission denied the Joint Parties’ temporary outdoor antennas used for transmitters of different MBAN systems request to eliminate all restrictions on this band) and revised § 95.1213 as set for the sole purpose of avoiding MBAN systems that operate in the forth in the rules. interference to each other, based on the 2390–2400 MHz band. Such a change text of the existing MedRadio rules for would have allowed networks that MBAN Definition and Permissible Medical Micropower Networks. It consist of multiple programmer/control Communications recognized that allowing MBAN systems transmitters, networks that do not 7. MBAN Configurations with a Single in the 2360–2390 MHz band (as well as include any programmer/control Body-Worn Device. The Commission the 2390–2400 MHz band) to coordinate transmitters, and networks in which amended Appendix 1 to subpart E of use among themselves of the available different groups of programmer/control part 95 (‘‘Glossary of Terms’’) to define MBAN frequencies could promote transmitters and body-worn devices an MBAN as a low power network efficient spectrum use. The Commission communicate between and among each consisting of a MedRadio programmer/ emphasized that it considered the other. The Commission disagreed with control transmitter and one or more modified requirement to be a limited the Joint Parties’ assertion that the medical body-worn devices. The exception to the general rule and, in rationale for the MBAN system design Commission found the argument of the agreement with the Joint Parties, noted requirements in § 95.1209(g) related Joint Parties that the pairing of a that programmer/control transmitters exclusively to concerns in the 2360– programmer/control transmitter with a would continue to be barred from 2390 MHz band and applying the single body-worn device ‘‘will likely be relaying the control message to each restriction to the 2390–2400 MHz band common’’ was plausible, concluding other. It retained the prohibition on served no purpose. Instead, it noted that that there could be times where best programmer/control transmitters entities operating in the 2360–2390 treatment practices could require the relaying other information (such as MHz band may need to default to the use of only a single body-worn device. medical data) to each other. 2390–2400 MHz band and found that it 8. Use of Bedside Devices. Under the 11. The Commission amended would be unwise to further complicate Commission’s rules as adopted in the § 95.1209 of the rules to eliminate the such transitions by allowing the band to language that precludes body-worn be populated by medical devices First Report and Order, a medical body- devices from communicating with other operating under many different system worn device is defined as an apparatus body-worn devices in the 2360–2400 designs. Nevertheless, the Commission that is placed on or in close proximity MHz band. It recognized that doing so did note that the First Report and Order to the human body (e.g., within a few could potentially enhance patient left open the potential to revisit the centimeters) for the purpose of welfare by preserving battery life and permissible use restrictions after gaining performing diagnostic or therapeutic enhancing signal strength in situations further experience with MBAN functions. The Commission clarified that may adversely affect the reception operations and it deemed continuing that bedside devices, which would of data. Further, the Commission noted this approach to be reasonable and require a physical attachment to the that the adoption of industry standards, appropriate to the circumstances. patient (e.g. by wire or tube), would it may have made it both feasible and Device Operation meet the definition even though there practical to produce such equipment. are other parts of the apparatus that are 12. Additionally, the Joint Parties 14. In the First Report and Order, the located away from the body. The asked that the Commission allow either Commission adopted transmission Commission further clarified that the a programmer/control transmitter or a requirements for the component parts of ‘‘few centimeters’’ language in the rule body-worn device to perform as a an MBAN—the programmer/control should be read as a general example and ‘‘coordinator node’’ in an MBAN transmitters and body-worn devices. not the codification of a specific system. According to the Joint Parties, The Commission applied much of the distance requirement. Based on this coordinator node is the ‘‘. . . term used existing MedRadio rule on ‘‘Permissible clarification, the Commission did not in IEEE 802.15.6 for the node Communications,’’ 47 CFR 95.1209, to grant the Joint Parties request to modify responsible for coordinating the MAC MBAN operation. Among these the rule to remove the ‘‘few function (e.g., assigning TDMA slots to requirements, § 95.1209(b), in pertinent centimeters’’ language. other nodes) and being the main routing part, addresses the operation of body- 9. Allowing Greater Flexibility in hub for communication with all other worn devices by stating that no Designing MBAN Systems. Together nodes in the MBAN star topology.’’ As MedRadio implant or body-worn § 95.1209(g) (‘‘Permissible an example, the Joint Parties described transmitter shall transmit except in Communications’’) and the MBAN a scenario in which a body-worn device response to a transmission from a definition contained in Appendix 1, serves as a coordinator node to transmit MedRadio programmer/control subpart E of the part 95 Rules (‘‘Glossary information related to the technical transmitter or in response to a non-radio of Terms’’) established the MedRadio operation of the network (e.g., what frequency actuation signal generated by programmer/control transmitter and the communication protocols to use) to a device external to the body with medical body-worn device as distinct other body-worn devices within the respect to which the MedRadio implant elements that must be present in every MBAN system and aggregate the patient or body-worn transmitter is used. MBAN; allow body-worn transmitters to data that it receives from other body- Additionally, with regard to relay information in the 2360–2400 worn devices. Because the Commission programmer/control transmitters, MHz band only to a programmer/control decided to permit a body-worn device § 95.628(c) states that a MedRadio transmitter that is part of the same within an MBAN system to programmer/control transmitter shall MBAN; and prohibit a programmer/ communicate with another body-worn not commence operating and shall control transmitter from using the 2360– device, it concluded that the Joint automatically cease operating in the 2400 MHz band to relay information to Parties would be able to design MBAN 2360–2390 MHz band if it does not another programmer/control transmitter. systems consistent with their request receive, in accordance with the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60094 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

protocols specified by the manufacturer, 2360–2390 MHz band and who are Commission agreed with the Joint a control message permitting such eligible to operate MBAN systems in the Parties that it will be sufficient to operation. Additionally, a MedRadio 2360–2390 MHz band register the provide the quantity and type (i.e. programmer/control transmitter MBAN system—regardless of whether equipment that may have different operating in the 2360–2390 MHz band they have any current intent to technical characteristics) of shall comply with a control message eventually use the 2360–2390 MHz programmer/control transmitters at each that notifies the device to limit its band capacity of their equipment. The MBAN installation. The Commission transmissions to segments of the 2360– Commission agreed with ASHE that accomplished this objective by retaining 2390 MHz band or to cease operation in such a requirement will give the the requirement in § 95.1223(a)(3) that the band. coordinator and health care facilities a programmer/control transmitter 15. The Joint Parties asserted that more complete understanding of the information include the manufacturer § 95.1209 as adopted in the First Report current and potential local spectrum name, model number and FCC and Order permitted only a polled environment for MBANs and will allow identification number. The practical media access control (MAC) protocol— qualifying health care facilities (and effect of the revised rules is that health that is, that the only time a body-worn their equipment vendors and installers) care facilities will be able to account for device can operate is immediately after to better plan their facilities with large groups of devices under a single the receipt of a transmission from the respect to appropriate efficient network filing. programmer/control transmitter. The architecture and systems planning and 19. Finally, the Commission clarified Commission found that this assertion implementation. The Commission that replacement of programmer/control was based upon an overly narrow further noted that the modified transmitters having the same technical reading of the rule and was inconsistent registration requirement is more limited characteristics as those reported on the with the language of the First Report and less burdensome than a more health care facility’s registration (i.e., and Order. It stated that while a polled comprehensive requirement that the the manufacturer name, model number access scenario would comply with the Commission rejected in the First Report and FCC identification number) will not rules, other access modes are and Order, and concluded that the trigger additional notification permissible provided that the body- benefits of providing the MBAN requirements under § 95.1223(b) of the worn devices operate in response to coordinator with this important rules. whatever instructions are transmitted by additional information outweigh the 20. Interaction between MBAN and their associated programmer/control fairly slight increase in registration costs AMT Coordinators. Under transmitter. The Commission thus for the limited number of MBAN § 95.1225(b)(2) of the Commission’s determined that the rules allow operators discussed. rules, the MBAN Coordinator is sufficient flexibility to account for the required to determine if an MBAN is Joint Parties’ concerns and made no 18. Registration Requirement for the within line of sight of an AMT receive changes to the rule. 2360–2390 MHz Band. In the First facility in the 2360–2390 MHz band, 16. The Commission modified Report and Order, the Commission and coordinate MBAN operations with § 95.628(c) of the rules, as shown below, required all MBAN devices operating in the designated AMT coordinator. to clearly state that body-worn the 2360–2390 MHz band to be Additionally, the MBAN coordinator transmitters must be capable of ceasing registered with a frequency coordinator, must approve any changes made to an transmissions when necessary to avoid and adopted § 95.1223 addressing authorized MBAN installation before interference in the 2360–2390 MHz MBAN registration and coordination. operation could begin with the altered band. It agreed that it is ‘‘critical that all Upon reconsideration, the Commission parameters. Accordingly, § 95.1223(b) MBAN devices...cease operation in agreed with the Joint Parties that the states, in pertinent part, that a health 2360–2390 MHz in the absence of a language in § 95.1223(a) that required care facility must notify the MBAN control message,’’ and noted that, registration of all MBAN devices a coordinator of any material change to because the rules adopted in the First health care facility proposes to operate the MBAN’s location or operating Report and Order require a programmer/ in the 2360–2390 MHz band was parameters, and that it may not operate control transmitter operating in the broader than necessary. It also noted under changed operating parameters 2360–2390 MHz that fails to receive a that, while the introductory text in until the frequency coordinator control message to cease operation and § 95.1223(a) suggests that all MBAN determines whether such changes allow body-worn transmitters to devices should be registered, the require coordination with the AMT transmit only in response to a registration information specified in coordinator. The Joint Parties had transmission from the programmer/ subparts (1) through (7) of the rule does suggested edits to the coordinator duties control transmitter, such a requirement not address body-worn devices. listed in § 95.1225 of the rules. The was already implicit. Furthermore, subparts (3) and (5) Commission concluded that the Joint specifically speak to ‘‘control Parties’ proposed edits to § 95.1225(b) Coordination and Registration transmitter[s]’’ (which we are updating were already addressed in § 95.1223(c) 17. Registration Requirement for the to read ‘‘MedRadio programmer/control and concluded that it would be 2390–2400 MHz Band. In the First transmitter’’ to provide clarity and unnecessarily repetitive to make the Report and Order, the Commission consistency). Because the existing rule requested edits. adopted a registration requirement for construction may create confusion in 21. The Commission determined that the 2360–2390 MHz band to facilitate that it could appear to be inconsistent it would be beneficial to further clarify coordination with AMT operations in or ambiguous, the Commission the procedures for how the AMT that band, but it did not adopt a amended the introductory text of coordinator is consulted before an registration requirement for the 2390– § 95.1223(a) as shown below. Under the MBAN location or operation is changed. 2400 MHz band. On reconsideration, the revision, the Commission did not Specifically, the Commission found the Commission amended its rules to require that the MBAN user provide the need to provide clarification as to require that entities preparing to use the coordinator with unique identifying whether coordination with or 2390–2400 MHz band with equipment data (e.g., a serial number) for each notification to the AMT coordinator that is capable of also operating in the programmer/control transmitter. The would be required if the modified

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60095

MBAN facility would operate beyond describing the functions of the 2360– any MedRadio transmitter must be line-of-sight of an AMT receive facility. 2390 MHz band MBAN coordinator supplied with the transmitter and shall It determined that the best course in should provide for the prompt be considered part of the transmitter such cases is to apply the existing identification and resolution of any subject to equipment authorization. procedures outlined in § 95.1223(c)(1), harmful interference caused by an 25. Equipment Labeling Requirement. which requires the MBAN coordinator MBAN to AMT operations. The labeling requirement for MBAN to approve operation without prior 23. Testing of Installed MBAN devices states that MedRadio coordination with the AMT coordinator, Equipment. The Joint Parties and ASHE programmer/control transmitters but also requires the MBAN coordinator requested the Commission to require operating in the 2360–2400 MHz band to notify the AMT coordinator and hospitals or equipment vendors to shall be labeled as provided in part 2 of provide the AMT coordinator with the certify to the MBAN coordinator that the chapter and shall bear the following opportunity to concur that the MBAN testing of the relevant 2360–2390 MHz statement in a conspicuous location on facility is beyond line of sight. MBAN equipment was conducted in the device: situ and confirmed that the equipment Accordingly, the Commission revised This device may not interfere with stations § 95.1223(b) of the rules to state that the does not operate outdoors. The authorized to operate on a primary basis in MBAN coordinator must evaluate the Commission found that its existing rules the 2360–2400 MHz band, and must accept proposed changes and comply with and processes are sufficient to address any interference received, including either (c)(1) or (c)(2), as appropriate, such concerns. It noted that all MBAN interference that may cause undesired prior to authorizing a modified MBAN equipment capable of operating in the operation. operation. Such a change satisfies the 2360–2390 MHz band is certified to be The statement may be placed in the Joint Parties’ request that the under the equipment authorization instruction manual for the transmitter Commission clarify the advance process to demonstrate compliance with where it is not feasible to place the the indoor operation restrictions and consultation requirement for the AMT statement on the device. coordinator, and does so in a way that that, under the existing rules, MBAN users must acknowledge when 26. The Commission denied the Joint complements our existing rules for Parties’ request that, in the event that coordinating MBAN operations. registering with an MBAN coordinator the need to comply with these the warning is not included on the 22. Notification of Interference. The requirements. In this regard, the device label, the Commission should Commission did not adopt a request by Commission noted that it has given require that the warning be placed on the Joint Parties to amend § 95.1223(a) MBAN coordinators broad discretion to the front page of the instruction manual of the rules to include a specific implement coordination procedures to in capital letters. On reconsideration, requirement that, if a health care facility ensure that MBAN operations are the Commission found that the Joint or the MBAN coordinator is notified of permitted only when and where they Parties had not offered any reason for it MBAN interference to an AMT receive will not interfere with AMT operations. to question this analysis the antenna, the MBAN user must cease Thus, if an MBAN coordinator Commission undertook in the First transmissions on the frequencies determines that the type of testing and Report and Order, or to convince it that causing interference. The Commission certification the Joint Parties and ASHE additional steps were needed to ensure pointed out that § 95.1211(c) of the rules seeks is warranted, it may ask a hospital that ‘‘all personnel are fully aware’’ of plainly states that MBAN devices may or equipment vendor to provide such the status of MBAN devices. not cause harmful interference to information as part of the coordination 27. Publication of Equipment authorized stations operating in the process. Authorization Requirements. The Joint 2360–2400 MHz band which places the Parties asked that the Commission take onus of avoiding such interference Equipment Authorization steps to ensure that the requirements for squarely on the operator of these 24. Attached Antennas and Operation equipment authorization of MBAN devices. Accordingly, it is the MBAN in the 2360–2390 MHz Band. The devices be ‘‘clear for all to follow.’’ They user’s responsibility to respond to Commission did not adopt the Joint did not propose any specific rule interference complaints, and to be Parties’ request that § 95.1213 of the modifications, but instead submitted a prepared to cease operation as necessary rules, which describes MBAN antenna list of ‘‘expected attestation and to avoid causing harmful interference. placement, be modified ‘‘to clarify that certification requirements for MBAN The Commission also emphasized that an antenna must be permanently affixed equipment. While the Commission failure to abide by this rule will subject to its MBAN transmitter’’ for devices declined to codify the Joint Parties’ an MBAN user to appropriate operating in the 2360–2390 MHz specific requirements, it indicated that Commission enforcement action. The portion of the band. The Commission it will draw on existing resources (for existing rules give the MBAN determined that there was little risk that example, the OET Laboratory Division’s coordinator the responsibility to MBAN users will make post-market Knowledge Database (KDB)) and staff identify the MBAN that is the source of device modifications, noting that it was will continue to be available to ensure interference and the authority to notify not aware of any issues with that information regarding authorization the registered health care facility to unauthorized modification of the procedures for MBAN equipment is cease operation as may be appropriate to existing base of MedRadio devices, nor published in a readily accessible the circumstances. Moreover, any health had the Joint Parties provided any manner, and that MBAN equipment is care facility planning to operate MBAN supporting evidence that this is a authorized in compliance with devices in the 2360–2390 MHz band common occurrence that would support Commission rules. will have provided to the MBAN additional rules tailored to MBAN coordinator, pursuant to the rules, a operation in the 2360–2390 MHz band. Second Report And Order point of contact in the event the MBAN It also found that the existing rules 28. The Commission’s rules require user is directed to cease operation. already protect against the potential that MBAN operations in the 2360–2390 Thus, the Commission concluded that, harm described by the Joint Parties. MHz be registered and coordinated to together, the rule defining the MBAN Specifically, § 95.639(f)(5) of the rules ensure that AMT operations in this band user responsibilities and the rule states that the antenna associated with are protected from harmful interference.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60096 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

The registration and coordination registration for health care institutions service, the Commission indicated that functions are to be performed by a because there will be a single point of it is important to allow the MBAN frequency coordinator to be designated contact and the registration process will coordinator to be replaced by the by the Commission. An MBAN be analogous to the Wireless Medical Commission if necessary. Consistent coordinator will be required to maintain Telemetry Service (WMTS) registration with the existing procedures for the a database of MBAN registrations that process that is familiar to many entities WMTS coordinator, the Commission includes the locations of MBAN systems in this specialized group, and will make delegated to the Bureau the authority to that operate in the 2360–2390 MHz coordination with AMT coordinator remove the MBAN coordinator after band, determine when MBAN simpler. The Commission noted that the giving adequate notice if it determines transmitters are within line-of-sight of authority already delegated to the that such an action would serve the AMT receive facilities, coordinate Bureau to certify frequency coordinators public interest. The Bureau can include MBAN operations with the coordinator for the services it administers allows it specific provisions in the MOU, for AMT services, notify registered to introduce competitive coordination including the notice it will give the MBAN users when they must change into a service with an exclusive coordinator. frequencies or cease operations coordinator, and noted that the Bureau 33. Qualifying Criteria. In the Further consistent with a coordination will consider, in the future, whether to Notice, the Commission sought agreement between the MBAN and AMT certify one or more additional comment on the minimum qualifying coordinator, and develop procedures to coordinators if it determines that such criteria that should be established for ensure that MBAN users operate an action would serve the public selecting an MBAN coordinator and consistent with the coordination interest. proposed that parties interested in being requirements. 31. Term of Service. The Commission designated an MBAN coordinator must, 29. In the Second Report and Order, required that the MBAN coordinator at a minimum, demonstrate that they the Commission determined that it will agree to serve a ten-year term. After the meet the following criteria: select only one MBAN coordinator for a initial ten-year term, the MBAN • Ability to register and maintain a ten-year term. After the ten-year term, coordinator will continue to serve until database of MBAN transmitter locations the coordinator will serve until either it the coordinator acts to vacate the role or and operational parameters; elects not to continue as coordinator or the Commission acts to remove the • Knowledge of or experience with is removed by the Commission. The coordinator under the procedures medical wireless systems in health care MBAN coordinator may rely on a third- discussed. The Commission also facilities (e.g., WMTS); party consultant for technical services adopted the proposal in the Further • Knowledge of or experience with necessary to fulfill its responsibilities, Notice to require that the MBAN AMT operations; but will be required to disclose coordinator transfer the MBAN • Ability to calculate and measure information about the technical registration data to another entity interference potential between MBAN qualifications of the third-party designated by the Commission if the and AMT operations and to enter into consultant and the contractual coordinator cannot or chooses not to mutually satisfactory coordination arrangement it has with the consultant. continue as coordinator. The agreements with the AMT coordinator The MBAN coordinator will be required Commission directed the Bureau to based on the requirements in to provide service on a non- incorporate this requirement into the § 95.1223(c); discriminatory basis to all eligible MOU that it will execute with the • Ability to develop procedures to health care institutions and will be MBAN coordinator. As part of the MOU, ensure that registered health care permitted to charge reasonable fees that the Bureau should also address what facilities operate an MBAN consistent reflect only its actual costs (including notice the MBAN coordinator must give with the requirements in § 95.1223. the costs associated with coordination, the Commission to provide adequate 34. In the Second Report and Order, such as the AMT coordinator’s cost and time to select a replacement the Commission required applicants the expense of any third-party technical coordinator, in the event that the applying to become the MBAN consultant). The Wireless coordinator intends to vacate the coordinator to demonstrate that they Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau), coordinator role. This notice will have meet these five criteria. It determined acting under delegated authority as to provide sufficient time for the Bureau that these criteria ‘‘ensure that the provided in the Commission’s rules, to select a replacement coordinator, for designated coordinator can successfully will select the MBAN coordinator. The the replacement coordinator to establish accomplish the functions required by Bureau will execute a Memorandum of a registration and coordination system, our rules.’’ The Commission declined to Understanding (MOU) with the selected and for the incumbent MBAN add the additional criteria suggested by coordinator, which will describe the coordinator to transfer the registration ASHE and Philips/GE to the core duties and responsibilities of the data to the replacement coordinator. criteria that it adopted, noting that some coordinator and provide for removal of The Commission also recognized that it of these elements are already addressed the coordinator if circumstances is possible that the coordinator would by the five criteria it adopted and warrant. These requirements are not continue in its role at some point. determining that other elements of the described in further detail in the In such a case, these notice and transfer proposed criteria described qualities following paragraphs. requirements will be necessary to that would likely be useful for an 30. Single Coordinator. The ensure an effective transition of MBAN coordinator to possess but did Commission found it appropriate to coordinators. The provisions will help not appear essential for performing the select only one MBAN coordinator at avoid having a period of time during coordination obligations required by the this time given the characteristics of the which there would be no functioning rules that it adopted, were insufficiently MBAN service. The health care MBAN registration and coordination concrete to warrant certification, or community represents a small part of regime or creating a re-registration would be expected to attend compliance the radiofrequency user ecosystem and burden on MBAN licensees. with the criteria it has specified. the number of MBAN registrants is 32. Because the role of the MBAN 35. The Commission also found that likely to be proportionally small. A coordinator is essential to prevent the MBAN coordinator should be able to single coordinator will simplify MBAN harmful interference to a primary rely on a contract with a third party for

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60097

technical expertise, and it will consider would need time to employ a on only its actual coordination costs, on such arrangements as part of a replacement consultant who meets the a not-for-profit basis, to the MBAN candidate’s demonstration that it Commission’s high standards and, if coordinator. This cost may include the satisfies the core qualifying criteria. The such a coordinator is not found, the actual cost to the AMT coordinator of Commission recognized that it may be Commission needs time to replace the coordinating Federal AMT operations, difficult to identify a single entity that MBAN coordinator. The Commission but may not include charges for work satisfies all the minimum qualifying provided the Bureau with the discretion performed by Federal employees such criteria that it has adopted, and stated to include such requirements in the as the Federal Government Area that a candidate that lacks expertise in MOU it executes with the MBAN Frequency Coordinators. Because the the core criteria may choose to rely on coordinator. costs incurred by the AMT coordinator a third party for technical support to 38. Fees for Service. The Commission will be charged to the MBAN user as demonstrate that it would be able to decided to permit the MBAN part of the registration and coordination provide all of the MBAN registration coordinator to set fees for MBAN fees paid to the MBAN coordinator, the and coordination functions with registration and coordination (as Commission found that there is no need minimal delay. The Commission noted opposed to having the Commission or to place a requirement in our rules that that the Bureau may exercise its the Bureau prescribe fees. The the MBAN user bear direct authority to terminate the tenure of the Commission required that the fees responsibility for the AMT coordinator’s MBAN coordinator if the third-party charged for MBAN registration and cost. technical consultant stops providing coordination be reasonable and reflect 40. On the matter of how reasonable service to the MBAN coordinator and only the MBAN coordinator’s actual costs should be evaluated and what the Bureau is not persuaded that either costs of providing the coordination and oversight the Commission should the MBAN coordinator can perform registration functions. The MBAN exercise over AMT–MBAN coordination these necessary duties without coordinator will be required to provide fees, the Commission observed that the assistance of a third-party consultant or the coordination and registration Bureau has the authority to investigate use of a replacement consultant will functions on a not-for-profit basis. The the reasonableness of the MBAN allow the coordinator to meet its Commission determined that requiring registration and coordination fees, and it obligations under our rules. that the MBAN coordinator provide will do so as appropriate, either in 36. The Commission found that services on a not-for-profit basis was response to complaints or on its own MBAN coordinator candidates that rely necessary because, with likely only one motion. The MBAN coordinator will be on third party contracts to demonstrate MBAN coordinator, it cannot rely on required to provide the Bureau with any compliance with the core qualifying competitive market forces to serve as a information it requests in the course of criteria will need to disclose certain check on the fees associated with conducting such an investigation. In information about such contracts. The MBAN registration and coordination. If judging the reasonableness of MBAN Commission found that demonstration competitive forces are introduced and registration and coordination fees the of the core qualifying criteria will more than one coordinator is selected, Bureau should consider the customary require the disclosure of more detailed however, the Commission recognized practices in other bands where information because the relationship that the need for such regulations may registration or coordination is required between the MBAN coordinator and a no longer exist and may need to be under the Commission’s rules. The third-party technical expert will affect reconsidered. The Commission also both the coordinator’s ability to carry required that the MBAN coordinator Commission also required the MBAN out its responsibilities and the must provide services on a non- coordinator to provide the Bureau with program’s ability to continue if either discriminatory basis to all eligible its fee schedule upon request. This fee the coordinator or the third-party expert health care institutions. notification requirement coupled with must relinquish its role. The 39. The Commission concluded that the ability to investigate the Commission therefore directed the the MBAN coordinator should establish reasonableness of fees will provide a Bureau to require that applicants for the MBAN user fees that include all costs necessary incentive for the MBAN and MBAN coordinator role relying on a associated with MBAN registration and AMT coordinators to maintain the fee third party consultant make a number of coordination, including the cost of any structure for MBAN registration and attestations regarding the consultant and third-party technical consultant coordination at a reasonable level. the contract between the consultant and employed by the MBAN coordinator 41. MBAN Coordinator Selection. The the applicant, and to take this and the fees of the AMT coordinator. Commission directed the Bureau, acting information into account when judging This approach establishes a single pay under its existing delegated authority, to the suitability of applicants for the point for MBAN users and will simplify select the MBAN coordinator. Because MBAN coordinator position. This the registration and coordination the procedures the Bureau used in information must include the identity process for them, and is supported by selecting the WMTS coordinator were and qualifications of any third-party the record. As with the other costs for successful, it directed it to employ a technical consultant the MBAN which the MBAN user is responsible, similar process to select the MBAN coordinator will rely on, the length of the cost of any third-party technical coordinator, including releasing a time that the contract between the consultant must be reasonable. This cost Public Notice to announce procedures MBAN coordinator and the third-party can include only the MBAN for interested parties to submit consultant would be in effect, and under coordinator’s actual costs for such applications for consideration as an what circumstances that contract could consultation services. The amount of the MBAN coordinator, issuing an Order to terminate. payment to the AMT coordinator should designate the MBAN coordinator, and 37. The Commission also indicated be determined by agreement between executing a MOU on behalf of the that the MOU should also recognize the the AMT and MBAN coordinators, and Commission with the selected possibility that the technical consultant would be incorporated into the overall coordinator that will set forth the would stop providing service to the coordination fee that an MBAN user coordinator’s authority and MBAN coordinator. Upon such an incurs. The Commission indicated that responsibilities. The Commission occurrence, the MBAN coordinator it expects the AMT coordinator to pass anticipated that the MBAN coordinator

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60098 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

would assume its duties upon the for this purpose given the ability of band. Among other actions, the execution of this MOU. MBAN devices to share with spectrum Commission concludes to only 42. The Commission agreed with with the incumbent users. Nothing in designate one MBAN coordinator, but Philips/GE that the MBAN coordinator the petition gave the Commission reason delegates to the Wireless and AMT coordinator should quickly to question this conclusion. Second, the Telecommunication Bureau (Bureau) reach agreement on mutually agreeable petition asserted that the amount of the authority to possibly designate more procedures to create coordination spectrum the Commission has allocated than one coordinator at a later date. The agreements. Until such procedures are for MBAN use would not be sufficient Commission adopts a number of in place, no registered MBAN system to meet future demand. The qualifying criteria to guide the Bureau can be deployed. Hence, the Commission found this claim to be in selecting the coordinator, such as the Commission required the selected speculative at best, particularly given ability to register and maintain a MBAN coordinator to report to the that no MBAN devices have been database of MBAN transmitter locations, Commission when it has procedures in deployed. Finally, the petition did not knowledge of wireless systems in place with the AMT coordinator provide the technical details necessary healthcare facilities and of AMT allowing coordination agreements for to draw conclusions as to the feasibility operations, and the ability to calculate MBAN systems to be made. If no such of the long-range medical wireless and measure interference potential report is made within six months of devices that Bartlett envisions. The between MBAN and AMT operations. selection of the MBAN coordinator, the Commission concluded that deployment The Commission also adopts a rule Commission directed the Bureau to take of these types of devices may be requiring that the MBAN coordinator all necessary action to promote such an possible under its existing rules in other provide registration and coordination to agreement. frequency bands. all eligible healthcare facilities on a 43. The Commission declined to Procedural Matters non-discriminatory basis, provide the adopt AFTRCC’s suggestion that registration and coordination services selection of the MBAN coordinator be 46. Final Regulatory Flexibility on a not-for-profit basis, notify the contingent on executing a coordination Certification. The Regulatory Flexibility Commission six months prior to ceasing agreement with AFTRCC. The Act of 1980, as amended (RFA) 1 to perform the functions of frequency Commission emphasized that it is the requires that a regulatory flexibility coordinator, and transmit the MBAN responsibility of both the selected analysis be prepared for rulemaking registration data in a usable form to MBAN coordinator and AFTRCC to proceedings, unless the agency certifies another coordinator designated by the cooperate in good faith in developing that ‘‘the rule will not have a significant Commission if it ceases to be the procedures for MBAN coordination. economic impact on a substantial frequency coordinator. While the 44. Petition for Rulemaking. Ben 2 number of small entities.’’ The RFA decisions made and rules adopted in the Bartlett, who identifies himself as a law generally defines ‘‘small entity’’ as Order on Reconsideration and Second student at the University of California having the same meaning as the terms Report and Order could have a Hastings College of Law, filed a Petition ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small organization,’’ significant economic impact on the for Rulemaking requesting that the and ‘‘small governmental jurisdiction.’’ 3 Commission allocate spectrum for MBAN coordinator, the Commission has In addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ decided to designate only one MBAN MBAN use in an unused portion of the has the same meaning as the term television frequency bands. Bartlett coordinator. Although the Commission ‘‘small business concern’’ under the does allow the Bureau to possibly claimed that the 2360–2400 MHz band Small Business Act.4 A small business is unsuitable for MBAN use because designate multiple coordinators at a concern is one which: (1) Is later date, it does not foresee there ever interference between MBAN systems independently owned and operated; (2) and the AMT and amateur services being more than a couple of MBAN is not dominant in its field of operation; coordinators. would put patients at risk and interfere and (3) satisfies any additional criteria 48. The Commission also addresses with the operation of these services, that established by the Small Business several issues related to MBAN users. the amount of spectrum available for Administration (SBA).5 First, the revisions to the authorized MBAN operations was not sufficient to 47. In the Order on Reconsideration location rule will not increase the meet the future demand for medical and Second Report and Order, the number of health care facilities that can applications, and that the current Commission addressed a number of use the 2360–2390 MHz band, and MBAN frequencies have limited issues related to designating the MBAN therefore will not impose regulatory propagation characteristics compared to coordinator for the 2360–2390 MHz the TV bands. He envisioned an burdens on any new small entities. expanded role for MBAN devices where 1 The RFA, see section 5 U.S.C. S 601 et. seq., has Second, in the Report and Order, the patients will not be tied to a hub been amended by the Contract With America Commission originally declined to because the wireless link will be able to Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law 104–121, require registration for the 2390–2400 traverse long distances and pass through 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of the MHz band users because it concluded CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory buildings and other obstacles. Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA). that such a requirement ‘‘would 45. The Commission concluded that 2 5 U.S.C. 605(b). unnecessarily burden hospitals that do the petition does not warrant further 3 5 U.S.C. 601(6). not need assistance from the MBAN consideration at this time and dismissed 4 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the coordination.’’ Under the revised it without prejudice. First, the definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in Small registration requirement we are Commission pointed out that MBAN Business Act, 15 U.S.C. S 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. adopting, the scope is narrower and it 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business systems are designed to provide applies ‘‘unless an agency, after consultation with targets only those hospitals that may wireless monitoring of patients over the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business eventually need to interact with MBAN short distances to provide patients with Administration and after opportunity for public coordinator. We find that the benefit of mobility in hospitals and other health comment, establishes one or more definitions of providing the MBAN coordinator with such term which are appropriate to the activities of care facilities. In the First Report and the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the this additional information outweighs Order, the Commission concluded that Federal Register.’’ the slight increase in registration costs the 2360–2400 MHz band is well suited 5 Small Business Act, section 15 U.S.C. S 632. for this limited number of MBAN

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60099

operators. In addition, we find that the 95.1225(c), which includes new or § 95.628 MedRadio transmitters in the increase in registration costs is minor, modified information collection 413–419 MHz, 426–432 MHz, 438–444 MHz, and therefore will not have a significant requirements that require approval by and 451–457 MHz and 2360–2400 MHz economic impact on a substantial Office of Management and Budget under bands. number of small entities. Lastly, the the PRA and will become effective after * * * * * remaining revisions to § 95.1223 do not such approval, on the effective date (c) Requirements for Medical Body change the regulatory burden on small specified in a notice that the Area Networks. A MedRadio business health care facilities; they Commission publishes in the Federal programmer/control transmitter and its merely clarify the rules and do not have Register announcing such approval and associated medical body-worn a significant economic impact on any effective date. transmitters shall not commence operating in, and shall automatically new small entities. 54. Pursuant to the authority of 49. Therefore, the Commission cease operating in, the 2360–2390 MHz section 5(c) of the Communications Act certifies that the requirements of this band if the programmer/control of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 155(c), Order on Reconsideration and Second transmitter does not receive, in the Commission delegate authority to Report and Order will not have a accordance with the protocols specified the Wireless Telecommunications significant economic impact on a by the manufacturer, a control message Bureau as set forth in this Second substantial number of small entities. permitting such operation. Medical The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order. body-worn transmitters shall cease Order on Reconsideration and Second 55. The Petition for Rulemaking filed operating in 2360–2390 MHz if they lose Report and Order including a copy of by Ben Bartlett in ET Docket Nos. 08– communication with their associated this final certification, in a report to 59 and 04–186 is denied. programmer/control transmitter. Congress pursuant to the Small Business 56. The Joint Petition for Additionally, a MedRadio programmer/ Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of Reconsideration of GE Healthcare, control transmitter and its associated 1996, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). In Phillips Healthcare, and the Aerospace medical body-worn transmitters addition, the Order on Reconsideration and the Flight Test Radio Coordinating operating in the 2360–2390 MHz band and Second Report and Order and this Council is granted in part and denied in shall comply with a control message certification will be sent to the Chief part. that notifies the devices to limit Counsel for Advocacy of the Small transmissions to segments of the 2360– Business Administration, and will be 57. The Petition for Reconsideration 2390 MHz band or to cease operation in published in the Federal Register. See of The American Society for Healthcare the band. Engineering of the American Hospital 5 U.S.C. 605(b). * * * * * 50. Congressional Review Act. The Association is granted. ■ 3. Appendix 1 to Subpart E is Commission will send a copy of this 58. The Commission’s Consumer and amended by revising the definition of Order on Reconsideration and Second Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference ‘‘Medical Body Network’’ to read as Report and Order to Congress and the Information Center, shall send a copy of follows: Government Accountability Office this Order on Reconsideration and pursuant to the Congressional Review Second Report and Order, including the Appendix 1 to Subpart E of Part 95— Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). Final Regulatory Certification, to the Glossary of Terms 51. Paperwork Reduction Act. This Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small * * * * * document contains new and modified Business Administration. Medical Body Area Network (MBAN). An information collection requirements MBAN is a low power network consisting of subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 95 a MedRadio programmer/control transmitter of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. The Communications equipment, Medical and one or more multiple medical body-worn requirements will be submitted to the devices all of which transmit or receive non- devices, Reporting and recordkeeping voice data or related device control Office of Management and Budget requirements. (OMB) for review under section 3507(d) commands for the purpose of measuring and of the PRA. The Commission will Federal Communications Commission. recording physiological parameters and other patient information or performing diagnostic Marlene H. Dortch, publish a separate notice in the Federal or therapeutic functions via radiated bi- or Register inviting comment on the Secretary. uni-directional electromagnetic signals. revised information collection * * * * * requirements adopted in this document. Final Rules The requirements will not go into effect For the reasons discussed in the Subpart I—Medical Device until OMB has approved them and the preamble, the Federal Communications Radiocommunications Service Commission has published a notice Commission amends 47 CFR part 95 as (MedRadio) announcing the effective date of the follows: information collection requirements. ■ 4. Section 95.1203 is revised to read as follows: Ordering Clauses PART 95—PERSONAL RADIO SERVICES 52. Pursuant to the authority § 95.1203 Authorized locations. contained in sections 4(i), 301, 302, MedRadio operation is authorized ■ 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), and 307(e) of the 1. The authority citation for part 95 is anywhere CB station operation is Communications Act of 1934, as revised to read as follows: authorized under § 95.405, except that amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 301, 302a, Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302(a), 303, use of Medical Body Area Network 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), and 307(e), this and 307(e). devices in the 2360–2390 MHz band is Order on Reconsideration and Second restricted to indoor operation within a Report and Order is adopted. Subpart E—Technical Regulations health care facility registered with the 53. The rules and requirements MBAN coordinator under § 95.1225. For adopted herein will become effective ■ 2. Section 95.628 is amended by the purposes of this subpart, health care November 5, 2014, except for 47 CFR revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: facilities are limited to hospitals and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60100 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

other establishments, both Federal and coordinator notifying the health care eligible health care facilities on a non- non-Federal, that offer services, facility that registration and discriminatory basis; facilities and beds for use beyond a 24 coordination (to the extent coordination (2) Provide MBAN registration and hour period in rendering medical is required under paragraph (c) of this coordination services on a not-for-profit treatment. section) is complete. The registration basis; ■ 5. Section 95.1209 is amended by must include the following information: (3) Notify the Commission of its intent revising paragraph (g) to read as follows: * * * * * to no longer serve as frequency (3) Number of MedRadio programmer/ coordinator six months prior to ceasing § 95.1209 Permissible communications. control transmitters in use at the health to perform these functions; and * * * * * care facility as of the date of registration (4) Transfer the MBAN registration (g) Medical body-worn transmitters including manufacturer name(s) and data in usable form to a frequency may relay only information in the 2360– model numbers and FCC identification coordinator designated by the 2400 MHz band to a MedRadio number; Commission if it ceases to be the programmer/control transmitter or frequency coordinator. another medical body-worn transmitter * * * * * (5) Location of MedRadio [FR Doc. 2014–23519 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] device that is part of the same Medical programmer/control transmitters (e.g., Body Area Network (MBAN). A BILLING CODE 6712–01–P geographic coordinates, street address, MedRadio programmer/control building); transmitter may not be used to relay information in the 2360–2400 MHz * * * * * DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION band to other MedRadio programmer/ (b) Notification. A health care facility controller transmitters. Wireless shall notify the frequency coordinator Federal Highway Administration retransmission of all other information whenever an MBAN programmer/ from an MBAN transmitter to a receiver control transmitter in the 2360–2390 23 CFR Part 771 that is not part of the same MBAN shall MHz band is permanently taken out of be performed using other radio services service, unless it is replaced with Federal Transit Administration that operate in spectrum outside of the transmitter(s) using the same technical 2360–2400 MHz band. Notwithstanding characteristics and locations as those 49 CFR Part 622 reported on the health care facility’s the above restriction, a MedRadio [Docket No. FHWA–2013–0049] programmer/control transmitter in the registration which will cover the 2360–2400 MHz band may replacement transmitter(s). A health FHWA RIN 2125–AF59] communicate with another MedRadio care facility shall keep the information FTA RIN 2132–AB14 programmer/control transmitter in the contained in each registration current 2360–2400 MHz band to coordinate and shall notify the frequency Environmental Impact and Related transmissions so as to avoid interference coordinator of any material change to Procedures—Programmatic between the two Medical Body Area the MBAN’s location or operating Agreements and Additional Networks. parameters. In the event that the health Categorical Exclusions care facility proposes to change the * * * * * AGENCY: MBAN’s location or operating Federal Highway ■ 6. Section 95.1213 is revised to read parameters, the MBAN coordinator must Administration (FHWA), Federal as follows: first evaluate the proposed changes and Transit Administration (FTA), Department of Transportation (DOT). § 95.1213 Antennas. comply with paragraph (c) of this ACTION: Final rule. (a) An antenna for a MedRadio section, as appropriate, before the health care facility may operate the MBAN in transmitter shall not be configured for SUMMARY: This final rule amends the the 2360–2390 MHz band under permanent outdoor use. FHWA and FTA joint procedures that changed operating parameters. (b) Any MedRadio antenna used implement the National Environmental outdoors shall not be affixed to any * * * * * Policy Act (NEPA) by adding new structure for which the height to the tip ■ 8. Section 95.1225 is amended by categorical exclusions (CE) for FHWA of the antenna will exceed three (3) revising paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) and and FTA; allowing State departments of meters (9.8 feet) above ground. adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: transportation (State DOT) to process (c) Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this § 95.1225 Frequency coordinator. certain CEs without FHWA’s detailed section do not apply to MedRadio project-by-project review and approval (a) The Commission will designate a operations in the 2390–2400 MHz band. as long as the action meets specific frequency coordinator(s) to manage the ■ 7. Section 95.1223 is amended by constraints; and adding a new section operation of medical body area revising the section heading, paragraph on programmatic agreements between networks by eligible health care (a) introductory text, and paragraphs FHWA and State DOTs that allow State facilities. (a)(3), (a)(5), and (b) to read as follows: DOTs to apply FHWA CEs on FHWA’s (b) * * * § 95.1223 Registration and frequency (1) Register health care facilities that behalf, as described in section 1318 of coordination. operate MBAN transmitters, maintain a the Moving Ahead for Progress in the (a) Registration. Prior to operating database of these MBAN transmitter 21st Century Act (MAP–21). MBAN devices that are capable of locations and operational parameters, DATES: Effective on November 5, 2014. operation in the 2360–2390 MHz band, and provide the Commission with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For a health care facility, as defined by information contained in the database the FHWA: Owen Lindauer, Ph.D., § 95.1203, must register with a upon request; Office of Project Delivery and frequency coordinator designated under * * * * * Environmental Review (HEPE), (202) § 95.1225. Operation of MBAN devices (c) The frequency coordinator shall: 366–2655, or Jomar Maldonado, Office in the 2360–2390 MHz band is (1) Provide registration and of the Chief Counsel (HCC), (202) 366– prohibited prior to the MBAN coordination of MBAN operations to all 1373, Federal Highway Administration,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60101

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, an EA or EIS. The FTA requires Agency Summary of and Responses to DC 20590–0001. For the FTA: Megan approval for all CEs. The FHWA Comments Blum, Office of Planning and requires detailed project-by-project The Agencies received comments Environment (TPE), (202) 366–0463, or review and approval only for (d)-list from a total of 30 entities, which Nancy-Ellen Zusman, Office of Chief CEs. included 12 State DOTs (Alaska, Counsel (TCC), (312) 353–2577. Office Section 1318 of MAP–21 requires the California, Colorado, Florida, Ohio, hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Secretary of Transportation to: (1) Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, e.t., Monday through Friday, except survey and publish the results of the use Texas, Virginia, Wyoming, and Federal holidays. of CEs for transportation projects since Washington), 6 transit and rail agencies SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 2005 and solicit requests for new CEs; (Los Angeles County Metropolitan General Background (2) publish a notice of proposed Transportation Authority, Metropolitan rulemaking (NPRM) to propose new CEs Transportation Authority of New York, On July 6, 2012, President Obama received by the Secretary to the extent New Jersey Transit, San Francisco Bay signed into law MAP–21 (Pub. L. 112– that the CEs meet the criteria for a CE Area Rapid Transit District, Southern 141, 126 Stat. 405), which contains new under 40 CFR 1508.4 and 23 CFR part California Regional Rail Authority, and requirements that the FHWA and the 771; and (3) issue an NPRM to move Utah Transit Authority), 4 public FTA, hereafter referred to as the three actions found in 23 CFR interest groups (National Trust for ‘‘Agencies,’’ must meet related to the 771.117(d)(1) through (3) to paragraph Historic Preservation, Natural Resources NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The (c) to the extent that such movement Defense Council, Southern Agencies’ joint procedures at 23 CFR complies with the criteria for a CE Environmental Law Center, and part 771 describe how the Agencies under 40 CFR 1508.4. In addition, Transportation Transformation Group), comply with NEPA and the Council on section 1318(d) directs the Secretary to 3 professional associations (American Environmental Quality (CEQ) seek opportunities to enter into Association of State Highway and regulations implementing NEPA; and programmatic agreements, including Transportation Officials, American include CEs that identify actions the agreements that would allow a State to Public Transportation Association, and Agencies have determined do not determine, on behalf of FHWA, whether American Road and Transportation normally have the potential for a project is categorically excluded. The Builders Association), 2 Federal significant environmental impacts and Agencies are carrying out this agencies (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers therefore do not require the preparation rulemaking on behalf of the Secretary. and U.S. Department of the Interior), 1 of an environmental assessment (EA) or This final rule contains a description Indian tribe (Osage Nation Historic environmental impact statement (EIS), of the notice of NPRM issued on Preservation Office), 1 regional pursuant to 40 CFR 1508.4. Section September 19, 2013 (78 FR 57587), a transportation consortium (Alameda 771.117 establishes CEs for FHWA summary of public comments received Corridor-East Construction Authority, actions and § 771.118 establishes CEs on that NPRM and responses to those Orange County Transportation for FTA actions. Sections 771.117(c) and comments, and a description of the final Authority, San Bernardino Associated 771.118(c) establish specific lists of regulatory text at the end of this rule. Governments, and Southern California categories of actions, or ‘‘(c)-list’’ CEs, Changes to the regulatory text not Regional Rail Authority) and 1 that the Agencies have determined described in the summary and response anonymous comment. The majority of normally do not individually or to comments are described in the commenters suggested additional cumulatively have a significant effect on Section-by-Section Analysis. Following clarifications on the use of CEs, the human environment and do not the Section-by-Section Analysis, this including expanding or limiting their require an EA or EIS. Sections rule explains the various rulemaking scope. The comments submitted have 771.117(d) and 771.118(d) list examples requirements that apply and how they been organized by theme or topic. of actions that may be categorically have been met. excluded from further NEPA review but General require additional documentation Notice of Proposed Rulemaking The FTA received 11 comments demonstrating that the specific criteria generally in support of the proposed for a CE are satisfied and that no On September 19, 2013, the Agencies rule change. Six of the comments significant environmental impacts will published an NPRM proposing provided overall support for all changes, result from the action. The list of amendments to 23 CFR 771.117 and while one comment specifically examples of actions that may be 771.118 as mandated by sections 1318 supported the new CEs added at excluded as ‘‘(d)-list’’ CEs is not of MAP–21. The Agencies proposed to: § 771.118(c)(14), (15), and (16). Four exclusive and the authority may be used (1) add four new CEs for FHWA and five comments supported the changes made for actions that are not included in the new CEs for FTA, (2) allow FHWA to to § 771.118(d), one of which offered list of examples. Additionally, process CEs in § 771.117(d)(1) through additional supporting information. §§ 771.117 and 771.118 include the (3) as (c)-list CEs when the action meets The FHWA received two comments requirement for considering unusual specified constraints, and (3) add a new that supported the consideration of circumstances, which is how the section allowing programmatic programmatic CE agreements in Agencies consider extraordinary agreements between FHWA and State § 771.117(g). Two comments supported circumstances, in accordance with the DOTs to permit State DOTs to apply the statement in the preamble that early CEQ regulations. The presence of FHWA CEs on the Agency’s behalf. The acquisitions of rights-of-way under ‘‘unusual circumstances’’ requires that NPRM sought comments on how the Section 108(d) may be approved as (d) the Agencies ‘‘conduct appropriate Agencies proposed to interpret and list CEs. One comment supported the environmental studies to determine if implement the provision. six conditional constraints in 771.117(e) the CE classification is proper’’ pursuant The public comment period closed on to condition the move of (d)-listed CE to §§ 771.117(b) or 771.118(b). The November 18, 2013. The Agencies actions to the (c)-list. The FHWA potential for unusual circumstances for considered all comments received when reviewed 109 comments on the new a project does not automatically trigger developing this final rule. CEs, including the former (d)-list CEs

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60102 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

moved to the (c)-list. Additionally, requests of a total of 86 were evaluation of highway projects may FHWA received 28 comments on appropriate for consideration. These 13 cause tribal governments hardship. programmatic agreements in requests were grouped into 5 CEs. Four The Agencies have undertaken § 771.117(g). of the five CEs could be substantiated as various initiatives that are consistent The FTA and FHWA appreciate the new CEs. No additional information was with the mandates in MAP–21 to comments received on the proposed provided during the comment period to expedite project delivery and reduce rule. substantiate new CEs. project costs. These include flexibilities The FTA received a comment that One professional association asked developed through FHWA’s Every Day suggested the numbering of the new CEs the Agencies to involve the regulated Counts initiative (http:// was incorrect. The numbering presented community as new CEs are developed. www.fhwa.dot.gov/everydaycounts), in the NPRM (i.e., the new CEs begin The commenter requested the Agencies FHWA and State DOTs’ revisions and with § 771.118(c)(14)) is correct as FTA to use stakeholder meetings as a forum refinements of programmatic CE (PCE) recently added two new CEs at to discuss the creation and agreements to process projects § 771.118(12) and (13) through a implementation of CEs. qualifying for CEs, and FTA’s creation separate rulemaking (see 79 FR 2107). The Agencies have involved State of its list of CEs (78 FR 8964). The DOTs, transit authorities, metropolitan CE Development Agencies also revised their lists of CEs planning organizations, and other Five State DOTs and two professional to include new CEs pursuant to MAP– governmental agencies in the 21 Sections 1315 (78 FR 11593), 1316, associations noted that only a handful of development of the new CEs in this the new CEs proposed by transportation and 1317 (79 FR 2107), which provide rule. For example, the Agencies’ new further flexibility to the environmental agencies were considered appropriate to CEs created in this final rule are a direct include and additional effort should review process, expedite project response to the requests received for delivery, and reduce project costs. This have been expended to identify more. new CEs under the section 1318(a) rulemaking continues the Agencies’ The Agencies are guided by their survey process. The Agencies also relied implementation of the MAP–21 experience with CEs and considered the on the public notification and comment provisions to ensure efficient and current administrative process for CE process required in the rulemaking effective planning. The Agencies have NEPA compliance. The Agencies also process, 40 CFR 1507.3, and the CEQ’s relied on their experience implementing considered the survey results made guidance ‘‘Establishing, Applying, and NEPA for surface transportation projects public in the U.S. Department of Revising Categorical Exclusions under and their experience in using tools to Transportation National Environmental the National Environmental Policy Act’’ implement this review process Policy Act Categorical Exclusion Survey (75 FR 75628). The Agencies will efficiently (e.g., FHWA is relying on its Review (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ provide outreach and training to their map21/reports/sec1318report.cfm). The stakeholders such as State DOTs and 25-year experience of using PCE FHWA evaluated the results of the CE transit agencies to ensure the agreements as a tool to expedite the survey to determine which requested appropriate implementation of the CEs. NEPA review processes (see FHWA’s actions would be appropriate as CEs The FHWA is not planning to provide 1989 PCE Memorandum)). The Agencies according to the criteria for a CE under training to the public but FTA will be determined that the language adopted in 40 CFR 1508.4 and 23 CFR 771.117(a). hosting a public Webinar that focuses this final rule appropriately balanced The FHWA did not pursue requests for on FTA’s portion of the rule. the goal of providing flexibility and new CEs for actions that would expeditious project delivery with the duplicate already existing CEs, requests Environmental Review Process need to satisfy the Agencies’ for new CEs that would not involve a Efficiency environmental review requirements and FHWA action (e.g., projects ineligible Three State DOTs and one responsibilities. The Agencies must for FHWA funding assistance), requests professional association expressed continue to meet their legal obligations that would not meet the criteria for a CE concern that the NPRM proposed little for a project even if the project qualifies under 40 CFR 1508.4 and 23 CFR to help expedite project delivery and for a CE, which includes the Agencies’ 771.117(a), or requests for new CEs for did not fully embrace flexibilities responsibilities to consult with Tribes. actions that would not have emphasized in MAP–21. Two State The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers independent utility. The FHWA also DOTs and one professional association (USACE) noted that Nationwide Permit eliminated proposed new CEs that indicated that the proposed rule was 23 (NWP 23)—the Clean Water Act would be covered by a statutorily overly prescriptive and could limit (CWA) section 404 Nationwide Permit mandated CE rulemaking under other States’ flexibility. Two transit agencies for actions that qualify for CEs approved MAP–21 provisions (e.g., emergency and one professional association by the USACE—is an example of actions (section 1315), operational right- indicated that the rule will save time efficient regulatory review consistent of-way actions (section 1316), limited and costs and streamline the with the goals of MAP–21. The USACE Federal assistance actions (section environmental review process. One noted that it had previously approved 1317), and the revision mandated by State DOT and one professional FHWA CEs for this purpose but has not section 1318(c) for moving association suggested re-writing the rule approved the new FHWA CEs or any of modernization of highways actions, in a manner that is consistent with the FTA’s CEs for use with NWP 23. As highway safety actions, and bridge congressional intent to streamline a result, those FHWA CEs moved from rehabilitation, reconstruction, or process and reduce cost, and remove the (d)-list to the (c)-list would continue replacement actions from the (d)-list to language that is not specifically required to require submittal of a pre- the (c)-list)). The FHWA evaluated the for compliance with the statute. One construction notification. Lastly, remaining actions proposed as CEs to professional association stated that all USACE noted that if FTA would like eliminate those that did not meet the 40 newly created CEs must be their CEs to be covered under the CFR 1508.4 definition and those that implemented in a programmatic permit, FTA would need to request were so broad that they could include fashion, with no further agency review. USACE review and receive approval actions with significant environmental A federally recognized Tribe indicated prior to using any of its CEs with NWP effects. The FHWA determined that 13 that a shortened review period for 23.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60103

The Agencies agree that until the requirements and perpetual Federal Federal, State, or local law, requirement USACE approves the new CEs for use agency oversight. The DOI expressed or administrative determination relating under NWP 23, the CEs could not be concern that with the rulemaking the to the environmental aspects of the used to meet NWP 23 and a pre- States might overlook consultation with action (23 CFR 771.117(b); 23 CFR construction notification would be DOI in situations where property at 771.118(b)). This list of unusual needed. The FTA understands that its issue was acquired through DOI and the circumstances is not all-inclusive and categorically excluded actions under deed contained perpetual use the finding that there are unusual § 771.118 are not currently covered requirements. circumstances will depend on the under the USACE NWP 23. The FTA The Agencies emphasize that the rule context of the project. For example, the has formally requested that USACE does not exempt a project that qualifies presence of listed species or critical review FTA’s CEs in order to utilize for a CE from compliance with all other habitat designated under ESA within NWP 23 and FTA will communicate requirements applicable to the action. the project area could signal unusual with the USACE further concerning the The CE determination does not exempt circumstances that require the Agencies application of NWP 23 to FTA actions. a State from consultation requirements and the applicant to conduct with the appropriate Federal land appropriate studies to determine if the Other Requirements management agency if the project CE classification is proper. In the One federally recognized Tribe involves a property that has perpetual Federal endangered species, threatened indicated that the exemption from use requirements imposed by the species or critical habitat context, early further review and permit requirements Federal land management agency. coordination with the appropriate for a project did not eliminate the need Documentation agency (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for establishing the area of potential or National Marine Fisheries Service) effect for that project under section 106 Five State DOTs, one regional and the results of the consultation of the National Historic Preservation Act transportation consortium, one process under section 7 of ESA would (NHPA), particularly for projects in professional association, one Federal be critical in the final assessment of areas that have not been previously agency, and one public interest group whether the CE classification is proper. surveyed. The Tribe indicated that requested clarification in the final rule The amount of documentation needed historic preservation requirements of the documentation necessary to for a project depends on the context in under section 106 of NHPA are ensure that the criteria for the CEs are which the project takes place. Some considered satisfied if treatment has satisfied. One professional association actions may carry little risk of triggering been agreed upon in a memorandum of expressed concern that additional unusual circumstances such that there agreement but there was no provision to documentation beyond a project is no practical need for or benefit from ensure that federally recognized tribes description is unnecessary. Two State obtaining and preparing documentation are included in the development of the DOTs expressed the opinion that some other than the project’s description. agreement. The Tribe commented that aspects of the NPRM will actually Other actions may have the potential to the new rulemaking may authorize a increase CE analysis and raise unusual circumstances or may State to use State review and approval documentation. Two public interest raise questions about a potential CE laws and procedures in lieu of Federal groups appreciated the Agencies’ determination due to their more laws and regulations, which has the reassertion that application of the new environmentally invasive nature and potential to significantly worsen CEs must still take into account unusual would, therefore, warrant sufficient consistency issues. circumstances. One public interest documentation (like information on Requirements under other Federal group suggested that any reduction in studies, analyses, or surveys conducted) and State laws and regulations still the documentation requirements, as to prove that the CE classification is apply, such as the CWA, Clean Air Act, advocated by a number of the State appropriate. The Agencies’ regulations NHPA, General Bridge Act of 1946, and DOTs, would increase the potential for establish a presumption that the types of Endangered Species Act (ESA). In the inconsistent and erroneous application actions that qualify for a (c)-list CE case of projects affecting historic of the new CEs. The public interest typically do not require much more than properties (which includes properties of group urged the Agencies to actively the project description to make a religious and cultural significance for monitor and audit the use of the CEs for determination that the CE covers the Tribes that are listed on or eligible for the first few years to evaluate whether proposed project and that there are no the National Register), the Agencies additional guidance is necessary. unusual circumstances that require must follow the section 106 procedures The final rule does not prescribe the additional environmental studies to outlined in 36 CFR part 800. This specific amount of documentation determine if the CE determination is includes the initiation of the section 106 needed to determine if a project proper. The presumption for actions process (identifying the parties such as qualifies for a CE or whether unusual that qualify for (d)-list CEs is that they federally recognized Tribes), circumstances exist such that additional require additional information to make identification of historic properties environmental studies are needed to an appropriate CE determination (including defining the area of potential determine if the CE classification is because they are types of actions that effect), evaluation of effects, and proper. It is important to note that all are more environmentally invasive and resolution of adverse effects. The final projects that qualify for CE have a higher potential to trigger one or rule does not authorize a State to use or determinations require the more unusual circumstances. rely on State environmental review and consideration of unusual circumstances. In section 1318(c) of MAP–21, approval laws in lieu of the Federal Unusual circumstances include Congress required the Agencies treat environmental requirements. substantial controversy on actions that the Agencies have The U.S. Department of the Interior environmental grounds or significant determined have a higher potential of (DOI) indicated that it transfers surplus impacts on properties protected by triggering unusual circumstances as Federal lands and buildings to State and section 4(f) of the Department of actions that do not have that higher local agencies for parks and recreation Transportation Act (23 U.S.C. 138 and potential to the extent that such use in perpetuity, and these transfers 49 U.S.C. 303) or section 106 of the movement complies with the criteria for include deeds with perpetual use NHPA, or inconsistencies with any a CE under 40 CFR 1508.4. The final

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60104 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

rule reflects the Agencies’ reconciliation such as when there is high public documentation demonstrating of this requirement with their interest in the action or there are compliance with environmental experience and the CEQ regulations. substantial mitigation measures requirements other than NEPA, such as Specifically for FHWA, this included pursuant to other section 106 of the NHPA, or section 7 reconciliation resulted in the creation of environmental laws. In these cases, the of ESA, may be necessary for the constraints that allow a subgroup of FHWA Division Office or FTA Regional processing of the grant. That supporting those actions to be treated as having a Office determines whether to post the documentation can be included in reduced risk of triggering unusual CE, in coordination with the project FTA’s grant management system or kept circumstances or challenges to the sponsor/applicant. In addition, the in the FTA Regional Office’s project determination. Documentation and any Agencies may engage in public files, and applicants should consult review considerations would need to involvement for certain CEs if it is with their FTA Regional Office to demonstrate that the constraints for the determined that it would be appropriate determine which is preferred. Other use of the CE (i.e., those in paragraph or needed for compliance with applicable environmental requirements (e)) have been met. Documentation may requirements other than NEPA. In must be met regardless of the consist of checklists or other simplified response to the comment that the applicability of the CE under NEPA, but reviews that address how the project Agencies’ regulations do not provide a compliance with and documentation of meets constraints listed in § 771.117(e). recommended course of action when other environmental requirements do The Agencies received an anonymous there are unresolved issues concerning not necessarily elevate an action that comment that suggested CEs should be alternative uses of available resources, otherwise is categorically excluded made available to the public and CEQ if the Agencies believe that the process for under § 771.118(c) to § 771.118(d). they contain mitigation measures or if considering unusual circumstances Section 771.118(d), which is an open- there are unresolved issues. The would take these into account and ended categorical exclusion authority, anonymous commenter, cited a court provide opportunities to address them lists example actions and requires case (California v. Norton, 311 F.3d as needed. As noted above, and in documentation to verify the application 1162, 1176 (9th Cir. 2002)) that stated §§ 771.117(b) and 771. 118(b), potential of a CE is appropriate (i.e., the action that it was ‘‘difficult to determine if the issues are addressed through the meets the criteria established in application of an exclusion is arbitrary consideration of unusual circumstances, § 771.118(a) and (b)). and capricious where there is no and in the cases of FHWA CEs a Outreach for New Rule contemporaneous documentation to detailed project-by-project review, show that the agency considered the which involve conducting studies to Two professional associations environmental consequences of its determine whether a CE is appropriate. recommended FHWA develop action and decided to apply a CE to the The FTA received a comment that centralized training for CE facts of a particular decision.’’ The requested clarification on the determinations and processing or anonymous commenter also noted that documentation requirements for promote the new CEs that are now the Agencies’ regulations do not provide § 771.118(c) CEs and § 771.118(d) CEs. available. One of the professional recommended courses of action, The commenter further suggested that associations suggested FHWA develop a whether advanced as a categorical the following language from the centralized data base for guidance and exclusion or a categorical exclusion preamble of the NRPM be included in frequently asked questions (FAQ) to created through imposition of a the regulatory text of the final rule: ‘‘The increase consistency in the application mitigation measure, for any proposal project description [for a (c)-list CE] of these new rules. The commenter that involves unresolved conflicts typically contains all of the information urged that the new CEs be implemented concerning alternative uses of available necessary to determine if the action fits in a uniform manner, without resources (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(E)). the description of the CE and that no differences among offices. The The Agencies typically do not post unusual circumstances exist that would commenter also opposed the issuance of CEs publicly as they issue a very large require further environmental studies.’’ regional guidance. One federally number each year and the process is The FTA does not believe clarifying recognized Tribe commented that the designed to be expeditious and simple. documentation requirements for the (c)- new rulemaking has the potential to In accordance with the CEQ NEPA list CEs (§ 771.118(c)) versus the (d)-list significantly worsen consistency issues. implementing regulations, a categorical examples (§ 771.118(d)) in the The FTA received three comments that exclusion is a ‘‘category of actions regulatory text is necessary because it is provided suggestions how to best engage which do not individually or more appropriate to provide clarity in in outreach and communicate with the cumulatively have a significant effect on FTA’s ‘‘Guidance for Implementation of public on the new rule. The comments the human environment and which FTA’s Categorical Exclusions’’ (23 CFR specifically suggested training for have been found to have no such effect 771.118). In general, grant applicants Federal staff and State DOTs and a in procedures adopted by a Federal should include sufficient information centralized resource that includes agency . . .’’ (emphasis added) (40 CFR for FTA to make a CE determination. guidance and FAQs. 1508.4). The Agencies generally have to Generally, a description of the project in The Agencies provide consistency demonstrate that any proposed CE the grant application, as well as any through national training and guidance. changes are supported by past Agency maps or figures typically included with The Agencies support the National experience and do not result in the application or as requested by the Highway Institute and the National significant environmental impacts; this FTA Regional Office is sufficient for Transit Institute, which conduct NEPA is done by examining past FTA. Submission of this information courses across the nation for employees environmental documents and through the FTA grant application of the Agencies, State DOTs, transit practices. Actions that can be process or through other means does not agencies, consultants, and other Federal, categorically excluded tend to be mean an action that otherwise meets the State, and local entities involved in straightforward and supported by past conditions for a CE under § 771.118(c) transportation NEPA processes. The Agency actions, so posting them needs to be converted to a § 771.118(d) Agencies and their training institute publicly is not deemed appropriate. On action. Given the nature of the CEs partners update the NEPA-related occasion, CEs may be posted publicly, listed under § 771.118(c), courses to address new regulations,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60105

policy, and guidance, including those amount of impacts that could occur in Sections 771.117(c)(24) and related to CEs, as needed. The Agencies a typically sensitive habitat area. This 771.118(c)(16) also have guidance on their NEPA same commenter asked whether a road processes, including CEs and ensure realignment would be covered under the Three State DOTs, one transit agency, that training is consistent with the latest bridge removal CE if the removal one professional association, and one procedures and guidance. The Agencies requires a road realignment to the new public interest group supported the addition of the new CE in will provide information on the bridge or whether the bridge § 771.117(c)(24) for geotechnical studies availability of the new CEs to their construction CE would cover this and investigations for preliminary environmental and field staff. To keep action. One State DOT indicated that it design. Three State DOTs and one the public informed, FTA will update has a PCE agreement that identifies professional association commented its ‘‘Guidance for Implementation of bridge removal as a CE action. FTA’s Categorical Exclusions’’ (23 CFR that this new CE could cause confusion 771.118) to reflect the new CEs and post The FHWA carefully considered by implying that these activities would it on FTA’s public Web site whether to propose new CEs for bridge trigger NEPA when there is no Federal (www.fta.dot.gov /12347_15129.html). removal and for preventative action involved. Four State DOTs The FTA also plans to hold a public maintenance activities and decided questioned the need for the CE because Webinar to provide additional guidance against it at this time. The FHWA was it implies that two NEPA approvals are on the CE changes. The FHWA will not able to identify projects that were needed (one for the preliminary provide information about these CEs limited to the act of removing the bridge investigation and one for the project through its Division Offices, Resource with no additional action being taken itself) increasing documentation Centers, and the Office of Project (e.g., construction of a new water requirements and requiring reviewers to Development and Environmental crossing). One possible scenario could engage in environmental review for Review, as necessary. be the removal of a bridge for safety activities typically associated with the purposes, but this action would qualify review itself. Some of the comments Agency Procedures for the new CE in paragraph (c)(27) also applied to the FTA CE proposed for The Agencies received an anonymous (highway safety or traffic operation § 771.118(c)(16). comment suggesting that because the improvements) if the constraints can be The Agencies’ intent is to create new FHWA and FTA have their own met, or the CE under paragraph (d)(13) CEs for geotechnical and other missions, programs, and unique if the constraints cannot be met. investigations for preliminary design experiences, each agency should have that involve ground disturbance. This its own separate NEPA procedures, not The FHWA does not believe that a preventative maintenance CE is needed can occur, for example, when these limited to just the CEs. investigations or studies are undertaken The Agencies are more similar than at this time. In FHWA’s experience to determine the suitability of a location they are dissimilar with respect to the preventative maintenance actions for a project but the project itself is not environmental review process and are typically take place within the ripe for analysis. The CEs apply when therefore not pursuing separate operational right-of-way and would there is a Federal action involved, such procedures at this time. The Agencies qualify for the recently created CE under as when FHWA undertakes the have, however, separated their existing paragraph (c)(22) (79 FR 2107). investigations (Federal Lands Highway procedures where appropriate due to Two State DOTs, one transit agency, programs) or when Federal-aid is used their individual programs. For example, and one professional association urged for these preliminary study actions. It is each Agency has separate public FHWA to move expeditiously to adopt not intended to federalize actions taken involvement procedures identified in a CE that specifically covers early right- by the applicants in furtherance of their § 771.111 based on each Agency’s of-way acquisitions under 23 U.S.C. applications without the use of Federal experience. 108(d), in order to clarify that these funds (see 40 CFR 1506.1(d) stating that Section 771.117(c) types of activities, like hardship and the procedural requirements in NEPA protective acquisitions (23 CFR Six State DOTs and one professional are not intended to preclude the 771.117(d)(12)), are covered by a CE. association asked FHWA to add or development by applicants of plans, The professional association adopt the FTA CEs for bridge removal designs, or performance of other work commented that the mere acquisition of and for preventative maintenance necessary to support an application for property does not impact the because those CEs would be beneficial Federal, State, or local permits or environment. to provide coverage for bridge removal assistance). projects in situations where the bridge The FHWA elected not to propose the Two State DOTs asked for replacement CE does not apply. Four of requested CE because the Agency has clarification on the breadth of the new the State DOTs and the professional not completed procedures to implement CEs in §§ 771.117(c)(24) and association suggested that bridge the amendments to 23 U.S.C. 108 771.118(c)(16). One of the State DOTs removal activities do not depend on introduced by section 1302 of MAP–21. requested the inclusion of whether they are being carried out as Early acquisition projects for hardship paleontological studies as one of the part of a highway project or a transit and protective purposes that meet the activities covered by the CEs. Another project. Four State DOTs and one statutory conditions in 23 U.S.C. 108(d) State DOT asked the Agencies to limit professional association said that it may be processed as CEs under the use of the CEs to stand-alone would be beneficial to provide a CE § 771.117(d)(12), so long as no unusual surveys that involve ground disturbing specifically for preventative circumstances exist that would lead activities only or specify that the CEs maintenance activities in culverts and FHWA to require the preparation of an are not needed if the area has no channels because it would eliminate EA or EIS. Early acquisition projects, previously identified archeological uncertainty about whether these types depending on total estimated cost, also resources. The State DOT also requested of activities are covered by other CEs. may meet the conditions specified by the Agencies to establish a scale to the One State DOT expressed concern with the CE for actions receiving limited CEs so that they apply for more than a a FHWA bridge removal CE due to the Federal assistance in § 771.117(c)(23). few hand-dug shovel probes.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60106 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

The CEs cover geotechnical and other groups and are eligible for Federal-aid whether the term reconstruction investigations for preliminary design highways. The actions listed in the included adding additional capacity or that involve ground disturbance. The NPRM for this CE were examples and whether it simply meant reconstruction actions listed in the NPRM for these CEs are not an inclusive list. The FHWA of an existing facility. The commenter were examples and are not an inclusive does not believe that the CE needs a recommended that only reconstruction list. Paleontological studies would be restriction similar to § 771.117(e)(3) that did not add capacity be moved to covered by the CEs. The Agencies because in the FHWA’s experience the the (c)-list CE list. decided not to establish a scale for the typical highway actions associated with The FHWA agrees with the CEs’ applicability to provide for this CE do not result in adverse effects commenters that a wholesale transfer maximum flexibility for their use. to historic properties, a use of a section without qualifications would be Three State DOTs and one 4(f) property other than a de minimis inconsistent with 40 CFR 1508.4. professional association requested the impact, or a finding that the action is However, FHWA found that, based on Agencies to allow the use of the CE in likely to adversely affect a threatened or its experience, a transfer with § 771.117(c)(24) for all activities endangered species or critical habitat. qualifications (i.e., the constraints in associated with preliminary The FHWA notes that this CE requires paragraph (e)) would be consistent with investigations of a project instead of an evaluation of unusual circumstances, 40 CFR 1508.4. (See NPRM preamble, 47 requiring the application of the CE for just as for any CE, and this evaluation FR 57587, 57590–91). The FHWA’s each individual investigation required would capture situations where an proposed approach to moving the first for the project. activity that otherwise qualifies for three actions on the (d)-list to the (c)-list The Agencies believe that the CE in § 771.117(c)(25) could result in adverse preserves the original (d)-listed CE § 771.117(c)(24), as well as the CE in effects to historic properties or actions through § 771.117(d)(13) and § 771.118(c)(16), should be used for all threatened and endangered species or acknowledges that the actions in activities associated with preliminary critical habitat, or the use of section 4(f) § 771.117(c)(26), (27), and (28) are investigation that involve ground properties that are not de minimis. identical except that those actions disturbance when there is a Federal processed under § 771.117(d)(13) do not action involved such as when FHWA Section 771.117(c)(26) meet the constraints in § 771.117(e). The undertakes the investigations (Federal Three State DOTs and one FHWA believes this approach meets the Lands Highway programs) or when professional association suggested that statutory requirements for the move and Federal-aid is used for these preliminary the CE in § 771.117(c)(26) be divided will result in greater consistency in study actions. into two parts: one for highway application and fewer errors than resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, Section 771.117(c)(25) further dividing the actions. Highway and reconstruction (4R) projects without modernization actions, § 771.117(c)(26), Three State DOTs, two public interest the constraints applied, and the other would not include actions that add groups, and one transit agency for all other projects with constraints capacity because in FHWA’s experience expressed support for the new CE in applied. The commenters indicated that such actions require a review of the § 771.117(c)(25) for environmental 4R projects often have no environmental context in which the project takes place, restoration and pollution abatement impacts or have de minimis impacts which means a detailed project-by- actions. One State DOT indicated that it because the projects do not expand the project review. The addition of auxiliary interprets this CE as covering projects footprint of the travel surface. Two lanes such as climbing, turning, passing that exclusively install, repair, or public interest groups opposed the shift lanes, and other purposes replace culverts designed to allow fish of this CE from the (d)-list to the (c)-list supplementary to through-traffic passage. One State DOT requested the even with the constraints proposed movement (see definition in http:// addition of ‘‘overall watershed because: (1) This CE requires a case-by- www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freewaymgmt/ management’’ to the language of the CE. case analysis to take into account the hovguidance/glossary.htm) rather than One Federal agency asked that the surrounding environment and particular adding capacity, serves primarily to constraint found in § 771.117(e)(3) be context; (2) the constraints miss other increase safety, which could qualify for applied to this proposed CE. One State environmental resources; and (3) adding CE in § 771.117(c)(27) for safety DOT commented that it would gain more constraints would confuse the projects. The FHWA notes that some little value from the CE because it purpose of the (c)-list. Another public actions formerly processed under normally designs projects to minimize interest group urged the DOT to § 771.117(d)(1), (2), and (3) may also and/or mitigate impacts to waterways conclude that the wholesale transfer is qualify for the recently created CE in and ecosystems. simply not consistent with CEQ § 771.117(c)(22) (if they are limited to The new CE in § 771.117(c)(25) is regulations at 40 CFR 1508.4. One State the existing operational right-of-way), or intended to cover actions that involve DOT suggested that § 771.117(c)(26) § 771.117(c)(23) (if the total costs and returning a habitat, ecosystem, or actions should accommodate adding Federal investments in the project meet landscape to a productive condition that capacity to a highway as long as the the criteria for that CE). supports natural ecological functions. project disturbance ‘‘widens less than a Restoration actions serve to re-establish single lane width.’’ Another State DOT Section 771.117(c)(27) the basic structure and function asked that the term ‘‘passing lanes’’ be Two public interest groups opposed associated with natural, productive included in § 771.117(c)(26) to clarify the shift of the new CE in conditions. This may include culverts that the construction of intermittent § 771.117(c)(27) for highway safety designed for fish passage. The CE in passing lanes is an activity that FHWA projects from the (d)-list to the (c)-list § 771.117(c)(25) also covers both has historically approved as a even with the constraints proposed pollution abatement practices and § 771.117(d)(1) CE. One State DOT because (1) the CE requires a case-by- control measures designed to retrofit pointed out that the activities most case analysis to take into account the existing facilities or minimize likely to have the potential for surrounding environment and particular stormwater quality impacts from significant impacts are the addition of context, (2) the constraints miss other highway projects and watershed shoulders and auxiliary lanes. A public environmental resources, and (3) adding management actions that fit these interest group sought clarification on more constraints would confuse the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60107

purpose of the (c)-list. Another public and shifting those to the (c)-list and Section 771.117(c)(29) interest group urged the Department of keeping in the (d)-list the more Two State DOTs, one public interest Transportation to conclude that the destructive projects like those that group, and one transit agency supported wholesale transfer is simply not would require destroying an existing the addition of the new CE in consistent with CEQ regulations at 40 bridge structure or constructing a new § 771.117(c)(29) (ferry vessels). CFR 1508.4. one where none currently exists. One The Agencies will adopt this CE as The FHWA’s proposed approach to State DOT requested the addition of a proposed. moving the first three actions on the (d)- qualification to cover ‘‘design list to the (c)-list preserves the original modification to meet current design Section 771.117(c)(30) (d)-listed actions in § 771.117(d)(13) and standards.’’ Two State DOTs, one public interest acknowledges that the actions in section group, and one transit agency supported 771.117(c)(26), (27), and (28) are The FHWA believes this approach the addition of the new CE in identical except that those actions meets the statutory requirements for the § 771.117(c)(30) for rehabilitation or processed under § 771.117(d)(13) do not move and will result in greater reconstruction of ferry facilities. One meet the constraints in the new consistency in application and fewer State DOT asked that the phrase § 771.117(e). The FHWA believes this errors than further dividing the actions. ‘‘substantial increase in users’’ be approach meets the statutory The constraints in § 771.117(e) are replaced with ‘‘substantial increase in requirements for the move and will intended to take into account those that facility’s capacity’’ as a constraint result in greater consistency in considerations with regards to the for the ferry facilities rehabilitation and application and fewer errors than surrounding environment and particular reconstruction. The State DOT indicated further dividing the actions. The context that experience has shown constraints in § 771.117(e) are intended that the constraint that facilities ‘‘do not necessitate additional documentation result in a substantial increase in users’’ to take into account considerations with and oversight or approval by FHWA. regards to the surrounding environment would be difficult to predict because of The FHWA did not intend to cover all year-to-year fluctuation in ferry users. In and particular context that would potential scenarios and issues that could necessitate additional documentation the State DOT’s experience it is nearly raise these concerns, rather the decision impossible to predict whether a and oversight or approval by FHWA. to limit the constraints to those resource The FHWA did not intend to cover all particular ferry terminal project will areas addressed was based on FHWA result in an increase in users. The State potential scenarios and issues that could past experience in implementing these raise these concerns, rather the decision DOT indicated that the term ‘‘users’’ is types of projects and the areas of to limit the constraints to those resource imprecise and can be interpreted in concern that most frequently come up areas addressed was based on FHWA many ways. The commenter suggests past experience in implementing these with these types of projects. In addition using a more precise phrase, such as types of projects and the areas of to these constraints, the CE for bridge- ‘‘substantial increase in that facility’s concern that most frequently come up related actions is subject to an capacity.’’ with these types of projects. evaluation of unusual circumstances The FHWA agrees with the that would take into account the commenter stating that an increase of Section 771.117(c)(28) potential for the action to result in users is not as accurate as capacity to Two public interest groups opposed significant environmental impacts. The apply in the rehabilitation or the shift of the new CE in FHWA considered the refined approach reconstruction of existing ferry facilities § 771.117(c)(28) for bridge of segregating the activities covered in CE. The intent of this constraint in rehabilitation, reconstruction, and the CEs as suggested by the public applying this CE is to ensure that project replacement activities from the (d)-list interest group and decided against it impacts undergo an appropriate level of to the (c)-list even with the constraints because in the Agency’s experience all review and capacity reflects this proposed because: (1) The CE requires a activities mentioned can be classified as distinction better than users. The FHWA case-by-case analysis to take into a CE as long as the constraints in considered this comment and modified account the surrounding environment § 771.117(e) are met. Removing and the constraint to state: ‘‘does not result and particular context; (2) the disposing of a bridge or the construction in a substantial increase in the existing constraints miss other environmental of a new bridge at a new location (to facility’s capacity.’’ resources; and (3) adding more replace an old bridge) would not Section 771.117(d) constraints would confuse the purpose typically result in significant impacts of the (c)-list. One public interest group Three State DOTs and one and there would not be a need for indicated that, in the absence of professional association supported the additional documentation and project- adequate constraints or conditions, retention of the three (d)-listed CEs in these projects could include destruction by-project approval by FHWA for the CE the proposed rule as possible and replacement of historic bridges, or determination if the constraints are met. documented CE actions to retain the construction of massive new Finally, the FHWA notes that a flexibility. elevated bridge structures for grade- rehabilitation, reconstruction, or The FHWA will retain all of the separated railroad crossings within replacement of a bridge would take into actions formerly listed in historic districts. The commenter account current codes and design § 771.117(d)(1), (2), and (3) via indicated that strong safeguards are standards. However, the FHWA paragraph (d)(13). This will provide needed to ensure that these CEs are not recognizes there may be situations notice that such actions may be applied when the projects involve where the modification of the bridge to processed as (d)-list CEs if any of the potentially significant impacts. The accommodate current codes and design constraints in § 771.117(e) cannot be commenter also suggested that a more standards could result the failure to met for those actions, and it is refined approach of separating out the meet a constraint under § 771.117(e). In determined with additional activities that are truly unlikely to cause these situations other CEs may be documentation that a CE classification any sort of significant impact, such as a available for the project, such as the is proper. It is also possible for those bridge rehabilitation and repair projects, new CE in § 771.117(d)(13). actions to be processed under

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60108 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

§ 771.117(c)(22) (if the actions are approaches. The FHWA’s experience environmental resources and to fully confined to the existing operational with State DOTs that use PCE account for the nature of the (c)-list. The right-of-way) or § 771.117(c)(23) (if the agreements indicates that these commenters indicated that the six action meets the funding conditions constraints are appropriate for constraints provided safeguards for specified in that CE). determining when a CE determination impacts to species, wetlands, may be processed without project-by- floodplains, historic places, and Section 771.117(e) project review by FHWA. The resources protected by section 4(f), but Constraints Applicability constraints for § 771.117(c)(26), (27), not others such as impacts to streams, Five State DOTs and one professional and (28) help to focus attention on air quality, non-endangered or association commented that the projects with particular environmental threatened species, and light and noise constraints for the three moved (d)-list concerns while speeding the approval of pollution. The commenters and one CEs were unnecessary and would projects with minor or trivial other public interest group urged the preclude the use of CEs for projects with environmental impacts. DOT to conclude that the wholesale The constraints in § 771.117(e) are minor impacts. Two State DOTs and one transfer to the (c)-list CEs from the (d)- different than the unusual professional association expressed list was simply not consistent with the circumstances specified in § 771.117(b). concern with the constraints because CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4), and Per § 771.117(b), ‘‘any action which they reflect a one-size-fits-all approach: therefore should be rejected. One of the normally would be classified as a CE but all States would be subject to the same public interest groups commented that could involve unusual circumstances list of constraints, regardless of the the transfer of these three categories of will require the FHWA, in cooperation actions to the (c)-list with the proposed unique circumstances in each State. with the applicant, to conduct These same commenters proposed that six constraints would undoubtedly lead appropriate environmental studies to to violations of 40 CFR 1508.4, as FHWA could alternatively issue determine if the CE classification is guidance for determining whether projects with significant impacts would proper.’’ This means that when unusual be processed as a CE without any additional documentation needs to be circumstances may be present, prepared to assess the potential for analysis. The commenter also stated that documentation is expected to to safeguard against this concern, ‘‘unusual circumstances.’’ This demonstrate there are no unusual approach would build on the existing additional constraints would need to be circumstances that warrant a higher placed in § 771.117(e) to ensure that requirement in 23 CFR 771.117(b), level of NEPA review even when the which requires ‘‘appropriate environmental resources will be project does not require detailed sufficiently protected, but this would environmental studies to determine if documentation and Agency review. the CE classification is proper’’ for any confuse the purpose of the (c)-list, However, the potential for unusual which has in the past been purely a list action that ‘‘could involve unusual circumstances for a project does not circumstances.’’ Two State DOT of activities that do not require case-by- automatically trigger an EA or EIS. The case review. One State DOT suggested commenters stated that moving the first constraints are not another articulation three actions from the (d)-list to the (c)- that these constraints ‘‘encourage of the unusual circumstances; rather minimizing certain environmental list need not include the six constraints they are conditions that, if followed, because of consideration of impacts’’ rather than avoiding detailed would eliminate the need for detailed project-by-project FHWA review. extraordinary circumstances was project-by-project review from FHWA. sufficient. One public interest group Failure to meet one or more of the The FHWA believes the constraints agreed with the Agencies that an constraints would mean that the project listed in § 771.117(e) are appropriate for ‘‘unconditional’’ move to the (c)-list was could not be processed with a (c)-list ensuring consideration of certain not warranted and that it supported, at CE. The action may be approved as a impacts occurs given a project’s context the very least, the six ‘‘constraints’’ that (d)-list CE after detailed review of the and location. The FHWA’s experience were proposed for the move. One project and appropriate documentation. with the three (d)-list CE actions is very Federal agency supported the Agencies’ However, failure to meet one or more of broad and includes projects that involve efforts to condition the move of the the constraints does not mean that the potentially significant effects. The three (d)-list CEs to the (c)-list and project has unusual circumstances that FHWA’s experience with State DOTs indicated that in their experience these warrant the start of an EA or EIS that use PCE agreements indicates that types of projects could have greater than process. The FHWA defined all the these constraints are appropriate for minimal impacts on aquatic resources. constraints in § 771.117(e) in such a way determining when a CE determination The FHWA believes the final that it is possible to assess whether the may be processed without detailed regulation strikes a reasonable balance constraints can be met by considering project-by-project review by FHWA. The between taking into account the the available information about a FHWA disagrees that the six constraints environmental context in which a project’s context and location. are insufficient to appropriately project takes place with reducing Preferably, available information could consider project impacts for purposes of documentation and promoting be assessed through a review of existing (c)-list classification. The constraints in administrative expediency. The list of maps and databases without having to § 771.117(e) are intended to take into constraints was derived from a list conduct field reviews or studies. For account considerations with regards to originally established in a 1989 FHWA many CE actions, it should be similarly the surrounding environment and memorandum (FHWA Memorandum— possible to consider unusual particular context that would otherwise Categorical Exclusion (CE) circumstances by reviewing maps and necessitate additional documentation Documentation and Approval, Mar. 30, databases, but some projects may and detailed project-by-project review 1989, http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ require field review or environmental by FHWA. The FHWA did not intend to projdev/docuceda.asp) (hereinafter analysis. cover all potential scenarios and issues FHWA’s 1989 PCE Memorandum) on Two public interest groups indicated that could raise these concerns; the how to develop PCE agreements and that the decision to place conditions on decision to limit the constraints to the refined based on the Agency’s the transfer of the CEs was appropriate listed resource areas was based on experience with these programmatic but insufficient to properly protect FHWA past experience in implementing

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60109

these types of projects and the areas of minor amount of right-of-way’’ and Division Office enter into an agreement concern frequently associated with ‘‘major traffic disruptions or substantial with the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and/ these types of projects. Although no environmental impacts’’). One State or USACE that programmatically merges FHWA regulatory requirements apply DOT and one professional association their respective permitting processes for controlling light pollution, such remarked on the level of specificity of with actions on the (c)-list. Another impacts would be considered, if the constraints. Another State DOT State DOT suggested that the constraint applicable, in the evaluation of unusual suggested that FHWA should establish in subparagraph (e)(2) is tied to circumstances. For example, artificial standard definitions, such as for a minor regulatory compliance with other laws illumination of the night sky by a amount of right-of-way, for use by and would be satisfied independent of project in a context where darkness is Division Offices and States for greater the CE classification and indicates it is necessary (such as where there is an consistency of application. In contrast, unnecessary. Another State DOT said observatory) would trigger a one professional association that forcing a State DOT to come up consideration of light pollution as an recommended clarifying in the final rule with documentation and a review unusual circumstance. that Division Offices and States may process for each project that requires a adopt specific thresholds for CWA section 404 permit is burdensome Constraints’ Purpose determining whether an action meets and time consuming. Two State DOTs requested more these criteria. Adopting specific Sufficient information about a explanation on the purpose of the thresholds, on a State-by-State basis, the project’s proposed scope, location, and constraints for actions listed in commenter indicates, will help to context should be available during § 771.117(c)(26), (27), and (28). They simplify the process for determining planning and initial project scoping to asked whether the constraints were that the criteria are met. indicate whether an individual section motivated to ensure that regulatory The list of constraints was derived 404 permit by the USACE or a USCG obligations were met (for example, from a list originally established in the permit would be needed. It is not section 404 of the CWA or section 106 FHWA’s 1989 PCE Memorandum. This necessary to fully develop information of the NHPA compliance) rather than list has been refined by experience over or documentation for such permits to ensuring that project classification time and in most State DOTs’ PCE determine whether this condition is (significance of impacts) is correct and agreements with FHWA. The FHWA met. An FHWA detailed project-by- whether a project that does not meet the recognizes for three of the constraints project review is needed if, based on constraints could be processed as a CE, that each State’s unique environmental preliminary project information, a CWA although it would be subject to a higher context should be considered in section 404 individual permit is likely level of review. They noted that as long determining whether an action meets going to be required. If agencies can as all appropriate permits are obtained, these criteria. For constraints in collaborate to develop programmatic and impacts are not found to be § 771.117(e)(1), (4), and (5), State DOTs approaches that more efficiently satisfy significant, then there is no need for this and Division Offices may adopt specific the requirements instead of completing constraint. thresholds for determining what is more individual permits, such approaches The FHWA list of constraints to than a minor amount of right-of-way should also satisfy this constraint. actions listed in § 771.117(c)(26), (27), (§ 771.117(e)(1)), what defines major The USACE stated that correlating the and (28) is meant to distinguish actions traffic disruption or substantial use of the three (c)-list CEs with that normally would require a higher environmental impacts from an existing activities that would generally comply level of documentation and detailed road, bridge, or ramp closure or the with the terms and conditions of a project-by-project review by FHWA construction of a temporary access nationwide or regional general permit through a (d)-list CE compared to (§ 771.117(e)(4)), and how to distinguish (i.e., paragraph (e)(2)) would indirectly actions that should be processed as (c)- changes in access control that deserve encourage transportation agencies to listed CEs. Some of the constraints further evaluation from ones that do not minimize impacts to aquatic resources exclude projects from a (c)-list CE for (§ 771.117(e)(5)), as appropriate. while protecting the integrity of the CE). FHWA when they trigger a permit The USACE was supportive of the because the information needed for the Section 771.117(e)(1) Right-of-way message that USACE would make the permit requires additional The FHWA has substituted the term ultimate determination whether an environmental studies, documentation, ‘‘non-residential’’ for ‘‘commercial’’ in action complies with the terms and and review. Such studies, review, and this constraint to be consistent with conditions of a nationwide or regional documentation are expected for FHWA terminology in the Uniform Relocation general permit, as well as the (d)-list CEs to assist in the detailed Assistance and Real Property appropriate NEPA class of action to project-by-project review. The Acquisition for Federal and Federally- qualify for NWP 23. The USACE constraints in § 771.117(e) were based assisted Programs regulations (49 CFR suggested that the final rule recommend on FHWA past experience in part 24). Any displacement of persons transportation agencies contact them implementing these types of projects within the meaning of the Uniform Act when conducting re-evaluations or and the areas of concern frequently must be taken into account in providing supplemental documentation associated with these types of projects. determining whether the action meets in support of review under a (d)-list CE Projects that satisfy all constraints may the constraint. The text now reads ‘‘[a]n to properly address those issues which be processed as (c)-list CEs. If one or acquisition of more than a minor triggered an Individual Permit review more of the constraints cannot be met, amount of right-of-way or that would process. the action could still be processed as a result in any residential or non- The FHWA concurs with the USACE (d)-list CE under § 771.117(d)(13). residential displacement.’’ that correlating the use of the CEs with activities that comply with the terms Section 771.117(e) Section 771.117(e)(2) Permits and conditions of a nationwide or Two State DOTs and one professional One State DOT recommended that regional general permit would association remarked that some of the flexibility be provided with the encourage transportation agencies to constraints involve subjective constraint in § 771.117(e)(2) for a minimize impacts to aquatic resources. determinations (e.g., ‘‘more than a situation where a State DOT and FHWA The USACE is in the best position to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60110 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

make the final determination that an allow projects to be determined to ‘‘not State DOTs to adopt specific criteria for activity qualifies for a nationwide or likely to adversely affect’’ threatened or the ‘‘substantial’’ threshold. The FHWA regional general permit. Section endangered species or critical habitat. has revised the constraint to focus on 771.129(c) (re-evaluations) would apply The FHWA considered the request to the activity involved (i.e., the closure or when an action affecting waters of the include compliance with other wildlife construction) and further change is not U.S. is initially determined to qualify laws, such as the BGEPA and MBTA, warranted. This constraint would not for a CE under § 771.117(c)(26), (c)(27), and decided that consideration of the automatically eliminate the use of the or (c)(28) but later is determined not to ESA was adequate based on past (d)-list CE. qualify for verification under a experience with PCE agreements. A Section 771.117(e)(5) Access Control nationwide or regional general permit. factor in making this determination was Although the action may no longer that the BGEPA and MBTA do not have Two State DOTs and one professional qualify for the (c)-list CEs, it may qualify similar review thresholds as ESA (i.e., association recommended revising the for a (d)-list CE (such as a CE under ‘‘no effect,’’ ‘‘may affect/not likely to constraint in § 771.117(e)(5) to be § 771.117(d)(13)). In engaging in the re- adversely affect,’’ or ‘‘may affect/likely limited to changes in access control evaluation process under § 771.129(c), to adversely affect’’). All other ‘‘that raise major concerns regarding transportation agencies should requirements applicable to the activity environmental effects.’’ They also asked communicate with the USACE to under other Federal and State statutes that the final rule clarify that the properly address those issues which and regulations still apply regardless of Division Office and State DOTs can triggered a section 404 Individual the § 771.117(e) constraints, and must adopt specific criteria for determining if Permit review process. be met before the action proceeds, this constraint is met. Two State DOTs regardless of the availability of a CE for asked that the constraint for changes in Section 771.117(e)(3) ESA, Section 106, the transportation project under part access control mirror the language in Section 4(f) 771. § 771.117(e)(1) so it would read ‘‘more One State DOT suggested providing than minor changes in access control.’’ additional flexibility to satisfy the Section 771.117(e)(4) Traffic Disruption One State DOT and one professional constraint in § 771.117(e)(3) by allowing One State DOT asked for clarification association suggested that some access for ‘‘programmatic’’ agreements to of the word ‘‘substantial’’ in the changes were sufficiently ‘‘minor’’ (e.g., address section 4(f), Land and Water § 771.117(e)(4) constraint especially as it closing just one access) to allow a Conservation Fund section 6(f), NHPA relates to the overall improvements that project to be processed as a (c)-list CE. section 106, and the ESA. Another State the project would allow and as those Some examples include the installation DOT suggested that this constraint is impacts are mitigated during of medians or a C-curb break in access tied to regulatory compliance of other construction (such as providing public control for maintenance or emergency laws and would be satisfied information that would help mitigate access, minimal alterations, or independently of the CE classification, traffic disruption during construction). adjustments to driveways. One State making it unnecessary. A Federal One State DOT noted that the constraint DOT asked that the constraint be agency asked that this constraint meant that the action could not be clarified to say the changes in access include compliance with the Bald and processed as a CE if road closures or the control would need to affect traffic Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) construction of temporary access to patterns for more documentation to be and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act existing roads would result in major required. (MBTA). traffic disruptions. The commenter Changing the text of the constraint to Section 4(f) programmatic evaluations indicated that this would severely limit ‘‘more than minor changes in access include an alternatives analysis to avoid the application of these CEs, especially control’’ or ‘‘that raise major concerns the use of a section 4(f) resource, which in heavily urbanized areas where traffic regarding environmental effects’’ would necessitates additional documentation congestion is usually high and the put this language at odds with the (d)- and an FHWA finding, and often transportation improvement project is list CE for approvals of changes in requires a detailed FHWA review. The more than likely needed to relieve access control (§ 771.117(d)(7)), which FHWA has limited experience with existing congestion. The commenter FHWA is not modifying at this time. programmatic agreements under section disagreed that temporary access could The FHWA recognizes that some 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation result in major traffic disruptions. The changes may raise minor concerns and Fund Act and as a result, the FHWA commenter indicated that the result in no significant environmental decided not to develop a constraint construction of temporary access is impacts or no safety and operational around that threshold at this time. typically used to provide temporary performance issues, while others may Programmatic approaches for section relief from traffic disruptions and are raise concerns regarding their 106 of NHPA and section 7 of ESA may temporary in nature; therefore, it should environmental effects and deserve a be considered in the evaluation of the not be equated with road closures or careful consideration of their safety and constraints as long as the programmatic considered an exception to the use of a operational performance through further approaches meet the specified CE. Another commenter stated that this evaluation, but these decisions depend constraint thresholds. An example is constraint was unnecessary as traffic on the environmental context and when a State DOT relies on an existing disruption would be considered as part regulatory framework of each State. The section 106 programmatic agreement of unusual circumstances. FHWA sees the value in allowing that establishes conditions to prevent an In FHWA’s experience, temporary FHWA Division Offices and States to undertaking from resulting in adverse road, bridge, detour, or ramp closures adopt specific criteria for the ‘‘change in effects to historic properties. The State deserve a higher level of scrutiny and access control’’ threshold. In DOT may not rely on a section 106 detailed project-by-project review establishing this threshold, State DOTs programmatic agreement that because they are the types of activities and FHWA Division Offices would establishes treatment measures for that have merited additional review focus on their experience with changes adverse effects. Another example would given their potential to have substantial and access control and the range of be reliance on a programmatic approach adverse impacts. The FHWA sees the impacts that result from the various under section 7 of the ESA that would value in allowing Division Offices and changes in access that may occur in the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60111

State. The State DOTs and FHWA implementing regulations at 23 CFR part public availability), but remove from the Division Offices would establish, 650, subpart A. It also indicates a higher regulatory text the legal sufficiency and through a PCE agreement or other risk of environmental impacts that FHWA Headquarters review in formalized programmatic agreement, deserve careful evaluation and subparagraph (g)(5) of the NPRM. The which of those require detailed project- consideration. This means that FHWA believes that its Headquarters by-project review. additional documentation, analysis, and program office and legal office should detailed review is needed to meet the engage in review of these agreements, Section 771.117(e)(6) Floodplains and floodplain management requirements but establishing this requirement in the Wild and Scenic Rivers and, therefore, a (d)-list CE is more regulatory text is unnecessary because it Two State DOTs asked that the appropriate. The action could proceed is an internal process that is better constraint in § 771.117(e)(6) regarding as a (c)-list CE if it encroaches on established through internal floodplains and wild and scenic rivers floodplains but the action is for a administrative protocols. be removed because it may limit functionally dependent use or an action Although FHWA disagrees with enhancement actions, or that it be that facilitates open space use. commenters expressing preference for revised to allow for some actions within Functionally dependent uses are actions guidance instead of rulemaking on this the floodway. Two other State DOTs that must occur in close proximity to subject, the Agency is receptive to the recommended revising this constraint to water (e.g., bridges). suggestion of developing guidance refer to projects with floodplain including a template agreement on this encroachment ‘‘that adversely affect the Section 771.117(g) topic. The FHWA disagrees with the function of the floodplain.’’ One State Three State DOTs and one commenters’ proposal to exempt DOT and one professional association professional association stated the renewal of existing or certain future asked that the final rule clarify that the statute included no rulemaking agreements from this rule because this State DOTs and Division Offices may requirements for PCE agreements. Four would result in inconsistent adopt specific criteria for determining if State DOTs indicated that imposing development of PCE agreements. this constraint is met. One State DOT these requirements through rulemaking Finally, in an effort to provide more suggested the constraint be limited to a was inconsistent with the intent of the clarity to the regulatory text the FHWA floodplain encroachment that requires a statute. The commenters recommended has deleted the phrase ‘‘Letter of Map Revision’’ which they that FHWA release non-binding ‘‘[n]otwithstanding paragraph (d) of this believe is alluded to in the discussion, guidance, including a template section’’ as proposed in the NPRM but not in the proposed regulatory agreement, rather than issue regulations because it was unnecessary since the language. Another State DOT asked that on PCE agreements. Two State DOTs introductory paragraph of 771.117(d) FHWA consider replacing the text with objected to the proposal to establish now contemplates the use of a restriction against projects that ‘‘result new requirements for all PCE programmatic agreements as an in an increase in the designated agreements and the requirement for all alternate method for approvals. regulatory floodway, or may result in an existing agreements to be amended for Five State DOTs and one professional increase of more than 1 foot of surface consistency with the new requirements. association expressed concern that the water elevation in the base floodplain One State DOT said existing agreements proposed rule did not allow PCE when no regulatory floodway is should be ‘‘grandfathered’’ and thus agreements to include CEs that were not designated, or may increase the risk of exempt from any new requirements and specifically listed in the regulations. damage to property and loss of human expressed concern that existing PCE The commenters also noted that State life, or may result in modification of a agreements may be overturned. DOTs should be allowed to approve CEs watercourse.’’ One State DOT suggested The FHWA considers this rulemaking that are not listed in FHWA’s that the constraint be limited to ‘‘a to be appropriate in light of the statutory regulations, as long as those CEs are significant floodplain encroachment’’ change that allows for State DOTs to ‘‘consistent with’’ the criteria in the because if a simple auxiliary lane enter into agreements with FHWA to CEQ regulations. project pushes the roadway shoulder 1 make CE determinations on FHWA’s The FHWA evaluated these comments foot into the floodplain for even just a behalf. The FHWA has taken a careful and determined that new CEs not few feet, the project could not be look at the requirements that were specifically listed in the regulations processed as a (c)-list CE. One State proposed in the NPRM in light of the would not be allowed in the PCE DOT indicated that floodplain comments submitted to determine agreements unless they are established encroachments and involvement of a which were necessary in the regulatory in accordance with CEQ regulations and wild and scenic river entail separate text and which could be implemented guidance (40 CFR 1507.3 and 1508.4, processing requirements, regardless of a administratively. The Agency decided and Establishing, Applying, and CE class of action and therefore did not that those requirements that were Revising Categorical Exclusions under think this constraint was necessary. substantive (i.e., elements that the the National Environmental Policy Act The FHWA believes the agreement must have) should be (75 FR 75628, Dec. 6, 2010)). To make § 771.117(e)(6) constraint is necessary to established through rulemaking and this clear, the FHWA has added assess the level of documentation detail those that were either procedural (i.e., additional language in the text of the necessary for a CE classification when a steps that must be met) or rule specifying that this authority is project involves a floodplain administrative (i.e., how FHWA limited to CEs specifically listed in encroachment or a wild and scenic processes the agreement internally) 771.117(c) and the activities identified river. After considering the suggestions could be removed from the regulatory in (d). from commenters on how to revise this text and established through other One State DOT compared and constraint, the FHWA decided to retain means. As a result, the Agency decided contrasted the CE processing the constraint language as proposed in to retain requirements in subparagraphs flexibilities for States under a PCE the NPRM. A floodplain encroachment (g)(1) (State DOT’s responsibilities), agreement with 23 U.S.C. 326 where the would trigger consideration of (g)(2) (five year term), (g)(3) (monitoring State has assumed responsibility and practicable alternatives under Executive requirements), and (g)(4) (stipulations liability for FHWA decisions. The Order 11988 and the FHWA for amendments, termination, and commenter suggested that a 23 U.S.C.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60112 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

326 Memorandum of Understanding removed. One public interest group unusual circumstance would likely (MOU) should provide the opportunity requested a clarification of public require FTA and the grant applicant to for States to make CE approvals for disclosure requirements of PCE conduct appropriate environmental actions not listed in regulation. documents and suggested that citizens studies under § 771.118(b)(1) to The Agencies considered this be allowed to monitor any PCE determine whether the CE classification comment and found it not to directly agreement. is proper. relate to the MAP–21 section 1318 The FHWA will retain the provisions. The provisions of paragraph requirement for monitoring for all PCE Section 771.118(c)(14) (g) in § 771.117 do not apply to the agreements. The purpose of monitoring section 326 program. comes from FHWA’s oversight The FTA received two comments obligation of the Federal-aid program to requesting clarification on how PCE Workload ensure that CE determinations are § 771.118(c)(14) differs from the existing One State DOT was concerned that appropriate and that State DOTs comply CEs. Specifically, one comment PCE agreement monitoring and with all environmental requirements. requested clarification on the types of reporting requirements will increase the The approach for conducting repair and replacement work applicable States’ workload and may result in State monitoring should be determined to this new CE versus those in DOTs requiring additional staff to between each State DOT and FHWA § 771.118(c)(8) (maintenance, ensure PCE compliance. The proposed Division Office. Division Office staff reconstruction, and rehabilitation of oversight and quality control/quality should determine the frequency and facilities). The second comment asks assurance requirements are similar to level of detail for monitoring events as whether the necessary realignment of a those mandated by a CE Assumption well as the composition of the road following a bridge removal would MOU under 23 U.S.C. 326 (State monitoring team. This monitoring also be covered under the new CE or another assumption of responsibility for should identify best practices and lead CE. categorical exclusions). Under that to the implementation of corrective The new CE expands upon existing program, the State DOT had to hire actions based on report findings and CEs to include permanent bridge additional staff to successfully assume observations. The State DOT and the removal and the resulting change to the CE responsibilities. The State DOT also FHWA Division Office will determine associated transportation network. The said it is foreseeable that States will be the extent to which monitoring required to hire additional staff and CE further addresses the potential need information will be made available to realign the transportation network revise procedures in order to comply through posting on the Web. with the proposed PCE requirements connected to the bridge and any where the intent of MAP–21 was not to Section 771.118(a) and (b) activities associated with the work not add additional staffing and workload The FTA received two comments that included in previously established CEs. requirements to CE approvals. expressed concern over the potential These activities could include in- The comment expressing concern impacts of the actions included in the channel work, pier removal or about the burden to State DOTs tied to new CEs on sensitive habitats and reduction, and materials disposal. monitoring PCE agreements did not protected resources. Section 771.118(c)(8) specifically distinguish between monitoring of PCE Sections 771.118(a) and (b) include focuses on the repair of existing agreements or monitoring of MOUs the requirement for considering unusual facilities that do not change the facility’s executed pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 326 circumstances, which is how the use, while this new CE includes where a State is responsible and legally Agencies consider extraordinary permanent bridge removal that changes liable for the CE determinations it circumstances in accordance with the the end use. makes. The commenter’s concern is CEQ regulations. These refer to The FTA received a comment based on its experience with the circumstances in which a normally requesting clarification on the monitoring process under a section 326 excluded action could have a significant circumstances where reducing pier MOU and not a PCE agreement. It may environmental impact and, therefore, height would serve to make in-water have been appropriate for the requires appropriate environmental navigation safer when conducting a studies to determine if the CE commenting State DOT to hire complete bridge removal. additional staff to assume CE classification is proper. Examples of responsibilities because they were not unusual circumstances include In some instances, when removing a only making CE determinations, but also substantial controversy on bridge, it is decided to leave piers in were assuming responsibilities for environmental grounds, significant place, rather than remove them. The compliance with all associated impacts on properties protected by considerations in this decision are environmental laws and regulations section 4(f) of the DOT Act or section varied, but include cost considerations associated with that CE determination. 106 of the NHPA, or inconsistencies as well as environmental considerations The quality control and quality with any Federal, State, or local law, (e.g., avoidance of exposure in cases of assurance requirement in § 771.117(g) requirement, or administrative contaminated sediments and other CWA for State DOTs may already be determination relating to the considerations, as well as cost incorporated in existing CE processing environmental aspects of the action (23 considerations). In cases where piers are procedures. This monitoring CFR 771.118(b)). The unusual left in place, they are reduced in height requirement should be comparable to circumstances provisions contained in to be below water level, but above the manner of monitoring existing PCE § 771.118(a) and (b) apply to all existing sediment levels, to allow for water craft agreements. and newly proposed CEs, and serve as to safely traverse over the piers. The Two public interest groups and one a safeguard to prevent significant decision to leave piers in place is also State DOT suggested that § 771.117(g)(3) impacts to sensitive habitats and based on coordination with be expanded to explain further what protection resources, among other stakeholders, permitting agencies, and ‘‘monitoring’’ of PCE agreements should concerns. An example of this practice project engineers, and depends on the entail. The State DOT suggested that in would be if sizeable swaths of habitat project context (e.g., location, the alternative the provision be are impacted for an action, then that conditions, etc.).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60113

Section 771.118(c)(15) considered past experience and § 771.118(c)(14), (c)(15), (c)(16), (d)(7), The FTA received three comments reviewed past EAs and findings of no and (d)(8), pursuant to section 1318 of recommending the text of the CE be significant impact in hopes of being able MAP–21, and are inherently limited in amended to include ‘‘and drainage to support the broader language. The their potential to cause significant pipes’’ at the end of the last sentence. FTA does not have sufficient environmental impacts because the use The commenters noted that expanding substantiation to cover the broader of the CEs is subject to the unusual existing culverts and existing drainage range of activities and, therefore, is not circumstances provision in 23 CFR pipes would likely result in similar able to proceed with the proposed 771.117(b) and 23 CFR 771.118(b), impacts, and since culverts often are change (i.e., adding ‘‘to drainage respectively. The CE provisions require used as drainage pipes, the language facilities, including’’) at this time. If appropriate environmental studies, and grantees would like to pursue should be clarified by including may result in the reclassification of the stormwater management activities drainage pipes so to avoid confusion NEPA evaluation of the project to an EA unconnected to a broader proposal and and an unintended distinction. or EIS, if the Agencies determine that The FTA agrees with the comment, outside the scope of this CE, FTA the proposal involves potentially and will amend § 771.118(c)(15) to read recommends considering the use of the significant or significant environmental ‘‘Preventative maintenance, including CEs at § 771.118(c)(3) or (d). impacts. The program changes in this safety treatments, to culverts and Section 771.118(c)(16) final rule establish criteria for PCE channels within and adjacent to agreements between State DOTs and The summary of comments on FHWA. These agreements further transportation right-of-way to prevent § 771.118(c)(16), and how they are damage to the transportation facility and expedite NEPA environmental review addressed, is included in the discussion for highway projects and enable projects adjoining property, plus any necessary above on the FHWA § 771.117(c)(24) CE. channel work, such as restoring, to move more expeditiously through the replacing, reconstructing, and Rulemaking Analyses and Notices Federal environmental review process. The PCE changes will reduce the rehabilitating culverts and drainage The Agencies considered all preparation of extraneous pipes; and, expanding existing culverts comments received before the close of environmental documentation and and drainage pipes.’’ At times, this business on the comment closing date analysis not needed for compliance with preventative maintenance may require indicated above, and the comments are NEPA, and will ensure that projects are expanding existing culverts or drainage available for examination in the docket built in an environmentally responsible pipes in order to properly manage the (FHWA–2013–0049) at Regulations.gov. manner. The changes contained within stormwater flow. The FTA reassessed its The Agencies also considered comments this rule will not adversely affect, in any supporting documentation and found received after the comment closing date material way, any sector of the the addition of expanding existing and filed in the docket prior to this final economy. In addition, these changes ‘‘drainage pipes’’ is supported by FTA’s rule. record (see ‘‘FTA Section 1318 will not interfere with any action taken Substantiation’’ document). In practice, Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 or planned by another agency, and will culverts and drainage pipes both (Regulatory Planning and Review) and not materially alter the budgetary provide or maintain stormwater DOT Regulatory Policies and impact of any entitlements, grants, user drainage, with culverts typically being Procedures fees, or loan programs. Consequently, a larger in diameter than drainage pipes. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 full regulatory evaluation is not Due to their functional similarity and direct agencies to assess all costs and required. anticipated similar impacts, as well as benefits of available regulatory Regulatory Flexibility Act the limitation to expanding only alternatives and, if regulation is existing culverts or pipes, FTA listed necessary, to select regulatory Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act both examples in the CE language in approaches that maximize net benefits of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the order to avoid confusion for (including potential economic, Agencies must consider whether this practitioners, as suggested by the environmental, public health and safety final rule would have a significant comments received. effects, distributive impacts, and economic impact on a substantial The FTA received a comment that equity). The Agencies determined that number of small entities. ‘‘Small suggested the text of the new CE be this action is not a significant regulatory entities’’ include small businesses, not broadened to read ‘‘Preventative action under section 3(f) of Executive for-profit organizations that are maintenance, including safety Order 12866 nor is it significant within independently owned and operated and treatments, to drainage facilities, the meaning of Department of are not dominant in their fields, and including culverts and channels . . .’’ Transportation regulatory policies and governmental jurisdictions with The intent of this CE is to focus on procedures (44 FR 11032). Executive populations under 50,000. The Agencies rainwater conveyance methods that can Order 13563 emphasizes the importance do not believe this final rule will have be useful in preventing future flooding of quantifying both costs and benefits, of a significant economic impact on at transit facilities. The FTA considered reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, entities of any size, and the Agencies the suggestion to include drainage and of promoting flexibility. It is received no comment in response to our facilities, but FTA interprets drainage anticipated that the economic impacts request for any such information in the facilities to be a broad term that of this rulemaking are minimal. The NPRM. These revisions could expedite includes rainwater conveyance and changes to this rule are requirements environmental review and thus would treatment; therefore, if the CE language mandated by MAP–21 to increase be less of an impact on small business includes ‘‘drainage facilities,’’ the CE efficiencies in environmental review by entities than any current impact on would cover a broader range of activities making changes in the Agencies’ small business entities. Thus, the than proposed in the NPRM. environmental review procedures. Agencies determined that this final rule Furthermore, FTA re-reviewed the The activities in this final rule add will not have a significant economic benchmarking examples in the ‘‘FTA § 771.117(c)(24), (c)(25), (c)(26), (c)(27), impact on a substantial number of small Section 1318 Substantiation’’ document, (c)(28), (c)(29), and (c)(30) and entities.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60114 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of The Agencies received one comment 2001. The Agencies determined that this 1995 in response to their request in the action is not a significant energy action NPRM for comments from Indian tribal under the order because it is not likely This final rule would not impose governments on the effect that adoption to have a significant adverse effect on unfunded mandates as defined by the of specific proposals might have on the supply, distribution, or use of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Indian communities. One federally energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy (Pub. L. 104–4, 109 Stat. 48). This final recognized Indian Tribe commented Effects under Executive Order 13211 is rule will not result in the expenditure that a tribal summary impact statement not required. by State, local, and tribal governments, was in order. The Indian tribe indicated in the aggregate, or by the private sector, that it was concerned that a shortened Executive Order 12372 of $148.8 million or more in any one review period for evaluation of highway (Intergovernmental Review) year (2 U.S.C. 1532). projects may cause tribal governments The regulations implementing Executive Order 13132 (Federalism hardship. The Indian Tribe also Executive Order 12372 regarding Assessment) expressed concerns with exempting the intergovernmental consultation on highway projects from other laws and Federal programs and activities apply to Executive Order 13132 requires allowing states to use State reviews and these programs and were carried out in agencies to assure meaningful and approval laws and procedures in lieu of the development of this rule. timely input by State and local officials Federal laws and regulations. Paperwork Reduction Act in the development of regulatory In their response to the comments, the policies that may have a substantial, FHWA reiterated that the rule does not Under the Paperwork Reduction Act direct effect on the States, on the exempt a project that qualifies for a CE of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), relationship between the national from compliance with all other no Federal agency shall conduct or government and the States, or on the requirements applicable to the action. sponsor a collection of information distribution of power and The Agencies determined that the unless in advance the agency has responsibilities among the various language adopted in this final rule obtained approval by and a control levels of government. The Agencies appropriately balanced the goal of number from the Office of Management analyzed this final rule in accordance providing flexibility with the need to and Budget (OMB), and no person is with the principles and criteria satisfy the Agencies’ environmental required to respond to a collection of contained in Executive Order 13132 and review requirements and information unless it displays a valid determined that this action will not responsibilities. The Agencies must OMB control number. The Agencies have a substantial direct effect on the continue to meet their legal obligations determined that this final rule does not States, the relationship between the for a project even if the project qualifies contain collection of information Federal Government and the States, or for a CE, which includes the Agencies’ requirements for the purposes of the the distribution of power and responsibilities to consult with Tribes. PRA. The final rule does not authorize a State responsibilities among the various Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice to use or rely on State environmental levels of government, and, therefore, Reform) review and approval laws in lieu of the does not have federalism implications. This action meets applicable The Agencies also determined that this Federal environmental requirements. The rule does not preempt tribal law. standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of action would not preempt any State law Projects that qualify for CEs must meet Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice or State regulation or affect the States’ the compliance requirements under Reform, to minimize litigation, ability to discharge traditional State other laws, including tribal laws if the eliminate ambiguity, and reduce governmental functions. The NPRM project will take place within tribal burden. invited State and local governments lands. The rule would not impose with an interest in this rulemaking to Executive Order 12898 (Environmental substantial direct compliance costs on Justice) comment on the effect that adoption of Indian tribal governments. The rule specific proposals may have on State or affects the environmental review Executive Order 12898, Federal local governments. No State or local process of projects that will receive Actions to Address Environmental governments provided comments on Federal-aid from FHWA or FTA, or that Justice in Minority Populations and this issue. would require an approval from those Low-Income Populations, and DOT Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Agencies. It does not impose Order 5610.2(a) (77 FR 27534) require Consultation) requirements on Indian tribal DOT agencies to achieve environmental governments other than those that are justice (EJ) as part of their mission by Executive Order 13175 requires typical for any other Federal agency identifying and addressing, as agencies to assure meaningful and grantee. Finally, the rule would not appropriate, disproportionately high timely input from Indian tribal have substantial direct effects on one or and adverse human health or government representatives in the more Indian Tribes. The final rule does environmental effects, including development of rules that ‘‘significantly not increase the burden of review more interrelated social and economic effects, or uniquely affect’’ Indian communities than what is already expected for these of their programs, policies, and and that impose ‘‘substantial and direct types of projects. Therefore, a tribal activities on minority populations and compliance costs’’ on such summary impact statement is not low-income populations in the United communities. The Agencies analyzed required. States. The DOT Order requires DOT this action under Executive Order agencies to address compliance with the 13175, and determined that it will not Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) Executive Order and the DOT Order in have substantial direct effects on one or The Agencies analyzed this action all rulemaking activities. In addition, more Indian Tribes; will not impose under Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions both Agencies have issued additional substantial direct compliance costs on Concerning Regulations That documents relating to administration of Indian tribal governments; and will not Significantly Affect Energy Supply, the Executive Order and the DOT Order. preempt tribal law. Distribution, or Use,’’ dated May 18, On June 14, 2012, the FHWA issued an

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60115

update to its EJ order (FHWA Order Governmental Actions and Interference 49 CFR Part 622 6640.23A, FHWA Actions to Address with Constitutionally Protected Property Environmental impact statements, Environmental Justice in Minority Rights and determined the rule will not Grant programs—transportation, Public Populations and Low Income affect a taking of private property or transit, Public transportation, Recreation Populations (available online at otherwise have taking implications areas, Reporting and record keeping www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/ under Executive Order 12630. requirements. orders/664023a.htm)). The FTA also issued an update to its EJ policy on July National Environmental Policy Act In consideration of the foregoing, the 17, 2012 (FTA Policy Guidance for This action will not have any effect on Agencies are amending title 23, Code of Federal Transit Recipients (available the quality of the human environment Federal Regulations part 771, and title online at www.fta.dot.gov/legislation_ and does not require analysis under 49, Code of Federal Regulations part law/12349_14740.html)). NEPA. Agencies are required to adopt 622, as follows: The Agencies evaluated this final rule implementing procedures for NEPA that Title 23 under the Executive Order, the DOT establish specific criteria for, and Order, the FHWA Order, and the FTA identification of, three classes of PART 771—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Circular. The Agencies determined that actions: those that normally require AND RELATED PROCEDURES designation of the new CEs and preparation of an EIS; those that establishing procedures for PCE normally require preparation of an EA; ■ 1. The authority citation for part 771 agreements through this rulemaking will and those that are categorically is revised to read as follows: not cause disproportionately high and excluded from further NEPA review. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 23 adverse human health and The CEQ’s requirements for establishing U.S.C. 106, 109, 128, 138, 139, 315, 325, 326, environmental effects on minority or Agency NEPA procedures are set forth and 327; 49 U.S.C. 303; 40 CFR Parts 1500– low income populations. This rule at 40 CFR 1505.1 and 1507.3. The CEQ 1508; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.85, and 1.91; Pub. L. simply adds a provision to the Agencies’ regulations do not direct agencies to 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144, sections 6002 and NEPA procedures under which they 6010; Pub. L. 112–141, 126 Stat. 405, sections prepare a NEPA analysis or document 1315, 1316, 1317, and 1318. may decide in the future that a project before establishing Agency procedures or program does not require the (such as this regulation) that ■ 2. Amend § 771.117 by: preparation of an EA or EIS. The rule supplement the CEQ NEPA regulations. ■ a. Adding paragraphs (c)(24) through itself has no potential for effects until it The CEs are one part of those agency (30); is applied to a proposed action requiring procedures (40 CFR 1507.3(b)), and ■ b. Revising paragraph (d) introductory approval by the FHWA or FTA. therefore establishing CEs or allowing text; At the time the Agencies apply a CE for programmatic approaches to ■ c. Removing and reserving paragraphs established by this rulemaking, the processing CEs does not require (d)(1) through (3); ■ Agencies have an independent preparation of a NEPA analysis or d. Adding paragraph (d)(13); ■ obligation to conduct an evaluation of document. Agency NEPA procedures e. Redesignating paragraph (e) as the proposed action under the are generally procedural guidance to paragraph (f); ■ applicable EJ orders and guidance. The assist agencies in the fulfillment of f. Adding new paragraph (e); and ■ adoption of this rule does not affect the agency responsibilities under NEPA, but d. Adding paragraph (g). scope or outcome of that EJ evaluation are not the agency’s final determination The additions and revisions read as nor does the new rule affect the ability of what level of NEPA analysis is follows: of affected populations to raise any required for a particular proposed § 771.117 FHWA categorical exclusions. concerns about potential EJ effects at the action. The determination that time the Agencies consider applying a * * * * * establishing CEs does not require NEPA (c) * * * new CE. Indeed, outreach to ensure the analysis and documentation was upheld effective involvement of minority and (24) Localized geotechnical and other in Heartwood, Inc. v. U.S. Forest investigation to provide information for low income populations where there is Service, 73 F. Supp. 2d 962, 972–73 potential for EJ effects is a core aspect preliminary design and for (S.D. Ill. 1999), aff’d, 230 F.3d 947, 954– environmental analyses and permitting of the EJ orders and guidance. For these 55 (7th Cir. 2000). reasons, the Agencies also determined purposes, such as drilling test bores for that no further EJ analysis is needed and Regulation Identification Number soil sampling; archeological no mitigation is required in connection investigations for archeology resources A regulation identification number assessment or similar survey; and with the designation of the CEs and (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory procedures for PCE agreements. wetland surveys. action listed in the Unified Agenda of (25) Environmental restoration and Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory pollution abatement actions to minimize Children) Information Service Center publishes or mitigate the impacts of any existing the Unified Agenda in April and The Agencies analyzed this action transportation facility (including October of each year. The RIN contained retrofitting and construction of under Executive Order 13045, in the heading of this document can be Protection of Children from stormwater treatment systems to meet used to cross reference this action with Federal and State requirements under Environmental Health Risks and Safety the Unified Agenda. Risks. The Agencies certify that this sections 401 and 402 of the Federal action will not cause an environmental List of Subjects Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1341; 1342)) carried out to address risk to health or safety that may 23 CFR Part 771 disproportionately affect children. water pollution or environmental Environmental protection, Grant degradation. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of programs—transportation, Highways (26) Modernization of a highway by Private Property) and roads, Historic preservation, Public resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, The Agencies analyzed this final rule lands, Recreation areas, Reporting and reconstruction, adding shoulders, or under Executive Order 12630, record keeping requirements. adding auxiliary lanes (including

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60116 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

parking, weaving, turning, and climbing conditions of a U.S. Army Corps of § 771.118 FTA categorical exclusions. lanes), if the action meets the Engineers nationwide or general permit * * * * * constraints in paragraph (e) of this under section 404 of the Clean Water (c) * * * section. Act and/or section 10 of the Rivers and (27) Highway safety or traffic Harbors Act of 1899; (14) Bridge removal and bridge operations improvement projects, (3) A finding of ‘‘adverse effect’’ to removal related activities, such as in- including the installation of ramp historic properties under the National channel work, disposal of materials and metering control devices and lighting, if Historic Preservation Act, the use of a debris in accordance with applicable the project meets the constraints in resource protected under 23 U.S.C. 138 regulations, and transportation facility paragraph (e) of this section. or 49 U.S.C. 303 (section 4(f)) except for realignment. (28) Bridge rehabilitation, actions resulting in de minimis impacts, (15) Preventative maintenance, reconstruction, or replacement or the or a finding of ‘‘may affect, likely to including safety treatments, to culverts construction of grade separation to adversely affect’’ threatened or and channels within and adjacent to replace existing at-grade railroad endangered species or critical habitat transportation right-of-way to prevent crossings, if the actions meet the under the Endangered Species Act; damage to the transportation facility and constraints in paragraph (e) of this (4) Construction of temporary access, adjoining property, plus any necessary section. or the closure of existing road, bridge, channel work, such as restoring, (29) Purchase, construction, or ramps, that would result in major replacing, reconstructing, and replacement, or rehabilitation of ferry traffic disruptions; rehabilitating culverts and drainage vessels (including improvements to (5) Changes in access control; pipes; and, expanding existing culverts ferry vessel safety, navigation, and (6) A floodplain encroachment other and drainage pipes. security systems) that would not require than functionally dependent uses (e.g., (16) Localized geotechnical and other a change in the function of the ferry bridges, wetlands) or actions that investigations to provide information for terminals and can be accommodated by facilitate open space use (e.g., preliminary design and for existing facilities or by new facilities recreational trails, bicycle and environmental analyses and permitting which themselves are within a CE. pedestrian paths); or construction (30) Rehabilitation or reconstruction activities in, across or adjacent to a river purposes, such as drilling test bores for of existing ferry facilities that occupy component designated or proposed for soil sampling; archeological substantially the same geographic inclusion in the National System of investigations for archeology resources footprint, do not result in a change in Wild and Scenic Rivers. assessment or similar survey; and their functional use, and do not result * * * * * wetland surveys. in a substantial increase in the existing (g) FHWA may enter into (d) * * * facility’s capacity. Example actions programmatic agreements with a State (7) Minor transportation facility include work on pedestrian and vehicle to allow a State DOT to make a NEPA realignment for rail safety reasons, such transfer structures and associated CE certification or determination and as improving vertical and horizontal utilities, buildings, and terminals. approval on FHWA’s behalf, for CEs alignment of railroad crossings, and (d) Additional actions which meet the specifically listed in paragraphs (c) and improving sight distance at railroad criteria for a CE in the CEQ regulations (d) of this section. Such agreements crossings. (40 CFR 1508.4) and paragraph (a) of must be subject to the following (8) Modernization or minor this section may be designated as CEs conditions: only after Administration approval (1) The agreement must set forth the expansions of transit structures and unless otherwise authorized under an State DOT’s responsibilities for making facilities outside existing right-of-way, executed agreement pursuant to CE determinations, documenting the such as bridges, stations, or rail yards. paragraph (g) of this section. The determinations, and achieving * * * * * applicant shall submit documentation acceptable quality control and quality Title 49 which demonstrates that the specific assurance; conditions or criteria for these CEs are (2) The agreement may not have a PART 622—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT satisfied and that significant term of more than five years, but may AND RELATED PROCEDURES environmental effects will not result. be renewed; Examples of such actions include but (3) The agreement must provide for ■ 4. The authority citation for part 622 are not limited to: FHWA’s monitoring of the State DOT’s is revised to read as follows: compliance with the terms of the * * * * * Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 49 (13) Actions described in paragraphs agreement and for the State DOT’s execution of any needed corrective U.S.C. 303 and 5323(q); 23 U.S.C. 139 and (c)(26), (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section 326; Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144, sections that do not meet the constraints in action. FHWA must take into account 6002 and 6010; 40 CFR parts 1500–1508; 49 paragraph (e) of this section. the State DOT’s performance when CFR 1.81; and Pub. L. 112–141, 126 Stat. 405, (e) Actions described in (c)(26), considering renewal of the sections 1315, 1316, 1317, and 1318. (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section may programmatic CE agreement; and (4) The agreement must include Issued on: September 26, 2014. not be processed as CEs under Gregory G. Nadeau, paragraph (c) if they involve: stipulations for amendment, (1) An acquisition of more than a termination, and public availability of Acting Administrator, Federal Highway Administration. minor amount of right-of-way or that the agreement once it has been would result in any residential or non- executed. Therese W. McMillan, residential displacements; ■ 3. Amend § 771.118 by adding Acting Administrator, Federal Transit (2) An action that needs a bridge paragraphs (c)(14) through (16) and Administration. permit from the U.S. Coast Guard, or an adding paragraphs (d)(7) and (8) to read [FR Doc. 2014–23660 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] action that does not meet the terms and as follows: BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCR1.SGM 06OCR1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60117

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 193

Monday, October 6, 2014

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, The Department of Agriculture contains notices to the public of the proposed DC 20250–0237; Fax: (202) 720–8938; or (USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in issuance of rules and regulations. The Internet: http://www.regulations.gov. All conformance with Executive Orders purpose of these notices is to give interested comments should reference the 12866, 13563, and 13175. persons an opportunity to participate in the document number and the date and This proposed rule has been reviewed rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. page number of this issue of the Federal under Executive Order 12988, Civil Register and will be made available for Justice Reform. This proposed rule is public inspection in the Office of the not intended to have retroactive effect. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Docket Clerk during regular business The Act provides that administrative hours, or can be viewed at: http:// proceedings must be exhausted before Agricultural Marketing Service www.regulations.gov. All comments parties may file suit in court. Under submitted in response to this proposal section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any 7 CFR Parts 948 and 980 will be included in the record and will handler subject to an order may file [Doc. No. AMS–FV–13–0073; FV13–948–3 be made available to the public. Please with USDA a petition stating that the PR] be advised that the identity of the order, any provision of the order, or any individuals or entities submitting obligation imposed in connection with Irish Potatoes Grown in Colorado and comments will be made public on the the order is not in accordance with law Imported Irish Potatoes; Relaxation of internet at the address provided above. and request a modification of the order the Handling Regulation for Area No. 2 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue or to be exempted therefrom. A handler and Import Regulations Coleman, Marketing Specialist, or Gary is afforded the opportunity for a hearing D. Olson, Regional Director, Northwest on the petition. After the hearing, USDA AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, would rule on the petition. The Act USDA. Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and provides that the district court of the ACTION: Proposed rule. Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA; United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his SUMMARY: This proposed rule invites Telephone: (503) 326–2724, Fax: (503) or her principal place of business, has comments on a revision to the minimum 326–7440, or Email: Sue.Coleman@ jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on quantity exception for potatoes handled ams.usda.gov or GaryD.Olson@ the petition, provided an action is filed under the Colorado potato marketing ams.usda.gov. not later than 20 days after the date of order, Area No. 2 (order). The order Small businesses may request the entry of the ruling. regulates the handling of Irish potatoes information on complying with this There are no administrative grown in Colorado and is administered regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, procedures which must be exhausted locally by the Colorado Potato Marketing Order and Agreement prior to any judicial challenge to the Administrative Committee, Area No. 2 Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, provisions of import regulations issued (Committee). This action would increase AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence under section 8e of the Act. the quantity of potatoes that may be Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, This proposal invites comments on a handled under the order without regard DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– revision to the minimum quantity to the order’s handling regulation 2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: exception currently prescribed in the requirements from 1,000 to 2,000 [email protected]. handling regulation for potatoes pounds. The change in the import SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This handled under the order. This proposal regulation is required under section 8e proposed rule is issued under Marketing would increase the quantity of potatoes of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement No. 97 and Order No. 948, that may be handled without regard to Agreement Act of 1937. This action both as amended (7 CFR part 948), the order’s handling regulation from would allow the importation which, in regulating the handling of Irish potatoes 1,000 to 2,000 pounds. Relaxing the the aggregate, does not exceed 2,000 grown in Colorado, hereinafter referred minimum quantity exception is pounds for all other round type to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is effective expected to benefit producers, handlers, potatoes, except red skinned, round under the Agricultural Marketing and importers. The rule was type or long type potatoes that continue Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 unanimously recommended by the to remain at a 500 pound limit, to be U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to Committee at a meeting on July 18, imported without regard to the import as the ‘‘Act.’’ 2013. regulations. This action is expected to This proposed rule is also issued Section 948.4 of the order divides the benefit producers, handlers, and under section 8e of the Act, which State of Colorado into three areas of importers. provides that whenever certain regulation for marketing order purposes. DATES: Comments must be received by specified commodities, including Irish These areas include: Area No. 1, December 5, 2014. potatoes, are regulated under a Federal commonly known as the Western Slope; ADDRESSES: Interested persons are marketing order, imports of these Area No. 2, commonly known as San invited to submit written comments commodities into the United States are Luis Valley; and, Area No. 3, which concerning this proposal. Comments prohibited unless they meet the same or consists of the remaining producing must be sent to the Docket Clerk, comparable grade, size, quality, or areas within the State of Colorado not Marketing Order and Agreement maturity requirements as those in effect included in the definition of Area No. Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, for the domestically produced 1 or Area No. 2. Currently, the order AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence commodities. only regulates the handling of potatoes

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 60118 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

produced in Area No. 2 and Area No. 3. United States are concurrently in effect, to regulation under the order and Regulation for Area No. 1 has been the importation into the United States of approximately 180 producers in the suspended. any such commodity shall be prohibited regulated production area. There are Section 948.50 of the order establishes unless it complies with the grade, size, approximately 240 importers of committees as administrative agencies quality and maturity provisions of the potatoes. Small agricultural service for each of the areas set forth under order which, as determined by the firms (handlers and importers) are § 948.4. Section 948.22(a) of the order Secretary of Agriculture, regulates the defined by the Small Business authorizes the issuance of grade, size, commodity produced in the area with Administration (SBA) as those having quality, maturity, pack, and container which the imported commodity is in annual receipts of less than $7,000,000, regulations for potatoes grown in the most direct competition (7 U.S.C. 608e– and small agricultural producers are order’s production area. Further, section (a)). Section 980.1(b)(2) of the Vegetable defined as those having annual receipts 948.22(b)(2) of the order provides Import Regulations specifies that of less than $750,000 (13 CFR 121.201). authority for each area committee to potatoes imported into the United States During the 2011–2012 fiscal period, recommend modification of regulations are in most direct competition with the most recent for which statistics are to provide for minimum quantities that potatoes of the same type produced in available, 15,072,963 hundredweight of should be relieved of regulatory or the area covered by this order. Since Colorado Area No. 2 potatoes were administrative obligations. this action would increase the minimum inspected under the order and sold into Section 948.386 of the order’s quantity exemption under the domestic the fresh market. Based on an estimated administrative rules prescribes grade, handling regulations, a corresponding average f.o.b. price of $12.60 per size, maturity, and inspection change to the import regulations must hundredweight, the Committee requirements for Colorado Area No. 2 also be considered. estimates that 66 Area No. 2 handlers, potatoes. Paragraph (f) of that section Minimum grade, size, quality, and or about 83 percent, had annual receipts prescribes the minimum quantity of maturity requirements for Irish potatoes of less than $7,000,000. In view of the potatoes that are exempt from imported into the United States are foregoing, the majority of Colorado Area regulation. Currently, each person may currently in effect under § 980.1 (7 CFR No. 2 potato handlers may be classified handle up to 1,000 pounds of potatoes 980.1). The minimum quantity as small entities. without regard to the order’s grade, size, exemption is specified in § 980.1(c). The In addition, based on information maturity, and inspection requirements. exemption for red skinned, round type provided by the National Agricultural At its meeting on July 18, 2013, the or long type potatoes would remain at Statistics Service, the average producer Committee unanimously recommended a 500 pound limit. This proposal would price for the 2011 Colorado fall potato increasing the order’s minimum increase the quantity for all other round crop was $10.70 per hundredweight. quantity exception from 1,000 to 2,000 type potatoes that may be imported Multiplying $10.70 by the shipment pounds. The recommendation was made without regard to the import regulation quantity of 15,072,963 hundredweight at the request of producers and handlers requirements from 1,000 to 2,000 yields an annual crop revenue estimate who wanted greater flexibility in pounds. The metric equivalent for 1,000 of $161,280,704. The average annual distributing smaller quantities of pounds is 453.592 kilograms and 2,000 fresh potato revenue for each of the 180 potatoes. In its deliberations, the pounds is 907.185 kilograms. The Colorado Area No. 2 potato producers is Committee commented that 2,000 increase in the minimum quantity therefore calculated to be approximately pounds is consistent with the current exemption for imports of potatoes $896,000 ($161,280,704 divided by 180), weight of a pallet of potatoes. One pallet would have a beneficial impact on which is greater than the SBA threshold is typically the smallest lot of potatoes importers. This proposed rule would of $750,000. Consequently, on average, distributed, since most delivery vehicles provide flexibility in the importation many of the Colorado Area No. 2 potato are now capable of transporting at least and distribution of smaller quantities of producers may not be classified as small 2,000 pounds. potatoes. entities. Handlers also feel that the value of Information from the Foreign one pallet of potatoes does not warrant Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Agricultural Service, USDA, indicates the cost of complying with the order’s Pursuant to requirements set forth in that the dollar value of imports of the regulations. Based on an estimated the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 type of potatoes affected by this rule average f.o.b. price of $12.60, the value U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural ranged from approximately $55.8 of one pallet of potatoes is Marketing Service (AMS) has million in 2009 to $ 56.5 million in approximately $225.00. Increasing the considered the economic impact of this 2013. Using these values, the majority of minimum quantity exception from 1,000 action on small entities. Accordingly, importers of the type of potatoes to 2,000 pounds of potatoes would AMS has prepared this initial regulatory affected by this rule would have annual allow a handler to ship one pallet of flexibility analysis. receipts of less than $7,000,000 and may potatoes without regard to the order’s The purpose of the RFA is to fit be classified as small entities. grade, size, maturity, and inspection regulatory actions to the scale of Canada is the major potato-producing requirements. Relaxing the minimum businesses subject to such actions in country exporting potatoes to the United quantity is expected to benefit order that small businesses will not be States. In 2013, affected shipments of producers, handlers, and importers. unduly or disproportionately burdened. potatoes imported into the United States Section 8e of the Act provides that Marketing orders issued pursuant to the totaled around 3,479,468 when certain domestically produced Act, and rules issued thereunder, are hundredweight. Of that amount, commodities, including Irish potatoes, unique in that they are brought about 3,479,383 hundredweight were are regulated under a Federal marketing through group action of essentially imported from Canada, 59 order, imports of that commodity must small entities acting on their own hundredweight were imported from meet the same or comparable grade, behalf. Import regulations issued under Ecuador, and 26 hundredweight were size, quality, and maturity requirements. the Act are based on those established imported from Peru. Whenever two or more marketing orders under Federal marketing orders. This proposal would revise the regulating the same commodity There are approximately 80 handlers quantity of potatoes that may be produced in different areas of the of Colorado Area No. 2 potatoes subject handled without regard to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60119

requirements of § 948.386(a), (b), and (c) impose any additional reporting or PART 948—IRISH POTATOES GROWN of the order from 1,000 to 2,000 pounds recordkeeping requirements on either IN COLORADO and makes a corresponding change to small or large Colorado Area No. 2 the potato import regulation. At the July potato handlers. As with all Federal ■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 18, 2013 meeting, the Committee marketing order programs, reports and part 948 continues to read as follows: unanimously recommended increasing forms are periodically reviewed to Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. the minimum quantity exception to be reduce information requirements and ■ 2. Revise § 948.386(f) to read as consistent with the approximate weight duplication by industry and public follows: of one pallet of potatoes. Authority for sector agencies. the establishment and modification of a AMS is committed to complying with § 948.386 Handling regulation. minimum quantity exception is the E-Government Act, to promote the * * * * * provided in § 948.22(b)(2) of the order. use of the internet and other (f) Minimum quantity. For purposes This proposed rule amends the information technologies to provide of regulation under this part, each provisions in §§ 948.386(f) and 980.1(c). increased opportunities for citizen person may handle up to but not to The change in the import regulation is access to Government information and exceed 2,000 pounds of potatoes required under section 8e of the Act. services, and for other purposes. without regard to the requirements of This action is not expected to increase USDA has not identified any relevant paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this the costs associated with the order’s Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or section, but this exception shall not requirements or the potato import conflict with this proposed rule. apply to any shipment which exceeds regulation. Rather, it is anticipated that In addition, the Committee’s meeting 2,000 pounds of potatoes. this proposed change will have a was widely publicized throughout the * * * * * beneficial impact. The Committee Colorado Area No. 2 potato industry and believes it would provide greater all interested persons were invited to PART 980—VEGETABLES: IMPORT flexibility in the distribution of small attend the meeting and participate in REGULATIONS quantities of potatoes. Currently, the Committee deliberations on all issues. distribution of potatoes between 1,000 Like all Committee meetings, the July ■ 3. In § 980.1, paragraph (c) is revised and 2,000 pounds requires an 18, 2013, meeting was a public meeting to read as follows: inspection and certification that the and all entities, both large and small, § 980.1 Import regulations; Irish potatoes. product conforms to the grade, size, and were able to express views on this issue. maturity requirements of the order. This Finally, interested persons are invited to * * * * * translates into a cost for handlers and submit comments on this proposed rule, (c) Minimum quantities. Any importers of both time and inspection including the regulatory and importation which, in the aggregate, fees, which is high in relation to the informational impacts of this action on does not exceed 500 pounds of red small value (approximately $225.00 per small businesses. skinned, round type or long type pallet) of these transactions. This action A small business guide on complying potatoes, or 2,000 pounds for all other would allow shipments up to 2,000 with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop round type potatoes, may be imported pounds of potatoes without regard to the marketing agreements and orders may without regard to the provisions of this order’s grade, size, maturity, and be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ section. inspection requirements and the related MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. * * * * * costs. The benefits for this proposed Any questions about the compliance rule are expected to be equally available Dated: September 29, 2014. guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny Rex A. Barnes, to all fresh potato producers, handlers, at the previously mentioned address in and importers, regardless of their size. Associate Administrator, Agricultural the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Marketing Service. As an alternative to the proposal, the section. [FR Doc. 2014–23524 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Committee discussed leaving the In accordance with section 8e of the handling regulation unchanged. The Act, the United States Trade BILLING CODE 3410–02–P Committee rejected this idea because a Representative has concurred with the pallet of potatoes weighs approximately issuance of this proposed rule. 2,000 pounds and the 1,000 pound A 60-day comment period is provided NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND minimum quantity exception did not to allow interested persons to respond SPACE ADMINISTRATION accommodate this size shipment. No to this proposal. All written comments other alternatives were discussed. timely received will be considered 14 CFR Part 1245 In accordance with the Paperwork before a final determination is made on Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. [Docket No: 2700–0010] this matter. Chapter 35), the order’s information collection requirements have been List of Subjects RIN 2700–AE02 previously approved by the Office of 7 CFR Part 948 Patents and Other Intellectual Property Management and Budget (OMB) and Rights assigned OMB No. 0581–0178 (Generic Marketing agreements, Potatoes, Vegetable and Specialty Crops). No Reporting and recordkeeping AGENCY: National Aeronautics and changes in those requirements as a requirements. Space Administration. result of this action are necessary. 7 CFR Part 980 ACTION: Proposed rule. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for Food grades and standards, Imports, SUMMARY: NASA is proposing to amend approval. Marketing agreements, Onions, Potatoes, its patent waivers regulations to update This proposed rule would relax the Tomatoes. citations and the patent waiver policy, minimum quantity exception under the For the reasons set forth above, 7 CFR and to clarify and update the patent order from 1,000 to 2,000 pounds. parts 948 and 980 are proposed to be waiver procedures, so they are more in Accordingly, this action would not amended as follows: line with the National Aeronautics and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 60120 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Space Act (Space Act), the authorizing update citations to the United States ‘‘invention or class of invention’’ statute. Code; to clarify the requirements and limitation on NASA’s waiver authority, DATES: Submit comments on or before procedures for petitioning for a patent and additionally to make more accurate November 5, 2014. waiver, so they follow more closely the the terminology being used (e.g., ADDRESSES: Comments must be terms of the Space Act; and to add replacing the phrase ‘‘elimination of identified with RIN 2700–AE02 and grounds for denial of a petition for right to retain title’’ with ‘‘denial of the may be sent to NASA via the Federal E- waiver of foreign rights. The revisions requested rights’’). Also, a new Rulemaking Portal: http:// include (1) clarification that NASA only paragraph (c)(2) is added to require an www.regulations.gov. Follow the online has authority under the Space Act to advance waiver petition content meet instructions for submitting comments. waive rights in ‘‘inventions or classes of the National Aeronautics and Space Act Please note that NASA will post all inventions;’’ (2) a definition for what a requirement of waiving rights to ‘‘any comments on the internet with changes, ‘‘class of invention’’ includes; and (3) a invention or class of inventions,’’ by including any personal information requirement that petitions for advance identifying the invention(s) and/or provided. waiver of rights to identify what class(es) of inventions that the inventions or classes of inventions the Contractor believes will be made under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contractor believes will be made under the contract and for which waiver of Helen M. Galus, Office of the General the contract and for which waiver of rights is being requested. Additionally, Counsel, NASA Headquarters, rights is being requested. paragraph (d) has been clarified and telephone (202) 358–3437. The current language of 14 CFR original paragraph (e) has been deleted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1245.100 to 1245.103, and 1245.116, is so that the petitioners’ reconsideration Background amended to update the citations to the rights will now solely be found in National Aeronautics and Space Act, section 1245.112, rather than in two The National Aeronautics and Space which now is codified in Title 51 of the potentially conflicting sections. Act (the Space Act), at 51 U.S.C. United States Code. Also, the current As to 14 CFR 1245.106, the language 20135(b) states that an invention made definition of ‘‘invention’’ in § 1245.102 has been revised to permit the Board to in the performance of any work under is amended to better conform with the review and recommend a partial grant any contract of the National Aeronautics definition of invention set forth in 35 or denial on the same grounds as are and Space Administration (NASA) shall U.S.C. 101 (‘‘Inventions Patentable’’), currently used for the partial granting or be the exclusive property of the United and to add language defining the term denial of domestic waiver petitions. States if the person who made the ‘‘class of Inventions’’ so that the Additionally, a clarification was made invention was (A) employed or assigned regulations better define and implement to make clear that the Board to perform research, development, or the Space Act (51 U.S.C. 20135(g)) recommends action to the exploration work and the invention is which permits NASA to ‘‘waive all or Administrator. related to the work or was within the any part of the rights of the United Only minor clarifying revisions were scope of that person’s employment States under this section with respect to made to the current language in 14 CFR duties; or (B) was not employed to any invention or class of inventions 1245.107 and 14 CFR 1245.117. perform research, development, or made or which may be made by any As to the current language of 14 CFR exploration work but the invention is person or class of persons in the 1245.110, it is revised to add the nevertheless related to the contract, or performance of any work required by requirement that ‘‘Advance waiver to the work or duties the person was any contract of the Administration if the petitions shall also identify the employed or assigned to perform, and Administrator determines that the invention(s) and/or class(es) of was made during working hours, or interests of the United States will be inventions that the Contractor believes with a contribution from the served thereby. . .’’. will be made under the contract and for Government. 51 U.S.C. 20135(g), The current language of 14 CFR which waiver of rights is being authorizes the Administrator of the 1245.103 is revised in several places to requested, in accordance with National Aeronautics and Space set forth the ‘‘invention or class of § 1245.104(c)(2) above.’’ Administration (NASA) to waive all or invention’’ limitation on NASA’s waiver Finally, as to 14 CFR 1245.112, the any part of the rights of the United authority. Also, paragraph (a) is revised language has been revised such that the States, under section 20135 of the Space to expand upon the objectives and petitioner will be given notice only of Act, with respect to any invention or policies upon which NASA will be proposed Board actions that are adverse class of inventions made or which may guided in the implementation of the or different from the waiver of rights be made by any person or class of provisions of section 20135(g) of the requested, as it is these types of actions persons in the performance of any work National Aeronautics and Space Act (51 that trigger the right to request required by any contract of the U.S.C. Chapter 201), and in determining reconsideration and an oral hearing, as Administration, if the Administrator when the interests of the United States set forth in this section. determines that the interests of the U.S. would be served by waiver of all or any The regulations have been modified will be served thereby. Any such waiver part of the rights of the United States in in multiple places to make them may be made upon such terms and an invention or class of inventions (see conform more closely with the specific conditions as the Administrator paragraph immediately above). waiver authority NASA has under the determines necessary for the protection Additionally, the language ‘‘Any such National Aeronautics and Space Act (51 of U.S. interests. The enabling waiver may be made upon such terms U.S.C. 20135(g)), which states ‘‘the regulations, setting forth these terms and under such conditions as the Administrator may waive all or any part and conditions are set forth in Title 14 Administrator shall determine to be of the rights of the United States under of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part required for the protection of the this section with respect to any 1245, Subpart 1. interests of the United States’’ has been invention or class of inventions made or NASA is revising its regulations at 14 added, this language is taken directly which may be made by any person or CFR sections 1245.100 through from the Space Act (51 U.S.C. 20135(g)). class of persons in the performance of 1245.104, 1245.106, 1245.107, 1245.110, The current language in 14 CFR any work required by any contract of the 1245.112, 1245.116 and 1245.117 to 1245.104 is also amended to include the Administration if the Administrator

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60121

determines that the interests of the 35 U.S.C. 200–204 (Pub. L. 96–517, 94 (d) Class of inventions means United States will be served thereby.’’ Stat. 3019, 3020, 3022 and 3023; and inventions directed to a particular Specifically, the proposed amendments Pub. L. 98–620, 98 Stat. 3364–3367). process, machine, manufacture, or to the regulations now make clear the Therefore, the rule will not have a composition of matter, or to a narrowly- limitation on NASA’s authority to waive significant economic impact on a drawn, focused area of technology. only ‘‘inventions’’ and ‘‘classes’’ of substantial number of small entities. (e) Made, when used in relation to inventions and, in particular, to more any invention, means the conception or List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 1245 directly address how this affects first actual reduction to practice of such advance waiver petitions. Inventions, patents and waivers. invention. Accordingly, 14 CFR Part 1245 is (f) Practical application means to Statutory Authority proposed to be amended as follows: manufacture in the case of a The National Aeronautics and Space composition or product, to practice in Act (the Space Act), 51 U.S.C. 20113(a), PART 1245—PATENTS AND OTHER the case of a process or method, or to authorizes the Administrator of the INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS operate in the case of a machine or National Aeronautics and Space system; and, in each case, under such Subpart 1—Patent and Waiver Administration (NASA) to make, conditions as to establish that the Regulations promulgate, issue, rescind, and amend invention is being utilized and that its rules and regulations governing the ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 1245, benefits are to the extent permitted by manner of its operations and the Subpart 1, is revised to read as follows: law or Government regulations available exercise of the powers vested in it by to the public on reasonable terms. law. Authority: 51 U.S.C. 20135, 35 U.S.C. 200 (g) Board means the NASA Inventions et seq. and Contributions Board established by Regulatory Analysis Section ■ 2. Section 1245.100 is revised to read the Administrator of NASA within the Paperwork Reduction Act Statement as follows: Administration under section 20135(g) This rule does not contain an § 1245.100 Scope. of the National Aeronautics and Space information collection requirement This subpart prescribes regulations for Act (51 U.S.C. 20135(g)). subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act the waiver of rights of the Government (h) Chairperson means Chairperson of of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). of the United States to inventions made the NASA Inventions and Contributions under NASA contract in conformity Board. Executive Order 12866 and Executive (i) Petitioner means a contractor or Order 13563 with section 20135 of the National Aeronautics and Space Act (51 U.S.C. prospective contractor who requests that Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 Chapter 201). the Administrator waive rights in an direct agencies to assess all costs and ■ 3. Section 1245.101 is revised to read invention or class of inventions made or benefits of available regulatory as follows: which may be made under a NASA alternatives and, if regulation is contract. In the case of an identified necessary, to select regulatory § 1245.101 Applicability. invention, the petitioner may be the approaches that maximize net benefits The provisions of the subpart apply to inventor(s). (including potential economic, all inventions made or which may be (j) Government agency includes any environmental, public health and safety made under conditions enabling the executive department, independent effects, distributive impacts, and Administrator to determine that the commission, board, office, agency, equity). Executive Order 13563 rights therein reside in the Government administration, authority, Government emphasizes the importance of of the United States under section corporation, or other Government quantifying both costs and benefits, of 20135(b)(1) of the National Aeronautics establishment of the executive branch of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and Space Act, 51 U.S.C. 20135(b)(1). the Government of the United States of and of promoting flexibility. This rule The provisions do not apply to America. has not been designated a ‘‘significant inventions made under any contract, (k) Administrator means the regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of grant, or cooperative agreement with a Administrator of the National Executive Order 12866. nonprofit organization or small business Aeronautics and Space Administration or the Administrator’s duly authorized Regulatory Flexibility Act firm that are afforded the disposition of rights as provided in 35 U.S.C. 200–204 representative. It has been certified that this rule is (Pub. L. 96–517, 94 Stat. 3019, 3020, ■ 5. Section 1245.103 is amended by not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility 3022 and 3023; and Pub. L. 98–620, 98 revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it would not, Stat. 3364–3367). as follows: if promulgated, have a significant ■ 4. Section 1245.102 is amended by § 1245.103 Policy. economic impact on a substantial revising paragraph (c) adding new number of small entities. The rule sets paragraph (d), and re-lettering (a) In implementing the provisions of forth policies and procedures for paragraphs (d) through (j), to read as section 20135(g) of the National submitting and reviewing petitions for follows: Aeronautics and Space Act (51 U.S.C. waiver of the Government’s rights to Chapter 201), and in determining when certain inventions made under § 1245.102 Definitions and terms. the interests of the United States would government funded contracts, pursuant * * * * * be served by waiver of all or any part to section 20135(b)(1) of the National (c) Invention means any, new and of the rights of the United States in an Aeronautics and Space Act, 51 U.S.C. useful process, machine, manufacture, invention or class of inventions made in 20135(b)(1). The provisions do not or composition of matter, or any new the performance of work under NASA apply to inventions made under any and useful improvement thereof, or any contracts, the Administrator will be contract, grant, or cooperative variety of plant, which is or may be guided by the objectives set forth in the agreement with a nonprofit organization patentable under the Patent Laws of the National Aeronautics and Space Act, by or small business firm that are afforded United States of America or any foreign the basic policy of the Presidential the disposition of rights as provided in country. Memorandum and Statement of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 60122 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Government Patent Policy to the Heads advance waiver of domestic rights to NASA under the applicable terms of of the Executive Departments and submitted prior to execution of contract the contract and a designation made agencies dated February 18, 1983, by the or within 30 days after execution of the within 6 months of the time of reporting goals and objectives of its current contract unless the Board finds that the (or a reasonable time thereafter Authorization Act, Strategic Plan, and interests of the United States will be permitted for good cause shown) that other pertinent National policies or better served by restricting or denying the contractor elects title to the laws, such as the National Space Policy all or part of the requested rights in one invention and intends to file or has filed of the United States of America. Any or more of the following situations: a U.S. patent application. Such election such waiver may be made upon such (1) * * * will be made by notification in writing terms and under such conditions as the (2) When a determination has been to the patent representative designated Administrator shall determine to be made by Government authority which is in the contract. Title to all other required for the protection of the authorized by statute or Executive order inventions made under the contract are interests of the United States. Among to conduct foreign intelligence or subject to section 20135(b)(1) of the the most important goals are to provide counter-intelligence activities that the National Aeronautics and Space Act, 51 incentives to foster inventiveness and restriction or denial of the requested U.S.C. 20135(b)(1). The granting of the encourage the reporting of inventions rights to any inventions made in the advance waiver does not otherwise made under NASA contracts, to provide performance of work under the contract relieve a contractor of any of the for the widest practicable dissemination is necessary to protect the security of invention identification or reporting of new technology resulting from NASA such activities; or requirements set forth in the applicable programs, and to promote early (3) Where the Board finds that patent rights clause in the contract. utilization, expeditious development, exceptional circumstances exist, such (4) The advance waiver shall extend and continued availability of this new that restriction or denial of the to the invention claimed in any patent technology for commercial purposes requested rights will better promote one application filed on the reported and the public benefit. In applying this or more of the following objectives: invention, including any subsequent regulation, both the need for incentives (i) * * * divisional or continuation application to draw forth private initiatives and the (ii) * * * thereof, provided the claims of the need to promote healthy competition in (iii) * * * subsequent application do not industry must be weighed. (iv) * * * substantially change the scope of the (b) Several different situations arise (v) Ensuring that the Government reported invention. when waiver of all or any part of the retains sufficient rights in federally- (d) When a petition for waiver is rights of the United States with respect supported inventions to meet the needs submitted under paragraph (b) of this to an invention or class of invention of the Government and protect the section, prior to contract execution, it may be requested and are prescribed in public against nonuse or unreasonable will be processed expeditiously so that §§ 1245.104–1245.106. Under use of inventions. a decision on the petition may be § 1245.104, advance waiver of any or all (c)(1) An advance waiver, when reached prior to execution of the of the rights of the United States with granted, will be subject to the contract. However, if there is respect to any invention or class of reservations set forth in § 1245.107. insufficient time or insufficient inventions which may be made under a Normally, the reservations of information is presented, or for other contract may be requested prior to the § 1245.107(a), License to the reasons which do not permit a execution of the contract, or within 30 Government, and § 1245.107(b), March- recommendation to be made without days after execution of the contract. in rights, will apply. However, should unduly delaying execution of the Waiver of rights to an identified one or more of the situations set forth contract, the Board will inform the invention made and reported under a in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3), of contracting officer that no contract are to be requested under this section exist, rather than denying recommendation can be made prior to § 1245.105, and may be requested under the advance waiver request, the Board contract execution and the reasons this provision even though a request may recommend granting to the therefor. The contracting officer will under § 1245.104 was not made, or if contractor only part of the requested then notify the petitioner of the Board’s made, was not granted. Waiver of rights, to the extent necessary to address action. foreign rights under § 1245.106 may be the particular situation, consistent with (e) A waiver granted pursuant to a requested concurrently with domestic the policy and goals of § 1245.103. In petition submitted under this section rights under § 1245.104 or § 1245.105, or that event, the waiver grant will be shall extend to any contract changes, may be made independently. subject to additional reservations as modifications, or supplemental * * * * * provided for in § 1245.107(c). agreements, so long as the purpose of ■ 6. Section 1245.104 is amended by (2) To meet the National Aeronautics the contract or the scope of work to be revising paragraphs (a), (b), (b)(2), (b)(3), and Space Act standard of ‘‘any performed is not substantially changed. (b)(3)(v), (c)(1–4), and (d), and deleting invention or class of inventions,’’ for ■ 7. Section 1245.106 is amended by paragraph (e) and re-lettering original advance waivers, the petition shall revising paragraph (c) and (d) to read as paragraph (f) accordingly to read as identify the invention(s) and/or class(es) follows: follows: of inventions that the Contractor believes will be made under the contract § 1245.106 Waiver of foreign rights. § 1245.104 Advance waivers. and for which waiver of rights is being * * * * * (a) The provisions of this section requested. Therefore, the petition must (c) The Board will normally apply to petitions for waiver of domestic be directed to a specific invention(s) or recommend the waiver of foreign rights rights of the United States with respect to inventions directed to a particular be granted under paragraph (a) or to any invention or class of inventions process, machine, manufacture, or paragraph (b) of this section in any which may be made under a contract. composition of matter, or to a narrowly- designated country unless: (1) The (b) The NASA Inventions and drawn, focused area(s) of technology. Board finds that exceptional Contributions Board normally will (3) An advance waiver, when granted, circumstances exist, such that recommend grant of a request for will apply only to inventions reported restriction or denial of the requested

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60123

foreign rights will better promote one or § 1245.103(c) shall follow the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION more of the objectives set forth in procedures and form prescribed by and AGENCY § 1245.104(b)(3)(i) through (v); or (2) shall be acted on by that agency. The Board finds that the economic Petitions under contracts awarded by 40 CFR Part 52 interests of the United States will not be NASA on behalf of other agencies will served thereby; or unless (3) in the case be coordinated with the agency before [EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0592; FRL–9917–01– Region 9] of an individual identified invention action is taken by the Board. under paragraph (b) of this section, ■ 10. Section 1245.112 is amended by Revisions to the California State NASA has determined, prior to the revising paragraph (a) deleting Implementation Plan, Imperial County request, to file a patent application in subparagraph (1)(i), and renumber Air Pollution Control District the designated country. original subparagraphs (1)(ii) and(1)(iii) (d) If, subsequent to the granting of accordingly, and revising paragraph AGENCY: Environmental Protection the petition for foreign rights, the (a)(2) to read as follows: Agency (EPA). petitioner requests and designates ACTION: Proposed rule. additional countries in which it wishes § 1245.112 Notice of proposed Board action and reconsideration. to secure patents, the Chairperson may SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection recommend such request, in whole or in (a) Notice. Except as provided by Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve part, without further action by the § 1245.104(d), the Board will notify the revisions to the Imperial County Air Board. petitioner, through the contracting Pollution Control District (ICAPCD) ■ 8. Section 1245.107 is amended by officer, with respect to petitions for portion of the California State revising introductory paragraph (b) to advance waiver prior to contract Implementation Plan (SIP). These read as follows: execution, and directly to the petitioner revisions concern oxides of nitrogen for all other petitions: (NOX) emissions from wallboard kilns § 1245.107 Reservations. (1) When it proposes to recommend to and internal combustion engines. We * * * * * the Administrator that the petition be: are proposing to approve local rules to (b) March-in rights. For any invention (i) Granted in an extent different from regulate these emission sources under for which waiver of rights has been that requested; or the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). granted under this subpart, NASA has (ii) Denied. DATES: Any comments on this proposal the same right as set forth in 35 U.S.C. (2) Of the reasons for the must arrive by November 5, 2014. 203 and 210, with the procedures set recommended action adverse to or forth in § 1245.117 and 37 CFR 401.6, to different from the waiver of rights ADDRESSES: Submit comments, require the contractor, an assignee, or requested by the petitioner. identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2014–0592, by one of the exclusive licensee of the invention to * * * * * grant a nonexclusive, partially ■ 11. Section 1245.116 is amended by following methods: exclusive, or exclusive license in any revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: field of use to a responsible applicant or www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line applicants, upon terms that are § 1245.116 Miscellaneous provisions. instructions. reasonable under the circumstances, * * * * * 2. Email: [email protected]. and if the contractor, assignee, or (b) Statement of Government rights. 3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel exclusive licensee refuses such a The waiver recipient shall include, (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection request, NASA has the right to grant within the specification of any United Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, such a license itself if NASA determines States patent application and any patent San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. that: issuing thereon for a waived invention, Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without * * * * * the following statement: change and may be made available ■ 9. Section 1245.110 is amended by The invention described herein was online at www.regulations.gov, adding new paragraph (b) and re- made in the performance of work under including any personal information lettering original paragraph (b) and (c) NASA Contract No. lll, and is provided, unless the comment includes accordingly to read as follows: subject to the provisions of Section 20135 of the National Aeronautics and Confidential Business Information (CBI) § 1245.110 Content of petitions. Space Act (51 U.S.C. Chapter 201). or other information whose disclosure is * * * * * * * * * * restricted by statute. Information that (b) Advance waiver petitions shall ■ 12. Section 1245.117 is amended by you consider CBI or otherwise protected also identify the invention(s) and/or revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: should be clearly identified as such and class(es) of inventions that the should not be submitted through Contractor believes will be made under § 1245.117 March-in and waiver revocation www.regulations.gov or email. the contract and for which waiver of procedures. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous rights is being requested, in accordance (a) The exercise of march-in access’’ system, and EPA will not know with § 1245.104(c)(2) above. procedures shall be in conformance your identity or contact information (c) No specific forms need be used. with 35 U.S.C. 203 and the applicable unless you provide it in the body of Requests for advanced waiver should, provisions of 37 CFR 401.6, entitled your comment. If you send email preferably, be included with the ‘‘Exercise of march-in rights for directly to EPA, your email address will proposal, but in any event in advance of inventions made by nonprofit be automatically captured and included negotiations. organizations and small business firms.’’ as part of the public comment. If EPA (d) Petitions for waiver under * * * * * cannot read your comment due to contracts funded by another agency. The technical difficulties and cannot contact content of the petitions for waiver of Cheryl E. Parker, you for clarification, EPA may not be title to inventions made under contracts NASA Federal Register Liaison Officer. able to consider your comment. awarded by NASA on behalf of the [FR Doc. 2014–23739 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Electronic files should avoid the use of Department of Energy under BILLING CODE 7510–13–P special characters, any form of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 60124 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

encryption, and be free of any defects or ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. AGENCY viruses. Docket: Generally, documents in the Docket: Generally, documents in the 40 CFR Part 52 docket for this action are available docket for this action are available electronically at www.regulations.gov [EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0412; FRL–9912–70– electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Region 9] and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105–3901. While all Revisions to the California State California 94105–3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at Implementation Plan, Lake County Air documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some information Quality Management District www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the AGENCY: Environmental Protection may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted Agency (EPA). hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not ACTION: Proposed rule. material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business revision to the Lake County Air Quality appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR Management District (LCAQMD) portion hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. of the California State Implementation FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Plan (SIP). This revision concerns the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: definition of hazardous air pollutants FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– and particulate matter emissions from Idalia Pe´rez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 3248, [email protected]. agricultural compression ignition 3248, [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This engines. We are proposing to approve SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal addresses the following local local rules under the Clean Air Act proposal addresses the following local rules: Rule 400.3, Internal Combustion (CAA or the Act). rules: LCAQMD Section 228, Hazardous Engine(s), and Rule 400.4, Emissions of DATES: Any comments on this proposal Air Pollutants (HAP), and LCAQMD Oxides of Nitrogen from Wallboard must arrive by November 5, 2014. Section 470, Air Toxics Control Measure Kilns. In the Rules and Regulations ADDRESSES: Submit comments, for Emissions of Toxic Particulate section of this Federal Register, we are identified by docket number EPA–R09– Matter from In-Use Agricultural approving these local rules in a direct OAR–2014–0412, by one of the Compression Ignition Engines. In the final action without prior proposal following methods: Rules and Regulations section of this because we believe these SIP revisions 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: Federal Register, we are approving are not controversial. If we receive www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line these local rules in a direct final action adverse comments, however, we will instructions. without prior proposal because we publish a timely withdrawal of the 2. Email: [email protected]. believe these SIP revisions are not direct final rule and address the 3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel controversial. If we receive adverse (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection comments in subsequent action based comments, however, we will publish a Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, on this proposed rule. Please note that timely withdrawal of the direct final San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. if we receive adverse comment on an Instructions: All comments will be rule and address the comments in amendment, paragraph, or section of included in the public docket without subsequent action based on this this rule and if that provision may be change and may be made available proposed rule. Please note that if we severed from the remainder of the rule, online at www.regulations.gov, receive adverse comment on an we may adopt as final those provisions including any personal information amendment, paragraph, or section of of the rule that are not the subject of an provided, unless the comment includes either of these rules and if that adverse comment. Confidential Business Information (CBI) provision may be severed from the We do not plan to open a second or other information whose disclosure is remainder of the rules, we may adopt as comment period, so anyone interested restricted by statute. Information that final those provisions of the rules that in commenting should do so at this you consider CBI or otherwise protected are not the subject of an adverse time. If we do not receive adverse should be clearly identified as such and comment. comments, no further activity is should not be submitted through We do not plan to open a second planned. For further information, please www.regulations.gov or email. comment period, so anyone interested see the direct final action. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous in commenting should do so at this access’’ system, and EPA will not know time. If we do not receive adverse Dated: August 20, 2014. your identity or contact information comments, no further activity is Jared Blumenfeld, unless you provide it in the body of planned. For further information, please your comment. If you send email Regional Administrator, Region IX. see the direct final action. [FR Doc. 2014–23787 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] directly to EPA, your email address will Dated: May 30, 2014. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA Jared Blumenfeld, cannot read your comment due to Regional Administrator, Region IX. technical difficulties and cannot contact [FR Doc. 2014–23770 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60125

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the AGENCY on-line instructions for submitting Final Rules section of this Federal comments. Register, EPA is approving the state’s 40 CFR Part 52 2. Email: [email protected]. SIP submittal as a direct final rule [EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0273; FRL–9914–96– 3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. without prior proposal because the Region 5] 4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Agency views this as a noncontroversial Control Strategies Section, Air Programs submittal and anticipates no adverse Approval and Promulgation of Air comments. A detailed rationale for the Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson approval is set forth in the direct final Amendments to Gasoline Volatility rule. If no adverse comments are Standards and Motor Vehicle Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. received in response to this rule, no Refinishing Requirements for Illinois 5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air further activity is contemplated. If EPA AGENCY: Environmental Protection Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. receives adverse comments, the direct Agency (EPA). Environmental Protection Agency, 77 final rule will be withdrawn and all ACTION: Proposed rule. West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, public comments received will be Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only addressed in a subsequent final rule SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection accepted during the Regional Office based on this proposed rule. EPA will Agency (EPA) is approving state normal hours of operation, and special not institute a second comment period. implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Illinois Environmental arrangements should be made for Any parties interested in commenting Protection Agency on March 19, 2013, deliveries of boxed information. The on this action should do so at this time. concerning the state’s gasoline volatility Regional Office official hours of Please note that if EPA receives adverse standards. The SIP revisions also business are Monday through Friday, comment on an amendment, paragraph, include amendments to the state’s motor 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding or section of this rule and if that vehicle refinishing regulations to allow Federal holidays. provision may be severed from the for the alternative use of a high volume, Please see the direct final rule which remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt low pressure equivalent coating is located in the Rules section of this as final those provisions of the rule that applicator in motor vehicle refinishing Federal Register for detailed are not the subject of an adverse operations, and repeal a registration instructions on how to submit comment. For additional information, program under these regulations that comments. see the direct final rule which is located overlaps with Federal registration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: in the Rules section of this Federal requirements. Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source Register. DATES: Comments must be received on Program Manager, Control Strategies Dated: July 29, 2014. or before November 5, 2014. Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), Susan Hedman, ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Environmental Protection Agency, Regional Administrator, Region 5. identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, OAR–2013–0273, by one of the Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6061, [FR Doc. 2014–23768 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] following methods: [email protected]. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 60126

Notices Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 193

Monday, October 6, 2014

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Office of Personnel Management, 5 CFR Whistleblower Protection Laws contains documents other than rules or 724.202. proposed rules that are applicable to the A Federal employee with authority to public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Antidiscrimination Laws take, direct others to take, recommend committee meetings, agency decisions and A Federal agency cannot discriminate or approve any personnel action must rulings, delegations of authority, filing of against an employee or applicant with not use that authority to take or fail to petitions and applications and agency respect to the terms, conditions or take, or threaten to take or fail to take, statements of organization and functions are privileges of employment on the basis of a personnel action against an employee examples of documents appearing in this or applicant because of disclosure of section. race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status or political information by that individual that is affiliation. Discrimination on these reasonably believed to evidence bases is prohibited by one or more of the violations of law, rule or regulation; ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF gross mismanagement; gross waste of THE UNITED STATES following statutes: 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(1), 29 U.S.C. 206(d), 29 U.S.C. 631, 29 funds; an abuse of authority; or a No FEAR Act Notice U.S.C. 633a, 29 U.S.C. 791, and 42 substantial and specific danger to public U.S.C. 2000e–16. health or safety, unless disclosure of AGENCY: Administrative Conference of If you believe that you have been the such information is specifically the United States. victim of unlawful discrimination on prohibited by law and such information ACTION: Notice. the basis of race, color, religion, sex, is specifically required by Executive national origin or disability, you must order to be kept secret in the interest of SUMMARY: The Administrative contact an Equal Employment national defense or the conduct of Conference of the United States (the Opportunity (EEO) counselor within 45 foreign affairs. Conference) is providing notice to all its calendar days of the alleged Retaliation against an employee or employees, former employees, and discriminatory action, or, in the case of applicant for making a protected applicants for employment about the a personnel action, within 45 calendar disclosure is prohibited by 5 U.S.C. rights and remedies available to them days of the effective date of the action, 2302(b)(8). If you believe that you have under the Federal antidiscrimination, before you can file a formal complaint been the victim of whistleblower whistleblower protection, and of discrimination with your agency. See, retaliation, you may file a written retaliation laws. This notice fulfills the e.g., 29 CFR part 1614. If you believe complaint (Form OSC–11) with the U.S. Conference’s notification obligations that you have been the victim of Office of Special Counsel at 1730 M under 5 CFR 724.202. unlawful discrimination on the basis of Street NW., Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036–4505 or online through the OSC FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: age, you must either contact an EEO Web site: www.osc.gov. Shawne McGibbon, General Counsel, counselor as noted above or give notice Administrative Conference of the of intent to sue to the Equal Retaliation for Engaging in Protected United States, Suite 706 South, 1120 Employment Opportunity Commission Activity (EEOC) within 180 calendar days of the 20th Street NW., Washington, DC 20036; A Federal agency cannot retaliate Telephone 202–480–2088; email alleged discriminatory action. Because the Conference is a very against an employee or applicant [email protected]. Additional because that individual exercises his or information can be found on the small agency, it has entered into a contractual arrangement with the her rights under any of the Federal Conference’s Web site at www.acus.gov. General Services Administration (GSA) antidiscrimination or whistleblower SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May for EEO services, including, but not protection laws listed above. If you 15, 2002, Congress enacted the limited to, counseling and Alternative believe that you are the victim of ‘‘Notification and Federal Employee Dispute Resolution (ADR) services. EEO retaliation for engaging in protected Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act counselors are available at GSA’s activity, you must follow, as of 2002’’ (No FEAR Act), 116 Stat. 566, Regional Office of Civil Rights, located appropriate, the procedures described in Public Law 107–174 (5 U.S.C. 2301 at 7th and D Streets SW., Room 7048, the Antidiscrimination Laws and note). The Act is intended to hold Washington, DC 20407. Telephone: Whistleblower Protection Laws sections Federal agencies accountable for (202) 708–8588. You may also file a or, if applicable, the administrative or violations of antidiscrimination and written complaint of discrimination negotiated grievance procedures in whistleblower protection laws. In with that office. order to pursue any legal remedy. support of this purpose, Congress found If you are alleging discrimination Disciplinary Actions that ‘‘agencies cannot be run effectively based on marital status or political if those agencies practice or tolerate affiliation, you may file a written Under the existing laws, each agency discrimination.’’ Sec. 101(1), Public Law complaint with the U.S. Office of retains the right, where appropriate, to 107–174. The Conference provides this Special Counsel (OSC) (see contact discipline a Federal employee for No FEAR Act notice to inform its information below). In the alternative conduct that is inconsistent with current employees, former employees, (or in some cases, in addition), you may Federal antidiscrimination and and applicants for employment of the pursue a discrimination complaint by whistleblower protection laws, up to rights and protections available under filing a grievance through the agency’s and including removal. If OSC has Federal antidiscrimination, administrative or negotiated grievance initiated an investigation under 5 U.S.C. whistleblower protection, and procedures, if such procedures apply 1214, however, according to 5 U.S.C. retaliation laws, as required by the and are available. 1214(f), agencies must seek approval

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60127

from the Special Counsel to discipline techniques or other forms of information management practices; (4) Provide data employees for, among other activities, technology. to be used when decisions regarding engaging in prohibited retaliation. Comments regarding this information intervention in a disease outbreak are Nothing in the No FEAR Act alters collection received by November 5, required; (5) Provide input into the existing laws or permits an agency to 2014 will be considered. Written design of surveillance systems for take unfounded disciplinary action comments should be addressed to: Desk specific diseases; (6) Provide cost against a Federal employee or to violate Officer for Agriculture, Office of estimates of selected aspects of equine the procedural rights of a Federal Information and Regulatory Affairs, health care to better inform those employee who has been accused of Office of Management and Budget planning to enter into equine ownership discrimination. (OMB), New Executive Office Building, of the cost of equine health care. 725—17th Street NW., Washington, DC Without the NAHMS data the United Additional Information 20502. Commenters are encouraged to States would not be able to assess the For information regarding the No submit their comments to OMB via potential risk to human health from FEAR Act regulations, refer to 5 CFR email to: OIRA_Submission@ pathogens associated with equids or part 724, or contact the General OMB.EOP.GOV or fax (202) 395–5806 shared with equids, such as Counsel’s Office at the Conference, 1120 and to Departmental Clearance Office, encephalidities. 20th Street NW., Suite 706 South, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Description of Respondents: Business Washington, DC 20036, (202) 480–2080. Washington, DC 20250–7602. Copies of or other for-profit. Additional information regarding the submission(s) may be obtained by Number of Respondents: 16,916. Federal antidiscrimination, calling (202) 720–8958. Frequency of Responses: Reporting: whistleblower protection, and An agency may not conduct or On occasion. retaliation laws can be found at sponsor a collection of information Total Burden Hours: 13,606. www.eeoc.gov and www.osc.gov. unless the collection of information Ruth Brown, displays a currently valid OMB control Existing Rights Unchanged Departmental Information Collection number and the agency informs Clearance Officer. potential persons who are to respond to Pursuant to section 205 of the No [FR Doc. 2014–23709 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] the collection of information that such FEAR Act, neither the Act nor this BILLING CODE 3410–34–P notice creates, expands or reduces any persons are not required to respond to rights otherwise available to any the collection of information unless it employee, former employee or applicant displays a currently valid OMB control DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE under the laws of the United States, number. including the provisions of law Animal and Plant Health Inspection Submission for OMB Review; specified in 5 U.S.C. 2302(d). Service Comment Request Dated: October 1, 2014. Title: National Animal Health September 30, 2014. Shawne McGibbon, Monitoring System (NAHMS); Equine The Department of Agriculture has General Counsel. 2015 Study. submitted the following information [FR Doc. 2014–23762 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] OMB Control Number: 0579–0269. collection requirement(s) to OMB for BILLING CODE 6110–01–P Summary of Collection: Collection review and clearance under the and dissemination of animal health and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, information is mandated by 7 U.S.C. Public Law 104–13. Comments DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 391, the Animal Industry Act of 1884, regarding (a) whether the collection of which established the precursor of the information is necessary for the proper Submission for OMB Review; Animal and Plant Health Inspection performance of the functions of the Comment Request Service (APHIS), Veterinary Services, agency, including whether the the Bureau of Animal Industry. Legal information will have practical utility; September 30, 2014. requirements for examining and (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate The Department of Agriculture has reporting on animal disease control of burden including the validity of the submitted the following information methods were further mandated by 7 methodology and assumptions used; (c) collection requirement(s) to OMB for U.S.C. 8308 of the Animal Health ways to enhance the quality, utility and review and clearance under the Protection Act, ‘‘Detection, Control, and clarity of the information to be Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Eradication of Diseases and Pests,’’ May collected; (d) ways to minimize the Public Law 104–13. Comments 13, 2002. NAHMS will initiate the third burden of the collection of information regarding (a) whether the collection of national equine health and management on those who are to respond, including information is necessary for the proper data collection through the Equine 2015 through the use of appropriate performance of the functions of the Study. The information collected automated, electronic, mechanical, or agency, including whether the through the Equine 2015 Study will be other technological collection information will have practical utility; analyzed and organized into one or techniques or other forms of information (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate more descriptive reports. The Equine technology. of burden including the validity of the 2015 Study is a part of an ongoing series Comments regarding this information methodology and assumptions used; (c) of NAHMS studies on the U.S. equine collection received by November 5, ways to enhance the quality, utility and population. 2014 will be considered. Written clarity of the information to be Need and Use of the Information: comments should be addressed to: Desk collected; (d) ways to minimize the APHIS will use the data collected to: (1) Officer for Agriculture, Office of burden of the collection of information Serve stakeholders by estimation of Information and Regulatory Affairs, on those who are to respond, including trends in national and regional equine Office of Management and Budget through the use of appropriate health, movement and management, (2) (OMB), New Executive Office Building, automated, electronic, mechanical, or Address emerging issues; (3) Examine 725—17th Street NW., Washington, DC other technological collection the economic impact of health 20502. Commenters are encouraged to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60128 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

submit their comments to OMB via Total Burden Hours: 2,326. • Updates from the subcommittees of email to: OIRA_Submission@ the NAREEE Advisory Board, including Ruth Brown, OMB.EOP.GOV or fax (202) 395–5806 the National Genetic Resources and to Departmental Clearance Office, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. Advisory Council, the Specialty Crop USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Committee, and the Citrus Disease [FR Doc. 2014–23710 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Washington, DC 20250–7602. Copies of Subcommittee. BILLING CODE 3410–05–P the submission(s) may be obtained by • Updates from the working groups of calling (202) 720–8958. the NAREEE Advisory Board, including An agency may not conduct or DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE deliberation of reports and sponsor a collection of information recommendations on the Balance of unless the collection of information Office of the Secretary Crop Research and the Review of the displays a currently valid OMB control Agricultural Experiment Station System. number and the agency informs Meeting Notice of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, Public Participation: This meeting is potential persons who are to respond to Education, and Economics Advisory open to the public and any interested the collection of information that such Board individuals wishing to attend. persons are not required to respond to Opportunity for public comment will be the collection of information unless it AGENCY: Research, Education, and offered at the end of each day of the displays a currently valid OMB control Economics, USDA. number. meeting. To attend the meeting and/or ACTION: Notice of meeting. make oral statements regarding any Farm Service Agency items on the agenda, you must contact SUMMARY: In accordance with the Michele Esch at 202–720–8408; email: Title: Representations for CCC and Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 [email protected] at least 5 FSA Loans and Authorization to File a U.S.C. App 2, Section 1408 of the business days prior to the meeting. Financing Statement and Related National Agricultural Research, Members of the public will be heard in Documents. Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3123), and the the order in which they sign up at the OMB Control Number: 0560–0215 Agricultural Act of 2014, the United beginning of the meeting. The Chair will Summary of Collection: Commodity States Department of Agriculture conduct the meeting to facilitate the Credit Corporation and the Farm Service (USDA) announces an open meeting of orderly conduct of business. Written Agency (FSA) programs require loans be the National Agricultural Research, comments by attendees or other secured with collateral. The security Extension, Education, and Economics interested stakeholders will be interest is created and attaches to the (NAREEE) Advisory Board. welcomed for the public record before collateral when: (1) Value has been DATES: The National Agricultural and up to two weeks following the given, (2) the debtor has rights in the Research, Extension, Education, and Board meeting (by close of business collateral or the power to transfer rights Economics Advisory Board will meet Tuesday, November 4, 2014). All in the collateral, and (3) the debtor has October 21–23, 2014: October 21, 2014, written statements must be sent to authenticated a security agreement that 1:00 p.m.–5:30 p.m. October 22, 2014, Michele Esch, Designated Federal provides a description of the collateral. 8:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. October 23, 2014, Officer and Executive Director, National In order to perfect the security interest 8:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m. Agricultural Research, Extension, in collateral, a financing statement must ADDRESSES: Loew’s Madison Hotel, 1177 Education, and Economics Advisory be filed according to a State’s Uniform Fifteenth Street NW., Washington, DC Board, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Commercial Code. The revised Article 9 20005. 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP of the Uniform Commercial Code deals 0321, Washington, DC 20250–0321; or with secured transaction for personal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: email: [email protected]. All property. The revised Article 9 affects Michele Esch, Designated Federal statements will become a part of the the manner in which the CCC and FSA, Officer and Executive Director, National as well as any other creditor, perfect and Agricultural Research, Extension, official record of the National liquidate security interests in collateral. Education, and Economics Advisory Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Need and Use of the Information: FSA Board, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP Board and will be kept on file for public will collect information using form 0321, Washington, DC 20250–0321; review in the Research, Education, and CCC–10. The information obtained on telephone: (202) 720–3684; fax: (202) Economics Advisory Board Office. CCC–10 is needed to not only obtain 720–6199; or email: michele.esch@ authorization from loan applicants to Done at Washington, DC, this 1st day of usda.gov. file a financing statement without their October 2014. signature, but also to verify the exact SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Ann Bartuska, legal name and location of the debtor. If Purpose of the Meeting: To provide Deputy Under Secretary, Research, this information is not collected, CCC advice and recommendations on the top Education, and Economics. and FSA will not be able to disburse priorities and policies for food and [FR Doc. 2014–23814 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] loans because a security interest would agricultural research, education, BILLING CODE 3410–03–P not be perfected. extension and economics. Description of Respondents: Farms; Tentative Agenda: The agenda will include the following: individuals or households; business or • other for-profit. Update on Research, Education, and Economics mission area activities. Number of Respondents: 2,148. • Roundtable discussion on the Frequency of Responses: Reporting; process for completing the mandatory On occasion. annual relevancy and adequacy review.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60129

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE fax to the attention of Allison Magness 3,277 mothers/caregivers of children in at 703–305–2576 or via email to the base study when their child is 30- Food and Nutrition Service [email protected]. and 36-months old; and obtaining their Comments will also be accepted through child’s height and weight measurements Agency Information Collection the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to at 36-months from WIC administrative Activities; Proposed Collection, http://www.regulations.gov and follow records, health care provider records, or Comment Request: Special the online instructions for submitting direct measurements at WIC sites. Supplemental Nutrition Program for comments electronically. The State WIC office and local WIC Women, Infants, and Children Infant All responses to this notice will be site staff will receive an email about the and Toddler Feeding Practices Study summarized and included in the request study extension and they will AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, for Office of Management and Budget participate in a conference call to United States Department of Agriculture approval. All comments will be a matter discuss the follow-up activities. (USDA). of public record. Additionally, each study participant will receive a study flyer when their ACTION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Notice and request for child is 21 months of age, and they will comments. request more information on the proposed project, contact Allison be asked to provide updated contact SUMMARY: In accordance with the Magness, Ph.D., R.D., Social Science information to ensure ongoing Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this Research Analyst, Office of Policy participation at the time of the 24- notice invites the public and other Support, Food and Nutrition Service, month interview. Prior to the telephone public agencies to comment on this USDA, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room interview, the mother/caregiver for each proposed information collection. This 1014, Alexandria, VA 22302. child in the cohort will be mailed an invitation to continue in the study that collection is a revision of the currently SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: approved WIC Infant and Toddler includes a toll-free number to call-in for Title: Special Supplemental Nutrition questions. They will also be re- Feeding Practices 2 Study (ITFPS–2). Program for Women, Infants, and The revision is to amend the 24-month contacted throughout this study. Children (WIC) Infant and Toddler Participants will receive periodic cards, data collection instrument and extend Feeding Practices Study-2 (ITFPS–2) the data collection on the cohort of calls, and text messages to remind them Age 3 Extension. of upcoming data collection interviews infants by one year, to their 3rd Form Number: N/A. birthday. The data will be used to and height and weight (H/W) OMB Number: 0584–0580. measurements. State agency staff will estimate the type and prevalence of Expiration Date of Approval: 05/31/ various feeding practices in the WIC extract H/W data of participating 2015. children from WIC administrative population and assess whether the new Type of request: Revision of a WIC food packages (instituted in 2009) records; health care providers will currently approved collection. provide H/W measurements for the have influenced feeding practices. This Abstract: The Food and Nutrition majority of non-participating children study will also examine the Service’s (FNS) WIC ITFPS–2 (‘‘base’’ (i.e., who have dropped out of WIC); circumstances and influences that shape study) will provide information on the and WIC site staff will weigh and mothers’ feeding decisions for their feeding practices of infants in the base measure the remaining non- children, and will describe the impact cohort from the time of birth up to 2 participating children. WIC site staff of these decisions throughout early years of age. The proposed revision will will also provide updated contact child development. amend the 24-month data collection information when requested. DATES: Written comments must be instrument and extend the longitudinal Affected Public: Individuals/ received on or before December 5, 2014. data collection of the current cohort of Households (4,050; 3,241 respondents ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: infants up to 3 years of age. This including pre-testing and 809 non- (a) Whether the proposed collection of proposed extension is needed to respondents); State, Local or Tribal information is necessary for the proper understand the environmental government (107 respondents and 0 performance of the functions of the characteristics, influence of WIC, and non-respondents); and Business-for- agency, including whether the children’s nutrient intake, meal and profit/not-for-profit (196; 157 information shall have practical utility; snack patterns, and feeding practices on respondents and 39 non-respondents). (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate children’s nutrition, health, weight, and There are approximately 848 non- of the burden on the proposed growth. The results will assist in the respondents who will be contacted but collection of information, including the development of appropriate and choose not to participate. The burden validity of the methodology and effective prevention strategies to for non-respondents is broken down in assumptions that were used; (c) ways to improve the health of young children. the table below. enhance the quality, utility, and clarity With over 50 percent of the nation’s Type of Respondents: Mothers/ of the information collected; and (d) infants enrolled in WIC, it is hoped that caregivers of infants in cohort; State ways to minimize the burden of the prevention strategies implemented in agency data managers and WIC site staff; information collection on respondents, WIC will have a substantial impact on and health care providers. including use of appropriate automated, the growth and health of U.S. infants Estimated Total Number of electronic, mechanical, or other and children. Respondents: 4,353. technological methods of data The study activities subject to this Frequency of Response: 10.36 collection. notice include: informing State WIC annually. Written comments may be sent to: office and local WIC sites that the study Estimated Annual Responses: 45,077. Allison Magness, Ph.D., R.D., Social has been extended and their role in the Estimate of Time per Respondent and Science Research Analyst, Office of extension study; collecting contact Annual Burden: The total public Policy Support, Food and Nutrition information on 2,716 mothers/caregivers reporting burden for this collection of Service, USDA, 3101 Park Center Drive, in the base study during the 24-month information is estimated at 5,039.11 Room 1014, Alexandria, VA 22302. telephone interview; administering two hours. The estimated burden for each Comments may also be submitted via additional telephone interviews to up to type of respondent is given in the table

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60130 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

below. Across all study respondents and non-respondents, the estimated average annual burden is 1.16 hours. BILLING CODE 3410–30–P

809 0.003 2.43 12.14

3115 3115 155.75 931 931 0.05 46.55 202.3

404 0.0 133 6 2716 2716 5 135.8 0 1330 0 0 135.8 327 2294 2294 0.1 229.4 983 983 0.1 98.3 327.7 327 0.0 2785 2785 33 91.9 492 492 0.033 16.24 108.14 Individuals WIC 404 146 and 2580 2580 0.5 1290 1466 1290 partici 6 6 0 0 Househol 163 0.0 ds 8 4914 245.7 0 0 0.05 0 245.7 contact information 311 2179 2179 0.1 217.9 934 934 0.1 93.4 311.3 311 0.0 2646 2646 33 87.32 467 467 0.033 15.41 102.73 404 6 2444 2444 1602 0 0 1222

244 196 196 48 48 0.05 2.4 12.2

978 685 685 293 0 0 685 327

er State & Local Governme nt site staff

(a) 4046 =base study total live birth cohort (b) Assume 80% will read flyer and 77% will sign consent form (c) Of base study total live birth cohort-- assume about 67% will complete 24-month survey, 64% will complete 30-month survey, 60% will complete 36-month survey (d) Assume study attrition from current cohort will be 10% per year x 2 years= 4,046* .9* .9 = 3,277 at end of 24-months. Assume 70% will complete the contact information form and 85% will read the advance letter. (d) Assume 64% of base study total live birth cohort will respond.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN06OC14.000 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60131

Dated: September 30, 2014. Three Rivers Ranger District, 12858 US intermediate harvest are being Audrey Rowe, Highway 2, Troy, MT 59935. Phone: proposed. These treatments would be Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service. (406) 295–4693. Individuals who use accomplished through 2,500 acres of [FR Doc. 2014–23740 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] telecommunication devices for the deaf tractor harvest and 851 acres of skyline BILLING CODE 3410–30–C (TDD) may call the Federal Information yarding. There are 40 units proposed Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 that would create or contribute to 24 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern different openings larger than 40 acres. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Time, Monday through Friday. This action requires a 60-day public SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Lower review and Regional Forester approval Forest Service Yaak, O’Brien, Sheep project area is (FSM 2471.1). This document serves as approximately 67,500 acres in size and the beginning of the 60-day comment Kootenai National Forest; Lincoln is located adjacent to and east of Troy, period. The largest of these treatment County; Montana; Lower Yaak, Montana along the Kootenai River. units would be approximately 190 acres O’Brien, Sheep Project EIS O’Brien, Lynx, Rabbit, Hummingbird, in size. Approximately 769 acres of the AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Kilbrennan, and Arbo Creeks are the total 2,080 proposed prescribed burning and fuel reduction treatments are within ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an main watersheds in the project area. The the WUI, while 2,894 of the total 3,351 environmental impact statement. legal description includes Townships 31, 32, 33, and 34 North, Ranges 32, 33, acre proposed timber harvest treatment SUMMARY: The Forest Service will and 34 West, PMM, Lincoln County, is within the WUI. Total WUI treatment prepare an Environmental Impact Montana. is approximately 3,663 acres. Statement (EIS) to disclose the (2) In an effort to return fire to the Purpose and Need for Action environmental effects of commercial landscape and to promote wildlife and non-commercial vegetation The purpose and need for this project foraging opportunities approximately management activities, prescribed is to: (1) Promote resilient vegetation by 1,508 acres of prescribed burning (1,482 burning, watershed and recreation managing towards Forest Plan desired acres of broadcast burning and 26 acres improvement activities, and granting conditions for landscape-level of maintenance underburning) is being road access to private timber lands. vegetation patterns, structure, patch proposed. Approximately 727 acres in Access management changes and other size, fuel loading, and species the WUI are proposed for burning. design features are included to protect composition; (2) maintain or improve Approximately 660 acres acres of this resources and facilitate management water quality and native aquatic species burning will occur in the Inventoried activities. The project is located in the habitat; (3) provide forage opportunities Roadless Areas. Lower Yaak, O’Brien, and Sheep while maintaining wildlife security; (4) (3) It is estimated that two temporary planning subunits on the Three Rivers provide wood products that are in roads, totaling approximately 0.4 mile Ranger District, Kootenai National demand by the American public, would be constructed to accomplish the Forest, Lincoln County, Montana, near contribute to the local economy by timber harvest and associated fuel Troy, Montana. generating jobs and income, and provide reduction work. These roads would be DATES: Comments concerning the scope a safe and efficient transportation decommissioned following activities. of the analysis must be received by system; and (5) treat hazardous fuels to Two segments of road would be November 5, 2014. The draft reduce crown fire potential and stand rerouted for resource protection environmental impact statement is replacing wildfire within the wildland (approximately 0.5 mile on near expected June 2015 and the final urban interface (WUI) and other areas Kilbrennan Lake and 0.3 mile near the environmental impact statement is while promoting fire behavior Troy shooting range). expected August 2015. characteristics and fuel conditions that (4) Implementation of best allow for safe and effective fire management practice (BMP) work and ADDRESSES: Send written comments to management. road maintenance work would be Kirsten Kaiser, District Ranger, Three implemented on Forest Service haul Rivers Ranger District, 12858 US Proposed Action roads. Approximately 45 miles of Highway 2, Troy, MT 59935. Comments The proposed action includes timber National Forest System road (NFSR) may also be sent via email to comments- harvest and associated fuels treatments, would be reconstructed to meet State northern-kootenai-three-rivers@ prescribed burning, and watershed work BMPs for water quality. fs.fed.us, or via facsimile to 406–295– to address the purpose and need. The (5) Implementation of BMPs on roads 7410. proposed action includes: not used for haul routes, including FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) Approximately 2,202 acres of NFSR 4429 O’Brien Lynx Creek road, Leslie McDougall, Project Team Leader, regeneration harvest and 1,149 acres of and NFSR 4445 Lynx Creek. This road

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES EN06OC14.001 60132 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

work would be completed separately Possible Alternatives (2) Because four of the proposed units from the timber sale and would be The Forest Service will consider a would combine to create three openings dependent on other sources of funding. range of alternatives. One of these will larger than 40 acres in MA 12 (big game (6) Approximately 10.7 miles of active be the ‘‘no action’’ alternative in which summer range), a site-specific Forest road storage, 6.3 miles of passive road none of the proposed action would be Plan amendment for MA 12 may be storage, 1.3 miles of active implemented. Additional alternatives required for Wildlife Standard 7, Forest decommissioning, and 7.0 miles of may be included in response to issues Plan page III–49, which states that passive decommissioning would be raised by the public during the scoping generally harvest unit size should not done on roads not currently open for process or due to additional concerns exceed 40 acres in elk and mule deer public motorized travel. Roads for resource values identified by the habitat or 20 acres in moose and identified in the Travel Analysis as interdisciplinary team. whitetail deer habitat. An amendment to needed for long-term management of allow timber harvest in MA 2 (semi- Responsible Official NFS lands would be put into primitive non-motorized recreation/ intermittent stored service (storage). The Forest Supervisor of the Kootenai unsuitable) Timber Standards 1, which Roads identified as not needed for National Forest, 31374 US Highway 2, states that this MA is unsuitable for future management would be Libby, MT 59923–3022, is the timber production, and 2, which states decommissioned. Both storage and Responsible Official. As the Responsible the timber harvest will not occur, may decommissioning could have a range of Official, I will decide if the proposed be necessary. An amendment to allow treatments including simple barrier action will be implemented. I will timber harvest MA 13 (old growth/ installation (passive treatment) where document the decision and rationale for unsuitable) for Timber Standard 1, watershed impacts are not likely, to the decision in the Record of Decision. which states that this MA is not suitable active treatments ranging from removing I have delegated the responsibility for for timber production, and Timber culverts to full recontouring where risks preparing the draft environmental Standard 3 which states that timber to watersheds are high. Non-motorized impact statement (DEIS) and final access would be facilitated with environmental impact statement (FEIS) harvest will not occur, may also be improved tread on road segments to the District Ranger, Three Rivers required. identified by the public as important for Ranger District. Scoping Process use. Nature of Decision To Be Made In addition, five sites are proposed for This notice of intent initiates the road stream crossing restoration where Based on the purpose and need, the scoping process, which guides the abandoned road stream crossing Responsible Official reviews the development of the environmental structures are failing and delivering proposed action, the other alternatives, impact statement. The interdisciplinary sediment to the streams. Streams where the environmental consequences, and team will continue to seek information, work is proposed include North Fork public comments on the analysis in comments, and assistance from Federal, O’Brien, Rabbit Creek, and Prospect order to make the following decisions: State, and local agencies, tribal Creek. (1) Whether to implement timber governments, and other individuals or harvest and associated fuel reduction (7) An estimated 650 acres of grizzly organizations that may be interested in, treatments, prescribed burning, bear Core habitat would be impacted by or affected by, the proposed action. watershed work, recreation proposed harvest and/or road use There are several collaborative groups in improvements, and private property activities occurring within or adjacent to the area that the interdisciplinary team access, including the design features existing Core. To compensate for this will interact with during the analysis. and potential mitigation measures to potential loss of Core acres, roads open protect resources; and if so, how much, It is important that reviewers provide or restricted (gated) to motorized use and at what specific locations. their comments at such times and in elsewhere within the bear management such manner that they are useful to the unit (BMU) would be effectively (2) What, if any, specific project agency’s preparation of the barriered to motorized traffic occuring monitoring requirements are needed to environmental impact statement. during the active bear year. This assure design features and potential compensation work would occur prior mitigation measures are implemented Therefore, comments should be to or concurrently with the proposed and effective, and to evaluate the provided prior to the close of the harvest or road use to be in compliance success of the project objectives. comment period and should clearly with design features of the Access Preliminary project monitoring needs articulate the reviewer’s concerns and Amendment. Similarly, to offset identified include effectiveness of BMP contentions. A more detailed scoping potential increases in open motorized work, and retention of coarse woody letter is available on request as well as route densities incurred during debris. A project-specific monitorng on the Kootenai National Forest projects roadwork and harvest activities in the plan will be developed. page located here: http:// BMU, a road(s) currently open to Preliminary Issues www.fs.usda.gov/projects/kootenai/ motorized use would be temporarily landmanagement/projects. Initial analysis by the gated during the implementation period interdisciplinary team has brought Comments received in response to of these activities. forward several issues that may affect this solicitation, including names and (8) Construction of approximately the design of the project. addresses of those who comment, will 0.14 mile of new road on NFS lands on (1) There are 40 harvest units that become part of the public record for this Yaak Mountain to allow access to would contribute to 24 openings larger proposed action. Comments submitted Stimson Lumber Company lands for than 40 acres. This action requires a 60- anonymously will be accepted and land management purposes. This new day public review and Regional Forester considered, however they will not grant road construction would access Stimson approval (FSM 2471.1). This document standing to the commenter during the land in T32N R34W, Section 3. serves as the beginning of the 60-day objection period. (9) Recreation improvement projects. public review period.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60133

Dated: September 15, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CONTACT. All reasonable Christopher S. Savage, Nancy Stremple, Executive Staff to the accommodation requests are managed Forest Supervisor. National Urban and Community on a case by case basis. [FR Doc. 2014–22817 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Forestry Advisory Council, Yates Dated: September 30, 2014. BILLING CODE P Building (3NW), 201 14th Street SW., Debra S. Pressman, Washington, DC 20250; or by phone at Acting Associate Deputy Chief, State and 202–205–7829, or by cell phone at 202– Private Forestry. 309–9873. Individuals who use DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE [FR Doc. 2014–23745 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] telecommunication devices for the deaf BILLING CODE 3411–15–P Forest Service (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 National Urban and Community between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON Forestry Advisory Council Eastern Standard Time, Monday CIVIL RIGHTS AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. through Friday. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The State Advisory Committees purpose of the meeting is to: SUMMARY: The National Urban and (1) Provide orientation for new AGENCY: United States Commission on Community Forestry Advisory Council members, Civil Rights. (Council) will meet on November 5 and (2) Introduce the facilitator for the ACTION: Notice of period during which 7, 2014. The Council is authorized development of the next National Urban individuals may apply to be appointed under Section 9 of the Cooperative Forestry Ten Year Action Plan, to the Colorado Advisory Committee, Forestry Assistance Act, as amended by (3) Finalize the work plan action Louisiana Advisory Committee, Ohio Title XII, Section 1219 of Public Law items, Advisory Committee, and South 101–624 (the Act) (16 U.S.C. 2105g) and (4) Discuss and approve the 2016 Carolina Advisory Committee; request the Federal Advisory Committee Act of grant categories, for applications. 1972 (5 U.S.C. App. II). The purpose of (5) Receive information from members SUMMARY: Because the terms of the the Committee is to: (a) Develop a of the urban forestry community of members of the Colorado Advisory national urban and community forestry practice, Committee are expiring on February 7, action plan in accordance with Section (6) Receive Forest Service updates on 2015, the United States Commission on 9(g)(3)(A–F) of the Act; (b) evaluate the program activities, partnerships, and Civil Rights hereby invites any implementation of that plan; and (c) budgets, and individual who is eligible to be develop criteria for, and submit (7) Approve the annual appointed to apply. The memberships reccomendations with respect to the accomplishments and recommendations are exclusively for the Colorado urban and community forestry challenge report. Advisory Committee, and applicants cost-share program as required by The agenda will include time for must be residents of Colorado to be Section 9(f)(1–2) of the Act. The meeting people to make oral statements of three considered. Letters of interest must be is open to the public. minutes or less. Individuals wishing to received by the Rocky Mountain Additional information concerning make an oral statement should request Regional Office of the U.S. Commission the Council, can be found by visiting the in writing within 7 days of the meeting on Civil Rights no later than November Council’s Web site at: http:// to be scheduled on the agenda. Council 1, 2014. Letters of interest must be sent www.fs.fed.us/ucf/nucfac.shtml. discussion is limited to Forest Service to the address listed below. DATES: The meeting will be held staff and Council members; however, Because the terms of the members of Wednesday, November 5, 2014 at 1:00 persons who wish to bring urban and the Louisiana Advisory Committee are p.m.–5:00 p.m., and Friday, November community forestry matters to the expiring on February 7, 2015, the 7, 2014 at 9:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m., or until attention of the Council may file written United States Commission on Civil Council business is completed. All statements with the Council staff before Rights hereby invites any individual Council meetings are subject to or after the meeting. Written comments who is eligible to be appointed to apply. cancellation. For status of the meetings and time request for oral comments The memberships are exclusively for the prior to attendance, please contact the must be sent to Nancy Stremple, Louisiana Advisory Committee, and person listed under FOR FURTHER Executive Staff to the National Urban applicants must be residents of INFORMATION CONTACT. and Community Forestry Advisory Louisiana to be considered. Letters of ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Council, Yates Building (3NW), 201 interest must be received by the Central The Westin Charlotte Hotel, Harris 14th Street SW., Washington, DC 20250, Regional Office of the U.S. Commission Room—Second Floor, 601 S. College or by email to [email protected], or on Civil Rights no later than November Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 via facsimile to 202–690–5792. 1, 2014. Letters of interest must be sent on November 5, 2014 and the Summary/minutes of the meeting will to the address listed below. Providence Ballroom I—First Floor on be posted on the following Web site: Because the terms of the members of November 7, 2014. Written comments http://www.fs.fed.us/ucf/nucfac.shtml the Ohio Advisory Committee are may be submitted as described under within 45 days after the meeting. expiring on February 7, 2015, the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. All Meeting Accommodations: If you are United States Commission on Civil comments, including names and a person requiring reasonable Rights hereby invites any individual addresses when provided, are placed in accommodation, please make requests who is eligible to be appointed to apply. the record and are available for public in advance for sign language The memberships are exclusively for the inspection and copying. The public may interpreting, assistive listening devices Ohio Advisory Committee, and inspect comments received at the Forest or other reasonable accommodation for applicants must be residents of Ohio to Service. Visitors are encouraged to call access to the facility or proceedings by be considered. Letters of interest must ahead to facilitate entry into the Forest contacting the person listed in the be received by the Midwestern Regional Service building. section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Office of the U.S. Commission on Civil

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60134 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Rights no later than November 1, 2014. Questions can also be directed via email DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Letters of interest must be sent to the to [email protected]. address listed below. International Trade Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Because the terms of the members of Colorado, Louisiana, Ohio, and South [A–570–848] the South Carolina Advisory Committee Carolina Advisory Committees (SACs) are expiring on February 7, 2015, the are statutorily mandated federal Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From United States Commission on Civil advisory committees of the U.S. the People’s Republic of China: Rights hereby invites any individual Commission on Civil Rights pursuant to Preliminary Results of Antidumping who is eligible to be appointed to apply. 42 U.S.C. 1975a. Under the charter for Duty Administrative Review and New The memberships are exclusively for the the SACs, the purpose is to provide Shipper Review; 2012–2013 South Carolina Advisory Committee, advice and recommendations to the U.S. AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, and applicants must be residents of Commission on Civil Rights South Carolina to be considered. Letters International Trade Administration, (Commission) on a broad range of civil Department of Commerce. of interest must be received by the rights matters in its respective state that Southern Regional Office of the U.S. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce pertain to alleged deprivations of voting (the Department) is conducting an Commission on Civil Rights no later rights or discrimination or denials of than November 1, 2014. Letters of administrative review and new shipper equal protection of the laws because of review of the antidumping duty order interest must be sent to the address race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, listed below. on freshwater crawfish tail meat from or national origin, or the administration the People’s Republic of China (PRC). DATES: Letters of interest for of justice. SACs also provide assistance The period of review (POR) for the membership on the Colorado Advisory to the Commission in its statutory administrative review and new shipper Committee should be received no later obligation to serve as a national review is September 1, 2012, through than November 1, 2014. clearinghouse for civil rights August 31, 2013. The Department Letters of interest for membership on information. preliminarily determines that Hubei the Louisiana Advisory Committee The SAC consists of not more than 19 Nature Agriculture Industry Co., Ltd. should be received no later than members, each of whom will serve a (Hubei Nature, the new shipper), and November 1, 2014. two-year term. Members serve as unpaid Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd. (Xiping Letters of interest for membership on Special Government Employees who are Opeck) have not made sales of subject the Ohio Advisory Committee should be reimbursed for travel and expenses. To merchandise in the United States at received no later than November 1, be eligible to be on a SAC, applicants prices below normal value. 2014. must be residents of the respective state DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2014. Letters of interest for membership on and have demonstrated expertise or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the South Carolina Advisory Committee interest in civil rights issues. should be received no later than Bryan Hansen or Hermes Pinilla, AD/ The Commission is an independent, November 1, 2014. CVD Operations, Office 1, Enforcement bipartisan agency established by and Compliance, International Trade ADDRESSES: Send letters of interest for Congress in 1957 to focus on matters of Administration, U.S. Department of the Colorado Advisory Committee to: race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Rocky or national origin. Its mandate is to: Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; Mountain Regional Office, 999 18th • Investigate complaints from citizens telephone: (202) 482–3683, and (202) Street NW., Suite 1380 South, Denver, that their voting rights are being 482–3477, respectively. CO 80294. Letter can also be sent via deprived, email to [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: • Send letters of interest for the Study and collect information about Scope of the Order Louisiana Advisory Committee to: U.S. discrimination or denials of equal protection under the law, The merchandise subject to the Commission on Civil Rights, Central antidumping duty order is freshwater • Appraise federal civil rights laws Regional Office, 400 State Avenue, Suite crawfish tail meat, which is currently and policies, 908, Kansas City, KS 66101. Letter can classified in the Harmonized Tariff • also be sent via email to Serve as a national clearinghouse Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) [email protected]. on discrimination laws, under item numbers 1605.40.10.10, Send letters of interest for the Ohio • Submit reports and findings and 1605.40.10.90, 0306.19.00.10, and Advisory Committee to: U.S. recommendations to the President and 0306.29.00.00. On February 10, 2012, Commission on Civil Rights, the Congress, and the Department added HTSUS Midwestern Regional Office, 55 W. • Issue public service announcements classification number 0306.29.01.00 to Monroe St., Suite 410, Chicago, IL to discourage discrimination. the scope description pursuant to a 60603. Letter can also be sent via email The Commission invites any request by U.S. Customs and Border to [email protected]. Protection (CBP). While the HTSUS Send letters of interest for the South individual who is eligible to be appointed a member of the Colorado, numbers are provided for convenience Carolina Advisory Committee to: U.S. and customs purposes, the written Commission on Civil Rights, Southern Louisiana, Ohio, or South Carolina Advisory Committee covered by this description is dispositive. A full Regional Office, 61 Forsyth St. SW., description of the scope of the order is Suite 16T126, Atlanta, GA 30303. notice to send a letter of interest and a resume´ to the respective address above. contained in the Preliminary Decision Letters can also be sent via email to Memorandum.1 [email protected]. Dated in Chicago, IL, on October 1, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Mussatt, 1 See the memorandum from Christian Marsh, Chief, Regional Programs Unit. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Programs Unit, 55 W. Monroe St., Suite [FR Doc. 2014–23746 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 410, Chicago, IL 60603, (312) 353–8311. BILLING CODE P Compliance, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60135

Methodology five days after the date of publication of will calculate an importer-specific 2 The Department conducted these this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR assessment rate on the basis of the ratio reviews in accordance with section 351.309(c), interested parties may of the total amount of dumping 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as submit cases briefs no later than 30 days calculated for the importer’s examined amended (the Act). Export Price is after the date of publication of these sales and, where possible, the total calculated in accordance with section preliminary results of review.3 Parties entered value of sales, in accordance 772(c) of the Act. Because the PRC is a who submit arguments are requested to with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). In these non-market economy (NME) within the submit with the argument: (1) A preliminary results, the Department meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, statement of the issue; (2) a brief applied the assessment rate calculation normal value has been calculated in summary of the argument; and (3) a method adopted in the Final accordance with section 773(c) of the table of authorities. Rebuttals briefs, Modification for Reviews, i.e., on the Act. limited to issues raised in case briefs, basis of monthly average-to-average For a full description of the may be filed no later than five days after comparisons using only the transactions methodology underlying our the time limit for filing the case briefs, associated with the importer with conclusions, see Preliminary Decision as specified by 19 CFR 351.309(d). offsets being provided for non-dumped Memorandum. The Preliminary Interested parties who wish to request comparisons.7 Where an importer- (or Decision Memorandum is a public a hearing, or to participate if one is customer-) specific ad valorem rate is document and is on file electronically requested, must submit a written zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP via Enforcement and Compliance’s request to the Assistant Secretary for to liquidate appropriate entries without Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. regard to antidumping duties.8 Centralized Electronic Service System Department of Commerce, filed Pursuant to a refinement in the (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to electronically using IA ACCESS. An Department’s assessment practice in 9 registered users at http:// electronically filed document must be NME cases, for entries that were not iaaccess.trade.gov and in the Central received successfully in its entirety by reported in the U.S. sales databases Records Unit, room 7046 of the main the Department’s IA ACCESS by 5:00 submitted by companies individually Department of Commerce building. In p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after examined during this review, the addition, a complete version of the the date of publication of this notice.4 Department will instruct CBP to Preliminary Decision Memorandum can Hearing requests should contain (1) the liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide be accessed directly on the internet at party’s name, address, and telephone rate. We intend to issue assessment http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/ number; (2) the number of participants; instructions to CBP 15 days after the index.html. The signed Preliminary and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. date of publication of the final results of Decision Memorandum and the Oral presentations will be limited to these reviews. electronic versions of the Preliminary issues raised in the briefs. If a request Cash Deposit Requirements Decision Memorandum are identical in for a hearing is made, we will inform The following cash deposit content. parties of the scheduled date for the requirements will be effective upon hearing which will be held at the U.S. Preliminary Results of Reviews publication of the final results of these Department of Commerce, 14th Street reviews for shipments of the subject The Department determines that the and Constitution Avenue NW., merchandise from the PRC entered, or following preliminary dumping margins Washington DC 20230, at a time and withdrawn from warehouse, for exist for the administrative review 5 location to be determined. Parties consumption on or after the publication covering the period September 1, 2012, should confirm by telephone or email through August 31, 2013: date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) the date, time, and location of the of the Act: (1) For the companies listed hearing. above that have a separate rate, with the Weighted Unless the deadline is extended exception of Hubei Nature (see below), average pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of Exporter dumping the cash deposit rate will be that the Act, the Department will issue the margin established in the final results of these (percent) final results of these reviews, including reviews (except if the rate is zero or de the results of its analysis of issues raised Xiping Opeck Food Co., Ltd...... 0.00 minimis, i.e., less than 0.5 percent, then by parties in their comments, within no cash deposit will be required); (2) for 120 days after the publication of these previously investigated or reviewed PRC As a result of the new shipper review, preliminary results, pursuant to section the Department preliminarily and non-PRC exporters not listed above 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR that received a separate rate in a prior determines that a dumping margin of 351.213(h). 0.00 percent exists for merchandise segment of this proceeding, the cash produced and exported by Hubei Nature Assessment Rates deposit rate will continue to be the Agriculture Industry Co., Ltd. covering Upon issuing the final results, the existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all the period September 1, 2012, through Department will determine, and CBP PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled August 31, 2013. shall assess, antidumping duties on all to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate Disclosure and Public Comment appropriate entries covered by these reviews.6 If a respondent’s weighted 7 See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of the The Department will disclose average dumping margin is above de calculations performed in these Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty preliminary results to the parties within results of these reviews, the Department Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012) (Final Modification for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Reviews). 2 See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Administrative Review and New Shipper Review: 8 See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 3 Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People’s See 19 CFR 351.309(c). 9 For a full discussion of this practice, see Non- Republic of China’’ dated concurrently with and 4 See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: hereby adopted by this notice (Preliminary Decision 5 Id. Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 Memorandum). 6 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). (October 24, 2011).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60136 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

will be that for the PRC-wide entity; and 15. Recommendation SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject [FR Doc. 2014–23793 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 12, 2012, the Department published the merchandise which have not received BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P PET Film Final Results. Domestic their own rate, the cash deposit rate will producers Dupont Teijin Films, be the rate applicable to the PRC Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., SKC, exporter that supplied that non-PRC DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. exporter. appealed the PET Film Final Results to With respect to Hubei Nature, the new International Trade Administration the CIT, and on February 7, 2013, the shipper respondent, the Department [A–570–924] CIT issued its first remand order in this established a combination cash deposit case concerning the Department’s rate for this company consistent with its Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, selection of its surrogate country.3 On practice as follows: (1) For subject Sheet, and Strip From the People’s August 21, 2013, the CIT issued its merchandise produced and exported by Republic of China: Notice of Court second remand and ordered the Hubei Nature, the cash deposit rate will Decision Not in Harmony With Final Department to reconsider its surrogate be the rate established for Hubei Nature Results of Administrative Review and country selection with the benefit of in the final results of the NSR; (2) for Notice of Amended Final Results of 2009 per-capita gross national income subject merchandise exported by Hubei Administrative Review Pursuant to data.4 Nature, but not produced by Hubei Court Decision Pursuant to the CIT’s remand Nature, the cash deposit rate will be the instructions, the Department, under rate for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, protest, selected South Africa as the subject merchandise produced by Hubei International Trade Administration, primary surrogate country for Nature but not exported by Hubei Department of Commerce. calculating normal value.5 The CIT Nature, the cash deposit rate will be the SUMMARY: On July 22, 2014, the United sustained the Department’s PET Film rate applicable to the exporter. States Court of International Trade Final Remand on July 22, 2014,6 and, as These deposit requirements, when (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the Department of a result, the Respondents’ dumping imposed, shall remain in effect until Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’’) results margins changed. further notice. of redetermination, pursuant to the Timken Notice Notification to Importers CIT’s remand order, in Dupont Teijin Films v. United States, 997 F. Supp. 2d In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at This notice serves as a preliminary 1338 (CIT 2014).1 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, reminder to importers of their Consistent with the decision of the the CAFC has held that, pursuant to responsibility under 19 CFR United States Court of Appeals for the section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) in Timken Co. 1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’), the regarding the reimbursement of v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. Department must publish a notice of a antidumping duties prior to liquidation 1990) (‘‘Timken’’), as clarified by court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ of the relevant entries during these Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. with a Department determination and PORs. Failure to comply with this United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. must suspend liquidation of entries requirement could result in the 2010) (‘‘Diamond Sawblades’’), the pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. Department’s presumption that Department is notifying the public that The CIT’s July 22, 2014, judgment reimbursement of antidumping duties the final judgment in this case is not in sustaining the PET Film Final Remand occurred and the subsequent assessment harmony with the Department’s PET constitutes a final decision of that court of double antidumping duties. Film Final Results 2 and is amending the that is not in harmony with the PET We are issuing and publishing the final results with respect to the margins Film Final Results. This notice is preliminary results of these reviews in assigned to Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd., published in fulfillment of the accordance with sections 751(a)(1), Sichuan Dongfang Insulating Material publication requirements of Timken. 751(a)(2)(B)(iv), 751(a)(3), 777(i) of the Co., Ltd., Fuwei Films (Shandong) Co., Amended Final Results Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h), 351.214 and Ltd., and Shaoxing Xiangyu Green 351.221(b)(4). Packing Co., Ltd. (‘‘Respondents’’) for Because there is now a final court Dated: September 29, 2014. the period of review (‘‘POR’’) November decision with respect to the PET Film Paul Piquado, 1, 2009, through October 31, 2010. Final Results, the revised dumping Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Effective Date: August 1, 2014. margins are as follows: Compliance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Weighted- Appendix Thomas Martin, Office IV, Enforcement average and Compliance, International Trade Exporter margin List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Administration, U.S. Department of (percent) Decision Memorandum Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 1. Summary Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd...... 19.49 2. Background telephone: (202) 482–3936. Sichuan Dongfang Insulating 3. Scope of the Order Material Co., Ltd...... 14.25 4. Bona Fides Analysis Fuwei Films (Shandong) Co., 5. Non-Market-Economy Country Status 1 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant Ltd...... 19.35 6. Surrogate Country to Court Remand, Court No. 12–00088, dated February 7, 2014, available at: http:// 7. Separate Rates 3 enforcement.trade.gov/remands/index.html (‘‘PET See Dupont Teijin Films v. United States, 896 8. Absence of De Jure Control Film Final Remand’’). F. Supp. 2d 1302 (CIT 2013). 9. Absence of De Facto Control 4 2 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and See Dupont Teijin Films v. United States, 931 10. Fair Value Comparisons Strip from the People’s Republic of China: Final F. Supp. 2d 1297 (CIT 2013) (‘‘Remand Opinion 11. U.S. Price Results of the 2009–2010 Antidumping Duty and Order’’). 12. Normal Value Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 5 See PET Film Final Remand. 13. Surrogate Values Order, 77 FR 14493 (March 12, 2012) (‘‘PET Film 6 See Dupont Teijin Films v. United States, 997 14. Currency Conversion Final Results’’). F. Supp. 2d 1338 (CIT 2014).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60137

Weighted- Comments must comply with 15 CFR photoemission spectroscopy. The Exporter average 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the regulations and electronics and STM head must provide margin be postmarked on or before October 27, 60 frames per second scan rate with (percent) 2014. Address written comments to pixel density of 128 x 128, the STM Shaoxing Xiangyu Green Pack- Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room head must be mounted on an 8 inch ing Co., Ltd...... 19.35 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, flange with a vertical face, the Washington, DC 20230. Applications instrument must have the ability to Because no party appealed the CIT’s may be examined between 8:30 a.m. and sputter clean the tip without removing decision before the period of appeal 5:00 p.m. at the U.S. Department of it from the STM scan head, the expired on September 22, 2014, the Commerce in Room 3720. tunneling bias voltage must be applied CIT’s decision is now final and Docket Number: 14–021. Applicant: to the sample, and the preamp must conclusive. Accordingly, the Utah State University, 2400 Old Main collect current from the tip. Justification Department will instruct U.S. Customs Hill, Logan, Utah 84322–2400. for Duty-Free Entry: There are no and Border Protection to assess Instrument: Respirometer for measuring instruments of the same general antidumping duties on entries during the oxygen consumption of aquatic category manufactured in the United the POR of the subject merchandise animals. Manufacturer: Loligo Systems, States. Application accepted by exported by the Respondents using the Denmark. Intended Use: The instrument Commissioner of Customs: August 26, revised assessment rates calculated by will be used to better understand how 2014. the Department in the PET Film Final the ability of aquatic organisms to obtain oxygen under different Dated: September 29, 2014. Remand. environmental conditions affects their Gregory W. Campbell, Cash Deposit Requirements growth, survivorship, distribution, and Director of Subsidies Enforcement, abundance. The phenomenon being Enforcement and Compliance. Since the PET Film Final Results, the [FR Doc. 2014–23794 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Department has established a new cash studied is the rate of oxygen BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P deposit rate for the Respondents.7 consumption by aquatic invertebrates, Therefore, the Respondents’ cash using the instrument under different deposit rates do not need to be updated temperatures and pollution concentrations. Continuous DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE as a result of these amended final measurement of metabolic (oxygen results. The cash deposit rate for the consumption) response to stress by International Trade Administration Respondents will remain the rate small aquatic organisms (<10mm in established for the subsequent and Quarterly Update to Annual Listing of length) requires a flow-through system most-recent period during which the Foreign Government Subsidies on with oxygen probes and equipment that Respondents were reviewed. Articles of Cheese Subject to an In- can both be programmed to precisely Quota Rate of Duty Notification to Interested Parties increase the temperature of a water bath This notice is issued and published in and automatically detect ug level AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, changes in oxygen concentrations, accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), International Trade Administration, without which the research could not be 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Department of Commerce. conducted. Justification for Duty-Free DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2014. Dated: September 29, 2014. Entry: There are no instruments of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Piquado, same general category manufactured in Stephanie Moore, AD/CVD Operations, Assistant Secretary For Enforcement and the United States. Application accepted Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, Compliance. by Commissioner of Customs: August 5, International Trade Administration, [FR Doc. 2014–23796 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 2014. U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Docket Number: 14–023. Applicant: Louisiana State University, 202 Street and Constitution Ave. NW., Nicholson Hall, LSU, Baton Rouge, LA Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 70803. Instrument: Scanning Probe 482–3692. Microscope (SPM)—scanning tunneling SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section International Trade Administration microscopy. Manufacturer: SPECS 702 of the Trade Agreements Act of Surface Nano Analysis, Germany. 1979 (as amended) (the Act) requires the Application(s) for Duty-Free Entry of Intended Use: The instrument will be Department of Commerce (the Scientific Instruments used to elucidate catalytic properties of Department) to determine, in consultation with the Secretary of Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the metal and metal-oxide systems, Agriculture, whether any foreign Educational, Scientific and Cultural uncovering new schemes by which government is providing a subsidy with Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. organic molecules become respect to any article of cheese subject L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106– environmentally hazardous upon to an in-quota rate of duty, as defined 36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301), we chemisorption. Scanning tunneling in section 702(h) of the Act, and to invite comments on the question of microscopy (STM) will be used to probe publish quarterly updates to the type whether instruments of equivalent the nanoscale atomic structure, growth, and amount of those subsidies. We scientific value, for the purposes for and atomic/molecular dynamics of a hereby provide the Department’s which the instruments shown below are variety of systems, including metal quarterly update of subsidies on articles intended to be used, are being nanoclusters on oxides and grasphene, of cheese that were imported during the manufactured in the United States. metal oxide surfaces and metal surfaces. All experiments will be conducted in periods April 1, 2014, through June 30, ultra-high vacuum conditions, including 2014. 7 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From the People’s Republic of China: Final in addition the STM, other surface The Department has developed, in Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative sciences probes such as electron-energy consultation with the Secretary of Review; 2011–2012, 79 FR 37715 (July 2, 2014). loss spectroscopy, x-ray and UV Agriculture, information on subsidies,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60138 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

as defined in section 702(h) of the Act, subsidies, and additional information Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution being provided either directly or on the subsidy programs listed, as the Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20230. indirectly by foreign governments on information is developed. This determination and notice are in articles of cheese subject to an in-quota The Department encourages any accordance with section 702(a) of the rate of duty. The appendix to this notice person having information on foreign Act. lists the country, the subsidy program or government subsidy programs which Dated: September 29, 2014. programs, and the gross and net benefit articles of cheese subject to an Paul Piquado, amounts of each subsidy for which in-quota rate of duty to submit such information is currently available. The information in writing to the Assistant Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Department will incorporate additional Secretary for Enforcement and programs which are found to constitute Compliance, U.S. Department of Appendix

SUBSIDY PROGRAMS ON CHEESE SUBJECT TO AN IN-QUOTA RATE OF DUTY

Gross 1 Net 2 Subsidy Country Program(s) Subsidy ($/lb) ($/lb)

28 European Union Member States 3 ...... European Union Restitution Payments ...... $0.00 $0.00 Canada ...... Export Assistance on Certain Types of Cheese ...... 0.38 0.38 Norway ...... Indirect (Milk) Subsidy ...... 0.00 0.00 Consumer Subsidy ...... 0.00 0.00

Total ...... 0.00 0.00 Switzerland ...... Deficiency Payments ...... 0.00 0.00 1 Defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(5). 2 Defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(6). 3 The 28 member states of the European Union are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slo- venia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

[FR Doc. 2014–23797 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] copies of the information collection II. Method of Collection BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P instrument and instructions should be Paper applications, electronic reports, directed to Adam Bailey, (727) 209– and telephone calls are required from 5968 or [email protected]. participants, and methods of submittal DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: include internet, electronic forms, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric facsimile transmission of paper forms. I. Abstract Administration III. Data This request is for a regular Proposed Information Collection; OMB Control Number: 0648–0345. Comment Request; Southeast Region submission (extension of a currently Form Number: None. Bycatch Reduction Device Certification approved information collection). Type of Review: Regular submission Family of Forms The National Marine Fisheries Service (extension of a currently approved collection). (NMFS) Southeast Region manages the AGENCY: National Oceanic and Affected Public: Business or other for- U.S. fisheries in the exclusive economic Atmospheric Administration, profit organizations. Commerce. zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic, Estimated Number of Respondents: Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico regions ACTION: Notice. 32. under various Fishery Management Estimated Time per Response: Station SUMMARY: The Department of Plans (FMPs). The Regional Fishery Sheet BRD Form, Species Commerce, as part of its continuing Management Councils prepared the Characterization Form, Length effort to reduce paperwork and FMPs pursuant to the Magnuson- Frequency Form, Condition and Fate respondent burden, invites the general Stevens Fishery Conservation and Form, and Trip Report/Cover Sheet, one public and other Federal agencies to Management Act. The regulations minute; Independent BRD Test Form, 5 take this opportunity to comment on implementing the FMPs are located at minutes; Vessel Information proposed and/or continuing information 50 CFR part 622. Application and the Gear Specification collections, as required by the Form, 20 minutes. The recordkeeping and reporting Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Estimated Total Annual Burden requirements at 50 CFR part 622 form DATES: Hours: 71. Written comments must be the basis for this collection of submitted on or before December 5, Estimated Total Annual Cost to information. The NMFS Southeast 2014. Public: $640 in recordkeeping/reporting Region requests information from the costs. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments shrimp fishery participants to certify IV. Request for Comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental individual Bycatch Reduction Devices Paperwork Clearance Officer, (BRDs). This information, upon receipt, Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Department of Commerce, Room 6616, results in an increasingly more efficient the proposed collection of information 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., and accurate database for management is necessary for the proper performance Washington, DC 20230 (or via the and permitting of the fisheries in the of the functions of the agency, including Internet at [email protected]). EEZ off the South Atlantic, Caribbean, whether the information shall have FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and Gulf of Mexico. practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Requests for additional information or agency’s estimate of the burden

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60139

(including hours and cost) of the The Cooperative Game Fish Tagging Dated: September 30, 2014 proposed collection of information; (c) Program was initiated in 1971 as part of Gwellnar Banks, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and a comprehensive research program Management Analyst, Office of the Chief clarity of the information to be resulting from passage of Public Law Information Officer. collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 86–359, Study of Migratory Game Fish, [FR Doc. 2014–23712 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] burden of the collection of information and other legislative acts under which BILLING CODE 3510–22–P on respondents, including through the the National Marine Fisheries Service use of automated collection techniques (NMFS) operates. The Cooperative or other forms of information Tagging Center attempts to determine DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE technology. the migration patterns of, and other Comments submitted in response to biological information for, billfish, National Oceanic and Atmospheric this notice will be summarized and/or tunas, and swordfish. The fish tagging Administration included in the request for approval by report is provided to the angler with the Proposed Information Collection; the Office of Management and Budget tags, and he/she fills out the card with Comment Request; Pacific Albacore for this information collection; they also the information when a fish is tagged Logbook will become a matter of public record. and mails it to NMFS. Information on Dated: September 30, 2014. each species is used by NMFS to AGENCY: National Oceanic and Gwellnar Banks, determine migratory patterns, distance Atmospheric Administration, traveled, stock boundaries, age, and Commerce. Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. growth. These data are necessary input ACTION: Notice. for developing management criteria by [FR Doc. 2014–23715 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] regional fishery management councils, SUMMARY: The Department of BILLING CODE 3510–22–P states, and NMFS. Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and II. Method of Collection respondent burden, invites the general DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Information is submitted by mail. public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on National Oceanic and Atmospheric III. Data proposed and/or continuing information Administration OMB Control Number: 0648–0247. collections, as required by the Proposed Information Collection; Form Number: NOAA form 88–162. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Comment Request; Cooperative Game Type of Review: Regular submission DATES: Written comments must be Fish Tagging Report (extension of a current information submitted on or before December 5, collection). 2014. AGENCY: National Oceanic and Affected Public: Individuals or ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments Atmospheric Administration, households. to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Commerce. Estimated Number of Respondents: Paperwork Clearance Officer, ACTION: Notice. 12,000. Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., SUMMARY: The Department of Estimated Time per Response: 2 Commerce, as part of its continuing minutes. Washington, DC 20230 (or via the effort to reduce paperwork and Estimated Total Annual Burden Internet at [email protected]). respondent burden, invites the general Hours: 400 hours. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: public and other Federal agencies to Estimated Total Annual Cost to Requests for additional information or take this opportunity to comment on Public: $0. copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be proposed and/or continuing information IV. Request for Comments collections, as required by the directed to John Childers, SWFSC, 8901 Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether La Jolla Shores Drive, La Jolla, CA the proposed collection of information 92037, 858–546–7192, john.childers@ DATES: Written comments must be is necessary for the proper performance noaa.gov. submitted on or before December 5, of the functions of the agency, including 2014. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: whether the information shall have ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the I. Abstract to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental agency’s estimate of the burden This request is for extension of a Paperwork Clearance Officer, (including hours and cost) of the currently approved collection. U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 6616, proposed collection of information; (c) fishermen, participating in the Pacific 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., ways to enhance the quality, utility, and albacore tuna fishery, are required to Washington, DC 20230 (or via the clarity of the information to be obtain a Highly Migratory Species Internet at [email protected]). collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Fishery Management Plan and/or a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: burden of the collection of information High-Seas Fishery Compliance Act Requests for additional information or on respondents, including through the permit. A requirement for the permits is copies of the information collection use of automated collection techniques to complete and submit logbooks instrument and instructions should be or other forms of information documenting their daily fishing directed to Eric Orbesen, (305) 361– technology. activities, including catch and effort for 4253 or [email protected]. Comments submitted in response to each fishing trip. Submissions must be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: this notice will be summarized and/or made within 30 days of the completion included in the request for OMB of a trip. The information obtained is I. Abstract approval of this information collection; used by the agency to assess the status This request is for extension of a they also will become a matter of public of Pacific albacore stocks and to monitor current information collection. record. the fishery.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60140 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

II. Method of Collection ACTION: Notice. III. Data Respondents have a choice of either OMB Control Number: 0648–0359. SUMMARY: The Department of electronic data submission or paper Form Number: None. Commerce, as part of its continuing forms. Methods of submittal include Type of Review: Regular submission effort to reduce paperwork and email of electronic data submissions, (extension of a currently approved respondent burden, invites the public and mailing of paper forms. collection). and other Federal agencies to take this Affected Public: Business or other for- III. Data opportunity to comment on proposed profit organizations. OMB Control Number: 0648–0223. and/or continuing information Estimated Number of Respondents: Form Number(s): NOAA Form 88– collections, as required by the 2,847. 197. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Estimated Time per Response: Live Type of Review: Regular submission DATES: Written comments must be rocks, 10 seconds; golden crab and (extension of a currently approved submitted on or before December 5, spiny lobster traps and sea bass pots, collection). 2014. seven minutes each; mackerel gillnets Affected Public: Business or other for- and buoy gear, 20 minutes each. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments profit organizations. Estimated Total Annual Burden to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Estimated Number of Respondents: Hours: 25,645. 4,000. Paperwork Clearance Officer, Estimated Total Annual Cost to Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour. Department of Commerce, Room 6616, Public: $410,311.50. Estimated Total Annual Burden 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Hours: 4,000. Washington, DC 20230 (or via the IV. Request for Comments Estimated Total Annual Cost to Internet at [email protected]). Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Public: $2,560 in recordkeeping/ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the proposed collection of information reporting costs. Requests for additional information or is necessary for the proper performance copies of the information collection of the functions of the agency, including IV. Request for Comments instrument and instructions should be whether the information shall have Comments are invited on: (a) Whether directed to Adam Bailey, (727) 209– practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the the proposed collection of information 5968 or [email protected]. agency’s estimate of the burden is necessary for the proper performance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (including hours and cost) of the of the functions of the agency, including proposed collection of information; (c) whether the information shall have I. Abstract ways to enhance the quality, utility, and practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the This request is for a regular clarity of the information to be agency’s estimate of the burden submission (extension of a currently collected; and (d) ways to minimize the (including hours and cost) of the approved information collection). burden of the collection of information proposed collection of information; (c) The National Marine Fisheries Service on respondents, including through the ways to enhance the quality, utility, and (NMFS) Southeast Region manages the use of automated collection techniques clarity of the information to be U.S. fisheries in the exclusive economic or other forms of information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic, technology. burden of the collection of information Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico regions Comments submitted in response to on respondents, including through the under various Fishery Management this notice will be summarized and/or use of automated collection techniques Plans (FMPs). The Regional Fishery included in the request for approval by or other forms of information Management Councils prepared the the Office of Management and Budget technology. FMPs pursuant to the Magnuson- for this information collection; they also Comments submitted in response to Stevens Fishery Conservation and will become a matter of public record. this notice will be summarized and/or Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Dated: September 30, 2014. included in the request for OMB Act). The regulations implementing the approval of this information collection; Gwellnar Banks, FMPs are located at 50 CFR part 622. they also will become a matter of public Management Analyst, Office of the Chief record. The recordkeeping and reporting Information Officer. requirements in 50 CFR part 622 form [FR Doc. 2014–23716 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Dated: September 30, 2014. the basis for this collection of BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Gwellnar Banks, information. Requirements that fishing Management Analyst, Office of the Chief gear be marked are essential to facilitate Information Officer. enforcement. The ability to link fishing DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [FR Doc. 2014–23713 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] gear to the vessel owner is crucial to BILLING CODE 3510–22–P enforcement of regulations issued under National Oceanic and Atmospheric the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Administration Act. The marking of fishing gear is also DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE valuable in actions concerning damage, Proposed Information Collection; loss, and civil proceedings. The Comment Request; Southeast Region National Oceanic and Atmospheric requirements imposed in the Southeast Vessel Identification Requirements Administration Region are for coral aquacultured live AGENCY: National Oceanic and Proposed Information Collection; rock; golden crab traps; mackerel gillnet Atmospheric Administration, Comment Request; Southeast Region floats; spiny lobster traps; black sea bass Commerce. Gear Identification Requirements pots; and buoy gear. ACTION: Notice. II. Method of Collection AGENCY: National Oceanic and SUMMARY: The Department of Atmospheric Administration, The markings will be placed directly Commerce, as part of its continuing Commmerce. on the gear. effort to reduce paperwork and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60141

respondent burden, invites the general readily identified, gear violations are DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE public and other Federal agencies to more readily prosecuted, and this take this opportunity to comment on allows for more cost-effective National Oceanic and Atmospheric proposed and/or continuing information enforcement. Administration collections, as required by the RIN 0648–XD530 Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. II. Method of Collection DATES: Written comments must be Numbers are painted directly on the Fisheries of the South Atlantic; South submitted on or before December 5, vessels. Atlantic Fishery Management Council; 2014. Public Meeting III. Data ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental OMB Control Number: 0648–0358. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Paperwork Clearance Officer, Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Form Number: None. Department of Commerce, Room 6616, Commerce. 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Type of Review: Regular submission ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. Washington, DC 20230 (or via the (extension of a currently approved Internet at [email protected]). collection). SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Affected Public: Business or other for- hold a meeting of its Snapper Grouper Requests for additional information or profit organizations. copies of the information collection Advisory Panel (AP) in North instrument and instructions should be Estimated Number of Respondents: Charleston, SC. The meeting is open to directed to Adam Bailey, (727) 209– 7,825. the public. 5968 or [email protected]. Estimated Time per Response: 45 DATES: The meeting will be held from 9 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: minutes. a.m. until 5 p.m. on Tuesday, October 21, 2014 and from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. Estimated Total Annual Burden I. Abstract on Wednesday, October 22, 2014. Hours: 5,869. This request is for a regular ADDRESSES: submission (extension of a currently Estimated Total Annual Cost to Meeting Address: The meeting will be approved information collection). Public: $234,750. held at the Crowne Plaza, 4381 Tanger The National Marine Fisheries Service Outlet Blvd., N. Charleston, SC 29418; IV. Request for Comments (NMFS) Southeast Region manages the telephone: (877) 747–7301. U.S. fisheries in the exclusive economic Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Council Address: South Atlantic zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic, the proposed collection of information Fishery Management Council, 4055 Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico regions is necessary for the proper performance Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405. under various Fishery Management of the functions of the agency, including Plans (FMPs). The Regional Fishery whether the information shall have FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Management Councils prepared the practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Iverson, Public Information Officer, FMPs pursuant to the Magnuson- South Atlantic Fishery Management agency’s estimate of the burden Stevens Fishery Conservation and Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite (including hours and cost) of the Management Act. The regulations 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405; implementing the FMPs are located at proposed collection of information; (c) telephone: (843) 571–4366 or toll free: 50 CFR part 622. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and (866) SAFMC–10; fax: (843) 769–4520; The recordkeeping and reporting clarity of the information to be email: [email protected]. requirements at 50 CFR part 622 form collected; and (d) ways to minimize the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the basis for this collection of burden of the collection of information The Snapper Grouper Advisory Panel information. NMFS Southeast Region on respondents, including through the will receive an update on the status of requires that all permitted fishing use of automated collection techniques various amendments to the Snapper vessels must mark their vessel with the or other forms of information Grouper Fishery Management Plan official identification number or some technology. (FMP) and other amendments affecting form of identification. A vessel’s official Comments submitted in response to the snapper grouper fishery. AP number, under most regulations, is this notice will be summarized and/or members will receive overviews and required to be displayed on the port and included in the request for approval by provide recommendations on the starboard sides of the deckhouse or hull, the Office of Management and Budget following amendments to the Snapper and weather deck. The official number for this information collection; they also Grouper FMP: Regulatory Amendment and color code identifies each vessel 16 with options to remove the current will become a matter of public record. and should be visible at distances from seasonal closure for the commercial the sea and in the air. These markings Dated: September 30, 2014. black sea bass pot fishery; Regulatory provide law enforcement personnel Gwellnar Banks, Amendment 22 addressing management with a means to monitor fishing, at-sea Management Analyst, Office of the Chief measures for gag grouper and wreckfish; processing, and other related activities, Information Officer. the development of a Joint South to ascertain whether the vessel’s [FR Doc. 2014–23714 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico observed activities are in accordance Amendment on South Florida Issues; BILLING CODE 3510–22–P with those authorized for that vessel. Amendment 36 to establish Spawning The identifying number is used by Special Management Zones (SMZs); and NMFS, the United States Coast Guard Amendment 35 that would remove (USCG) and other marine agencies in some species from the snapper grouper issuing violations, prosecutions, and management complex. other enforcement actions. Vessels that The AP will also receive updates on qualify for particular fisheries are the development of a recreational tag

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60142 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

program through Amendment 22 and (Algonquin), for authorization under the Background updates on stock assessments for Marine Mammal Protection Act Sections 101(a)(5)(A) (D) of the hogfish, mutton snapper, red snapper (MMPA) to take marine mammals, by MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct and gray triggerfish. The AP will receive harassment, incidental to operating, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) updates on electronic reporting efforts, maintaining, and repairing a liquefied to allow, upon request, the incidental, the Council’s Visioning and Strategic natural gas (LNG) port and the but not intentional taking of marine Planning Project for the snapper grouper Algonquin Pipeline Lateral (Pipeline mammals by U.S. citizens who engage fishery, and address other business as Lateral) facilities by NEG and in a specified activity (other than necessary. Algonquin, in Massachusetts Bay, with commercial fishing) within a specified Although non-emergency issues not changes to the proposed monitoring geographical region if certain findings contained in this agenda may come measures only. Due to the proposed are made and regulations are issued or, before this group for discussion, those revision, the IHA would be effective if the taking is limited to harassment, a issues may not be the subject of formal later than originally anticipated, notice of a proposed authorization is action during the meeting. Action will although it still would be effective for a provided to the public for review. be restricted to those issues specifically one-year period. NMFS is requesting An authorization for incidental listed in this notice and any issues comments on changes to the proposed takings shall be granted if NMFS finds arising after publication of this notice monitoring in its proposal to issue an that the taking will have a negligible that require emergency action under authorization to Northeast Gateway to impact on the species or stock(s), will section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens incidentally take, by harassment, small not have an unmitigable adverse impact Act, provided the public has been numbers of marine mammals for a on the availability of the species or notified of the Council’s intent to take period of 1 year. stock(s) for subsistence uses (where final action to address the emergency. DATES: Comments and information must relevant), and if the permissible Special Accommodations be received no later than November 5, methods of taking and requirements The meeting is physically accessible 2014. pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring to people with disabilities. Requests for and reporting of such takings are set ADDRESSES: Comments should be auxiliary aids should be directed to the forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘. . . an Council office (see ADDRESSES) 3 days Permits and Conservation Division, prior to the meeting. impact resulting from the specified Office of Protected Resources, National activity that cannot be reasonably Note: The times and sequence specified in Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East- expected to, and is not reasonably likely this agenda are subject to change. West Highway, Silver Spring, MD to, adversely affect the species or stock Dated: October 1, 2014. 20910. The mailbox address for through effects on annual rates of providing email comments on this recruitment or survival.’’ Tracey L. Thompson, action is [email protected]. Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Comments sent via email, including all established an expedited process by Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. attachments, must not exceed a 10- which citizens of the U.S. can apply for [FR Doc. 2014–23752 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] megabyte file size. A copy of the a one-year authorization to incidentally BILLING CODE 3510–22–P application and a list of references used take small numbers of marine mammals in this document may be obtained by by harassment, provided that there is no potential for serious injury or mortality DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE writing to this address, and is also available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ to result from the activity. Section National Oceanic and Atmospheric pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications. 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time Administration Instructions: All comments received limit for NMFS review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and RIN 0648–XC228 are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http:// comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ harassment of marine mammals. Within Specified Activities; Taking Marine incidental.htm#applications without 45 days of the close of the comment Mammals Incidental to Operation, change. All Personal Identifying period, NMFS must either issue or deny Maintenance, and Repair of the Information (for example, name, the authorization. Northeast Gateway Liquefied Natural address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by Gas Port and the Algonquin Pipeline the commenter may be publicly Summary of Request Lateral Facilities in Massachusetts Bay accessible. Do not submit Confidential On January 18, 2013, NMFS received Business Information or otherwise AGENCY: an application from Excelerate and National Marine Fisheries sensitive or protected information. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Tetra Tech, on behalf of Northeast Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), The Maritime Administration Gateway and Algonquin, for an Commerce. (MARAD) and U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) authorization to take 14 species of ACTION: Notice; revised proposed Final Environmental Impact Statement marine mammals by Level B harassment incidental harassment authorization; (Final EIS) on the Northeast Gateway incidental to operations, maintenance, request for comments. Energy Bridge LNG Deepwater Port and repair of an LNG port and the license application is available for Pipeline Lateral facilities in SUMMARY: NMFS received a revised viewing at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ Massachusetts Bay. They are: North application from Excelerate Energy, L.P. pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications. Atlantic right whale, humpback whale, (Excelerate) and Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra fin whale, sei whale, minke whale, long- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tech), on behalf of the Northeast finned pilot whale, Atlantic white-sided Shane Guan, Office of Protected Gateway® Energy BridgeTM, L.P. dolphin, bottlenose dolphin, short- Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. (Northeast Gateway or NEG) and beaked common dolphin, killer whale, Algonquin Gas Transmission, L.L.C. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Risso’s dolphin, harbor porpoise, harbor

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60143

seal, and gray seal. Since LNG Port and of the proposed IHA during the previous of the MARU array for the NEG Port Pipeline Lateral operation, maintenance, 30-day public comment period will be ended in February 2013. This, coupled and repair activities have the potential considered before we make a final with the transfer of operational to take marine mammals, a marine decision on whether to issue an IHA. responsibility of the MARU array to mammal take authorization under the Neptune LNG, which suspended Proposed Revised Monitoring Measures MMPA is warranted. operation of their Deepwater Port on In response to the IHA application, In order to issue an ITA for an June 26, 2013, led to the removal of the NMFS published a Federal Register activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MARU array in July 2013, meaning the notice for the proposed IHA on MMPA states that NMFS must set forth MARUs were not available for routine November 18, 2013 (78 FR 69049), ‘‘requirements pertaining to the acoustic monitoring after that date. which included proposed mitigation monitoring and reporting of such The MARUs collected archived noise and monitoring measures to minimize taking.’’ The MMPA implementing data and were not designed to provide and monitor potential impacts to marine regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) real-time or near-real-time information mammals that could result from the indicate that requests for ITAs must about vocalizing whales. The acoustic proposed LNG Port and Pipeline Lateral include the suggested means of data collected by the MARUs were operation, maintenance, and repair accomplishing the necessary monitoring analyzed by the Bioacoustics Research activities. After the close of the public and reporting that will result in Program (BRP) at Cornell University to comment period, Northeast Gateway increased knowledge of the species and document the seasonal occurrences and notified NMFS that it does not intend to of the level of taking or impacts on overall distributions of whales use marine autonomous recording units populations of marine mammals that are (primarily fin, humpback, and right (MARUs) for long-term passive acoustic expected to be present in the proposed whales) within approximately 10 monitoring (PAM), as was described in action area. nautical miles of the NEG Port, and to the November 18, 2013, proposed IHA Our November 18, 2013, initial measure and document the noise Federal Register notice, the IHA Federal Register notice of the proposed ‘‘budget’’ of Massachusetts Bay so as to application, and marine mammal IHA described several proposed eventually assist in determining monitoring plan, except under certain monitoring efforts: Vessel-based visual whether an overall increase in noise in levels of LNG port activity, and monitoring to detect marine mammals the Bay associated with the NEG Port requested NMFS to modify the in real-time (in part to trigger mitigation and Algonquin Pipeline Lateral might monitoring measures in the proposed measures); and two types of acoustic be having a potentially negative impact IHA to use alternative acoustic monitoring: 19 MARUs in on marine mammals. monitoring, with triggers for additional Massachusetts Bay near the Port (to Northeast Gateway and Algonquin long-term monitoring during higher collect long-term data during Port and state that continued monitoring utilizing levels of LNG port activity (which Pipeline Lateral related activities) and the MARU array is no longer warranted would require reinstallation of MARUs). 10 acoustic buoys (‘‘ABs’’) in the for a number of reasons: Following discussions with NMFS’ Separation Zone of the Boston Traffic 1. The MARU array system was Office of Protected Resources, the NMFS Separation Scheme (TSS) to detect, in designed for monitoring for the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries real-time, calling North Atlantic right maximum operational scenario with the Office (GARFO), and National Ocean whales within 5 nm of an AB (to assist NEG Port receiving 65 cargo deliveries Service’s Stellwagen Bank National in implementing mitigation). The per year. Anticipated deliveries to the Marine Sanctuary, on June 20, 2014, proposed revisions to the monitoring Port during the next IHA period will be Excelerate and Tetra Tech submitted a plan, which are the subject of this significantly smaller scale and, though revised IHA application with tiered Federal Register notice, concern only dependent on market rates, will likely PAM measures corresponding to the MARU requirement. We fully retain be confined to the winter heating different levels of LNG Port and our original proposal for the vessel- season. Pipeline Lateral operation, maintenance, based monitoring and the 10 ABs. 2. The purpose of the MARU data was and repair activities. Details of the Please refer to the November 18, 2013, principally intended to determine the revised PAM are discussed in this Federal Register notice for a description daily occurrence of acoustically active notice. of those other two elements of fin whales, humpback whales, and right This Federal Register notice sets forth monitoring. whales with nineteen MARUs deployed. the proposed PAM measures as revised. MARUs—Background: Beginning in A secondary purpose was to evaluate There are no other changes to Excelerate April 2007, Northeast Gateway the extent to which operations sounds and Tetra Tech’s application or our monitored the noise environment in were evident throughout the region and proposed IHA as described in the Massachusetts Bay in the vicinity of the the relative contribution of those sounds November 18, 2013, Federal Register NEG Port and Algonquin Pipeline to the acoustic environment in the notice of a proposed IHA: the specified Lateral using an array of 19 MARUs to region. The majority of the MARUs were activity; description of marine mammals collect data during the preconstruction positioned at separation distances too in the area of the specified activity; and active construction phases of the large to meet this secondary objective. potential effects on marine mammals NEG Port and Algonquin Pipeline In comparison, the revised passive and their habitat; proposed mitigation Lateral. As a condition of the Deepwater acoustic monitoring program described and related monitoring used to Port License, the MARU array remained below is intended to provide empirical implement mitigation; proposed in place for a period of five years measurements of specific operational reporting; estimated take by incidental following the commissioning of the NEG and maintenance events and ‘‘ground- harassment; negligible impact and small Port. Previous IHAs for the NE Gateway truth’’ the acoustic model algorithms numbers analyses and determinations; Port and Pipeline Lateral operations employed. By targeting these specific and impact on availability of affected included the MARUs as a monitoring events, and positioning sensors within species or stocks for subsistence uses requirement, as did the proposed IHA the water column in proximity to the remain unchanged and are herein noticed in the November 18, 2013, Port, the resultant dataset should incorporated by reference. Public Federal Register notice. However, the provide a clearer picture of the actual comments we received on those aspects five-year stipulated period of operation acoustic footprint of the Port.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60144 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

3. The static recorders and real-time stated trigger will be provided to NEG National Environmental Policy Act hydrophone arrays that will be in advance, giving adequate time for Our November 18, 2013, Federal employed in the revised proposed monitoring systems to be put in place Register notice of proposed IHA passive acoustic monitoring program prior to the first forecasted delivery described the history and status of (see below) are designed specifically for event. The field monitoring program National Environmental Policy Act empirical measurement and recording of will be used to verify actual distances to compliance for the NE Gateway LNG underwater sound. With National thresholds and these values will be facility. Please refer to that notice. Institute of Standards and Technologies compared to the impact distances (NIST) traceable calibration certificates predicted from modeling. Proposed Incidental Harassment for the entire measurement chain, the To reiterate, the remaining proposed Authorization data will provide an absolute monitoring measures, including vessel- Our November 18, 2013, Federal based visual monitoring and the real- measurement of received sound levels, Register notice provided a draft of the time autonomous buoys (ABs), are the ensuring the highest degree of accuracy IHA itself. Here we provide the language same as described in the initial Federal possible for an offshore measurement of the proposed IHA with the proposed Register notice (78 FR 69049; November program. revisions to the monitoring measures. Revised Proposed PAM: In place of 18, 2013) for the proposed IHA. No other changes have been made. the MARUs, Northeast Gateway Moreover, these proposed changes will (1) This Authorization is valid from developed a proposed field program to have no bearing on the specified November 1, 2014, through October 31, measure underwater sound during the activity, its impacts, and our proposed 2015. initial Energy Bridge Regasification mitigation and mitigation-related (2) This Authorization is valid only Vessel (EBRV) delivery for the 2014 monitoring requirements. for activities associated with Northeast winter season, during certain Proposed Reporting Measures Gateway’s LNG Port and Algonquin’s maintenance and repair, and additional long-term PAM in the vicinity of the As indicated above, no changes are Pipeline Lateral operations and LNG Port using devices such as MARUs proposed to the reporting measures maintenance and repair activities in the if the anticipated LNG deliveries exceed described in the initial Federal Register Massachusetts Bay. The specific area of 5 shipments in a 30-day period or 20 notice of the proposed IHA (78 FR the activities is shown in Figure 2–1 of shipments in a six-month period. 69049; November 18, 2013). However, the Excelerate Energy, L.P. and Tetra The intent of the proposed PAM NMFS has requested that Northeast Tech, Inc.’s IHA application. program is to provide better information Gateway make all acoustic data (3)(a) The species authorized for about the acoustic footprint associated collected by the MARUs during prior incidental harassment takings, Level B with operation of the NEG Port in construction, operations, and harassment only, are: right whales Massachusetts Bay. The modeled maintenance and repair activities (Eubalaena glacialis); fin whales underwater acoustic impacts presented available to NOAA. (Balaenoptera physalus); humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae); in the IHA application relied primarily Endangered Species Act (ESA) on estimated source levels derived from minke whales (B. acutorostrata); sei the similar vessels and operations. This Our November 18, 2013, Federal whales (B. borealis); long-finned pilot proposed monitoring plan will measure Register notice of proposed IHA whales (Globicephala melas); Atlantic the actual sound levels that are described the history and status of white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus introduced into the underwater Endangered Species Act (ESA) acutus); bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops environment, reducing uncertainty compliance for the NE Gateway LNG truncatus); short-beaked common associated with source levels used as facility. As explained in that notice, the dolphins (Delphinus delphis); Risso’s modeling inputs for the analysis biological opinions for construction and dolphin (Grampus griseus); killer presented in this and any future IHAs. operation of the facility only analyzed whales (Orcinus orca); harbor porpoises Underwater noise monitoring will be ESA-listed species for activities under (Phocoena phocoena); harbor seals conducted to obtain a representative the initial short construction period and (Phoca vitulina); and gray seals acoustic signature of vessel transit, during operations, and did not take into (Halichoerus grypus). docking, maintenance, onboard consideration potential impacts to (3)(b) The authorization for taking by regasification operational scenarios, and marine mammals that could result from harassment is limited to the following maintenance activities. NEG will the subsequent LNG Port and Pipeline acoustic sources and from the following conduct the short-term hydroacoustic Lateral maintenance and repair activities: monitoring to document sound levels activities. In addition, NEG also (i) NEG Port operations; during the initial operational event for revealed that significantly more water (ii) NEG Port maintenance and repair; the 2014–2015 heating season. In usage and vessel operating air emissions and addition, the short-term hydroacoustic are needed from what was originally (iii) Algonquin Pipeline Lateral monitoring will be utilized for any evaluated for the LNG Port operation. operations and maintenance. maintenance or repair activities with the NMFS PR1 initiated consultation with (3)(c) The taking of any marine potential to result in significant noise NMFS Greater Atlantic Region Fisheries mammal in a manner prohibited under levels (i.e. DP thrusters) or for any Office under section 7 of the ESA on the this Authorization must be reported delivery that may occur outside the issuance of an IHA to NEG under within 24 hours of the taking to the identified winter heating season. section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for National Marine Fisheries Service Autonomous Marine Recording the proposed activities that include (NMFS) Northeast Regional (AMAR) units will be deployed one day increased NEG Port and Algonquin Administrator (978–281–9300) or his prior to the identified monitoring events Pipeline Lateral maintenance and repair designee (978–282–8468), NMFS and retrieved one day after these events, and water usage for the LNG Port Headquarter Chief of the Permits and utilizing a vessel similar to that operations this activity. Consultation Conservation Division, Office of described for MARU deployment and will be concluded prior to a Protected Resources, NMFS, at (301– retrieval. Information pertaining to determination on the issuance of an 427–8401), or his designee (301–427– forecasted delivery levels at or above the IHA. 8418).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60145

(4) Prohibitions radius ZOI of a maneuvering EBRV, he/ connecting the following points in the (a) The taking, by incidental she will take the following actions: order stated below unless an emergency harassment only, is limited to the (I) The Officer-of-the-Watch shall be situation dictates for an alternate speed. notified immediately; who shall then species listed under condition 3(a) This area shall hereafter be referred to relay the sighting information to the above and by the numbers listed in as the Off Race Point Seasonal Master of the vessel to ensure action(s) Table 3. The taking by Level A Management Area (ORP–SMA) and can be taken to avoid physical contact harassment, injury or death of these tracks NMFS regulations at 50 CFR with marine mammals. ° ′ ° ′ ° ′ species or the taking by harassment, 224.105: 42 30 N 70 30 W, 41 40 N (II) The sighting shall be recorded in 69°57′ W, 42°30′ N 69°45′ W, 42°12′ N injury or death of any other species of the sighting log by the designated look- ° ′ ° ′ ° ′ ° ′ marine mammal is prohibited and may 70 15 W, 41 40 N 69 45 W, 42 12 N out. 70°30′ W, 42°04.8′ N 70°10′ W, 42°30′ N result in the modification, suspension, (iii) In accordance with 50 CFR 70°30′ W. or revocation of this Authorization. 224.103(c), all vessels associated with (B) Vessels shall reduce their (b) The taking of any marine mammal NEG Port and Pipeline Lateral activities maximum transit speed while in the is prohibited whenever the required shall not approach closer than 500 yards TSS to 10 knots or less unless an mitigation measures under (5) of this (460 m) to a North Atlantic right whale emergency situation dictates for an authorization are not implemented. and 100 yards (91 m) to other whales to alternate speed from April 1 to July 31 (5) Mitigation the extent physically feasible given in all waters bounded by straight lines navigational constraints. In addition, connecting the following points in the (a) General Marine Mammal Avoidance when approaching and departing the order stated below. This area shall Measures project area, vessels shall be operated so hereafter be referred to as the GSC–SMA (i) All vessels shall utilize the as to remain at least 1 km away from and tracks NMFS regulations at 50 CFR International Maritime Organization any visually-detected North Atlantic 224.105: 42°30′ N 69°45′ W, 41°40′ N (IMO)-approved Boston Traffic right whales. 69°45′ W, 42°30′ N 67°27′ W, 42°30′ N Separation Scheme (TSS) on their (iv) In response to active right whale 69°45′ W, 42°09′ N 67°08.4′ W, 41°00′ N approach to and departure from the sightings and active acoustic detections, 69°05′ W. NEG Port and/or the repair/maintenance and taking into account exceptional (C) Vessels are not expected to transit area at the earliest practicable point of circumstances, EBRVs, repair and the Cape Cod Bay or the Cape Cod transit in order to avoid the risk of maintenance vessels shall take Canal; however, in the event that transit whale strikes. appropriate actions to minimize the risk through the Cape Cod Bay or the Cape (ii) Upon entering the TSS and areas of striking whales. Specifically vessels Cod Canal is required, vessels shall where North Atlantic right whales are shall: reduce maximum transit speed to 10 known to occur, including the Great (A) Respond to active right whale knots or less from January 1 to May 15 South Channel Seasonal Management sightings and/or DMAs reported on the in all waters in Cape Cod Bay, extending Area (GSC–SMA) and the SBNMS, the Mandatory Ship Reporting (MSR) or to all shorelines of Cape Cod Bay, with EBRV shall go into ‘‘Heightened SAS by concentrating monitoring efforts a northern boundary of 42°12′ N latitude Awareness’’ as described below. towards the area of most recent and the Cape Cod Canal. This area shall (A) Prior to entering and navigating detection and reducing speed to 10 hereafter be referred to as the Cape Cod the modified TSS the Master of the knots or less if the vessel is within the Bay Seasonal Management Area (CCB– vessel shall: boundaries of a DMA (50 CFR 224.105) SMA). (I) Consult Navigational Telex or within the circular area centered on (D) All Vessels transiting to and from (NAVTEX), NOAA Weather Radio, the an area 8 nm in radius from a sighting the project area shall report their NOAA Right Whale Sighting Advisory location; activities to the mandatory reporting System (SAS) or other means to obtain (B) Respond to active acoustic Section of the USCG to remain apprised current right whale sighting information detections by concentrating monitoring of North Atlantic right whale as well as the most recent Cornell efforts towards the area of most recent movements within the area. All vessels acoustic monitoring buoy data for the detection and reducing speed to 10 entering and exiting the MSRA shall potential presence of marine mammals; knots or less within an area 5 nm in report their activities to (II) Post a look-out to visually monitor radius centered on the detecting AB; WHALESNORTH. Vessel operators shall for the presence of marine mammals; and contact the USCG by standard (III) Provide the U.S. Coast Guard (C) Respond to additional sightings procedures promulgated through the (USCG) required 96-hour notification of made by the designated look-outs Notice to Mariner system. an arriving EBRV to allow the NEG Port within a 2-mile radius of the vessel by (E) All Vessels greater than or equal Manager to notify Cornell of vessel slowing the vessel to 10 knots or less to 300 gross tons (GT) shall maintain a arrival. and concentrating monitoring efforts speed of 10 knots or less, unless an (B) The look-out shall concentrate his/ towards the area of most recent sighting. emergency situation requires speeds her observation efforts within the 2-mile (v) All vessels operated under NEG greater than 10 knots. radius zone of influence (ZOI) from the and Algonquin must follow the (F) All Vessels less than 300 GT maneuvering EBRV. established specific speed restrictions traveling between the shore and the (C) If marine mammal detection was when calling at the NEG Port. The project area that are not generally reported by NAVTEX, NOAA Weather specific speed restrictions required for restricted to 10 knots will contact the Radio, SAS and/or an acoustic all vessels (i.e., EBRVs and vessels Mandatory Ship Reporting (MSR) monitoring buoy, the look-out shall associated with maintenance and repair) system, the USCG, or the project site concentrate visual monitoring efforts consist of the following: before leaving shore for reports of active towards the areas of the most recent (A) Vessels shall reduce their DMAs and/or recent right whale detection. maximum transit speed while in the sightings and, consistent with (D) If the look-out (or any other TSS from 12 knots or less to 10 knots navigation safety, restrict speeds to 10 member of the crew) visually detects a or less from March 1 to April 30 in all knots or less within 5 miles (8 marine mammal within the 2-mile waters bounded by straight lines kilometers) of any sighting location,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60146 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

when traveling in any of the seasonal (c) Planned and Unplanned National Marine Sanctuary (SBNMS) management areas (SMAs) or when Maintenance and Repair Activities with a minimum of 30-day notice prior traveling in any active dynamic (i) NEG Port to any planned repair and/or management area (DMA). maintenance activity. For any (A) The Northeast Gateway shall unplanned/emergency repair/ (b) NEG Port-Specific Operations conduct empirical source level maintenance activity, Northeast measurements on all noise emitting (i) In addition to the general marine Gateway shall notify the agencies as construction equipment and all vessels soon as it determines that repair work mammal avoidance requirements that are involved in maintenance/repair must be conducted. Algonquin shall identified in (5)(a) above, vessels calling work. continue to keep the agencies apprised on the NEG Port must comply with the (B) If dynamic positioning (DP) of repair work plans as further details following additional requirements: systems are to be employed and/or (e.g., the time, location, and nature of (A) EBRVs shall travel at 10 knots activities will emit noise with a source the repair) become available. A final maximum speed when transiting to/ level of 139 dB re 1 mPa at 1 m, activities notification shall be provided to from the TSS or to/from the NEG Port/ shall be conducted in accordance with agencies 72 hours prior to crews being Pipeline Lateral area. For EBRVs, at 1.86 the requirements for DP systems listed deployed into the field. miles (3 km) from the NEG Port, speed in (5)(b)(ii). (F) If dynamic positioning (DP) will be reduced to 3 knots and to less (C) Northeast Gateway shall provide systems are to be employed and/or than 1 knot at 1,640 ft (500 m) from the the NMFS Headquarters Office of the activities will emit noise with a source NEG buoys, unless an emergency Protected Resources, NMFS Northeast level of 139 dB re 1 mPa at 1 m, activities situation dictates the need for an Region Ship Strike Coordinator, and shall be conducted in accordance with alternate speed. SBNMS with a minimum of 30 days the requirements for DP systems listed notice prior to any planned repair and/ (B) EBRVs that are approaching or in (5)(b)(ii). or maintenance activity. For any (G) In the event that a whale is departing from the NEG Port and are unplanned/emergency repair/ visually observed within 0.5 mile (0.8 within the ATBA5 surrounding the NEG maintenance activity, Northeast kilometers) of a repair or maintenance Port, shall remain at least 1 km away Gateway shall notify the agencies as vessel, the vessel superintendent or on- from any visually-detected North soon as it determines that repair work deck supervisor shall be notified Atlantic right whale and at least 100 must be conducted. Northeast Gateway immediately. The vessel’s crew shall be yards (91 m) away from all other shall continue to keep the agencies put on a heightened state of alert and visually-detected whales unless an apprised of repair work plans as further the marine mammal shall be monitored emergency situation requires that the details (e.g., the time, location, and constantly to determine if it is moving vessel stay its course. During EBRV nature of the repair) become available. toward the repair or maintenance area. maneuvering, the Vessel Master shall A final notification shall be provided to (H) Repair/maintenance vessel(s) designate at least one look-out to be agencies 72 hours prior to crews being must cease any movement and/or cease exclusively and continuously deployed into the field. all activities that emit noises with monitoring for the presence of marine source level of 139 dB re 1 mPa @ 1 m mammals at all times while the EBRV is (ii) Pipeline Lateral or higher when a right whale is sighted approaching or departing from the NEG (A) Pipeline maintenance/repair within or approaching at 500 yd (457 m) Port. vessels less than 300 GT traveling from the vessel. Repair and maintenance (C) During NEG Port operations, in the between the shore and the maintenance/ work may resume after the marine event that a whale is visually observed repair area that are not generally mammal is positively reconfirmed within 1 km of the NEG Port or a restricted to 10 knots shall contact the outside the established zones (500 yd confirmed acoustic detection is reported MSR system, the USCG, or the project [457 m]) or 30 minutes have passed on either of the two ABs closest to the site before leaving shore for reports of without a redetection. Any vessels NEG Port (western-most in the TSS active DMAs and/or recent right whale transiting the maintenance area, such as array), departing EBRVs shall delay sightings and, consistent with barges or tugs, must also maintain these their departure from the NEG Port, navigation safety, restrict speeds to 10 separation distances. unless an emergency situation requires knots or less within 5 miles (8 km) of (I) Repair/maintenance vessel(s) must that departure is not delayed. This any sighting location, when travelling in cease any movement and/or cease all departure delay shall continue until any of the seasonal management areas activities that emit noises with source either the observed whale has been (SMAs) as defined above. level of 139 dB re 1 mPa @ 1 m or higher visually (during daylight hours) (B) Maintenance/repair vessels greater when a marine mammal other than a confirmed as more than 1 km from the than 300 GT shall not exceed 10 knots, right whale is sighted within or NEG Port or 30 minutes have passed unless an emergency situation that approaching at 100 yd (91 m) from the without another confirmed detection requires speeds greater than 10 knots. vessel. Repair and maintenance work (C) Planned maintenance and repair either acoustically within the acoustic may resume after the marine mammal is activities shall be restricted to the detection range of the two ABs closest positively reconfirmed outside the period between May 1 and November established zones (100 yd [91 m]) or 30 to the NEG Port, or visually within 1 km 30. minutes have passed without a from the NEG Port. (D) Unplanned/emergency redetection. Any vessels transiting the (ii) Vessel captains shall focus on maintenance and repair activities shall maintenance area, such as barges or reducing dynamic positioning (DP) be conducted utilizing anchor-moored tugs, must also maintain these thruster power to the maximum extent dive vessel whenever operationally separation distances. practicable, taking into account vessel possible. (J) Algonquin and associated and Port safety, during the operation (E) Algonquin shall also provide the contractors shall also comply with the activities. Vessel captains will shut NMFS Office of the Protected Resources, following: down thrusters whenever they are not NMFS Northeast Region Ship Strike (I) Operations involving excessively needed. Coordinator, and Stellwagen Bank noisy equipment (source level

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60147

exceeding 139 dB re 1 mPa @ 1 m) shall (III) Transit route, destination, sea (B) Binoculars to support ‘‘ramp-up’’ sound sources, allowing conditions and any marine mammal observations; whales a chance to leave the area before sightings/mitigation actions during (C) Marine mammal detection guide sounds reach maximum levels. In watch shall be recorded in the log book. sheets; and addition, Northeast Gateway, Any whale sightings within 1,000 m of (D) Sighting log. Algonquin, and other associated the vessel shall result in a high alert and (b) NEG LNG Port Operations contractors shall maintain equipment to slow speed of 4 knots or less and a manufacturers’ specifications, including sighting within 750 m shall result in (i) All individuals onboard the EBRVs any sound-muffling devices or engine idle speed and/or ceasing all movement. responsible for the navigation duties covers in order to minimize noise (IV) The material barges and tugs used and any other personnel that could be effects. Noisy construction equipment in repair and maintenance shall transit assigned to monitor for marine shall only be used as needed and from the operations dock to the work mammals shall receive training on equipment shall be turned off when not sites during daylight hours when marine mammal sighting/reporting and in operation. possible provided the safety of the vessel strike avoidance measures. (ii) While an EBRV is navigating (II) Any material that has the potential vessels is not compromised. Should within the designated TSS, there shall to entangle marine mammals (e.g., transit at night be required, the be three people with look-out duties on anchor lines, cables, rope or other maximum speed of the tug shall be 5 or near the bridge of the ship including construction debris) shall only be knots. the Master, the Officer-of-the-Watch and deployed as needed and measures shall (V) All repair vessels must maintain a the Helmsman-on-watch. In addition to be taken to minimize the chance of speed of 10 knots or less during daylight the standard watch procedures, while entanglement. hours. All vessels shall operate at 5 the EBRV is transiting within the (III) For any material that has the knots or less at all times within 5 km of designated TSS, maneuvering within potential to entangle marine mammals, the repair area. the Area to be Avoided (ATBA), and/or such material shall be removed from the (d) Acoustic Monitoring Related while actively engaging in the use of water immediately unless such action Activities thrusters, an additional look-out shall be jeopardizes the safety of the vessel and designated to exclusively and crew as determined by the Captain of (i) Vessels associated with continuously monitor for marine the vessel. maintaining the AB network operating mammals. (IV) In the event that a marine as part of the mitigation/monitoring protocols shall adhere to the following (iii) All sightings of marine mammals mammal becomes entangled, the marine by the designated look-out, individuals mammal coordinator and/or PSO will speed restrictions and marine mammal monitoring requirements. posted to navigational look-out duties notify NMFS (if outside the SBNMS), and/or any other crew member while and SBNMS staff (if inside the SBNMS) (A) In accordance with NOAA Regulation 50 CFR 224.103 (c), all the EBRV is transiting within the TSS, immediately so that a rescue effort may maneuvering within the ATBA and/or be initiated. vessels associated with NEG Port activities shall not approach closer than when actively engaging in the use of (K) All maintenance/repair activities thrusters, shall be immediately reported shall be scheduled to occur between 500 yards (460 meters) to a North Atlantic right whale. to the Officer-of-the-Watch who shall May 1 and November 30; however, in then alert the Master. The Master or the event of unplanned/emergency (B) All vessels shall obtain the latest DMA or right whale sighting Officer-of-the-Watch shall ensure the repair work that cannot be scheduled required reporting procedures are during the preferred May through information via the NAVTEX, MSR, SAS, NOAA Weather Radio, or other followed and the designated marine November work window, the following mammal look-out records all pertinent additional measures shall be followed available means prior to operations to determine if there are right whales information relevant to the sighting. for Pipeline Lateral maintenance and (iv) Visual sightings made by look- present in the operational area. repair related activities between outs from the EBRVs shall be recorded December and April: (6) Monitoring using a standard sighting log form. (I) Between December 1 and April 30, (a) Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring Estimated locations shall be reported for if on-board PSOs do not have at least each individual and/or group of 0.5-mile visibility, they shall call for a (i) Vessel-based monitoring for marine individuals categorized by species when shutdown. At the time of shutdown, the mammals shall be done by trained look- known. This data shall be entered into use of thrusters must be minimized. If outs during NEG LNG Port and Pipeline a database and a summary of monthly there are potential safety problems due Lateral operations and maintenance and sighting activity shall be provided to to the shutdown, the captain will decide repair activities. The observers shall NMFS. Estimates of take and copies of what operations can safely be shut monitor the occurrence of marine these log sheets shall also be included down. mammals near the vessels during LNG in the reports to NMFS. (II) Prior to leaving the dock to begin Port and Pipeline Lateral related transit, the barge shall contact one of the activities. Lookout duties include (c) Planned and Unplanned PSOs on watch to receive an update of watching for and identifying marine Maintenance and Repair sightings within the visual observation mammals; recording their numbers, (i) Two (2) qualified and NMFS- area. If the PSO has observed a North distances, and reactions to the activities; approved protected species observers Atlantic right whale within 30 minutes and documenting ‘‘take by harassment’’. (PSOs) shall be assigned to each vessel of the transit start, the vessel shall hold (ii) The vessel look-outs assigned to that will use dynamic positioning (DP) for 30 minutes and again get a clearance visually monitor for the presence of systems during maintenance and repair to leave from the PSOs on board. PSOs marine mammals and shall be provided related activities. PSOs shall operate shall assess whale activity and visual with the following: individually in designated shifts to observation ability at the time of the (A) Recent NAVTEX, NOAA Weather accommodate adequate rest schedules. transit request to clear the barge for Radio, SAS and/or acoustic monitoring Additional PSOs shall be assigned to release. buoy detection data; additional vessels if auto-detection buoy

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60148 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

(AB) data indicates that sound levels (3.31-kilometers) zone of influence (e) Acoustic Whale Detection and exceed 120 dB re 1 mPa, further than 100 (ZOI) of a DP vessel or other Response Plan meters (328 feet) from these vessels. construction vessel that has shown to (i) NEG Port Operations (ii) All PSOs shall receive NMFS- emit noise with source level in excess approved marine mammal observer of 139 dB re 1 mPa @1 m, the PSO will (A) Ten (10) ABs that have been training and be approved in advance by notify the repair/maintenance deployed since 2007 shall be used to NMFS after review of their resume. All construction crew to minimize the use continuously screen the low-frequency acoustic environment (less than 1,000 PSOs shall have direct field experience of thrusters until the animal has moved Hertz) for right whale contact calls on marine mammal vessels and/or aerial away, unless there are divers in the occurring within an approximately 5- surveys in the Atlantic Ocean/Gulf of water or an ROV is deployed. Mexico. nm radius from each buoy (the AB’s (iii) PSOs (one primary and one (d) Acoustic Monitoring detection range). secondary) shall be responsible for (B) Once a confirmed detection is visually locating marine mammals at the (i) Northeast Gateway shall deploy 10 made, the Master of any EBRVs ocean’s surface and, to the extent ABs within the Separation Zone of the operating in the area will be alerted possible, identifying the species. The TSS for the operational life of the immediately. primary PSO shall act as the Project. (ii) NEG Port and Pipeline Lateral identification specialist and the (ii) The ABs shall be used to detect a Planned and Unplanned/Emergency secondary PSO will serve as data calling North Atlantic right whale an Repair and Maintenance Activities. recorder and also assist with average of 5 nm from each AB. The AB (A) If the repair/maintenance work is located outside of the detectible range of identification. Both PSOs shall have system shall be the primary detection the 10 project area ABs, Northeast responsibility for monitoring for the mechanism that alerts the EBRV Master Gateway and Algonquin shall consult presence of marine mammals and sea to the occurrence of right whales, with NOAA (NMFS and SBNMS) to turtles. Specifically PSO’s shall: heightens EBRV awareness, and triggers (A) Monitor at all hours of the day, determine if the work to be conducted necessary mitigation actions as warrants the temporary installation of scanning the ocean surface by eye for a described in section (5) above. minimum of 40 minutes every hour. an additional AB(s) to help detect and (B) Monitor the area where (iii) Northeast Gateway shall conduct provide early warnings for potential maintenance and repair work is short-term passive acoustic monitoring occurrence of right whales in the conducted beginning at daybreak using to document sound levels during the vicinity of the repair area. 25x power binoculars and/or hand-held initial operational events in the 2014– (B) The number of ABs installed binoculars. Night vision devices must be 2015 winter heating season, and during around the activity site shall be provided as standard equipment for both regular deliveries outside the commensurate with the type and spatial monitoring during low-light hours and winter heating season should such extent of maintenance/repair work at night. deliveries occur, and during scheduled required, but must be sufficient to detect (C) Conduct general 360° visual and unscheduled maintenance and vocalizing right whales within the 120- monitoring during any given watch repair activities. dB impact zone. (C) Should acoustic monitoring be period and target scanning by the (iv) Northeast Gateway shall conduct deemed necessary during a planned or observer shall occur when alerted of a long-term monitoring of the noise whale presence. unplanned/emergency repair and/or environment in Massachusetts Bay in maintenance event, active monitoring (D) Alert the vessel superintendent or the vicinity of the NEG Port and construction crew supervisor of visual for right whale calls shall begin 24 Pipeline Lateral using marine hours prior to the start of activities. detections within 2 miles (3.31 autonomous recording units (MARUs) kilometers) immediately. (D) Revised noise level data from the when there is anticipated to be more acoustic recording units deployed in the (E) Record all sightings on marine than 5 LNG shipments in a 30-day mammal field sighting logs. NEG Port and/or Pipeline Lateral period or over 20 shipments in a six- Specifically, all data shall be entered at maintenance and repair area shall be month period. the time of observation, notes of provided to NMFS. activities will be kept, and a daily report (v) The acoustic data collected in (7) Reporting prepared and attached to the daily field 6(d)(ii) shall be analyzed to document sighting log form. The basic reporting the seasonal occurrences and overall (a) Throughout NEG Port and Pipeline requirements include the following: distributions of whales (primarily fin, Lateral operations, Northeast Gateway • Beaufort sea state; humpback and right whales) within and Algonquin shall provide a monthly • Wind speed; approximately 10 nm of the NEG Port Monitoring Report. The Monitoring • Wind direction; and shall measure and document the Report shall include: • Temperature; noise ‘‘budget’’ of Massachusetts Bay so (i) Both copies of the raw visual EBRV • Precipitation; as to eventually assist in determining lookout sighting information of marine mammals that occurred within 2 miles • Glare; whether or not an overall increase in • of the EBRV while the vessel transits Percent cloud cover; noise in the Bay associated with the • within the TSS, maneuvers within the Number of animals; Project might be having a potentially • ATBA, and/or when actively engaging Species; negative impact on marine mammals. • Position; in the use of thrusters, and a summary • Distance; (vi) Northeast Gateway shall make all of the data collected by the look-outs • Behavior; acoustic data, including data previously over each reporting period. • Direction of movement; and collected by the MARUs during prior (ii) Copies of the raw PSO sightings • Apparent reaction to construction construction, operations, and information on marine mammals activity. maintenance and repair activities, gathered during pipeline repair or (iv) In the event that a whale is available to NOAA. Data storage will be maintenance activities. This visual visually observed within the 2-mile the responsibility of NOAA. sighting data shall then be correlated to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60149

periods of thruster activity to provide 427–8401 and/or by email to determines that the injury or death is estimates of marine mammal takes (per [email protected] and not associated with or related to the species/species class) that took place [email protected] and the activities authorized (if the IHA is during each reporting period. Northeast Regional Stranding issued) (e.g., previously wounded (iii) Conclusion of any planned or Coordinators ([email protected]) animal, carcass with moderate to unplanned/emergency repair and/or or by phone at 978–281–9300. The advanced decomposition, or scavenger maintenance period, a report shall be report must include the following damage), NEG and/or Algonquin shall submitted to NMFS summarizing the information: report the incident to the Chief, Permits repair/maintenance activities, marine (A) Time, date, and location (latitude/ and Conservation Division, Office of mammal sightings (both visual and longitude) of the incident; Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301– acoustic), empirical source-level (B) The name and type of vessel 427–8401, and/or by email to measurements taken during the repair involved; [email protected] and work, and any mitigation measures (C) The vessel’s speed during and [email protected] and the NMFS taken. leading up to the incident; Northeast Stranding Coordinators (b) During the maintenance and repair (D) Description of the incident; ([email protected]) or by phone of NEG Port components, weekly status (E) Status of all sound source use in at 978–281–9300, within 24 hours of the reports shall be provided to NOAA the 24 hours preceding the incident; discovery. NEG and/or Algonquin shall (both NMFS and SBNMS) using (F) Water depth; provide photographs or video footage (if standardized reporting forms. The (G) Environmental conditions (e.g., available) or other documentation of the weekly reports shall include data wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea stranded animal sighting to NMFS and collected for each distinct marine state, cloud cover, and visibility); the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. (H) Description of marine mammal mammal species observed in the repair/ NEG and/or Algonquin can continue its observations in the 24 hours preceding maintenance area during the period that operations under such a case. maintenance and repair activities were the incident; taking place. The weekly reports shall (I) Species identification or Request for Public Comments include the following information: description of the animal(s) involved; NMFS requests comment on the (i) Location (in longitude and latitude (J) The fate of the animal(s); and revised proposed PAM monitoring for (K) Photographs or video footage of coordinates), time, and the nature of the NMFS proposed IHA for Northeast the animal (if equipment is available). maintenance and repair activities; Gateway’s LNG Port and Pipeline Activities shall not resume until (ii) Indication of whether a DP system Lateral operations and maintenance and NMFS is able to review the was operated, and if so, the number of repair activities, as described in this circumstances of the prohibited take. thrusters being used and the time and notice and in Tetratech’s June 20, 2014, NMFS shall work with NEG and/or duration of DP operation; application (see ADDRESSES). Please Algonquin to determine what is (iii) Marine mammals observed in the include with your comments any necessary to minimize the likelihood of area (number, species, age group, and supporting data or literature citations to further prohibited take and ensure initial behavior); help inform our final decision. (iv) The distance of observed marine MMPA compliance. NEG and/or Dated: September 30, 2014. mammals from the maintenance and Algonquin may not resume their repair activities; activities until notified by NMFS via Donna Wieting, (v) Changes, if any, in marine letter, email, or telephone. Director, Office of Protected Resources, mammal behaviors during the (ii) In the event that NEG and/or National Marine Fisheries Service. observation; Algonquin discovers an injured or dead [FR Doc. 2014–23764 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] (vi) A description of any mitigation marine mammal, and the lead PSO BILLING CODE 3510–22–P measures (power-down, shutdown, etc.) determines that the cause of the injury implemented; or death is unknown and the death is (vii) Weather condition (Beaufort sea relatively recent (i.e., in less than a DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION moderate state of decomposition as state, wind speed, wind direction, [Docket No.: ED–2014–ICCD–0069] ambient temperature, precipitation, and described in the next paragraph), NEG percent cloud cover etc.); and/or Algonquin will immediately Agency Information Collection (viii) Condition of the observation report the incident to the Chief, Permits Activities; Submission to the Office of (visibility and glare); and and Conservation Division, Office of Management and Budget for Review (ix) Details of passive acoustic Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301– and Approval; Comment Request; detections and any action taken in 427–8401, and/or by email to E-Complaint Form response to those detections. [email protected] and [email protected] and the NMFS AGENCY: Office of Management (OM), (d) Injured/Dead Protected Species Northeast Stranding Coordinators Department of Education (ED). Reporting ([email protected]) or by phone ACTION: Notice. (i) In the unanticipated event that at 978–281–9300, within 24 hours of the survey operations clearly cause the take discovery. The report must include the SUMMARY: In accordance with the of a marine mammal in a manner same information identified above. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 prohibited by the proposed IHA, such as Activities may continue while NMFS U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is an injury (Level A harassment), serious reviews the circumstances of the proposing a new information collection. injury or mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear incident. NMFS will work with NEG DATES: Interested persons are invited to interaction, and/or entanglement), NEG and/or Algonquin to determine whether submit comments on or before and/or Algonquin shall immediately modifications in the activities are November 3, 2014. cease activities and immediately report appropriate. ADDRESSES: Comments submitted in the incident to the Chief, Permits and (iii) In the event that NEG or response to this notice should be Conservation Division, Office of Algonquin discovers an injured or dead submitted electronically through the Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301– marine mammal, and the lead PSO Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60150 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

www.regulations.gov by selecting Total Estimated Number of Annual Filed Date: 9/26/14. Docket ID number ED–2014–ICCD–0069 Responses: 500. Accession Number: 20140926–5188. or via postal mail, commercial delivery, Total Estimated Number of Annual Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/14. or hand delivery. If the regulations.gov Burden Hours: 500. Docket Numbers: ER14–2954–000. site is not available to the public for any Abstract: The Family Policy Applicants: Golden Spread Electric reason, ED will temporarily accept Compliance Office (FPCO) is the office Cooperative, Inc. comments at [email protected]. responsible for administering the Description: Tariff Withdrawal per Please note that comments submitted by Family Educational Rights and Privacy 35.15: REA and EESA Cancellation to be fax or email and those submitted after Act. As fully investigating complaints of effective 10/1/2014. the comment period will not be alleged violations takes time, we ask Filed Date: 9/26/14. accepted; ED will only accept comments parents and students filing complaints Accession Number: 20140926–5206. during the comment period in this to read carefully accompanying Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/14. mailbox when the regulations.gov site is information prior to completing and Docket Numbers: ER14–2955–000. not available. Written requests for submitting the complaint form. Applicants: Skylar Resources, LP. information or comments submitted by Dated: September 30, 2014. Description: Initial rate filing per postal mail or delivery should be Stephanie Valentine, 35.12 Application for Market-Based addressed to the Director of the Rates to be effective 10/25/2014. Acting Director, Information Collection Filed Date: 9/26/14. Information Collection Clearance Clearance Division, Privacy, Information and Division, U.S. Department of Education, Records Management Services, Office of Accession Number: 20140926–5212. 400 Maryland Avenue SW, LBJ, Management. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/14. Mailstop L–OM–2–2E319, Room 2E105, [FR Doc. 2014–23642 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Docket Numbers: ER14–2956–000. Applicants: Hoopeston Wind, LLC. Washington, DC 20202. BILLING CODE 4000–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Description: Initial rate filing per specific questions related to collection 35.12 Hoopsten Wind Baseline Tariff Filing to be effective 9/26/2014. activities, please contact Regina Miles, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 202–260–3887. Filed Date: 9/26/14. Accession Number: 20140926–5221. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Energy Regulatory Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/14. Department of Education (ED), in Commission accordance with the Paperwork Take notice that the Commission Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. Combined Notice of Filings #1 received the following electric securities filings: 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general Take notice that the Commission public and Federal agencies with an Docket Numbers: ES14–54–000. received the following electric rate Applicants: NorthWestern opportunity to comment on proposed, filings: revised, and continuing collections of Corporation. Docket Numbers: ER14–2017–002. Description: Application for information. This helps the Department Applicants: California Independent assess the impact of its information authorization to issue securities under System Operator Corporation. FPA Section 204 of NorthWestern collection requirements and minimize Description: Compliance filing per 35: the public’s reporting burden. It also _ _ Corporation. 2014–09–26 FNM Waiver to be Filed Date: 9/29/14. helps the public understand the effective N/A. Department’s information collection Accession Number: 20140929–5072. Filed Date: 9/26/14. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/20/14. requirements and provide the requested Accession Number: 20140926–5220. Take notice that the Commission data in the desired format. ED is Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/14. soliciting comments on the proposed received the following qualifying Docket Numbers: ER14–2325–000. information collection request (ICR) that facility filings: Applicants: Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC. is described below. The Department of Docket Numbers: QF14–809–000. Description: eTariff filing per Education is especially interested in Applicants: CF Industries Nitrogen, 35.19a(b): Refund Report to be effective public comment addressing the LLC. N/A. following issues: (1) Is this collection Description: Form 556 of CF Filed Date: 9/26/14. necessary to the proper functions of the Industries Nitrogen, LLC. Accession Number: 20140926–5185. Department; (2) will this information be Filed Date: 9/29/14. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/14. processed and used in a timely manner; Accession Number: 20140929–5100. (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; Docket Numbers: ER14–2952–000. Comments Due: None Applicable. (4) how might the Department enhance Applicants: Midcontinent The filings are accessible in the the quality, utility, and clarity of the Independent System Operator, Inc. Commission’s eLibrary system by information to be collected; and (5) how Description: § 205(d) rate filing per clicking on the links or querying the _ might the Department minimize the 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2014–09–26 Amend docket number. burden of this collection on the Schedule 43, 43G, & 43H to be effective Any person desiring to intervene or respondents, including through the use 12/1/2014. protest in any of the above proceedings of information technology. Please note Filed Date: 9/26/14. must file in accordance with Rules 211 that written comments received in Accession Number: 20140926–5183. and 214 of the Commission’s response to this notice will be Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/17/14. Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and considered public records. Docket Numbers: ER14–2953–000. 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Title of Collection: E-Complaint Form. Applicants: PJM Interconnection, time on the specified comment date. OMB Control Number: 1880–NEW. L.L.C. Protests may be considered, but Type of Review: A new information Description: Tariff Withdrawal per intervention is necessary to become a collection. 35.15: Notice of Cancellation of Service party to the proceeding. Respondents/Affected Public: Agreement No. 3047; Queue No. W3– eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Individuals or households. 095 to be effective 11/17/2014. information relating to filing

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60151

requirements, interventions, protests, Filed Date: 9/29/14. 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to service, and qualifying facilities filings Accession Number: 20140929–5217. intervene or protest must serve a copy can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/20/14. of that document on the Applicant. docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For Docket Numbers: ER14–2959–000. Notice is hereby given that the other information, call (866) 208–3676 Applicants: LWP Lessee, LLC. deadline for filing protests with regard (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Description: § 205(d) rate filing per to the applicant’s request for blanket Dated: September 29, 2014. 35.13(a)(2)(iii): LWP Lessee Market- authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Based Rate Tariff Revision to be future issuances of securities and effective 11/29/2014. assumptions of liability is October 20, Deputy Secretary. Filed Date: 9/29/14. 2014. [FR Doc. 2014–23759 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Accession Number: 20140929–5222. The Commission encourages BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/20/14. electronic submission of protests and The filings are accessible in the interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http:// DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Commission’s eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic Federal Energy Regulatory docket number. service, persons with Internet access Commission Any person desiring to intervene or who will eFile a document and/or be protest in any of the above proceedings listed as a contact for an intervenor Combined Notice of Filings #2 must file in accordance with Rules 211 must create and validate an and 214 of the Commission’s eRegistration account using the Take notice that the Commission Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and eRegistration link. Select the eFiling received the following electric rate 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern link to log on and submit the filings: time on the specified comment date. intervention or protests. Docket Numbers: ER14–1594–001; Protests may be considered, but Persons unable to file electronically ER14–1596–001. intervention is necessary to become a should submit an original and 5 copies Applicants: Lone Valley Solar Park I party to the proceeding. of the intervention or protest to the LLC, Lone Valley Solar Park II LLC. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Description: Notice of Non-Material information relating to filing 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Change in Status of Lone Valley Solar requirements, interventions, protests, 20426. Park I LLC, et. al. service, and qualifying facilities filings The filings in the above-referenced Filed Date: 9/29/14. can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/ proceeding(s) are accessible in the Accession Number: 20140929–5165. docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For Commission’s eLibrary system by Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/20/14. other information, call (866) 208–3676 clicking on the appropriate link in the Docket Numbers: ER14–2345–001. (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. above list. They are also available for Applicants: El Paso Electric Company. Dated: September 29, 2014. review in the Commission’s Public Description: Compliance filing per 35: Reference Room in Washington, DC. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Compliance Filing of Housekeeping There is an eSubscription link on the Updates—OATT to be effective 9/1/ Deputy Secretary. Web site that enables subscribers to 2014. [FR Doc. 2014–23760 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] receive email notification when a Filed Date: 9/29/14. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P document is added to a subscribed Accession Number: 20140929–5224. docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/20/14. Online service, please email Docket Numbers: ER14–2858–001. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [email protected]. or call Applicants: Origin Wind Energy, LLC. Federal Energy Regulatory (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call Description: Tariff Amendment per Commission (202) 502–8659. 35.17(b): Origin Wind Energy, LLC Dated: September 30, 2014. Amendment to MBR Tariff to be [Docket No. ER14–2945–000] Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., effective 9/15/2014. Filed Date: 9/29/14. Roundtop Energy LLC; Supplemental Deputy Secretary. Accession Number: 20140929–5225. Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate [FR Doc. 2014–23754 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/20/14. Filing Includes Request for Blanket BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Section 204 Authorization Docket Numbers: ER14–2957–000. Applicants: PJM Interconnection, This is a supplemental notice in the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY L.L.C. above-referenced proceeding, of Description: Tariff Withdrawal per Roundtop Energy LLC’s application for Federal Energy Regulatory 35.15: Notice of Cancellation of Original market-based rate authority, with an Commission Service Agreement No. 3063; Queue No. accompanying rate schedule, noting that W3–078 to be effective 4/26/2012. such application includes a request for [Docket No. ER14–2955–000] Filed Date: 9/29/14. blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Skylar Resources, LP; Supplemental Accession Number: 20140929–5142. part 34, of future issuances of securities Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/20/14. and assumptions of liability. Filing Includes Request for Blanket Docket Numbers: ER14–2958–000. Any person desiring to intervene or to Section 204 Authorization Applicants: PJM Interconnection, protest should file with the Federal L.L.C. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 This is a supplemental notice in the Description: § 205(d) rate filing per First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, above-referenced proceeding, of Skylar 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Original Service in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Resources, LP’s application for market- Agreement No. 3941; Queue Z2–056 to of the Commission’s Rules of Practice based rate authority, with an be effective 8/28/2014. and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and accompanying rate schedule, noting that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60152 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

such application includes a request for DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY docket(s). For assistance with any FERC blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Online service, please email part 34, of future issuances of securities Federal Energy Regulatory [email protected]. or call and assumptions of liability. Commission (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Any person desiring to intervene or to [Docket Nos. ER04–1047–000; ER04–1047– protest should file with the Federal 001] Dated: September 30, 2014. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., White Pine Electric Power, L.L.C.; Deputy Secretary. First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, Supplemental Notice That Initial in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Market-Based Rate Filing Includes [FR Doc. 2014–23757 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Request for Blanket Section 204 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Authorization 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy This is a supplemental notice in the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY of that document on the Applicant. above-referenced proceeding, of White Pine Electric Power, L.L.C.’s application Federal Energy Regulatory Notice is hereby given that the for market-based rate authority, with an Commission deadline for filing protests with regard accompanying rate schedule, noting that [Docket No. ER07–1237–000] to the applicant’s request for blanket such application includes a request for authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of blanket authorization, under 18 CFR UP Power Marketing, LLC; future issuances of securities and part 34, of future issuances of securities Supplemental Notice That Initial assumptions of liability is October 20, and assumptions of liability. Market-Based Rate Filing Includes 2014. Any person desiring to intervene or to Request for Blanket Section 204 The Commission encourages protest should file with the Federal Authorization electronic submission of protests and Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 This is a supplemental notice in the interventions in lieu of paper, using the First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, above-referenced proceeding, of UP FERC Online links at http:// in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Power Marketing, LLC’s application for www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic of the Commission’s Rules of Practice market-based rate authority, with an service, persons with Internet access and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and accompanying rate schedule, noting that who will eFile a document and/or be 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to such application includes a request for intervene or protest must serve a copy listed as a contact for an intervenor blanket authorization, under 18 CFR of that document on the Applicant. Part 34, of future issuances of securities must create and validate an Notice is hereby given that the eRegistration account using the and assumptions of liability. deadline for filing protests with regard Any person desiring to intervene or to eRegistration link. Select the eFiling to the applicant’s request for blanket link to log on and submit the protest should file with the Federal authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 intervention or protests. future issuances of securities and First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, Persons unable to file electronically assumptions of liability is October 20, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 should submit an original and 5 copies 2014. of the Commission’s Rules of Practice of the intervention or protest to the The Commission encourages and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, electronic submission of protests and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC interventions in lieu of paper, using the intervene or protest must serve a copy 20426. FERC Online links at http:// of that document on the Applicant. www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic Notice is hereby given that the The filings in the above-referenced service, persons with Internet access deadline for filing protests with regard proceeding(s) are accessible in the who will eFile a document and/or be to the applicant’s request for blanket Commission’s eLibrary system by listed as a contact for an intervenor authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of clicking on the appropriate link in the must create and validate an future issuances of securities and above list. They are also available for eRegistration account using the assumptions of liability is October 20, review in the Commission’s Public eRegistration link. Select the eFiling 2014. Reference Room in Washington, DC. link to log on and submit the The Commission encourages There is an eSubscription link on the intervention or protests. electronic submission of protests and Web site that enables subscribers to Persons unable to file electronically interventions in lieu of paper, using the receive email notification when a should submit an original and 5 copies FERC Online links at http:// document is added to a subscribed of the intervention or protest to the www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, service, persons with Internet access Online service, please email 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC who will eFile a document and/or be [email protected]. or call 20426. listed as a contact for an intervenor (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call The filings in the above-referenced must create and validate an (202) 502–8659. proceeding(s) are accessible in the eRegistration account using the Commission’s eLibrary system by eRegistration link. Select the eFiling Dated: September 30, 2014. clicking on the appropriate link in the link to log on and submit the Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., above list. They are also available for intervention or protests. Deputy Secretary. review in the Commission’s Public Persons unable to file electronically [FR Doc. 2014–23755 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Reference Room in Washington, DC. should submit an original and 5 copies There is an eSubscription link on the of the intervention or protest to the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Web site that enables subscribers to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, receive email notification when a 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC document is added to a subscribed 20426.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60153

The filings in the above-referenced must create and validate an Suite 300, Salt Lake City, UT 84111– proceeding(s) are accessible in the eRegistration account using the 1580, telephone (801) 524–4007, email: Commission’s eLibrary system by eRegistration link. Select the eFiling [email protected]. clicking on the appropriate link in the link to log on and submit the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By above list. They are also available for intervention or protests. Delegation Order No. 00–037.00A, the review in the Commission’s Public Persons unable to file electronically Secretary of Energy delegated: (1) The Reference Room in Washington, DC. should submit an original and 5 copies authority to develop power and There is an eSubscription link on the of the intervention or protest to the transmission rates to Western’s Web site that enables subscribers to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Administrator; (2) the authority to receive email notification when a 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC confirm, approve, and place such rates document is added to a subscribed 20426. into effect on an interim basis to the docket(s). For assistance with any FERC The filings in the above-referenced Deputy Secretary of Energy; and (3) the Online service, please email proceeding(s) are accessible in the authority to confirm, approve, and place [email protected]. or call Commission’s eLibrary system by into effect on a final basis, to remand or (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call clicking on the appropriate link in the to disapprove such rates to the Federal (202) 502–8659. above list. They are also available for Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Dated: September 30, 2014. review in the Commission’s Public This extension is issued pursuant to the Reference Room in Washington, DC. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Delegation Order and Department of There is an eSubscription link on the Deputy Secretary. Energy (DOE) rate extension procedures Web site that enables subscribers to at 10 CFR 903.23(a). [FR Doc. 2014–23758 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] receive email notification when a Under Delegation Order No. 0204–108 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P document is added to a subscribed and existing DOE procedures for public docket(s). For assistance with any FERC participation in rate adjustments at 10 Online service, please email DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CFR part 903, Western’s Provo River [email protected]. or call Power Rate formula was submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call FERC for confirmation and approval on Commission (202) 502–8659. February 2, 2010. The Provo River Dated: September 30, 2014. Power Rate formula, Rate Order No. [Docket No. ER14–2956–000] Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., WAPA–149, was approved for 5 years Hoopeston Wind, LLC; Supplemental Deputy Secretary. beginning April 1, 2010, and ending Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate [FR Doc. 2014–23756 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] March 31, 2015. The Provo River Project, which Filing Includes Request for Blanket BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Section 204 Authorization includes Deer Creek Dam on the Provo River in Utah, was authorized in 1935. This is a supplemental notice in the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Construction of the dam began in 1938 above-referenced proceeding, of and was completed in 1951. The Deer Hoopeston Wind, LLC’s application for Western Area Power Administration Creek Powerplant was authorized on market-based rate authority, with an August 20, 1951; construction began in accompanying rate schedule, noting that Provo River Project—Rate Order No. 1956 and was completed in 1958; such application includes a request for WAPA–165 generation began that same year. Its blanket authorization, under 18 CFR maximum operating capacity is 5,200 AGENCY: Western Area Power Part 34, of future issuances of securities kilowatts. Administration, DOE. and assumptions of liability. The Provo River Project’s power is Any person desiring to intervene or to ACTION: Notice of Proposed Extension sold according to a marketing plan that protest should file with the Federal for the Provo River Project Power Rate was published in the Federal Register Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Formula. on November 21, 1994. This marketing First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, plan allows Western to sell the output SUMMARY: This action is a proposal to in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 extend the existing Provo River Project of the Provo River Project to Utah of the Commission’s Rules of Practice firm power rate formula through March Municipal Power Agency, Utah and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 31, 2020. The existing rate formula will Associated Municipal Power Systems, 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to expire on March 31, 2015. and Heber Light and Power (Customers) intervene or protest must serve a copy in the Provo River drainage area. of that document on the Applicant. DATES: Thirty days after this notice is Contract Nos. 94–SLC–0253, 94–SLC– Notice is hereby given that the published, Western Area Power 0254, and 07–SLC–0601 between the deadline for filing protests with regard Administration (Western) will take United States and Customers require to the applicant’s request for blanket further action on the proposed formula that each fiscal year (FY) a new annual authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of rate extension consistent with 10 CFR installment be calculated in advance by future issuances of securities and 903. Western and submitted to the Customers assumptions of liability is October 20, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. on or before August 31 of the year 2014. Lynn C. Jeka, CRSP Manager, Colorado preceding the appropriate FY. Each FY, The Commission encourages River Storage Project Management Western prepares a power repayment electronic submission of protests and Center, 150 East Social Hall Avenue, study, which includes estimates of interventions in lieu of paper, using the Suite 300, Salt Lake City, UT 84111– operation, maintenance, and FERC Online links at http:// 1580, telephone (801) 524–6372, email: replacement costs for the Deer Creek www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic [email protected], or Mr. Rodney Bailey, Powerplant. The annual installment is service, persons with Internet access Power Marketing Manager, Colorado adjusted on or before August 31 of the who will eFile a document and/or be River Storage Project Management year preceding the FY to which it listed as a contact for an intervenor Center, 150 East Social Hall Avenue, pertains, and Western identifies this

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60154 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

amount in contract revisions. Each • Mail: Document Control Office i. Identify the document by docket ID annual installment pays the amortized (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention number and other identifying portion of the United States’ investment and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental information (subject heading, Federal in the Deer Creek hydroelectric facilities Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Register date and page number). with interest and the associated Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. ii. Follow directions. The Agency may operation, maintenance, and • Hand Delivery: To make special ask you to respond to specific questions administrative costs. This repayment arrangements for hand delivery or or organize comments by referencing a schedule is not dependent upon the delivery of boxed information, please Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part capacity and associated energy made follow the instructions at http:// or section number. available for sale each year. www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; Thirty days after this notice is Additional instructions on suggest alternatives and substitute published, Western will take further commenting or visiting the docket, language for your requested changes. action on the proposed formula rate along with more information about iv. Describe any assumptions and extension for the Provo River Project, dockets generally, is available at provide any technical information and/ pursuant to the Delegation Order and http://www.epa.gov/dockets. or data that you used. v. If you estimate potential costs or DOE rate extension procedures at 10 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For CFR 903.23(a). burdens, explain how you arrived at technical information contact: Bernice your estimate in sufficient detail to Dated: September 26, 2014. Mudd, Information Management allow for it to be reproduced. Mark A. Gabriel, Division (7407), Office of Pollution vi. Provide specific examples to Administrator. Prevention and Toxics, Environmental illustrate your concerns and suggest [FR Doc. 2014–23773 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania alternatives. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; vii. Explain your views as clearly as telephone number: (202) 564–8951; possible, avoiding the use of profanity email address: [email protected]. or personal threats. For general information contact: The ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION viii. Make sure to submit your TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 AGENCY comments by the comment period South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY deadline identified. [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2014–0706; FRL–9917–18] 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@ II. What action is the Agency taking? Certain New Chemicals; Receipt and epa.gov. This document provides receipt and Status Information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: status reports, which cover the period from August 25, 2014 to September 15, AGENCY: Environmental Protection I. General Information 2014, and consists of the PMNs pending Agency (EPA). A. Does this action apply to me? and/or expired, and the NOCs to ACTION: Notice. manufacture a new chemical that the This action is directed to the public SUMMARY: EPA is required under the Agency has received under TSCA in general. As such, the Agency has not section 5 during this time period. Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to attempted to describe the specific publish in the Federal Register a notice entities that this action may apply to. III. What is the Agency’s authority for of receipt of a premanufacture notice Although others may be affected, this taking this action? (PMN); an application for a test action applies directly to the submitter Section 5 of TSCA requires that EPA marketing exemption (TME), both of the PMNs addressed in this action. periodical publish in the Federal pending and/or expired; and a periodic Register receipt and status reports, status report on any new chemicals B. What should I consider as I prepare which cover the following EPA under EPA review and the receipt of my comments for EPA? activities required by provisions of notices of commencement (NOC) to 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this TSCA section 5. manufacture those chemicals. This information to EPA through EPA classifies a chemical substance as document covers the period from regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark either an ‘‘existing’’ chemical or a August 25, 2014 to September 15, 2014. the part or all of the information that ‘‘new’’ chemical. Any chemical DATES: Comments identified by the you claim to be CBI. For CBI substance that is not on EPA’s TSCA specific PMN number or TME number, information in a disk or CD–ROM that Inventory is classified as a ‘‘new must be received on or before November you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the chemical,’’ while those that are on the 5, 2014. disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then TSCA Inventory are classified as an ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identify electronically within the disk or ‘‘existing chemical.’’ For more identified by docket identification (ID) CD–ROM the specific information that information about the TSCA Inventory number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2014–0706, is claimed as CBI. In addition to one go to: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/ and the specific PMN number or TME complete version of the comment that newchems/pubs/inventory.htm. Anyone number for the chemical related to your includes information claimed as CBI, a who plans to manufacture or import a comment, by one of the following copy of the comment that does not new chemical substance for a non- methods: contain the information claimed as CBI exempt commercial purpose is required • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// must be submitted for inclusion in the by TSCA section 5 to provide EPA with www.regulations.gov. Follow the online public docket. Information so marked a PMN, before initiating the activity. instructions for submitting comments. will not be disclosed except in Section 5(h)(1) of TSCA authorizes EPA Do not submit electronically any accordance with procedures set forth in to allow persons, upon application, to information you consider to be 40 CFR part 2. manufacture (includes import) or Confidential Business Information (CBI) 2. Tips for preparing your comments. process a new chemical substance, or a or other information whose disclosure is When submitting comments, remember chemical substance subject to a restricted by statute. to: significant new use rule (SNUR) issued

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60155

under TSCA section 5(a), for ‘‘test of a PMN or an application for a TME that such information is not claimed as marketing’’ purposes, which is referred and to publish in the Federal Register CBI) on the PMNs received by EPA to as a test marketing exemption, or periodic status reports on the new during this period: The EPA case TME. For more information about the chemicals under review and the receipt number assigned to the PMN, the date requirements applicable to a new of NOCs to manufacture those the PMN was received by EPA, the chemical go to: http://www.epa.gov/ chemicals. projected end date for EPA’s review of oppt/newchems. the PMN, the submitting manufacturer/ IV. Receipt and Status Reports Under TSCA sections 5(d)(2) and importer, the potential uses identified 5(d)(3), EPA is required to publish in In Table I. of this unit, EPA provides by the manufacturer/importer in the the Federal Register a notice of receipt the following information (to the extent PMN, and the chemical identity.

TABLE I—37 PMNS RECEIVED FROM 8/25/14 TO 9/15/14

Projected Case No. Received date notice end Manufacturer Use Chemical date /importer

P–14–0806 ... 8/26/2014 11/24/2014 CBI ...... (G) Open, non-dispersive ...... (G) Epoxy-amine adduct, neutralized. P–14–0807 ... 8/26/2014 11/24/2014 CBI ...... (G) Reactive polymer for waterborne (G) Aromatic diacid polymer with alkyl industrial coating & ink applications. diacid, cycloalkyl dimethanol, alkyl diisocyanate, hydroxyalkyl acrylate blocked alkyl diisocyanate homopolymer, dihydroxyalkanoic acid, alkanediol, alkali metal salt, dialkanolamine-and- hydroxyalkyl acrylate-and-polyalkyl glycol monoalkyl ether blocked. P–14–0808 ... 8/26/2014 11/24/2014 CBI ...... (G) Process intermediate ...... (G) Fluoroalkene. P–14–0809 ... 8/26/2014 11/24/2014 CBI ...... (S) Intermediate for use in the manu- (G) Depolymerized waste plastics. facture of polymers. P–14–0810 ... 8/26/2014 11/24/2014 SEPPIC ...... (S) Hydrotrope agent and perform- (S) D-Glucoside, heptyl. ance booster. P–14–0811 ... 8/27/2014 11/25/2014 CBI ...... (G) Lubricant additive ...... (G) Sulfurized hydrocarbon. P–14–0812 ... 8/27/2014 11/25/2014 CBI ...... (S) Floor coating; general architec- (G) Isocyanate terminated poly- tural and industrial coatings. urethane. P–14–0813 ... 8/27/2014 11/25/2014 CBI ...... (G) Intermediate ...... (G) Perfluoropolyether chlorosilane. P–14–0814 ... 8/27/2014 11/25/2014 CBI ...... (G) Surface modification coating ...... (G) Perfluoropolyether methoxysilane. P–14–0822 ... 8/27/2014 11/25/2014 CBI ...... (G) Resin additive designed to be (G) Epoxycyclohexylmethyl- added to existing systems improv- epoxycyclohexane carboxylate ing overall mechanical properties. polymer with cyclohexlamine. P–14–0817 ... 8/29/2014 11/27/2014 Firmenich In- (G) As part of a fragrance formula ..... (S) 3-hexenoic acid, corporated. cyclopropylmethyl ester. P–14–0818 ... 8/29/2014 11/27/2014 CBI ...... (G) Adhesive for cellulosic surfaces .. (G) Cross-linked biopolymer. P–14–0820 ... 9/2/2014 12/1/2014 Allnex USA (S) Industrial coating resin ...... (G) Formaldehyde, polymer with sub- Inc. stituted carbomonocycles, alkyl ether. P–14–0821 ... 9/2/2014 12/1/2014 Industrial (S) Intermediate for polymer produc- (G) Glycidyl trimethylammonium bro- Speciality tion. mide. Chemicals. P–14–0823 ... 9/3/2014 12/2/2014 Allnex USA (S) Industrial Coating Resin ...... (G) Formaldehyde, polymer with sub- Inc. stituted carbomonocycle, alkyl ether. P–14–0824 ... 9/3/2014 12/2/2014 CBI ...... (G) Rape oil, reaction products with (G) Rape oil, reaction products with amines. alkylamine. P–14–0825 ... 9/3/2014 12/2/2014 CBI ...... (G) Paint additive ...... (G) Amide wax. P–14–0827 ... 9/3/2014 12/2/2014 Baze Chem- (S) Diluted corrosion inhibitor/organic (S) Poly[oxy(methyl-1,2- ical Com- scale inhibitor intermediate. ethanediyl)],alpha-(2- pany. aminomethylethyl)-omega-(2- aminomethylethoxy)-, phosphonomethylated, sodium salts. P–14–0827 ... 9/3/2014 12/2/2014 Baze Chem- (S) Organic scale inhibitor inter- (S) Poly[oxy(methyl-1,2- ical Com- mediate for oil field scale inhibition. ethanediyl)],alpha-(2- pany. aminomethylethyl)-omega-(2- aminomethylethoxy)-, phosphonomethylated, sodium salts. P–14–0826 ... 9/3/2014 12/2/2014 Rhineland (S) Binder in paints used for marine (G) Fatty acids, unsatd., polymers Special- applications. with hydroxy-terminated PH PR ties, Inc. organosilica, alkylpolyhydroxide, aryl anhydride, and fatty acid. P–14–0828 ... 9/3/2014 12/2/2014 CBI ...... (S) Polymer intermediate ...... (G) Formamide, N-ethenyl-, polymer. P–14–0829 ... 9/4/2014 12/3/2014 CBI ...... (S) Surfactant for use in paints, coat- (S) Pending Letter of Support. ings, inks, waxes, detergents, polishes, adhesives, and lubricants.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60156 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

TABLE I—37 PMNS RECEIVED FROM 8/25/14 TO 9/15/14—Continued

Projected Case No. Received date notice end Manufacturer Use Chemical date /importer

P–14–0830 ... 9/8/2014 12/7/2014 CBI ...... (G) Additve for household cleaners (S) 1-propanaminium, N,N,N- and products. trimethyl-3-[(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-pro- penyl)amino]-, chloride (1:1), poly- mer with 2-propenamide and 2-pro- penoic acid, sodium salt. P–14–0831 ... 9/8/2014 12/7/2014 CBI ...... (S) A binder for metal coating ...... (G) Fatty acids, polymers with acrylic monomers, bisphenol A, 2- ethoxyethanol, epichlorohydrin and styrene, alkyl peroxide-initiated, compounds (cmpds) with triethylamine. P–14–0832 ... 9/8/2014 12/7/2014 CBI ...... (S) A binder resin for metal coating ... (G) Fatty acids, polymers with acrylic monomers, bisphenol A, modified oil, epichlorohydrin and styrene, alkyl peroxide-initiated, cmpds. with triethylamine. P–14–0833 ... 9/8/2014 12/7/2014 CBI ...... (G) Open, non-dispersive ...... (G) Epoxy-amine adduct, neutralized. P–14–0834 ... 9/9/2014 12/8/2014 CBI ...... (G) Component for plastic parts coat- (G) Polyfunctional carbodiimide. ing. P–14–0835 ... 9/11/2014 12/10/2014 CBI ...... (G) PMN substance is a component (G) Alkyl carboxylic acid lithium salt. OF inkjet ink. P–14–0837 ... 9/12/2014 12/11/2014 Henkel Cor- (S) Hot melt adhesive and industrial (S) Fatty acids, C18-unsaturated poration. bonding applications. (unsat’d.), dimers, polymers with azelaic acid, ethylenediamine, hexamethylenediamine, piperazine, polyoxypropylene diamine and tall- oil fatty acids. P–14–0836 ... 9/12/2014 12/11/2014 Henkel Cor- (S) Hot melt adhesive and industrial (S) Fatty acids, C18-unsat’d., dimers, poration. bonding applications. polymers with azelaic acid, ethyl- enediamine, piperazine, poly- propylene glycol diamine and tall oil fatty acids*. P–14–0838 ... 9/12/2014 12/11/2014 CBI ...... (G) Component for tire ...... (G) Modified copolymer of buta-1,3- diene and styrene. P–14–0840 ... 9/12/2014 12/11/2014 CBI ...... (G) Reactive hot melt adhesive for (G) Silane cure reactive hot melt ad- roll coating or spraying application hesive. to make panels for construction. P–14–0841 ... 9/12/2014 12/11/2014 CBI ...... (S) Fluorescent brightener for use in (G) Triazinylaminostilbene. paper applications. P–14–0842 ... 9/12/2014 12/11/2014 CBI ...... (G) Polymerization monomer ...... (G) Polycyclic hydrocarbon. P–14–0843 ... 9/15/2014 12/14/2014 CBI ...... (G) Laundry additive ...... (G) Alkoxylated glycerol ester. P–14–0844 ... 9/15/2014 12/14/2014 CBI ...... (G) Heat dissipation...... (G) Organosilane treated boron nitride. P–14–0845 ... 9/15/2014 12/14/2014 CBI ...... (G) Heat dissipation ...... (G) Organosilane treated oxide ce- ramic.

In Table II. of this unit, EPA provides CBI) on the NOCs received by EPA the NOC was received by EPA, the the following information (to the extent during this period: The EPA case projected end date for EPA’s review of that such information is not claimed as number assigned to the NOC, the date the NOC, and chemical identity.

TABLE II—29 NOCS RECEIVED FROM 8/25/14 TO 9/15/14

Commence- Case no. Received date ment notice Chemical end date

P–01–0357 ... 8/22/2014 8/5/2014 (G) N,N’ substituted aniline sulfonic acid, compound with 2,2’,2‘‘-nitrilotris [ethanol]. P–14–0539 ... 8/22/2014 8/6/2014 (G) Siloxanes and silicones, di-me, 3-(2-hydroxyethoxy)alkyl group-terminated, polymers with 1,4-alkanediol, di-et carbonate, alkene glycol, 1,6-alkanediol and 1,1-alkylenebis[4- isocyanatocycloalkane]. P–14–0540 ... 8/22/2014 8/6/2014 (G) Siloxanes and silicones, di-me, 3-(2-hydroxyethoxy)alkyl group-terminated, polymers with 1,4-alkanediol, di-et carbonate, alkene glycol, 1,6-alkanediol and 1,1-alkylenebis[4- isocyanatocycloalkane]. P–14–0052 ... 8/25/2014 8/3/2014 (G) Polymer modified multifunctional silane. P–14–0500 ... 8/25/2014 8/21/2014 (G) Butanedioic acid, compd. with polyalkylpolyaminoamidine. P–12–0573 ... 8/26/2014 8/8/2014 (G) Amine substitued quinoacridine product. P–14–0270 ... 8/26/2014 8/18/2014 (G) Multifunctional novolac type epoxy resin. P–14–0289 ... 8/26/2014 8/18/2014 (G) Multifunctional novolac type epoxy resin.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60157

TABLE II—29 NOCS RECEIVED FROM 8/25/14 TO 9/15/14—Continued

Commence- Case no. Received date ment notice Chemical end date

J–14–0017 ... 8/26/2014 8/19/2014 (G) Modified microalgae. P–12–0115 ... 8/27/2014 8/20/2014 (G) Alkylbenzene sulfonic acid. P–14–0143 ... 8/28/2014 8/20/2014 (G) Alkanaminium, substituted carbomonocycle alkylamino)carbomonocycle]alkylene]-sub- stituted carbomonocycle, carboxylate salt. P–13–0907 ... 8/28/2014 8/25/2014 (G) Epoxy resin, reaction products with alkanolamines. P–12–0116 ... 8/28/2014 8/28/2014 (G) Alkylbenzene sulfonate sodium salt. P–14–0487 ... 8/29/2014 8/5/2014 (G) Polyalkylaminoalkaryloxy, carboxylic acid, metal salt. P–14–0336 ... 8/29/2014 8/20/2014 (S) Dodecanedioic acid, polymer with 2,2-dimethyl-1,3-propanediol. P–14–0417 ... 9/2/2014 8/26/2014 (G) Aliphatic ether ethyl alcohol. P–14–0418 ... 9/2/2014 8/26/2014 (G) Styrene-methacrylate copolymer. P–13–0919 ... 9/2/2014 8/30/2014 (G) Glycerides, C14-C18, C16-C18 unsaturated, from algal fermentation. P–14–0308 ... 9/2/2014 8/30/2014 (G) Algal biomass from fermentation. P–14–0447 ... 9/4/2014 8/9/2014 (S) Alcohols, C18–22, distillation residues. P–14–0448 ... 9/4/2014 8/9/2014 (S) Alcohols, C12–22, distillation residues. P–14–0556 ... 9/5/2014 8/21/2014 (S) Oils, peach pulp. P–13–0650 ... 9/8/2014 9/3/2014 (G) Epoxy-amine adduct, neutralized. P–14–0547 ... 9/9/2014 9/5/2014 (G) Organometallic, reaction product with zirconium metallocene, silica, and aluminum alkyl. P–14–0337 ... 9/10/2014 8/20/2014 (S) Poly(oxy(methyl-1,2-ethanediyl)], -hydro—hydroxy-, polymer with 1,6-diisocyanatohexane and 1,1’-methylenebis[4-isocyanatocyclohexane], caprolactam- and polyethylene glycol mono-me ether-blocked. P–14–0450 ... 9/10/2014 9/2/2014 (G) Siliconate potassium. P–14–0504 ... 9/11/2014 9/3/2014 (G) Alkylated urethane copolymer. P–08–0271 ... 9/12/2014 9/4/2014 (S) Molybdenum, borate neodecanoate oxo complexes. P–14–0566 ... 9/15/2014 9/6/2014 (G) Disubstituted alkenal.

If you are interested in information to Section 122(h)(1) of CERCLA, 42 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. that is not included in these tables, you U.S.C. 9622(h)(1), and it requires the Andrew Helmlinger, Assistant Regional may contact EPA as described in Unit settling party to pay $40,000 to the Counsel (ORC–3), Office of Regional III. to access additional non-CBI United States Environmental Protection Counsel, U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 information that may be available. Agency (Agency). The settlement Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et. seq. includes a covenant not to sue the 94105; phone: (415) 972–3904; fax: (417) settling party pursuant to Sections 106 947–3570; email: helmlinger.andrew@ Dated: September 23, 2014. or 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 or epa.gov. Chandler Sirmons, 9607(a). For thirty (30) days following Acting Director, Information Management SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the date of publication of this Notice in Respondent to the Proposed Settlement: Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and the Federal Register, the Agency will Toxics. K&W Properties, Inc. receive written comments relating to the [FR Doc. 2014–23772 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] settlement. The Agency will consider all Dated: September 25, 2014. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P comments received and may modify or Enrique Manzanilla, withdraw its consent to the settlement Director, Superfund Division, U.S. EPA, Region IX. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION if comments received disclose facts or AGENCY considerations which indicate the [FR Doc. 2014–23816 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] proposed settlement is inappropriate, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P [FRL–9917–47–Region–9] improper, or inadequate. The Agency’s response to any comments received will Strategic Sciences Removal Site, be available for public inspection at 75 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Sylmar, CA; Notice of Proposed Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA COMMISSION CERCLA Settlement Agreement for 94105. Recovery of Response Costs [3060–0855] DATES: Comments must be submitted on AGENCY: Environmental Protection or before November 5, 2014. Information Collection Being Agency. Submitted for Review and Approval to ADDRESSES: ACTION: Notice; request for comment. The proposed settlement is the Office of Management and Budget available for public inspection at EPA SUMMARY: In accordance with Section Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San AGENCY: Federal Communications 122(i) of the Comprehensive Francisco, California. A copy of the Commission. Environmental Response, Compensation proposed settlement may be obtained ACTION: Notice and request for and Liability Act of 1980, as amended from J. Andrew Helmlinger, EPA Region comments. (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, ORC–3, San hereby given of a proposed Francisco, CA 94105, telephone number SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort administrative settlement with two 415–972–3904. Comments should to reduce paperwork burdens, and as parties for recovery of response costs reference the Strategic Sciences required by the Paperwork Reduction concerning the Strategic Sciences Superfund Site, Sylmar, California, and Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Superfund Site in Sylmar, California. should be addressed to J. Andrew 3520), the Federal Communications The settlement is entered into pursuant Helmlinger at the above address. Commission (FCC or Commission)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60158 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

invites the general public and other click on the ICR Reference Number. A electronically or on paper). Also, the Federal agencies to take this copy of the FCC submission to OMB third-party disclosure requirement is opportunity to comment on the will be displayed. being eliminated. following information collections. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal Communications Commission. Comments are requested concerning: OMB Control Number: 3060–0855. Marlene H. Dortch, whether the proposed collection of Title: Telecommunications Reporting information is necessary for the proper Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of Worksheets and Related Collections, the Managing Director. performance of the functions of the FCC Forms 499–A and 499–Q. Commission, including whether the [FR Doc. 2014–23785 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Form Number: FCC Forms 499–A and BILLING CODE 6712–01–P information shall have practical utility; 499–Q. the accuracy of the Commission’s Type of Review: Revision of a burden estimate; ways to enhance the currently approved collection. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS quality, utility, and clarity of the Respondents: Business or other for- COMMISSION information collected; ways to minimize profit and not-for-profit institutions. the burden of the collection of Number of Respondents and [OMB 3060–1156] information on the respondents, Responses: 6,700 respondents; 41,650 including the use of automated responses. Information Collection Being Reviewed collection techniques or other forms of Estimated Time per Response: 0.25 information technology; and ways to by the Federal Communications hours to 25 hours per response. Commission further reduce the information Frequency of Response: Annually, collection burden on small business quarterly, recordkeeping and on AGENCY: Federal Communications concerns with fewer than 25 employees. occasion reporting requirements. Commission. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor Obligation to Respond: Mandatory. ACTION: a collection of information unless it Notice and request for Statutory authority for this collection of displays a currently valid OMB control comments. information is contained in 151, 154(i), number. No person shall be subject to 154(j), 155, 157, 159, 201, 205, 214, 225, SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort any penalty for failing to comply with 254, 303(r), 715 and 719 of the Act, 47 to reduce paperwork burdens, and as a collection of information subject to the U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 157, 159, required by the Paperwork Reduction PRA that does not display a valid OMB Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– control number. 201, 205, 214, 225, 254, 303(r), 616, and 620. 3520), the Federal Communications DATES: Written comments should be Total Annual Burden: 247,375 hours. Commission (FCC or the Commission) submitted on or before November 5, Annual Cost Burden: No cost. invites the general public and other 2014. If you anticipate that you will be Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No Federal agencies to take this submitting comments, but find it impact(s). opportunity to comment on the difficult to do so within the period of Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: following information collection. time allowed by this notice, you should The Commission will allow respondents Comments are requested concerning: advise the contacts below as soon as to certify that data contained in their Whether the proposed collection of possible. submissions is privileged or information is necessary for the proper ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to confidential commercial or financial performance of the functions of the Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB, via email information and that disclosure of such Commission, including whether the [email protected]; and information would likely cause information shall have practical utility; to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email PRA@ substantial harm to the competitive the accuracy of the Commission’s fcc.gov and to [email protected]. position of the entity filing the FCC burden estimate; ways to enhance the Include in the comments the OMB worksheets. If the Commission receives quality, utility, and clarity of the control number as shown in the a request for or proposes to disclose the information collected; ways to minimize SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section information, the respondent would be the burden of the collection of below. required to make the full showing information on the respondents, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For pursuant to the Commission’s rules for including the use of automated additional information or copies of the withholding from public inspection collection techniques or other forms of information collection, contact Nicole information submitted to the information technology; and ways to Ongele at (202) 418–2991. Commission. further reduce the information To view a copy of this information Needs and Uses: This information collection burden on small business collection request (ICR) submitted to collection requires contributors to the concerns with fewer than 25 employees. OMB: (1) Go to the Web page , telecommunications relay service fund, collection of information unless it (2) look for the section of the Web page and numbering administration to file, displays a currently valid control called ‘‘Currently Under Review,’’ (3) pursuant to sections 151, 225, 251 and number. No person shall be subject to click on the downward-pointing arrow 254 of the Act, a Telecommunications any penalty for failing to comply with in the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box below the Reporting Worksheet on an annual basis a collection of information subject to the ‘‘Currently Under Review’’ heading, (4) (FCC Form 499–A and/or on a quarterly PRA that does not display a valid Office select ‘‘Federal Communications basis (FCC Form 499–Q). The of Management and Budget (OMB) Commission’’ from the list of agencies information is also used to calculate control number. presented in the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, FCC regulatory fees for interstate DATES: Written PRA comments should (5) click the ‘‘Submit’’ button to the telecommunications service providers. be submitted on or before December 5, right of the ‘‘Select Agency’’ box, (6) This information collection is being 2014. If you anticipate that you will be when the list of FCC ICRs currently revised to require online electronic submitting comments, but find it under review appears, look for the OMB filing for FCC Forms 499–A and 499–Q difficult to do so within the period of control number of this ICR and then (currently, the forms may be filed either time allowed by this notice, you should

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60159

advise the contact listed below as soon In order for carriers to comply with FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS as possible. annual reporting requirements COMMISSION ADDRESSES stipulated in 47 CFR 43.62, the : Direct all PRA comments to [OMB 3060–0783] Cathy Williams, FCC, via email PRA@ Commission is developing a web-based fcc.gov and to [email protected]. system for filers to submit their reports. Information Collection Being Reviewed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Filers will access the filing system via by the Federal Communications additional information about the a portal on the FCC Web site, Commission Under Delegated information collection, contact Cathy www.FCC.gov The software for the web- Authority Williams at (202) 418–2918. based system is now under development AGENCY: Federal Communications SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and the Commission is seeking final Commission. OMB Control No.: 3060–1156. OMB approval for the new requirements Title: 47 CFR 43.62, Annual Reporting in 47 CFR 43.62, the new consolidated ACTION: Notice and request for Requirements for U.S. Providers of Filing Manual and the electronic filing comments. International Services and Circuits. of the data. Form No.: N/A. SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort Type of Review: Revision of a Without this collection of to reduce paperwork burdens, and as currently approved information information, the Commission would not required by the Paperwork Reduction collection. be able to ensure compliance with its Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– Respondents: Business or other for- international rules and policies. 3520), the Federal Communications profit. Furthermore, the Commission would Commission (FCC or the Commission) Number of Respondents: 2,328 not have sufficient information to take invites the general public and other respondents; 14,606 responses. measures to prevent anticompetitive Federal agencies to take this Estimated Time per Response: 1–50 conduct in the provision of opportunity to comment on the hours. international communications services. following information collection. Frequency of Response: Annual Comments are requested concerning: The Commission would not have reporting requirement. whether the proposed collection of adequate information to respond to Obligation to Respond: Required to information is necessary for the proper obtain or retain benefits. The statutory failures in the U.S.-international market. performance of the functions of the authority for this information collection The Commission would not be able to Commission, including whether the is contained under Sections 1, 4(i)-4(j), promote effective competition in the information shall have practical utility; 11, 201–205, 211, 214, 219, 220, 303(r), global market for communications the accuracy of the Commission’s 309 and 403 of the Communications Act services. The lack of effective burden estimate; ways to enhance the of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, competition would adversely affect the quality, utility, and clarity of the 154(i)-154(j), 161, 201–205, 211, 214, U.S. revenues in the information collected; ways to minimize 219–220, 303(r), 309, 403. telecommunications industry. The the burden of the collection of Total Annual Burden: 14,606 hours. agency would not be able to comply information on the respondents, Annual Cost Burden: $2,400. with the international regulations stated including the use of automated Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No in the World Trade Organization (WTO) collection techniques or other forms of impact(s). Basic Telecom Agreement. Carriers and information technology; and ways to Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: other entities outside the Commission, further reduce the information In general, there is no need for such as other government agencies, collection burden on small business confidentiality with this collection of international organizations, and concerns with fewer than 25 employees. information. The Commission, however, The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a will allow filing entities to seek academia, use the information to analyze industry trends. Other collection of information unless it confidential treatment of their data. displays a currently valid control Needs and Uses: The Federal government agencies use the number. No person shall be subject to Communications Commission information in merger analyses and any penalty for failing to comply with (Commission) is requesting that the negotiations with foreign countries. If a collection of information subject to the Office of Management and Budget the information collection was not PRA that does not display a valid Office (OMB) approve a revision of OMB conducted, carriers, government of Management and Budget (OMB) Control No. 3060–1156. The purpose of agencies and other entities would not control number. the revision is to obtain OMB approval have accurate industry data available in of the annual reporting requirements order to conduct analyses. DATES: Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before December 5, stipulated under 47 CFR 43.62 which Federal Communications Commission. requires that entities providing 2014. If you anticipate that you will be international services file annual circuit Marlene H. Dortch, submitting comments, but find it capacity reports and annual traffic and Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of difficult to do so within the period of revenue reports, in a format set out in the Managing Director. time allowed by this notice, you should a Filing Manual. [FR Doc. 2014–23784 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] advise the contact listed below as soon Upon the OMB’s approval of the BILLING CODE 6712–01–P as possible. proposed changes in this information ADDRESSES: Submit your PRA comments collection, the Commission plans to to Benish Shah, Federal eliminate two existing information Communications Commission, via the collections from the Commission’s Internet at [email protected]. To inventory, OMB Control Number 3060– submit your PRA comments by email 0106 (47 CFR 43.61 annual traffic and send them to: [email protected]. revenue reports) and OMB Control FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Number 3060–0572 (47 CFR 43.82 Benish Shah, Office of Managing annual circuit-status reports). Director, (202) 418–7866.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60160 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal Communications Commission. prod/cdbs_pa.htm. A copy of this OMB Control No.: 3060–0783. Marlene H. Dortch, application may also be purchased from Title: Section 90.176, Coordination Secretary. the Commission’s duplicating Notification Requirements on [FR Doc. 2014–23783 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Frequencies Below 512 BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 445 12th Street SW., Room CY–B402, MHz or at 764–776/794–806 MHz. Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1– Form No.: N/A. 800–378–3160 or www.BCPIWEB.com. Type of Review: Extension of a FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS currently approved collection. COMMISSION Federal Communications Commission. Respondents: Business or other for- profit. Radio Broadcasting Services; AM or James D. Bradshaw, Number of Respondents: 15 FM Proposals To Change The Deputy Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. respondents; 3,900 responses. Community of License [FR Doc. 2014–23778 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Estimated Time per Response: 0.5 AGENCY: Federal Communications BILLING CODE 6712–01–P hours. Commission. Frequency of Response: On occasion ACTION: Notice. reporting requirement and third party disclosure requirement. SUMMARY: The following applicants filed FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Obligation to Respond: Required to AM or FM proposals to change the obtain or retain benefits. Statutory community of license: Birach Sunshine Act Meetings authority for this information collection Broadcasting Corporation, Station (IC) is contained in sections 47 U.S.C. WMFN, Facility ID 55089, BP– AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. 154(i), 161, 303(g), 303(r) and 332(c)(7) 20140715AAF, From Zeeland, MI, To DATE AND TIME: Thursday, October 9, of the Communications Act of 1934, as Peotone, IL; Isleta Radio Company, 2014 at 10 a.m. amended. Station KQNM, Facility ID 22391, BP– Total Annual Burden: 1,950 hours. 20140715ABR, From Milan, NM, To PLACE: 999 E Street NW., Washington, Annual Cost Burden: N/A. Sandia, NM; Max Henry & Associates, DC (ninth floor). Privacy Act Impact Assessment: N/A. Station NEW, Facility ID 191528, STATUS: This meeting will be open to the Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: BMPH–20140715AAT, From Harrison, public. There is no need for confidentiality. MI, To Big Rapids, MI; Radio Fargo- Needs and Uses: This collection will Moorhead, Inc., Station KSKK, Facility ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: be submitted as an extension (no change ID 49094, BPH–20140917ABQ, From Correction and Approval of Minutes for in the reporting requirements and/or Staples, MN, To Frazee, MN; Results September 18, 2014 third party disclosure requirements) Radio of Redding Licensee, LLC, Station after this 60 day comment period to KNCQ, Facility ID 40828, BPH– Citizens United v. FEC Rulemaking Office of Management and Budget 20140828ACE, From Redding, CA, To McCutcheon v. FEC Interim Final Rule (OMB) in order to obtain the full three Weaverville, CA; Results Radio of McCutcheon v. FEC Advance Notice of year clearance. Section 90.176 requires Redding Licensee, LLC, Station KHRD, Proposed Rulemaking each Private Land Mobile frequency Facility ID 82720, BPH–20140828ACG, coordinator to provide, within one From Weaverville, CA, To Redding, CA; Draft Advisory Opinion 2014–12: business day, a listing of their frequency Sacred Heart University, Inc., Station Democratic National Committee and recommendations to all other frequency WSHU, Facility ID 43126, BP– Republican National Committee coordinators in their respective pool, 20140821AFR, From Westport, CT, To Draft Advisory Opinion 2014–14: John and if requested, an engineering Seymour, CT; SSR Communications, Trammell analysis. Inc., Station WYAB, Facility ID 77646, Draft Advisory Opinion 2014–15: David Any method can be used to ensure BPH–20140826ACE, From Flora, MS, To Alan Brat this compliance with the ‘‘one business Pocahontas, MS; Sunnylands day requirement’’ and must provide, at Broadcasting LLC, Station NEW, Facility Management and Administrative a minimum, the name of the applicant; ID 189496, BNPH–20110630AGJ, From Matters frequency or frequencies recommended; Ilwaco, WA, To Central Park, WA. Individuals who plan to attend and antenna locations and heights; and DATES: The agency must receive require special assistance, such as sign effective radiated power; the type(s) of comments on or before December 5, language interpretation or other emissions; the description of the service 2014. reasonable accommodations, should area; and the date and time of the recommendation. If a conflict in ADDRESSES: Federal Communications contact Shawn Woodhead Werth, recommendations arises, the effected Commission, 445 Twelfth Street SW., Secretary and Clerk, at (202)694–1040, coordinators are jointly responsible for Washington, DC 20554. at least 72 hours prior to the meeting taking action to resolve the conflict, up FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: date. to and including notifying the Tung Bui, 202–418–2700. PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: Commission that an application may SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The full Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: have to be returned. text of these applications is available for (202) 694–1220. This requirement seeks to avoid inspection and copying during normal situations where harmful interference is business hours in the Commission’s Shawn Woodhead Werth, created because two or more Reference Center, 445 12th Street SW., Secretary and Clerk of the Commission. coordinators recommend the same Washington, DC 20554 or electronically [FR Doc. 2014–23952 Filed 10–2–14; 4:15 pm] frequency in the same area at via the Media Bureau’s Consolidated BILLING CODE 6715–01–P approximately the same time to Data Base System, http:// different applicants. svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60161

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION compliance questionnaire, dated replace the QI, and that continued February 2, 2012. operation could result in civil penalties. [Docket No. 14–13] 9. Metro Freight’s February 29, 2012 22. BCL receive no response from response identified its QI, Georges Metro Freight regarding the letter issued Metro Freight Services, Inc. d/b/a Samaha, as deceased. June 26, 2012. Maritime Express Lines—Possible 10. On information and belief, the 23. Through September 1, 2014, the Violations of the Shipping Act; Order former QI and owner of Metro Freight, Commission’s Bureau of Certification of Investigation and Hearing Georges Samaha, passed away on and Licensing has not approved a The Federal Maritime Commission August 6, 2011. replacement QI for Metro Freight. 24. According to records of the New (Commission) deems it appropriate and 11. Metro Freight’s February 29, 2012 York State Division of Corporations, in the public interest that a proceeding response identified Metro Freight as G&M Export was incorporated in the be, and hereby is, instituted pursuant to having handled 634 export ocean State of New York in 1990. section 11 of the Shipping Act of 1984 shipments as an OTI ocean freight 25. According to records of the New (Shipping Act), 46 U.S.C. 41302, against forwarder in the 12 months immediately York State Division of Corporations, respondent Metro Freight Services, Inc., prior. G&M Export’s address is 1225 West St. a licensed and bonded ocean freight 12. Metro Freight’s February 29, 2012 George Avenue, Linden, New Jersey forwarder and non-vessel-operating response identified G&M Export 07036. common carrier (NVOCC), for possible Corporation as a shipper of cargo affiliated with Metro Freight. 26. According to records of the New violations of the Commission’s York State Division of Corporations, regulations at 46 CFR 515.18(c) and 13. Metro Freight’s February 29, 2012 response identified G&M Export’s Paola C. Samaha is currently the 515.42(i) and section 19(e)(3) of the Chairman and CEO of G&M Export. Shipping Act, 46 U.S.C. 40904(c). address as 1225 West St. George Avenue, Linden, New Jersey 07036. 27. According to records in the Based on information provided to it, Commission’s SERVCON database, G&M the Commission’s Bureau of 14. Metro Freight’s February 29, 2012 response identified G&M Export as Export is identified as the shipper party Enforcement makes the following named in service contracts with United allegations: sharing office space, expenses and/or personnel with Metro Freight. Arab Shipping Company (UASC), an Statement of Facts Constituting Basis of 15. Metro Freight’s February 29, 2012 ocean common carrier. 28. UASC service contract No. 2009– Violations response identified Paola C. Samaha as 130 was first executed on or about the 100% owner of G&M Export. 1. Metro Freight Services, Inc. dba February 20, 2009 and signed by 16. By letter dated March 6, 2012, Maritime Express Lines (M.E.L.) (Metro Georges T. Samaha as President and BOE advised Metro Freight of its Freight) is a licensed, tariffed and CEO of G&M Export. bonded ocean transportation obligation to submit an application for 29. In entering into UASC service intermediary (OTI), providing service as a proposed replacement QI. 46 CFR contract No. 2009–130, G&M Export a freight forwarder and NVOCC (Org. 515.18(c). certified that its shipper status was No. 006490). 17. By follow-up letter to BOE dated cargo owner. 2. Metro Freight’s offices are located March 16, 2012, Metro Freight advised 30. The term of UASC service contract at 1225 West St. George Avenue, that it had collected freight forwarder No. 2009–130 was February 20, 2009 Linden, New Jersey 07036. compensation on 28 shipments in through February 19, 2010. UASC 3. Metro Freight was incorporated in which G&M Export was the shipper service contract No. 2009–130 was the State of New York in 1985, and is named on the bill of lading issued by extended by contract amendments registered with the State of New Jersey the ocean common carrier, United Arab through March 31, 2011. as a foreign corporation doing business Shipping Company (UASC). 31. UASC service contract No. 124288 in that state. 18. On or about May 11, 2012, Metro was first executed on or about April 1, 4. Metro Freight holds itself out to do Freight submitted an application 2011 and signed by Paola C. Kamel as OTI business through its Internet Web designating Paola C. Samaha as the President and CEO of G&M Export. site, www.metroiff.com. proposed QI for Metro Freight, replacing 32. In entering into UASC service 5. Metro Freight holds itself out as an Georges Samaha. Mrs. Samaha was contract No. 124288, G&M Export NVOCC through its automated tariff identified therein as the President and certified that its shipper status was (#006490–001) published by 100% owner of Metro Freight. cargo owner. Distribution Publications, Inc at http:// 19. In support of its application, 33. The term of UASC service contract www.dpiusa.com. Metro Freight submitted a copy of a No. 124288 was April 1, 2011 through 6. Metro Freight maintains an NVOCC corporate resolution dated January 3, March 31, 2012. bond, No. 570364, in the amount of 2012, designating Paola Samaha as 34. UASC service contract No. 187966 $75,000 and a freight forwarder bond, President of Metro Freight to replace the was first executed on or about April 17, No. W6009, in the amount of $50,000 ‘‘decedent President, Mr. Georges T. 2012 and signed by Paola Samaha on with American Alternative Insurance Samaha.’’ behalf of G&M Export. Corporation in Princeton, New Jersey. 20. On June 26, 2012, Metro Freight 35. On information and belief, Paola 7. Through April 2010, OTI licensing was notified by letter that the C. Kamel and Paola C. Samaha are the records maintained by the Commission’s Bureau of Certification same person. Commission’s Bureau of Certification and Licensing (BCL) closed its 36. In entering into UASC service and Licensing (BCL) identify Georges T. application for failure to demonstrate contract No. 187996, G&M Export Samaha as the sole Qualifying that the proposed QI, Paola Samaha, met certified that its shipper status was Individual (QI) for Metro Freight. the requirements to demonstrate prior cargo owner. 8. On or about February 29, 2012, OTI-related work experience. 37. The term of UASC service contract Metro Freight submitted to the 21. BCL’s June 26, 2012 letter notified No. 187966 was April 1, 2012 through Commission’s Bureau of Enforcement Metro Freight that it was required to April 30, 2013. UASC service contract (BOE) written responses to an OTI promptly submit another application to No. 187966 was terminated by

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60162 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Amendment 3, effective February 5, that the Commission believes may be in It is further ordered, That within 25 2013. violation of the Shipping Act. days from date of publication of this 38. With respect to the 25 shipments 45. The Commission may, after notice Order in the Federal Register, identified in Attachment A, G&M Export and opportunity for hearing, issue an Respondent must file with the was identified as the shipper on the order relating to any violation of the Commission and serve upon the Bureau UASC ocean bill of lading. Shipping Act, including assessment of a of Enforcement an Answer to the 39. With respect to the 25 shipments civil penalty. 46 U.S.C. 41304. allegations in this Order, in accordance identified in Attachment A, Metro 46. The Commission may suspend or with the requirements of the Freight invoiced or collected freight revoke an OTI license if the Commission Commission’s regulations set forth in 46 forwarder compensation for shipments finds that the OTI willfully failed to CFR 502.63(c). Respondent’s answer in which G&M Exports was the shipper. comply with an order or regulation of must be verified and admit or deny all 40. On May 28, 2014, the the Commission. 46 U.S.C. 40903(a). allegations in this Order. Allegations not Commission’s New York Area denied shall be deemed admitted; Violations of the Shipping Act and Representative Ron Podlaskowich It is further ordered, That this matter Commission Regulations visited Metro Freight’s offices and be assigned for hearing before an interviewed staff at the offices of Metro 47. It is alleged that Metro Freight Administrative Law Judge of the Freight, and confirmed that Metro violated the Commission’s regulations at Commission’s Office of Administrative Freight was still operating as an OTI in 46 CFR 515.18(a)(6) and (c) by failing to Law Judges at a date and place to be the absence of an approved QI. promptly notify the Commission of the determined by the Administrative Law death of its QI and failing to timely seek Judge in compliance with Rule 61 of the The Commission’s Jurisdiction and and obtain approval of a replacement Commission’s Rules of Practice and Requirements of Law Qualifying Individual. Procedure, 46 CFR 502.61. This hearing 41. Each OTI licensee must have and 48. It is alleged that, with respect to shall include oral testimony and cross- continuously maintain an approved the 25 shipments identified in examination in the discretion of the Qualifying Individual having the Attachment A, Metro Freight violated presiding Administrative Law Judge necessary experience in OTI activities section 19(e)(3) of the Shipping Act and only after consideration has been given and the necessary character to render the Commission’s regulations at 46 CFR by the parties and the presiding OTI services. The Commission’s 515.42(i), by receiving freight forwarder Administrative Law Judge to the use of regulations at 46 CFR 515.18(a)(6) and compensation from a common carrier alternative forms of dispute resolution, (c) require that when a corporation has for shipments in which Metro Freight and upon a proper showing that there been licensed on the basis of the had a direct or indirect beneficial are genuine issues of material fact that qualifications of an officer of the interest. cannot be resolved on the basis of sworn company and that individual no longer statements, affidavits, depositions, or serves in a full time and active capacity, Order other documents or that the nature of the licensee must report such change to Now therefore, it is ordered, That the matters in issue is such that an oral the Commission within 30 days and pursuant to sections 11 and 14 of the hearing and cross-examination are within that time period furnish to the Shipping Act, 46 U.S.C. 41302 and necessary for the development of an Commission the names and detailed 41304, an investigation is instituted to adequate record; intermediary experience of any other determine: (1) Whether Metro Freight It is further ordered, That failure of active officer who may qualify the Services Inc. violated (a) the Respondent to timely file an answer to licensee. Commission’s regulations at 46 CFR this Order may be deemed to constitute 42. Section 19(e) of the Shipping Act, 515.18(a)(6) and (c) by failing to default and authorize the presiding 46 U.S.C. 40904 states that an ocean promptly notify the Commission of the Administrative Law Judge, without freight forwarder may not ‘‘receive death of its QI and to timely seek and further notice to Respondent, to find the compensation from a common carrier obtain approval of a replacement QI; facts to be as alleged and to enter a for a shipment in which the ocean and (b) section 19(e)(3) of the Shipping decision containing appropriate freight forwarder has a direct or indirect Act, 46 U.S.C. 40904(c), and the findings, conclusions, and an order; beneficial interest.’’ The Commission Commission’s regulations at 46 CFR It is further ordered, That other regulations further specify that a freight 515.42(i), by receiving freight forwarder persons having an interest in forwarder ‘‘may not receive compensation for shipments in which participating in this proceeding may file compensation from a common carrier the forwarder had a direct or indirect motions for leave to intervene in with respect to any shipment in which beneficial interest; (2) in the event accordance with Rule 68 of the the forwarder has a beneficial interest or violations of the Shipping Act or the Commission’s Rules of Practice and with respect to any shipment in which Commission’s regulations are found, Procedure, 46 CFR 502.68; the holding company, subsidiary, whether civil penalties should be It is further ordered, That all further affiliate, officer, director, agent or assessed against Metro Freight, and in notices, orders, and/or decisions issued executive of such forwarder has a what amount; (3) whether the OTI by or on behalf of the Commission in beneficial interest.’’ 46 CFR 515.42(i). license of Metro Freight should be this proceeding, including notice of the 43. The activities of Metro Freight, suspended or revoked pursuant to time and place of hearing or prehearing identified above, were provided as part section 19 of the Shipping Act; and (4) conference, shall be served on the of and in connection with transportation whether appropriate cease and desist parties of record; by water of cargo between the United orders should be entered; It is further ordered, That all States and a foreign country for It is further ordered, That Metro documents filed by any party of record compensation over which the Freight Services, Inc. is designated in this proceeding shall be directed to Commission has jurisdiction. Respondent in this proceeding; the Secretary, Federal Maritime 44. Under 46 U.S.C. 41302(a), the It is further ordered, That the Commission, Washington, DC 20573, in Commission is empowered to Commission’s Bureau of Enforcement is accordance with Rule 2 of the investigate any conduct or agreement made a party to this proceeding; Commission’s Rules of Practice and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60163

Procedure, 46 CFR 502.2, and shall be applications to amend an existing OTI Versailles Shipping, LLC (NVO & OFF), served on the parties of record; and license or the Qualifying Individual (QI) 1759 N. Florida Mango Rd, Suite 8, It is further ordered, That in for a licensee. West Palm Beach, FL 33409, Officers: accordance with Rule 61 of the Interested persons may contact the Sheldon Serrao, Manager (QI), Commission’s Rules of Practice and Office of Ocean Transportation Ricardo Charles, Member, Application Procedure, 46 CFR 502.61, the initial Intermediaries, Federal Maritime Type: New NVO & OFF License. decision of the Administrative Law Commission, Washington, DC 20573, by Pursuant To The Commission’s Direct Judge shall be issued by September 29, telephone at (202) 523–5843 or by email Final Rule (79 FR 56522), Beginning October 2015, and the final decision of the at [email protected]. 20, 2014, These Notices Will No Longer Be Commission shall be issued by March ACE International, Inc. (NVO & OFF), Posted In The Federal Register. After October 28, 2016. 144 Riverview Park Road, Jackson, GA 20, 2014, This Information Will Be Available On The Commission’s Web site at By the Commission. 30233, Officers: Norma K. Williams, http://www.Fmc.Gov. See OTI Licensing Karen V. Gregory, Secretary (QI), David Higgs, President, Updates. Application Type: Removal of Trade Secretary. By the Commission. Name Ocean Cargo Express and QI Dated: September 30, 2014. Order of Investigation and Hearing Change. AFCO Shipping Line, LLC (NVO & Karen V. Gregory, Attachment A OFF), 1501 NW 12th Avenue, Secretary. Pompano Beach, FL 33069, Officer: [FR Doc. 2014–23649 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] SHIPMENTS UPON WHICH METRO Avi Nir, General Manager (QI), BILLING CODE 6730–01–P FREIGHT SERVICES INC. ALLEGEDLY Application Type: New NVO & OFF OBTAINED FORWARDER COMPENSA- License. TION IN VIOLATION OF SECTION AIT Ocean Systems Inc. (NVO), 701 W. FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 19(e) OF THE SHIPPING ACT Rohlwing Road, Itasca, IL 60143, Ocean Transportation Intermediary Officers: Gregory W. Weigel, Vice License Reissuance UASC Ocean bill of Date of President (QI), Vaughn Moore, No. lading number issue President, Application Type: Transfer The Commission gives notice that the 1 .. USCQG028534 ...... 12/11/2010 to AIT Worldwide Logistics, Inc. following Ocean Transportation 2 .. USCQG027253 ...... 12/12/2010 Global Port Ship Lines, Inc. (NVO & Intermediary license has been reissued 3 .. USCQG029247 ...... 12/23/2010 OFF), 103 East 3rd Street, Bevington, pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping 4 .. USCQG029603 ...... 01/03/2011 IA 50033, Officer: Timothy Pontier, Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. 40101). 5 .. USCQG030665 ...... 01/20/2011 President (QI), Application Type: Add License No.: 014257N. 6 .. USCQG032192 ...... 01/27/2011 NVO Service. Name: Trans-Union Group New York 7 .. USCQG040363 ...... 05/12/2011 Grandbelle International, Inc. (NVO), Co., Ltd. 8 .. USCQG041856 ...... 05/26/2011 145 Hook Creek Boulevard, Suite Address: One Cross Island Plaza, 9 .. USCQG042415 ...... 05/26/2011 Suite 229–C, Rosedale, NY 11422. 10 USCQG040722 ...... 05/29/2011 B6A, Valley Stream, NY 11581, Officer: Francisca Enyaosa, CEO (QI), Date Reissued: September 3, 2014. 11 USCQG043224 ...... 06/16/2011 Pursuant to the Commission’s direct 12 USCQG043092 ...... 06/23/2011 Application Type: New NVO License. final rule (79 FR 56522), beginning 13 USCQG044329 ...... 06/23/2011 GreenShields Cowie (U.S.A.) Inc. (OFF), October 20, 2014, these notices will no 14 USCQG043103 ...... 06/30/2011 1635 East Highway 50, Suite 200, longer be posted in the Federal Register. 15 USCQG044899 ...... 06/30/2011 Clermont, FL 34711, Officers: Sary S. After October 20, 2014, this information 16 USCQG043090 ...... 06/30/2011 Chun, Secretary (QI), Lee Chacksfield, 17 USCQG043105 ...... 07/07/2011 will be available on the Commission’s President, Application Type: QI 18 USCQG046169 ...... 07/14/2011 Web site at http:/www.fmc.gov. See OTI Change. 19 USCQG045558 ...... 07/14/2001 Licensing Updates. 20 USCQG048972 ...... 08/22/2011 Interlog USA, Inc. (NVO), 9380 Central 21 USCQG049349 ...... 08/25/2011 Avenue NE, Suite 350, Blaine, MN Sandra L. Kusumoto, 22 USCQG053301 ...... 10/08/2011 55434, Officers: David Canfield, Director, Bureau of Certification and 23 USCQG053172 ...... 10/15/2011 President (QI), Justin Engelmeier, Licensing. 24 USCQG057132 ...... 11/17/2011 Secretary, Application Type: QI [FR Doc. 2014–23648 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 25 USCQG060236 ...... 12/27/2011 Change. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P International Cargotrans Inc. (NVO & [FR Doc. 2014–23645 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] OFF), 9245 Laguna Springs Drive, BILLING CODE 6730–01–P Suite 200, Elk Grove, CA 95758, FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Officers: Karl W. Tede, Director (QI), Linda S. Cardenas, Director, Ocean Transportation Intermediary FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Application Type: New NVO & OFF License Rescission of Order of Revocation Ocean Transportation Intermediary License. License Applicants Latam Cargo USA LLC (NVO & OFF), The Commission gives notice that the 4624 NW 74th Avenue, Miami, FL Order revoking the following Ocean The Commission gives notice that the 33166, Officer: Jose G. Suarez, Transportation Intermediary license has following applicants have filed an Managing Member (QI), Application been rescinded pursuant to section 19 of application for an Ocean Transportation Type: New NVO & OFF License. the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. Intermediary (OTI) license as a Non- Sam Taghavi dba US General Shipping 40101). Vessel-Operating Common Carrier (NVO & OFF), 24328 S. Vermont License Number: 019113N. (NVO) and/or Ocean Freight Forwarder Avenue, Suite 222, Harbor City, CA Name: Amoy International, LLC dba (OFF) pursuant to section 19 of the 90710, Officers: Sam Taghavi, Sole Amoy Line dba VMS Lines. Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. 40101). Proprietor (QI), Application Type: Address: 14145 Proctor Avenue, Suite Notice is also given of the filing of New NVO & OFF License. 14, City of Industry, CA 91746.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60164 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Order Published: September 19, 2014 Pursuant to the Commission’s direct Mailstop-CC–9528, Washington, DC (79 FR 56367 DOC No. 2014–22385) final rule (79 FR 56522), beginning 20580, (202) 326–2098. Pursuant to the Commission’s direct October 20, 2014, these notices will no SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: final rule (79 FR 56522), beginning longer be posted in the Federal Register. Title: Negative Option Rule, 16 CFR October 20, 2014, these notices will no After October 20, 2014, this information part 425. longer be posted in the Federal Register. will be available on the Commission’s OMB Control Number: 3084–0104. After October 20, 2014, this information Web site at http:/www.fmc.gov. See OTI Type of Review: Extension of will be available on the Commission’s Licensing Updates. currently approved collection. Web site at http://www.fmc.gov. See OTI Abstract: On July 24, 2014, the Sandra L. Kusumoto, Licensing Updates. Commission sought comment on the Director, Bureau of Certification and information collection requirements Sandra L. Kusumoto, Licensing. associated with the Negative Option Director, Bureau of Certification and [FR Doc. 2014–23646 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Licensing. Rule. No comments were received. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P Pursuant to the OMB regulations, 5 CFR [FR Doc. 2014–23647 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] part 1320, that implement the PRA, 44 BILLING CODE 6730–01–P U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the FTC is providing FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION a second opportunity for the public to comment while seeking OMB approval FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Agency Information Collection to renew the pre-existing clearance for Activities; Proposed Collection; the Rule. Ocean Transportation Intermediary Comment Request License Revocations and Surrenders Estimated Annual Burden: 3,125 AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission hours. The Commission gives notice that the (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’). Estimated Number of Respondents, following Ocean Transportation ACTION: Notice. Estimated Average Burden per Year per Intermediary licenses have been Respondent: (35 existing clubs × 75 revoked or terminated for the reason SUMMARY: The FTC intends to ask the hours each of disclosure burden per indicated pursuant to section 19 of the Office of Management and Budget year) + (5 new clubs per year × 100 Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. 40101) (‘‘OMB’’) to extend for an additional hours each, including start-up time).1 effective on the date shown. three years the current Paperwork Estimated annual cost burden: License No.: 014257F. Reduction Act (‘‘PRA’’) clearance for $153,950 (solely related to labor costs). Name: Trans-Union Group New York information collection requirements Estimated Capital or Other Non-Labor Co., Ltd. contained in its rule on Use of Cost: $0 or de minimis. Address: One Cross Island Plaza, Prenotification Negative Option Plans Request for Comment: You can file a Suite 229–C, Rosedale, NY 11422. (‘‘Negative Option Rule’’ or ‘‘Rule’’). comment online or on paper. For the Date Revoked: September 3, 2014. That clearance expires on December 31, FTC to consider your comment, we Reason: Failed to maintain a valid 2014. must receive it on or before November bond. DATES: Comments must be submitted by 5, 2014. Write ‘‘Negative Option Rule: License No.: 17509N. November 5, 2014. FTC File No. P064202’’ on your Name: Global Alliance Logistics (L.A.) ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a comment. Your comment—including Inc. comment online or on paper, by your name and your state—will be Address: 9133 S La Cienega Blvd., placed on the public record of this Suite 270, Inglewood, CA 90301. following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the proceeding, including, to the extent Date Revoked: September 12, 2014. practicable, on the public Commission Reason: Failed to maintain a valid SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/ bond. below. Write ‘‘Negative Option Rule: FTC File No. P064202’’ on your publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of License No.: 17688F. discretion, the Commission tries to Name: International Services comment. File your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ remove individuals’ home contact Corporation. information from comments before Address: 1629 K Street NW., Suite ftc/NegOptionPRA2 by following the placing them on the Commission Web 700, Washington, DC 20006. instructions on the Web-based form. If site. Date Surrendered: August 31, 2014. you prefer to file your comment on Because your comment will be made Reason: Voluntary surrender of paper mail your comment to the public, you are solely responsible for license. following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, making sure that your comment does License No.: 022502NF. not include any sensitive personal Name: Conquests International 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite information, like anyone’s Social Freight LLC. CC–5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC Security number, date of birth, driver’s Address: 4454 NW 74th Avenue, 20580, or deliver your comment to the license number or other state Miami, FL 33166. following address: Federal Trade Date Surrendered: September 3, 2014. Commission, Office of the Secretary, identification number or foreign country Reason: Voluntary surrender of Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., equivalent, passport number, financial license. 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), account number, or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible License No.: 022985F. Washington, DC 20024. for making sure that your comment does Name: Ruky International Shipping FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: not include any sensitive health Line LLC. Requests for additional information Address: 100 Menlo Park Drive, Suite should be addressed to Robert M. information, like medical records or 204, Edison, NJ 08837. Frisby, Attorney, Division of 1 The details and assumptions underlying these Date Revoked: September 12, 2014. Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer estimates and for estimated annual labor and non- Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Protection, Federal Trade Commission, labor costs were set forth in the July 24, 2014 bond. 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Federal Register notice.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60165

other individually identifiable health uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in 20580, or deliver your comment to the information. In addition, do not include the Commission’s privacy policy, at following address: Federal Trade any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. Commission, Office of the Secretary, financial information which is obtained Comments on the information Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., from any person and which is privileged collection requirements subject to 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), or confidential ..., ’’ as provided in review under the PRA should Washington, DC 20024. Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. additionally be submitted to OMB. If FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR sent by U.S. mail, they should be David Newman, Western Region—San 4.10(a)(2). If you want the Commission addressed to Office of Information and Francisco, (415) 848–5123, 901 Market to give your comment confidential Regulatory Affairs, Office of Street, Suite 570, San Francisco, CA treatment, you must file it in paper Management and Budget, Attention: 94103. form, with a request for confidential Desk Officer for the Federal Trade SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant treatment, and you have to follow the Commission, New Executive Office to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade procedure explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), Building, Docket Library, Room 10102, Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 16 CFR 4.9(c).2 Your comment will be 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is kept confidential only if the FTC 20503. Comments sent to OMB by U.S. hereby given that the above-captioned General Counsel grants your request in postal mail, however, are subject to consent agreement containing consent accordance with the law and the public delays due to heightened security order to cease and desist, having been interest. precautions. Thus, comments instead Postal mail addressed to the should be sent by facsimile to (202) filed with and accepted, subject to final Commission is subject to delay due to 395–5806. approval, by the Commission, has been heightened security screening. As a placed on the public record for a period David C. Shonka, result, we encourage you to submit your of thirty (30) days. The following comments online, or to send them to the Principal Deputy General Counsel. Analysis to Aid Public Comment Commission by courier or overnight [FR Doc. 2014–23682 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] describes the terms of the consent service. To make sure that the BILLING CODE 6750–01–P agreement, and the allegations in the Commission considers your online complaint. An electronic copy of the comment, you must file it at https:// full text of the consent agreement ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION package can be obtained from the FTC NegOptionPRA2 by following the [File No. 132 3094] Home Page (for September 29, 2014), on instructions on the Web-based form. If the World Wide Web, at http:// this Notice appears at http:// Norm Thompson Outfitters, Inc.; www.ftc.gov/os/actions.shtm. www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also Analysis To Aid Public Comment You can file a comment online or on may file a comment through that Web paper. For the Commission to consider AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. site. your comment, we must receive it on or If you file your comment on paper, ACTION: Proposed consent agreement. before October 29, 2014. Write ‘‘In the Matter of Norm Thompson Outfitters, write ‘‘Negative Option Rule: FTC File SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this Inc.—Consent Agreement; File No. 132 No. P064202’’ on your comment and on matter settles alleged violations of 3094’’ on your comment. Your the envelope, and mail it to the federal law prohibiting unfair or comment—including your name and following address: Federal Trade deceptive acts or practices. The attached your state—will be placed on the public Commission, Office of the Secretary, Analysis to Aid Public Comment record of this proceeding, including, to 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite describes both the allegations in the the extent practicable, on the public CC–5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC draft complaint and the terms of the Commission Web site, at http:// 20580, or deliver your comment to the consent order—embodied in the consent www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. following address: Federal Trade agreement—that would settle these As a matter of discretion, the Commission, Office of the Secretary, allegations. Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., Commission tries to remove individuals’ 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), DATES: Comments must be received on home contact information from Washington, DC 20024. If possible, or before October 29, 2014. comments before placing them on the submit your paper comment to the ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a Commission Web site. Commission by courier or overnight comment at https:// Because your comment will be made service. ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ public, you are solely responsible for Visit the Commission Web site at normthompsonconsent/ online or on making sure that your comment does http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice. paper, by following the instructions in not include any sensitive personal The FTC Act and other laws that the the Request for Comment part of the information, like anyone’s Social Commission administers permit the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section Security number, date of birth, driver’s collection of public comments to below. Write ‘‘In the Matter of Norm license number or other state consider and use in this proceeding as Thompson Outfitters, Inc.—Consent identification number or foreign country appropriate. The Commission will Agreement; File No. 132 3094’’ on your equivalent, passport number, financial consider all timely and responsive comment. File your comment online at account number, or credit or debit card public comments that it receives on or https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ number. You are also solely responsible before November 5, 2014. You can find ftc/normthompsonconsent/ by following for making sure that your comment does more information, including routine the instructions on the Web-based form. not include any sensitive health If you prefer to file your comment on information, like medical records or 2 In particular, the written request for confidential paper, mail your comment to the other individually identifiable health treatment that accompanies the comment must following address: Federal Trade information. In addition, do not include include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the Commission, Office of the Secretary, any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or comment to be withheld from the public record. See 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite financial information which . . . is FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). CC–5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC privileged or confidential,’’ as discussed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60166 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in unsubstantiated claims alleged in the 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR the Commission’s privacy policy, at complaint. Part I prohibits respondent 4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. from claiming that any Covered competitively sensitive information Product—i.e., a garment that contains Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To such as costs, sales statistics, any drug or cosmetic—causes Aid Public Comment inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, substantial weight or fat loss or a manufacturing processes, or customer The Federal Trade Commission substantial reduction in body size. The names. (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) has accepted, Commission has publicly advised that If you want the Commission to give subject to final approval, an Agreement any claim that a product worn on the your comment confidential treatment, Containing Consent Order from Norm body causes substantial weight loss is you must file it in paper form, with a Thompson Outfitters, Inc. always false. request for confidential treatment, and (‘‘respondent’’). The proposed consent Part II covers any representation, you have to follow the procedure order has been placed on the public other than representations covered explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR record for thirty (30) days for receipt of under Part I, that any Covered Product 4.9(c).1 Your comment will be kept comments by interested persons. or any drug or cosmetic causes weight confidential only if the FTC General Comments received during this period or fat loss or a reduction in body size. Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, will become part of the public record. Part II prohibits respondent from grants your request in accordance with After thirty (30) days, the Commission making such representations unless the the law and the public interest. will again review the agreement and the representation is non-misleading, and, Postal mail addressed to the comments received, and will decide at the time of making such Commission is subject to delay due to whether it should withdraw from the representation, respondent possesses heightened security screening. As a agreement and take appropriate action and relies upon competent and reliable result, we encourage you to submit your or make final the agreement’s proposed scientific evidence that substantiates comments online. To make sure that the order. that the representation is true. For Commission considers your online This matter involves the advertising, purposes of Part II, the proposed order comment, you must file it at https:// marketing, and sale by respondent of defines ‘‘competent and reliable ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ women’s undergarments that are scientific evidence’’ as at least two normthompsonconsent/ by following infused with microencapsulated randomized, double-blind, placebo- the instructions on the web-based form. caffeine and other ingredients. controlled human clinical studies that If this Notice appears at http:// Respondent has marketed the garments are conducted by independent, qualified www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also through its mail order catalogs and researchers and that conform to may file a comment through that Web through Web sites under the names acceptable designs and protocols, and site. Norm Thompson Outfitters, Sahalie, whose results, when considered in light If you file your comment on paper, Solutions, Body Essentials and of the entire body of relevant and write ‘‘In the Matter of Norm Thompson Body*Belle. According to the FTC reliable scientific evidence, are Outfitters, Inc.—Consent Agreement; complaint, respondent claimed the sufficient to substantiate that the File No. 132 3094’’ on your comment garments would slim and reshape the representation is true. and on the envelope, and mail your body and reduce cellulite. Part III of the proposed order comment to the following address: Specifically, the FTC complaint prohibits respondent from making any Federal Trade Commission, Office of the alleges that respondent represented that representation, other than Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue wearing the garments eight hours a day representations covered under Parts I or NW., Suite CC–5610 (Annex D), for 30 days eliminates or substantially II, that use of a Covered Product or a Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your reduces cellulite; causes a reduction of drug or cosmetic reduces or eliminates comment to the following address: up to two inches in the wearer’s hip cellulite, unless the representation is Federal Trade Commission, Office of the measurements and up to one inch in the non-misleading, and, at the time of Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th wearer’s thigh measurements in one making such representation, respondent Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 month or less; and that the reduction in possesses and relies upon competent (Annex D), Washington, DC 20024. If thigh and hip measurements can be and reliable scientific evidence that is possible, submit your paper comment to achieved without effort. The complaint sufficient in quality and quantity based the Commission by courier or overnight alleges that these claims are on standards generally accepted in the service. unsubstantiated and thus violate the relevant scientific fields, when Visit the Commission Web site at FTC Act. The complaint also alleges that considered in light of the entire body of http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice respondent represented that scientific relevant and reliable scientific evidence, and the news release describing it. The tests prove that wearing the garments to substantiate that the representation is FTC Act and other laws that the results in a substantial reduction in hip true. For purposes of Part III, the Commission administers permit the and thigh measurement and that proposed order defines ‘‘competent and collection of public comments to scientific tests prove that wearing the reliable scientific evidence’’ as tests, consider and use in this proceeding as garments five days a week, for eight analyses, research, or studies that have appropriate. The Commission will hours a day, for 28 days will reduce a been conducted and evaluated in an consider all timely and responsive wearer’s hip measurement by two objective manner by qualified persons, public comments that it receives on or inches and a wearer’s thigh and that are generally accepted in the before October 29, 2014. You can find measurement by one inch. The profession to yield accurate and reliable more information, including routine complaint alleges that these claims are results. false and thus violate the FTC Act. Part IV of the proposed order 1 In particular, the written request for confidential The proposed consent order contains addresses the allegedly false claims that treatment that accompanies the comment must provisions designed to prevent scientific tests prove that wearing the include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the respondent from engaging in similar advertised garments results in the comment to be withheld from the public record. See acts or practices in the future. reduction in the wearer’s body size. Part FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). Specifically, Parts I–III address the IV prohibits respondent, when

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60167

advertising any product, from The purpose of this analysis is to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant misrepresenting the existence, contents, facilitate public comment on the to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade validity, results, conclusions, or proposed order, and it is not intended Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and interpretations of any test, study, or to constitute an official interpretation of FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is research, or misrepresenting that the the complaint and proposed order or to hereby given that the above-captioned benefits of the product are scientifically modify the proposed order’s terms in consent agreement containing consent proven. any way. order to cease and desist, having been Part V of the proposed order provides By direction of the Commission. filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been a safe harbor for representations that are Donald S. Clark, permitted in labeling for that drug under placed on the public record for a period Secretary. any tentative or final standard of thirty (30) days. The following promulgated by the Food and Drug [FR Doc. 2014–23680 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Analysis to Aid Public Comment Administration (‘‘FDA’’), any new drug BILLING CODE 6750–01–P describes the terms of the consent application approved by the FDA, or agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the FDA regulations pursuant to the FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of full text of the consent agreement 1990 or the FDA Modernization Act of package can be obtained from the FTC 1997. [File No. 132 3095] Home Page (for September 29, 2014), on Part VII of the proposed order requires the World Wide Web, at http:// Wacoal America, Inc.; Analysis To Aid www.ftc.gov/os/actions.shtm. respondent to pay two hundred thirty Public Comment thousand dollars ($230,000) to the You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider Commission to be used for equitable AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. your comment, we must receive it on or relief, including restitution. The order ACTION: Proposed consent agreement. also requires respondent to administer before October 29, 2014. Write ‘‘In the Matter of Wacoal America, Inc.— and bear the costs of the redress SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this Consent Agreement; File No. 132 3095’’ program. To facilitate the payment of matter settles alleged violations of redress, Part VI of the proposed order on your comment. Your comment— federal law prohibiting unfair or including your name and your state— requires respondent to provide to the deceptive acts or practices. The attached Commission a searchable electronic file will be placed on the public record of Analysis to Aid Public Comment this proceeding, including, to the extent containing the name and contact describes both the allegations in the practicable, on the public Commission information of all consumers who draft complaint and the terms of the Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/ purchased the garments from consent order—embodied in the consent publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of respondent from March 20, 2011, agreement—that would settle these discretion, the Commission tries to through the date of entry of the order. allegations. remove individuals’ home contact Part VIII of the proposed order is DATES: Comments must be received on information from comments before triggered whenever the human clinical placing them on the Commission Web testing requirement in either Part II or or before October 29, 2014. ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a site. Part III applies. Part VIII of the proposed Because your comment will be made comment at https:// order requires the company to secure public, you are solely responsible for ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ and preserve all underlying or making sure that your comment does wacoalamericaconsent online or on supporting data and documents not include any sensitive personal paper, by following the instructions in generally accepted by experts in the information, like anyone’s Social the Request for Comment part of the field as relevant to an assessment of the Security number, date of birth, driver’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section test. There is an exception for a license number or other state below. Write ‘‘In the Matter of Wacoal ‘‘Reliably Reported’’ test defined as a identification number or foreign country test published in a peer-reviewed America, Inc.—Consent Agreement; File equivalent, passport number, financial journal that was not conducted, No. 132 3095’’ on your comment. File account number, or credit or debit card controlled, or sponsored by any your comment online at https:// number. You are also solely responsible proposed respondent or supplier. Also, ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ for making sure that your comment does the published report must provide wacoalamericaconsent by following the not include any sensitive health sufficient information about the test for instructions on the web-based form. If information, like medical records or experts in the relevant field to assess the you prefer to file your comment on other individually identifiable health reliability of the results. paper, mail your comment to the information. In addition, do not include Part IX of the proposed order contains following address: Federal Trade any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or recordkeeping requirements for Commission, Office of the Secretary, financial information which . . . is advertisements and substantiation 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite privileged or confidential,’’ as discussed relevant to any representation covered CC–5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. by the proposed order. Parts X, XI and 20580, or deliver your comment to the 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR XII of the proposed order require following address: Federal Trade 4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include respondent to provide copies of the Commission, Office of the Secretary, competitively sensitive information order to its personnel; to notify the Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., such as costs, sales statistics, Commission of changes in corporate 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, structure that might affect compliance Washington, DC 20024. manufacturing processes, or customer obligations under the order; and to file FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: names. compliance reports with the David Newman, Western Region—San If you want the Commission to give Commission. Part XIII provides that the Francisco, (415) 848–5123, 901 Market your comment confidential treatment, order will terminate after twenty (20) Street, Suite 570, San Francisco, CA you must file it in paper form, with a years, with certain exceptions. 94103. request for confidential treatment, and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60168 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

you have to follow the procedure on the public record for thirty (30) days at the time of making such explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR for receipt of comments by interested representation, respondent possesses 4.9(c).1 Your comment will be kept persons. Comments received during this and relies upon competent and reliable confidential only if the FTC General period will become part of the public scientific evidence that substantiates Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, record. After thirty (30) days, the that the representation is true. For grants your request in accordance with Commission will again review the purposes of Part II, the proposed order the law and the public interest. agreement and the comments received, defines ‘‘competent and reliable Postal mail addressed to the and will decide whether it should scientific evidence’’ as at least two Commission is subject to delay due to withdraw from the agreement and take randomized, double-blind, placebo- heightened security screening. As a appropriate action or make final the controlled human clinical studies that result, we encourage you to submit your agreement’s proposed order. are conducted by independent, qualified comments online. To make sure that the This matter involves the advertising, researchers and that conform to Commission considers your online marketing, and sale by respondent of acceptable designs and protocols, and comment, you must file it at https:// iPants, women’s undergarments that are whose results, when considered in light ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ infused with microencapsulated of the entire body of relevant and wacoalamericaconsent by following the caffeine and other ingredients. reliable scientific evidence, are instructions on the web-based form. If Respondent has marketed the iPants sufficient to substantiate that the this Notice appears at http:// garments to consumers through third- representation is true. www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also party retailers and through its Web site. Part III of the proposed order may file a comment through that Web According to the FTC complaint, prohibits respondent from making any site. respondent claimed the iPants garments representation, other than If you file your comment on paper, would slim and reshape the body and representations covered under Parts I or write ‘‘In the Matter of Wacoal America, reduce cellulite. II, that use of a Covered Product or a Inc.—Consent Agreement; File No. 132 Specifically, the FTC complaint drug or cosmetic reduces or eliminates 3095’’ on your comment and on the alleges that respondent represented that cellulite, unless the representation is envelope, and mail your comment to the wearing iPants garments eliminates or non-misleading, and, at the time of following address: Federal Trade substantially reduces cellulite; causes a making such representation, respondent Commission, Office of the Secretary, substantial reduction in the wearer’s possesses and relies upon competent 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite thigh measurements; and that iPants and reliable scientific evidence that is CC–5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC garments contain caffeine that causes sufficient in quality and quantity based 20580, or deliver your comment to the the destruction of fat cells and results in on standards generally accepted in the following address: Federal Trade substantial slimming. The complaint relevant scientific fields, when Commission, Office of the Secretary, alleges that these claims are considered in light of the entire body of Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., unsubstantiated and thus violate the relevant and reliable scientific evidence, 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), FTC Act. The complaint also alleges that to substantiate that the representation is Washington, DC 20024. If possible, respondent represented that scientific true. For purposes of Part III, the submit your paper comment to the tests prove that most iPant wearers proposed order defines ‘‘competent and Commission by courier or overnight achieve a substantial reduction in thigh reliable scientific evidence’’ as tests, service. measurement and that scientific tests analyses, research, or studies that have Visit the Commission Web site at prove that wearing the iPants garments been conducted and evaluated in an http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice for eight hours a day for 28 days will objective manner by qualified persons, and the news release describing it. The substantially reduce a wearer’s thigh and that are generally accepted in the FTC Act and other laws that the measurement. The complaint alleges profession to yield accurate and reliable Commission administers permit the that these claims are false and thus results. collection of public comments to violate the FTC Act. Part IV of the proposed order consider and use in this proceeding as The proposed consent order contains addresses the allegedly false claims that appropriate. The Commission will provisions designed to prevent scientific tests prove that wearing iPants consider all timely and responsive respondent from engaging in similar garments result in reduction of the public comments that it receives on or acts or practices in the future. wearer’s thigh measurement. Part IV before October 29, 2014. You can find Specifically, Parts I–III address the prohibits respondent, when advertising more information, including routine unsubstantiated claims alleged in the any product, from misrepresenting the uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in complaint. Part I prohibits respondent existence, contents, validity, results, the Commission’s privacy policy, at from claiming that any Covered conclusions, or interpretations of any http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. Product—i.e., a garment that contains test, study, or research, or any drug or cosmetic—causes misrepresenting that the benefits of the Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To substantial weight or fat loss or a product are scientifically proven. Aid Public Comment substantial reduction in unclad body Part V of the proposed order provides The Federal Trade Commission size. The Commission has publicly a safe harbor for representations that are (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) has accepted, advised that any claim that a product permitted in labeling for that drug under subject to final approval, an Agreement worn on the body causes substantial any tentative or final standard Containing Consent Order from Wacoal weight loss is always false. promulgated by the Food and Drug America, Inc. (‘‘respondent’’). The Part II covers any representation, Administration (‘‘FDA’’), any new drug proposed consent order has been placed other than representations covered application approved by the FDA, or under Part I, that any Covered Product FDA regulations pursuant to the 1 In particular, the written request for confidential or any drug or cosmetic causes weight Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of treatment that accompanies the comment must or fat loss or a reduction in unclad body 1990 or the FDA Modernization Act of include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the size. Part II prohibits respondent from 1997. comment to be withheld from the public record. See making such representations unless the Part VII of the proposed order requires FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). representation is non-misleading, and, respondent to pay one million three

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60169

hundred thousand dollars ($1,300,000) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND The NTP prepares the RoC on behalf to the Commission to be used for HUMAN SERVICES of the Secretary of Health and Human equitable relief, including restitution, Services. For the 13th RoC, the NTP and any attendant expenses for the Announcement of Availability of the followed an established, multi-step administration of such equitable relief. Report on Carcinogens, Thirteenth process with multiple opportunities for To facilitate the payment of redress, Part Edition public input, and used established VI of the proposed order requires criteria to evaluate the scientific AGENCY: National Toxicology Program Wacoal America to provide to the evidence on each candidate substance (NTP), National Institute of Commission a searchable electronic file under review (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ Environmental Health Sciences containing the name and contact go/rocprocess). (NIEHS); National Institutes of Health information of all consumers who (NIH). New Listings to the 13th RoC purchased the iPants garments directly from respondent from January 1, 2011, ACTION: Availability of the Report on The 13th RoC contains 243 listings, through the date of entry of the order. Carcinogens, Thirteenth Edition (13th some of which consist of a class of Part VIII of the proposed order requires RoC). structurally related chemicals or agents. respondent to comply with the There are three new listings and one SUMMARY: The Department of Health and provisions of Appendix A to the order, revised listing in this edition. The Human Services released the 13th RoC which sets out the methods for notifying revised listing is for ortho-toluidine, to the public on October 2, 2014. The consumers who may be entitled to file which was previously listed as report is available on the RoC Web site a claim for consumer redress. reasonably anticipated to be a human at: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc13 or carcinogen and is now listed as known Part IX of the proposed order is electronically from the Office of the RoC to be a human carcinogen. The new triggered whenever the human clinical (see ADDRESSES below). listings in the 13th RoC are three testing requirement in either Part II or DATES: The 13th RoC is available to the substances—1-bromopropane, cumene, Part III applies. Part IX of the proposed public on October 2, 2014. and pentachlorophenol and by-products order requires the company to secure of its synthesis—each listed as and preserve all underlying or ADDRESSES: Dr. Ruth Lunn, Director, Office of the RoC, NTP, NIEHS, P.O. Box reasonably anticipated to be a human supporting data and documents carcinogen. generally accepted by experts in the 12233, MD K2–14, Research Triangle field as relevant to an assessment of the Park, NC 27709; telephone: (919) 316– Dated: September 26, 2014. test. There is an exception for a 4637; FAX: (301) 480–2970; Linda S. Birnbaum, ‘‘Reliably Reported’’ test defined as a [email protected]. Director, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and National Toxicology test published in a peer-reviewed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Program. journal that was not conducted, Questions or comments concerning the [FR Doc. 2014–23748 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] controlled, or sponsored by any 13th RoC should be directed to Dr. Ruth proposed respondent or supplier. Also, Lunn (telephone: (919) 316–4637 or BILLING CODE 4140–01–P the published report must provide [email protected]). sufficient information about the test for experts in the relevant field to assess the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES reliability of the results. Background Information on the RoC Part X of the proposed order contains The RoC is a congressionally Administration for Children and recordkeeping requirements for mandated document that identifies and Families advertisements and substantiation discusses agents, substances, mixtures, Submission for OMB Review; relevant to any representation covered or exposure circumstances (collectively Comment Request by the proposed order. Parts XI, XII and referred to as ‘‘substances’’) that may XIII of the proposed order require pose a hazard to human health by virtue Title: Temporary Assistance for Needy respondent to provide copies of the of their carcinogenicity. Substances are Families/National Directory of New order to its personnel; to notify the listed in the report as either known or Hires Match Results Report Commission of changes in corporate reasonably anticipated to be human OMB No.: 0970–0311 structure that might affect compliance carcinogens. The listing of a substance Description: Section 453(j)(3) of the obligations under the order; and to file in the RoC indicates a potential hazard, Social Security Act (the Act) allows for compliance reports with the but does not establish the exposure matching between the National Commission. Part XIV provides that the conditions that pose a cancer hazard to Directory of New Hires (maintained by order will terminate after twenty (20) individuals in their daily lives. For each the Federal Office of Child Support years, with certain exceptions. listed substance, the RoC provides Enforcement (OCSE) and State TANF The purpose of this analysis is to information from cancer studies that Agencies for purposes of carrying out facilitate public comment on the support the listing as well as responsibilities under programs funded proposed order, and it is not intended information about potential sources of under part A of Title IV of the Act. To to constitute an official interpretation of exposure and current federal regulations assist OCSE and the Office of Family the complaint or and proposed order or to limit exposures. Each edition of the Assistance (OFA) in measuring savings to modify the proposed order’s terms in RoC is cumulative, that is, it lists newly to the TANF program attributable to the any way. reviewed substances in addition to use of NDNH data matches, the State By direction of the Commission. substances listed in the previous TANF Agencies have agreed to provide edition. Information about the RoC is OCSE with a written description of the Donald S. Clark, available on the RoC Web site (http:// performance outputs and outcomes Secretary. ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc13) or by attributable to the State TANF Agency’s [FR Doc. 2014–23681 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] contacting Dr. Lunn (see ADDRESSES use of NDNH match results. This BILLING CODE 6750–01–P above). information will help OCSE

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60170 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

demonstrate how the NDNH supports Respondents: State TANF Agencies the OCSE’s mission and strategic goals.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Number of Average Instrument Number of responses per burden hours Total burden respondents respondent per response hours

TANF/NDNH Match Results Report ...... 12 4 0.17 8.16

Estimated Total Annual Burden Email: OIRA_SUBMISSION@ Refugee Resettlement (ORR) program Hours: 8.16 OMB.EOP.GOV, Attn: Desk Officer for regulations at 45 CFR 400.11(b). The Additional Information: Copies of the the Administration for Children and regulation specifies that States must proposed collection may be obtained by Families. submit, as their application for this writing to the Administration for program, estimates of the projected costs Robert Sargis, Children and Families, Office of they anticipate incurring in providing Planning, Research and Evaluation, 370 Reports Clearance Officer. cash and medical assistance for eligible L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, [FR Doc. 2014–23670 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] recipients and the costs of administering DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance BILLING CODE 4184–01–P the program. Under the CMA program, Officer. All requests should be States are reimbursed for the costs of identified by the title of the information providing these services and benefits for collection. Email address: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND eight months after an eligible recipient [email protected]. HUMAN SERVICES arrives in this country. The eligible OMB Comment: OMB is required to Administration for Children and recipients for these services and benefits make a decision concerning the Families are refugees, Amerasians, Cuban and collection of information between 30 Haitian Entrants, asylees, Afghans and and 60 days after publication of this Submission for OMB Review; Iraqi with Special Immigrant Visas, and document in the Federal Register. Comment Request victims of a severe form of trafficking. Therefore, a comment is best assured of States that provide services for having its full effect if OMB receives it Title: Refugee Assistance Program unaccompanied refugee minors also within 30 days of publication. Written Estimates: CMA—ORR–1 provide an estimate for the cost of these comments and recommendations for the OMB No.: 0970–0030 services for the year for which they are proposed information collection should Description: The ORR–1, Cash and applying for grants. be sent directly to the following: Medical Assistance (CMA) Program Respondents: Respondents are the 47 Office of Management and Budget, Estimates, is the application for grants States and the District of Columbia that Paperwork Reduction Project, under the CMA program. The participate in the Refugee Resettlement Fax: 202–395–7285, application is required by the Office of program.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Number of Average Instrument Number of responses per burden hours Total burden respondents respondent per response hours

ORR–1, Cash and Medical Assistance Program Estimates ...... 47 1 0.60 28.20.

Estimated Total Annual Burden is best assured of having its full effect DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Hours: 28.20 if OMB receives it within 30 days of HUMAN SERVICES Additional Information publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed National Institutes of Health Copies of the proposed collection may information collection should be sent National Institute of Neurological be obtained by writing to the directly to the following: Office of Administration for Children and Disorders and Stroke; Notice of Closed Management and Budget, Paperwork Families, Office of Planning, Research Meetings Reduction Project, Fax: 202–395–7285, and Evaluation, 370 L’Enfant _ Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447, Email: OIRA SUBMISSION@ Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All OMB.EOP.GOV, Attn: Desk Officer for Federal Advisory Committee Act, as requests should be identified by the title the Administration for Children and amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is of the information collection. Email Families. hereby given of the following meetings. The meetings will be closed to the address: [email protected]. Robert Sargis, public in accordance with the OMB Comment Reports Clearance Officer. provisions set forth in sections OMB is required to make a decision [FR Doc. 2014–23672 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., concerning the collection of information BILLING CODE 4184–01–P as amended. The grant applications and between 30 and 60 days after the discussions could disclose publication of this document in the confidential trade secrets or commercial Federal Register. Therefore, a comment property such as patentable materials,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60171

and personal information concerning DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, individuals associated with the grant HUMAN SERVICES Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, applications, the disclosure of which HHS). National Institutes of Health would constitute a clearly unwarranted Dated: September 30, 2014. invasion of personal privacy. National Cancer Institute; Notice of Melanie J. Gray, Name of Committee: National Institute of Closed Meetings Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Neurological Disorders and Stroke Initial Committee Policy. Review Group, Neurological Sciences and Pursuant to section 10(d) of the [FR Doc. 2014–23733 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Disorders C. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Date: October 16–17, 2014. amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. hereby given of meetings of the Board of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Counselors for Clinical applications. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Sciences and Epidemiology, National HUMAN SERVICES Place: The Kinzie Hotel, 20 West Kinzie Cancer Institute and the Board of Street, Chicago, IL 60654. Scientific Counselors for Basic Sciences, Contact Person: William C Benzing, Ph.D., National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute. Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Center For Scientific Review; Notice of Branch, Division of Extramural Research, The meetings will be closed to the Closed Meetings NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center, public as indicated below in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 3208, MSC Pursuant to section 10(d) of the 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892–9529, 301–496– Federal Advisory Committee Act, as for the review, discussion, and 0660, [email protected] amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is evaluation of individual intramural This notice is being published less than 15 hereby given of the following meetings. days prior to the meeting due to the timing programs and projects conducted by the The meetings will be closed to the limitations imposed by the review and National Cancer Institute, including public in accordance with the funding cycle. consideration of personnel provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: Neurological Sciences qualifications and performance, and the 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Training Initial Review Group, NST–2 competence of individual investigators, as amended. The grant applications and Subcommittee. the disclosure of which would Date: October 27–28, 2014. the discussions could disclose constitute a clearly unwarranted confidential trade secrets or commercial Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. invasion of personal privacy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant property such as patentable material, applications. Name of Committee: Board of Scientific and personal information concerning Place: The Fairmont Washington, D.C, Counselors for Clinical Sciences and individuals associated with the grant 2401 M Street NW., Washington, DC 20037. Epidemiology, National Cancer Institute. applications, the disclosure of which Date: November 17–18, 2014. Contact Person: JoAnn McConnell, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Agenda: To review and evaluate personal invasion of personal privacy. Branch, Division of Extramural Research, qualifications and performance, and Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center, competence of individual investigators. Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review 6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 3208, MSC Place: National Institutes of Health, 31 Group; Developmental Brain Disorders Study 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892–9529., 301–496– Center Drive, Building 31, C-Wing, 6th Floor, Section. 5324, [email protected]. Conference Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892. Date: October 23–24, 2014. Name of Committee: National Institute of Contact Person: Brian E. Wojcik, Ph.D. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Neurological Disorders and Stroke Initial Executive Secretary, Institute Review Office, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Group, Neurological Sciences and Office of the Director, National Cancer applications. Disorders B. Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Place: Beacon Hotel and Corporate Date: October 27–28, 2014. Medical Center Drive, Room 3W414, Quarters, 1615 Rhode Island Avenue NW., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Rockville, MD 20850, 240–276–5660, Washington, DC 20036. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [email protected]. Contact Person: Pat Manos, Ph.D., applications. Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Scientific Review Officer, Center for Place: Admiral Fell Inn, 888 South Counselors for Basic Sciences, National Scientific Review, National Institutes of Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231. Cancer Institute. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5200, Contact Person: Birgit Neuhuber, Ph.D., Date: November 18, 2014. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–408– Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Time: 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. 9866, [email protected]. Branch, Division of Extramural Research, Agenda: To review and evaluate personal This notice is being published less than 15 NINDS/NIH/DHHS/Neuroscience Center, qualifications and performance, and days prior to the meeting due to the timing 6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 3208, MSC competence of individual investigators. limitations imposed by the review and 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892–9529, 301–496– Place: National Institutes of Health, 31 funding cycle. 3562, [email protected]. Center Drive, Building 31, C Wing, 6th Floor, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Conference Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Review Special Emphasis Panel; Topics in Contact Person: Mehrdad Tondravi, Ph.D., Bacterial Pathogenesis. Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Chief, Institute Review Office, Office of the Date: October 27–28, 2014. Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Director, National Cancer Institute, National Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Biological Basis Research in the Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, Drive, Room 3W302, Rockville, MD 20850, applications. HHS). 240–276–5660, [email protected]. Place: Marine’s Memorial Club & Hotel, Dated: September 26, 2014. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 609 Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. Carolyn Baum, Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; Contact Person: Richard G Kostriken, 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Scientific Review, National Institutes of Committee Policy. Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3192, [FR Doc. 2014–23723 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240–519– BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 7808, [email protected].

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60172 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Deborah L Lewis, Ph.D., 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Review Special Emphasis Panel; PAR Panel: Scientific Review Officer, Center for 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Synthetic Psychoactive Drugs and Strategic Scientific Review, National Institutes of Institutes of Health, HHS). Approaches to Counteract Their Deleterious Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4183, Dated: September 30, 2014. Effects. MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–408– Date: October 28, 2014. 9129, [email protected]. Melanie J. Gray, Time: 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Committee Policy. applications. Business: Risk Prevention, and Health [FR Doc. 2014–23731 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Behavior. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. Date: November 3–4, 2014. Contact Person: Nicholas Gaiano, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND applications. HUMAN SERVICES Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5178, Place: Pier 2620 Hotel, 2620 Jones Street, MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892–7844, 301– San Francisco, CA 94133. National Institutes of Health 435–1033, [email protected]. Contact Person: Claire E Gutkin, Ph.D., Name of Committee: Center for Scientific MPH, Scientific Review Officer, Center for National Cancer Institute; Notice of Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Scientific Review, National Institutes of Closed Meetings Conflict: Neural Trauma and Stroke. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3106, Date: October 28, 2014. MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594– Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Time: 12:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 3139, [email protected]. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 hereby given of the following meetings. Business: Cardiovascular and Surgical Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, The meetings will be closed to the Devices. (Telephone Conference Call). public in accordance with the Date: November 3, 2014. Contact Person: Alexei Kondratyev, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. provisions set forth in sections Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. as amended. The grant applications and Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5200, Place: Hilton Alexandria Mark Center, the discussions could disclose MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– 5000 Seminary Road, Alexandria, VA 22311. confidential trade secrets or commercial 1785, [email protected]. Contact Person: Donald S Wright, MD, property such as patentable material, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for and personal information concerning Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Scientific Review, National Institutes of individuals associated with the grant Conflict: Cognition and Perception. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5108, Date: October 30, 2014. applications, the disclosure of which MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– would constitute a clearly unwarranted Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. 8363, [email protected]. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant invasion of personal privacy. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Name of Committee: National Cancer Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Business: Non-HIV Microbial Vaccine Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Omnibus Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, SEP–5. (Telephone Conference Call). Development. Date: November 3, 2014. Date: November 13–14, 2014. Contact Person: Serena Chu, Ph.D., Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Scientific Review Officer, BBBP IRG, Center Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant for Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3178, applications. Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Place: Gaithersburg Marriott MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–500– Washingtonian Center, 9751 Washingtonian 5829, [email protected]. Pavilion, 4300 Military Road, NW, Washington, DC 20015. Boulevard, Gaithersburg, MD 20878. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Andrea Keane-Myers, Contact Person: Thomas A. Winters, Ph.D., Review Special Emphasis Panel; Genetics of Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes Scientific Review Officer, Special Review Health and Disease Overflow. of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, Date: October 31, 2014. National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Rockledge Dr., Room 4218, Bethesda, MD Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Center Drive, Room 7W240, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301)435–1221, andrea.keanne- Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 20892–9750, 240–276–6386, twinters@ [email protected]. applications. mail.nih.gov. Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Name of Committee: National Cancer Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Provocative (Virtual Meeting). Group; Clinical Neuroscience and Questions Group A. Contact Person: Cheryl M Corsaro, Ph.D., Neurodegeneration Study Section. Date: November 17, 2014. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Date: November 3–4, 2014. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2204, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. MSC 7890, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– applications. Place: National Cancer Institute Shady 1045, [email protected]. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. 2E908, Rockville, MD 20850, (Telephone Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA Panel: Contact Person: Samuel C Edwards, Ph.D., Conference Call). Molecular and Cellular Substrates of Chief, Brain Disorders and Clinical Contact Person: Thomas Vollberg, Ph.D., Complex Brain Disorders. Neuroscience, Center for Scientific Review, Scientific Review Officer, Research Date: November 3, 2014. National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Technology and Contract Review Branch, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Drive, Room 5210, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD Division of Extramural Activities, National Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 20892, (301) 435–1246, edwardss@ Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, applications. csr.nih.gov. Room 7W102, Rockville, MD 20850, 240– Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 276–6341, [email protected]. Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW, Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; Name of Committee: National Cancer Washington, DC 20015. 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, Institute Special Emphasis Panel;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60173

Technologies for Biospecimen Science or commercial property such as 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., (IMAT). patentable material, and personal as amended. The grant applications and Date: November 19, 2014. information concerning individuals the discussions could disclose Time: 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. associated with the grant applications confidential trade secrets or commercial Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. and contract proposals, the disclosure of property such as patentable material, Place: Hyatt Regency Hotel, 1 Bethesda which would constitute a clearly and personal information concerning Metro Center, Bethesda, MD 20814. unwarranted invasion of personal individuals associated with the grant Contact Person: Jeffrey E. DeClue, Ph.D., privacy. applications, the disclosure of which Scientific Review Officer, Research Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, would constitute a clearly unwarranted Technology and Contract Review Branch, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel invasion of personal privacy. Division of Extramural Activities, National Topic 73 Phase II: Evaluating Obstructive Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Name of Committee: National Institute of Sleep Apnea Dental Device Treatment Drive, 7W238, Rockville, MD 20850, 240– General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Compliance. 276–6371, [email protected]. Panel; SCORE Panel on Neuroscience and Date: October 31, 2014. Physiology. Name of Committee: National Cancer Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Date: November 3, 2014. Institute Special Emphasis Panel; IMAT. Agenda: To review and evaluate contract Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Date: November 20, 2014. proposals. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One applications. (Telephone Conference Call). Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Place: Hyatt Regency Hotel, 1 Bethesda Contact Person: Kristen Page, Ph.D. Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Metro Center, Bethesda, MD 20814. Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Contact Person: Brian R. Pike, Ph.D., Contact Person: Jeffrey E. DeClue, Ph.D., Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Scientific Review Officer, Research Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room Review, National Institute of General Medical Technology and Contract Review Branch, 7185, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–0725, Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Division of Extramural Activities, National [email protected]. Center Drive, Room 3An.18, Bethesda, MD Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 20892, 301–594–3907, [email protected]. Room 7W238, Rockville, MD 20850, 240– Name of Committee: National Heart, Lung, Name of Committee: National Institute of 276–6371, [email protected]. and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel, General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Information is also available on the NHLBI Conference Grant Review (R13). Panel; Review of COBRE Phase III— Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// Date: November 5, 2014. Transitional Centers. deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/sep/sep.htm, Time: 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Date: November 3, 2014. where an agenda and any additional Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. information for the meeting will be posted applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant when available. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 applications. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance (Virtual Meeting). Place: Residence Inn Bethesda Downtown, Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; Contact Person: Susan Wohler Sunnarborg, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of 20814. Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Contact Person: Lisa A. Newman, SCD, Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Review, National Institute of General Medical Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; Drive, Room 7182, Bethesda, MD 20892, [email protected]. Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Center Drive, Room 3As.18A, Bethesda, MD (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, 20892, 301–435–0965, newmanla2@ Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for HHS). nigms.nih.gov. Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Dated: September 30, 2014. Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Melanie J. Gray, Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory of Health, HHS). Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Committee Policy. Physiology, and Biological Chemistry [FR Doc. 2014–23735 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Dated: September 30, 2014. Research; 93.862, Genetics and BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Michelle Trout, Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Committee Policy. Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS). DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND [FR Doc. 2014–23730 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] HUMAN SERVICES BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Dated: September 30, 2014. Melanie J. Gray, National Institutes of Health Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Committee Policy. National Heart, Lung, and Blood HUMAN SERVICES [FR Doc. 2014–23734 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Pursuant to section 10(d) of the National Institutes of Health Federal Advisory Committee Act, as National Institute of General Medical DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Sciences; Notice of Closed Meetings hereby given of the following meetings. HUMAN SERVICES The meetings will be closed to the Pursuant to section 10(d) of the public in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as National Institutes of Health provisions set forth in sections amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Office of The Director, National 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., hereby given of the following meetings. Institutes of Health; Notice of Meeting as amended. The grant applications and The meetings will be closed to the contract proposals and the discussions public in accordance with the Pursuant to section 10(a) of the could disclose confidential trade secrets provisions set forth in sections Federal Advisory Committee Act, as

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60174 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND hereby given of a meeting of the Office HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES of AIDS Research Advisory Council. National Institutes of Health The meeting will be open to the National Institutes of Health public, with attendance limited to space National Cancer Institute; Notice of National Institute of Diabetes and available. Individuals who plan to Closed Meeting Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice attend and need special assistance, such of Closed Meetings as sign language interpretation or other Pursuant to section 10(d) of the reasonable accommodations, should Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Pursuant to section 10(d) of the notify the Contact Person listed below amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Federal Advisory Committee Act, as in advance of the meeting. hereby given of the following meeting. amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings. Name of Committee: Office of AIDS The meeting will be closed to the Research Advisory Council. public in accordance with the The meetings will be closed to the Date: November 13, 2014. provisions set forth in sections public in accordance with the Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., provisions set forth in sections Agenda: The Office of AIDS Research as amended. The grant applications and 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Advisory Council (OARAC) meeting will be the discussions could disclose as amended. The grant applications and devoted to presentations and discussions on the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial the impact of inflammation and immune confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, activation on HIV disease progression. An property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning update also will be provided on the latest and personal information concerning changes made to the federal treatment and individuals associated with the grant individuals associated with the grant prevention guidelines by the OARAC applications, the disclosure of which applications, the disclosure of which Working Groups responsible for the would constitute a clearly unwarranted would constitute a clearly unwarranted guidelines as well as an update on the HIV/ invasion of personal privacy. invasion of personal privacy. AIDS priority/portfolio review. Name of Committee: National Cancer Name of Committee: National Institute of Place: National Institutes of Health, 5635 Institute Special Emphasis Panel Omnibus Fishers Lane, Terrace Level, Suite T–500, Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases SEP–3. Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK Career Rockville, MD 20852. Date: November 6–7, 2014. Contact Person: Joan Romaine, M.P.H., Awards Review. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Date: October 31, 2014. Supervisory Program Analyst, Office of AIDS Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Research, Office of the Director, NIH, 5635 Time: 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Fishers Lane, MSC 9310, Suite 4000, Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One applications. Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 496–4564, Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Place: National Institutes of Health, Two [email protected]. Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Any interested person may file written Contact Person: Viatcheslav Soldatenkov, Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone comments with the committee by forwarding Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Special Conference Call). the statement to the Contact Person listed on Review Branch, Division of Extramural Contact Person: Carol J. Goter-Robinson, this notice. The statement should include the Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review name, address, telephone number and when Medical Center Drive, Room 7W254, Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of applicable, the business or professional Bethesda, MD 20892–9750, 240–276–6378, Health, Room 748, 6707 Democracy affiliation of the interested person. [email protected]. Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892–5452, (301) Information is also available on the OAR’s Information is also available on the 594–7791, goterrobinsonc@ home page: http://www.oar.nih.gov, where Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// extra.niddk.nih.gov. additional information for the meeting will deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/sep/sep.htm, Name of Committee: National Institute of be posted when available. where an agenda and any additional Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance information for the meeting will be posted Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK Ancillary Program Nos. 93.14, Intramural Research when available. R01 Telephone SEP. Training Award; 93.22, Clinical Research (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Date: November 5, 2014. Loan Repayment Program for Individuals Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; Time: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. from Disadvantaged Backgrounds; 93.232, 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Loan Repayment Program for Research Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and applications. Generally; 93.39, Academic Research Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Enhancement Award; 93.936, NIH Acquired Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Immunodeficiency Syndrome Research Loan Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892. Repayment Program; 93.187, Undergraduate 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Contact Person: Xiaodu Guo, MD, Ph.D., Scholarship Program for Individuals from Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, Disadvantaged Backgrounds, National HHS). DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Institutes of Health, HHS). Room 761, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Dated: September 30, 2014. Bethesda, MD 20892–5452, (301) 594–4719, Dated: September 30, 2014. Melanie J. Gray, [email protected]. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Committee Policy. [FR Doc. 2014–23722 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; [FR Doc. 2014–23725 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology BILLING CODE 4140–01–P and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60175

Dated: September 30, 2014. Contact Person: Alexander Yakovlev, Date: November 4–5, 2014. David Clary, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5206, Committee Policy. applications. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892–7846, 301– Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 [FR Doc. 2014–23724 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 435–1254, [email protected]. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and (Virtual Meeting). Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Contact Person: Scott Jakes, Ph.D., Group; Acute Neural Injury and Epilepsy Scientific Review Officer, Center for DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Study Section. Scientific Review, National Institutes of HUMAN SERVICES Date: October 28–29, 2014. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4198, Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– National Institutes of Health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1506, [email protected]. applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Place: Embassy Suites DC Convention Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Closed Meetings Center, 900 10th NW., Washington, DC Conflict: Adult Psychopathology and 20001. Disorders of Aging. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Contact Person: Seetha Bhagavan, Ph.D., Date: November 4, 2014. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant hereby given of the following meetings. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5194, applications. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 237– The meetings will be closed to the Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 9838, [email protected]. public in accordance with the Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (Virtual Meeting). Review Special Emphasis Panel; RFA Panel: 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Contact Person: Andrea B Kelly, Ph.D., Investigations on Primary Immunodeficiency Scientific Review Officer, Center for as amended. The grant applications and Diseases. the discussions could disclose Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: October 28, 2014. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3182, confidential trade secrets or commercial Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 455– property such as patentable material, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1761, [email protected]. applications. and personal information concerning (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance individuals associated with the grant Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; applications, the disclosure of which (Virtual Meeting). 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, would constitute a clearly unwarranted Contact Person: Jin Huang, Ph.D., 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, invasion of personal privacy. Scientific Review Officer, Center for 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS). Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review, National Institutes of Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Health, 6701 Rockledge, Drive, Room 4095G, Dated: September 30, 2014. MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Business: Rehabilitation. Michelle Trout, Date: October 24, 2014. 1230, [email protected]. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Time: 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. Name of Committee: Bioengineering Committee Policy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Sciences & Technologies Integrated Review applications. Group; Gene and Drug Delivery Systems [FR Doc. 2014–23729 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Place: Embassy Suites Alexandria, 1900 Study Section. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Diagonal Road, Alexandria, VA 22314. Date: October 29–30, 2014. Contact Person: Jo Pelham, BA, Scientific Time: 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge applications. HUMAN SERVICES Drive, Room 4102, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD Place: Hotel Kabuki, 1625 Post Street, San 20892, (301) 435–1786, [email protected]. Francisco, CA 94115. National Institutes of Health Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Amy L Rubinstein, Ph.D., Review Special Emphasis Panel; Molecular Scientific Review Officer, Center for National Institute of Mental Health; Targets for Cancer Intervention. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Notice of Closed Meetings Date: October 27–28, 2014. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5152, Time: 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–408– Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 9754, [email protected]. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Place: Doubletree Guest Suites Santa Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member hereby given of the following meetings. Monica, 1707 Fourth Street, Santa Monica, Conflict: Surgical Sciences and The meetings will be closed to the CA 90401. Bioengineering. Contact Person: Careen K Tang-Toth, Date: October 30, 2014. public in accordance with the Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. provisions set forth in sections Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6214, applications. as amended. The grant applications and MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 the discussions could disclose 3504, [email protected]. Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, confidential trade secrets or commercial Name of Committee: Center for Scientific (Virtual Meeting). property such as patentable material, Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Contact Person: John Firrell, Ph.D., and personal information concerning Conflict: Neurovascular Disorders. Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of individuals associated with the grant Date: October 27, 2014. applications, the disclosure of which Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5118, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– would constitute a clearly unwarranted applications. 2598, [email protected]. invasion of personal privacy. Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Name of Committee: National Institute of Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Review Special Emphasis Panel; Overflow: Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; (Telephone Conference Call). IHD. National Cooperative Drug Discovery/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60176 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Development Groups (NCDDG) and National Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Date: November 3–4, 2014. Cooperative Reprogrammed Cell Research Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Groups (NCRCRG). applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: October 24, 2014. Place: Hotel Monaco, 700 F Street NW., applications. Time: 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Washington, DC 20001. Place: Hilton Washington/Rockville 1750 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Megan Kinnane, Ph.D., Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. applications. Scientific Review Officer, Division of Contact Person: Maryam Feili-Hariri, Place: National Institutes of Health, Extramural Activities, National Institute of Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, Review Program, Division of Extramural Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6148, MSC 9609, Activities, National Institutes of Health/ Conference Call). Rockville, MD 20852–9609, 301–402–6807, NIAID, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Contact Person: Vinod Charles, Ph.D., [email protected]. Bethesda, MD 20892–7616, 301–594–3243, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Name of Committee: National Institute of [email protected]. Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; The (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Mental Health, NIH Neuroscience Center, Brain Somatic Mosaicism. Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6151, MSC 9606, Date: October 29, 2014. and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Bethesda, MD 20892–9606, 301–443–1606, Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Microbiology and Infectious Diseases [email protected]. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS). Name of Committee: National Institute of applications. Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; Early Place: National Institutes of Health, Dated: September 30, 2014. Phase Clinical Trials. Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive David Clary, Date: October 27, 2014. Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Conference Call). Committee Policy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Vinod Charles, Ph.D., [FR Doc. 2014–23726 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] applications. Scientific Review Officer, Division of BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Place: St. Gregory Hotel, 2033 M Street Extramural Activities, National Institute of NW., Washington, DC 20036. Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, Contact Person: David I. Sommers, Ph.D., 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6151, MSC 9606, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Bethesda, MD 20892–9606, 301–443–1606, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Extramural Activities, National Institute of [email protected]. HUMAN SERVICES Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6154, MSC 9606, Program No. 93.242, Mental Health Research National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD 20892–9606, 301–443–7861, Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS). [email protected]. National Center for Complementary & Dated: September 29, 2014. Name of Committee: National Institute of Alternative Medicine; Notice of Closed Carolyn A. Baum, Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; Meeting NRSA Institutional Research Training (T32). Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Date: October 27, 2014. Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. [FR Doc. 2014–23728 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Agenda: To review and evaluate grant BILLING CODE 4140–01–P amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is applications. hereby given of the following meeting. Place: Hotel Monaco, 700 F Street NW., The meeting will be closed to the Washington, DC 20001. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND public in accordance with the Contact Person: David W. Miller, Ph.D., HUMAN SERVICES Scientific Review Officer, Division of provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Extramural Activities, National Institute of National Institutes of Health Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, as amended. The grant applications and 6001 Executive Blvd, Room 6140, MSC 9608, National Institute of Allergy and the discussions could disclose Bethesda, MD 20892–9608, 301–443–9734, Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed confidential trade secrets or commercial [email protected]. Meeting property such as patentable material, Name of Committee: National Institute of and personal information concerning Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; Pursuant to section 10(d) of the individuals associated with the grant Confirmatory Efficacy Clinical Trials of Non- Federal Advisory Committee Act, as applications, the disclosure of which Pharmacological Interventions for Mental amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is would constitute a clearly unwarranted Disorders (R01). hereby given of the following meeting. invasion of personal privacy. Date: October 27, 2014. The meeting will be closed to the Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Name of Committee: National Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant public in accordance with the Complementary and Alternative Medicine applications. provisions set forth in sections Special Emphasis Panel; Multi-Site Clinical Place: National Institutes of Health, 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Trial and Data Center. Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive as amended. The grant applications and Date: October 21, 2014. Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone the discussions could disclose Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Conference Call). confidential trade secrets or commercial Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Marcy Ellen Burstein, property such as patentable material, applications. Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of and personal information concerning Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Extramural Activities, National Institute of individuals associated with the grant Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6143, MSC 9606, applications, the disclosure of which Conference Call). Bethesda, MD 20892–9606, 301–443–9699, would constitute a clearly unwarranted Contact Person: Peter Kozel, Ph.D., [email protected]. invasion of personal privacy. Scientific Review Officer, NCCAM, 6707 Name of Committee: National Institute of Name of Committee: National Institute of Democracy Boulevard, Suite 401, Bethesda, Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel; Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special MD 20892–5475, 301–496–8004, kozelp@ Silvio O. Conte Centers for Basic or Emphasis Panel; Partnerships for Diagnostics mail.nih.gov. Translational Mental Health Research (P50). to Address Antimicrobial Resistance of Select (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Date: October 28, 2014. Bacterial Pathogens (R01). Program Nos. 93.213, Research and Training

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60177

in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, National Institutes of Health, HHS). Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, Dated: September 30, 2014. Physiology, and Biological Chemistry HHS). Research; 93.862, Genetics and Michelle Trout, Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Dated: September 30, 2014. Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Melanie J. Gray, Committee Policy. Special Minority Initiatives, National Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory [FR Doc. 2014–23727 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Institutes of Health, HHS). Committee Policy. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Dated: September 30, 2014. [FR Doc. 2014–23737 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Melanie J. Gray, BILLING CODE 4140–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory HUMAN SERVICES Committee Policy. [FR Doc. 2014–23732 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND National Institutes of Health BILLING CODE 4140–01–P HUMAN SERVICES National Institute of General Medical National Institutes of Health Sciences; Notice of Closed Meetings DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Cancer Institute; Notice of Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Closed Meeting Federal Advisory Committee Act, as National Institutes of Health amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Pursuant to section 10(d) of the hereby given of the following meetings. National Cancer Institute; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Act, as The meetings will be closed to the Closed Meeting amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is public in accordance with the hereby given of the following meeting. provisions set forth in sections Pursuant to section 10(d) of the 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Federal Advisory Committee Act, as The meeting will be closed to the as amended. The grant applications and amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is public in accordance with the the discussions could disclose hereby given of the following meeting. provisions set forth in sections 552b(c) confidential trade secrets or commercial The meeting will be closed to the (4) and 552b(c) (6), Title 5 U.S.C., as property such as patentable material, public in accordance with the amended. The grant applications and and personal information concerning provisions set forth in sections 552b(c) the discussions could disclose individuals associated with the grant (4) and 552b(c) (6), Title 5 U.S.C., as confidential trade secrets or commercial applications, the disclosure of which amended. The grant applications and property such as patentable material, would constitute a clearly unwarranted the discussions could disclose and personal information concerning invasion of personal privacy. confidential trade secrets or commercial individuals associated with the grant property such as patentable material, applications, the disclosure of which Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis and personal information concerning would constitute a clearly unwarranted Panel, Review of NIH Pathway to individuals associated with the grant invasion of personal privacy. Independence Award (K99/R00) Grants. applications, the disclosure of which Name of Committee: National Cancer Date: October 28, 2014. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NCI Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. invasion of personal privacy. Subcommittee A-Cancer Centers. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Cancer Date: December 11, 2014. applications. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Place: The Ritz-Carlton Washington DC, Institute Special Emphasis Panel NCI U01 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1150 22nd Street NW., Washington, DC Review. applications. 20037. Date: December 4, 2014. Contact Person: Lee Warren Slice, Ph.D., Time: 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Review, National Institute of General Medical applications. North Bethesda, MD 20852. Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Contact Person: Sonya Roberson, Ph.D., Center Drive, Room 3An.12, Bethesda, MD Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room Scientific Review Officer, Resources and 20892, 301–435–0807, [email protected]. 7W538, Rockville, MD 20850, (Telephone Training Review Branch, Division of Conference Call). Name of Committee: National Institute of Extramural Activities, National Cancer General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Contact Person: Caron A. Lyman, Ph.D., Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room Panel, Peer Review of T32 Grant Chief, Scientific Review Officer, Research 7W116, Bethesda, MD 20892–9750, 240–276– Applications. Programs Review Branch, Division of 6347, [email protected]. Extramural Activities, National Cancer Date: October 28, 2014. Information is also available on the Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 7W126, Bethesda, MD 20892–9750, 240–276– 6348, [email protected]. deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/sep/sep.htm, applications. where an agenda and any additional Place: National Institutes of Health, Information is also available on the Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// information for the meeting will be posted Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Room when available. 3An.12, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/sep/sep.htm, Conference Call). where an agenda and any additional (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Contact Person: Saraswathy Seetharam, information for the meeting will be posted Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of when available. 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Scientific Review, National Institute of (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and General Medical Sciences, National Institutes Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3An.12C, 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594–2763, Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; [email protected]. Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; HHS).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60178 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Dated: September 30, 2014. collection request for OMB No. 1600– DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Melanie J. Gray, 004 was approved through May 31, 2014 SECURITY Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory by OMB in a Notice of OMB Action. [Docket No. DHS–2014–0049] Committee Policy. The information being collected will [FR Doc. 2014–23736 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] be obtained from contractors as part of Agency Information Collection their submissions whenever they file a BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Activities: Various Contract Related bid protest with the Department’s Forms That Will Be Included in the Components. The information will be Homeland Security Acquisition used by DHS officials in deciding how DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Regulation, DHS Form 0700–01, DHS the protest should be resolved. Failure SECURITY Form 0700–02, DHS Form 0700–03, to collect this information would result DHS FORM 0700–04 [Docket No. DHS–2014–0050] in delayed resolution of agency protests. According to Federal Procurement AGENCY: Office of Chief Procurement Agency Information Collection Data System (FPDS), the number of Officer, Acquisition Policy and Activities: Regulation on Agency protest has increased each year over the Legislation Office, DHS. Protests past two years in annual respondent and ACTION: 60-Day Notice and request for AGENCY: Office of Chief Procurement burden hours. This increase in current comments; Extension without Change, Officer, Acquisition Policy and protest activity is not the result of a 1600–0002. Legislation Office, DHS. deliberate program change, but from a new estimate of actions that are not SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland ACTION: 60-day notice and request for controllable by the Federal government. comments; extension without change, Security, Office of Chief Procurement Although, the number of protests has 1600–0004. Officer, Acquisition Policy and increased, there has not been any Legislation Office, will submit the SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland change in the information being following Information Collection Security, Office of Chief Procurement collected. Request (ICR) to the Office of Officer, Acquisition Policy and The Office of Management and Budget Management and Budget (OMB) for Legislation Office, will submit the is particularly interested in comments review and clearance in accordance following Information Collection which: with the Paperwork Reduction Act of Request (ICR) to the Office of 1. Evaluate whether the proposed 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter Management and Budget (OMB) for collection of information is necessary 35). review and clearance in accordance for the proper performance of the DATES: Comments are encouraged and with the Paperwork Reduction Act of functions of the agency, including will be accepted until December 5, 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter whether the information will have 2014. This process is conducted in 35). practical utility; accordance with 5 CFR 1320.1. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the DATES: Comments are encouraged and agency’s estimate of the burden of the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, will be accepted until December 5, proposed collection of information, identified by docket number DHS– 2014. This process is conducted in including the validity of the 2014–0049, by one of the following accordance with 5 CFR 1320.1. methods: methodology and assumptions used; • ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// identified by docket number DHS– clarity of the information to be www.regulations.gov. Please follow the 2014–0050, by one of the following instructions for submitting comments. collected; and • methods: 4. Minimize the burden of the Email: [email protected] Please • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// collection of information on those who include docket number DHS–2014–0049 www.regulations.gov. Please follow the are to respond, including through the in the subject line of the message. instructions for submitting comments. use of appropriate automated, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This • Email: [email protected]. Please electronic, mechanical, or other information collection under the HSAR include docket number DHS–2014–0050 technological collection techniques or is necessary in order to implement in the subject line of the message. other forms of information technology, applicable parts of the FAR (48 CFR). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The e.g., permitting electronic submissions The four forms under this collection of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR); of responses. information request are used by offerors, 48 CFR Chapter 1 provides general contractors, and the general public to procedures on handling protests Analysis comply with requirements in contracts submitted by contractors to federal Agency: Office of Chief Procurement awarded by the Department of agencies. This regulation provides Officer, Acquisition Policy and Homeland Security (DHS). The four detailed guidance for contractors doing Legislation Office, DHS. forms are DHS Form 0700–01, business with acquisition offices within Title: Regulation on Agency Protests. Cumulative Claim and Reconciliation the Department of Homeland Security OMB Number: 1600–0004. Statement; DHS Form 0700–02, (DHS) to implement the FAR. FAR Part Frequency: Annually. Contractor’s Assignment of Refund, 33.103, Protests, Disputes, and Appeals Affected Public: Private Sector. Rebates, Credits and Other Amounts; Number of Respondents: 95. prescribe policies and procedures for Estimated Time per Respondent: 2 DHS Form 0700–03, Contractor’s filing protests and for processing hours. Release; and DHS Form 0700–04, contract disputes and appeals. Total Burden Hours: 190. Employee Claim for Wage Restitution. DHS will not be asking for anything These four forms will be used by outside of what is already required in Dated: September 24, 2014. contractors and/or contract employees the FAR. Should anything outside the Margaret H. Graves, during contract administration. FAR arise, DHS will submit a request for Deputy Chief Information Officer. The information will be used by DHS Office of Management and Budget [FR Doc. 2014–23688 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] contracting officers to ensure (OMB) approval. The prior information BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P compliance with terms and conditions

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60179

of DHS contracts and to complete Dated: September 24, 2014. Instructions: All submissions received reports required by other Federal Margaret H. Graves, must include the words ‘‘Department of agencies such as the General Services Deputy Chief Information Officer. Homeland Security’’ and the docket Administration and the Department of [FR Doc. 2014–23687 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] number for this action. Comments Labor. If this information is not BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P received will be posted without collected, the DHS could inadvertently alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, violate statutory or regulatory including any personal information requirements and the DHS’s interest DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND provided. concerning inventions and contractor’s SECURITY Docket: For access to the docket, to claims would not be protected. read background documents or There has been an increase in the Homeland Security Academic Advisory comments received by the Homeland estimated annual burden hours Council Security Academic Advisory Council, previously reported for this collection. [Docket No. DHS–2014–0043] go to http://www.regulations.gov and An adjustment in annual burden is search for ‘‘Homeland Security necessary at this time in the amount of Committee Management; Notice of Academic Advisory Council’’ then 902 actions and hours. The initial Federal Advisory Committee Meeting select the notice dated October 3, 2014. annual burden was based on a lower One thirty-minute public comment AGENCY: number of contract actions which Department of Homeland period will be held during the meeting related to the fact that DHS was a new Security. on October 22, 2014 after the conclusion agency with consolidated acquisition SUMMARY: The Homeland Security of the presentation of draft procedures, processes, and policies. Academic Advisory Council will meet recommendations, but before the Although, there is an increase in the on October 22, 2014 in Washington, DC. Council deliberates. Speakers will be estimated burdened hours, there is no The meeting will be open to the public. requested to limit their comments to change in the information being DATES: The Homeland Security three minutes. Contact the Office of collected. Academic Advisory Council will meet Academic Engagement as indicated The Office of Management and Budget Wednesday, October 22, 2014, from below to register as a speaker. is particularly interested in comments 10:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Please note that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: which: the meeting may close early if the Lindsay Burton, Office of Academic 1. Evaluate whether the proposed Council has completed its business. Engagement/Mailstop 0440, Department collection of information is necessary ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at of Homeland Security; 245 Murray Lane for the proper performance of the the Ronald Reagan International Trade SW., Washington, DC 20528–0440, functions of the agency, including Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., email: AcademicEngagement@ whether the information will have Floor B, Room B1.5–10, Washington, DC hq.dhs.gov, tel: 202–447–4686 and fax: practical utility; 20004. All visitors to the Ronald Reagan 202–447–3713. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the International Trade Center must bring a Notice of agency’s estimate of the burden of the Government-issued photo ID. Please use this meeting is given under the Federal proposed collection of information, the main entrance on 14th Street NW. Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. including the validity of the For information on facilities or Appendix. The Homeland Security methodology and assumptions used; services for individuals with disabilities Academic Advisory Council provides or to request special assistance at the advice and recommendations to the 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and meeting, send an email to Secretary and senior leadership on clarity of the information to be [email protected] or matters relating to student and recent collected; and contact Lindsay Burton at 202–447– graduate recruitment; international 4. Minimize the burden of the 4686 as soon as possible. students; academic research; campus collection of information on those who To facilitate public participation, we and community resiliency, security and are to respond, including through the are inviting public comment on the preparedness; faculty exchanges; and use of appropriate automated, issues to be considered by the Council cybersecurity. electronic, mechanical, or other prior to the adoption of the Agenda: The six Council technological collection techniques or recommendations as listed in the subcommittees (Student and Recent other forms of information technology, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section Graduate Recruitment, Homeland e.g., permitting electronic submissions below. Comments must be submitted in Security Academic Programs, Academic of responses. writing no later than Tuesday, October Research and Faculty Exchange, Analysis 14, 2014, must include DHS–2014–0043 International Students, Campus as the identification number, and may Resilience, and Cybersecurity) will give Agency: Office of Chief Procurement be submitted using one of the following progress reports and may present draft Officer, Acquisition Policy and methods: recommendations for action in response Legislation Office, DHS. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// to the taskings issued by the Title: Various Contract Related Forms www.regulations.gov. Follow the Department. DHS senior leadership will That Will Be Included in the Homeland instructions for submitting comments. provide an update on the Department’s Security Acquisition Regulation. • Email: AcademicEngagement@ efforts in implementing the Council’s OMB Number: 1600–0002. hq.dhs.gov. Include the docket number approved recommendations as well as Frequency: On Occasion. in the subject line of the message. its recent initiatives with the academic • Fax: 202–447–3713 community. Affected Public: Private Sector. • Mail: Academic Engagement; The meeting materials will be posted Number of Respondents: 9537. MGMT/Office of Academic to the Council Web site at: http:// Estimated Time per Respondent: 1 Engagement/Mailstop 0440, Department www.dhs.gov/homeland-security- hours. of Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane academic-advisory-council-hsaac on or Total Burden Hours: 9537. SW., Washington, DC 20528–0440 before October 17, 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60180 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Responsible DHS Official: Lauren Comments supplementary documents, or need Kielsmeier, AcademicEngagement@ additional information, please visit hq.dhs.gov, 202–447–4686. Note: The address listed in this notice http://www.regulations.gov. We may should only be used to submit comments Dated: September 30, 2014. also be contacted at: USCIS, Office of concerning this information collection. Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Lauren Kielsmeier, Please do not submit requests for individual Coordination Division, 20 case status inquiries to this address. If you Executive Director for Academic Engagement. Massachusetts Avenue NW., [FR Doc. 2014–23782 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] are seeking information about the status of your individual case, please check ‘‘My Case Washington, DC 20529–2134; BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P Status’’ online at: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/ Telephone 202–272–8377. Dashboard.do, or call the USCIS National Dated: September 30, 2014._ Customer Service Center at 1–800–375–5283. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Laura Dawkins, SECURITY Written comments and suggestions Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, from the public and affected agencies Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship U.S. Citizenship and Immigration should address one or more of the and Immigration Services, Department of Services following four points: Homeland Security. (1) Evaluate whether the proposed [FR Doc. 2014–23786 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] [OMB Control Number 1615–0035] collection of information is necessary BILLING CODE 9111–97–P for the proper performance of the Agency Information Collection functions of the agency, including Activities: Application To Adjust whether the information will have DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Status from Temporary to Permanent practical utility; SECURITY (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Resident, Form I–698; Revision of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection Currently Approved Collection agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, [Docket No. USCBP–2014–0026] ACTION: 30-Day notice. including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; The U.S. Customs and Border SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and Protection Airport and Seaport Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and clarity of the information to be Inspections User Fee Advisory Immigration Services (USCIS) will be collected; and Committee (UFAC) submitting the following information (4) Minimize the burden of the AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border collection request to the Office of collection of information on those who Protection, Department of Homeland Management and Budget (OMB) for are to respond, including through the Security (DHS). review and clearance in accordance use of appropriate automated, ACTION: Committee Management; Notice with the Paperwork Reduction Act of electronic, mechanical, or other of Federal Advisory Public Committee 1995. The information collection notice technological collection techniques or Meeting. was previously published in the Federal other forms of information technology, Register on May 13, 2014, at 79 FR e.g., permitting electronic submission of SUMMARY: The U.S. Customs and Border 27340, allowing for a 60-day public responses. Protection Airport and Seaport comment period. USCIS did not receive Inspections User Fee Advisory any comment in connection with the 60- Overview of This Information Committee (UFAC) will meet on day notice. Collection Wednesday, October 22, 2014, in DATES: The purpose of this notice is to (1) Type of Information Collection Washington, DC. The meeting will be allow an additional 30 days for public Request: Revision of a Currently open to the public. comments. Comments are encouraged Approved Collection. DATES: The UFAC will meet on and will be accepted until November 5, (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Wednesday, October 22, 2014, from 1:00 2014. This process is conducted in Application to Adjust Status from p.m. to 3:00 p.m. EST. Please note that accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Temporary to Permanent Resident. the meeting is scheduled for two hours (3) Agency form number, if any, and and that the meeting may close early if ADDRESSES: Written comments and/or the applicable component of the DHS the committee completes its business. suggestions regarding the item(s) sponsoring the collection: Form I–698; Pre-Registration: Meeting participants contained in this notice, especially USCIS. may attend either in person or via regarding the estimated public burden (4) Affected public who will be asked webinar after pre-registering using a and associated response time, must be or required to respond, as well as a brief method indicated below: directed to the OMB USCIS Desk Officer abstract: Primary: Individuals and —For members of the public who plan via email at oira_submission@ Households. The data collected on Form to attend the meeting in person, omb.eop.gov. Comments may also be I–698 is used by USCIS to determine the please register either online at https:// submitted via fax at (202) 395–5806. All eligibility to adjust an applicant’s apps.cbp.gov/te_reg/index.asp?w=30, submissions received must include the residence status. by email to [email protected]; or agency name and the OMB Control (5) An estimate of the total number of by fax to 202–325–4290 by 5:00 p.m. Number 1615–0035. respondents and the amount of time EST on October 20, 2014. You may wish to consider limiting the estimated for an average respondent to —For members of the public who plan amount of personal information that you respond: 211 responses at 1 hour and 15 to participate via webinar, please provide in any voluntary submission minutes (1.25 hours) per response. register online at https:// you make. For additional information (6) An estimate of the total public apps.cbp.gov/te_reg/index.asp?w=31 please read the Privacy Act notice that burden (in hours) associated with the by 5:00 p.m. EST on October 20, 2014. is available via the link in the footer of collection: 263 annual burden hours. Feel free to share this information http://www.regulations.gov. If you need a copy of the information with other interested members of your SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: collection instrument with organization or association.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60181

Members of the public who are pre- submit a comment, see the link on the Protection’s budget, costs, and funding registered and later require cancellation, Regulations.gov Web site for ‘‘How do I sources. please do so in advance of the meeting submit a comment?’’ located on the 2. The Processes Subcommittee will by accessing one (1) of the following right hand side of the main site page. be responsible for developing advice links: There will be two (2) public comment that would enhance CBP operational https://apps.cbp.gov/te_reg/ periods held during the meeting on efficiencies. cancel.asp?w=30 to cancel an in October 22, 2014. Speakers are Dated: October 1, 2014. person registration, or requested to limit their comments to Maria Luisa Boyce, https://apps.cbp.gov/te_reg/ two (2) minutes or less to facilitate Senior Advisor for Private Sector Engagement, cancel.asp?w=31 to cancel a webinar greater participation. Contact the Office of Trade Relations, U.S. Customs and registration. individual listed below to register as a Border Protection. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at speaker. Please note that the public [FR Doc. 2014–23744 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] comment periods for speakers may end the U.S. International Trade BILLING CODE 9111–14–P Commission, 500 E Street SW., before the times indicated on the Courtroom B, Washington, DC 20436. schedule that is posted on the CBP Web All visitors to the International Trade page, http://www.cbp.gov/trade/ Commission should proceed through stakeholder-engagement/user-fee- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the main lobby to Courtroom B. advisory-committee. Fish and Wildlife Service For information on facilities or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. services for individuals with disabilities Wanda Tate, Office of Trade Relations, [FWS–HQ–IA–2014–N211; or to request special assistance at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, FXIA16710900000–156–FF09A30000] meeting, contact Ms. Wanda Tate, Office 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room of Trade Relations, U.S. Customs and 3.5A, Washington, DC 20229; telephone Endangered Species; Marine Border Protection at 202–344–1661 as 202–344–1440; facsimile 202–325–4290. Mammals; Issuance of Permits soon as possible. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant To facilitate public participation, we AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, to the Federal Advisory Committee Act are inviting public comment on the Interior. (5 U.S.C. Appendix), DHS hereby issues to be considered by the announces the meeting of the U.S. ACTION: Notice of issuance of permits. committee prior to the formulation of Customs and Border Protection Airport recommendations as listed in the SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and and Seaport Inspections User Fee ‘‘Agenda’’ section below. Wildlife Service (Service), have issued Comments must be submitted in Advisory Committee (UFAC). The the following permits to conduct certain writing no later than October 15, 2014, UFAC is tasked with providing advice activities with endangered species, and must be identified by Docket No. to the Secretary of Homeland Security marine mammals, or both. We issue USCBP–2014–0026, and may be (DHS) through the Commissioner of U.S. these permits under the Endangered submitted by one of the following Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on Species Act (ESA) and Marine Mammal methods: matters related to the performance of Protection Act (MMPA). • airport and seaport inspections Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// ADDRESSES: Brenda Tapia, U.S. Fish and coinciding with the assessment of an www.regulations.gov. Follow the Wildlife Service, Division of agriculture, customs, or immigration instructions for submitting comments. Management Authority, Branch of • user fee. The UFAC meeting will be Email: [email protected]. Permits, MS: IA, 5275 Leesburg Pike, held on the date and time specified Include the docket number in the Falls Church, VA 22041; fax (703) 358– subject line of the message. above. • 2281; or email [email protected]. Fax: 202–325–4290. Agenda • Mail: Ms. Wanda Tate, Office of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trade Relations, U.S. Customs and The UFAC will meet to discuss and Brenda Tapia, (703) 358–2104 Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania report the work completed by the (telephone); (703) 358–2281 (fax); Avenue NW., Room 3.5A, Washington, Financial Assessment and Options [email protected] (email). DC 20229. Subcommittee and the Processes SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On the Instructions: All submissions received Subcommittee: dates below, as authorized by the must include the words ‘‘Department of 1. The Financial Assessment and provisions of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 Homeland Security’’ and the docket Options Subcommittee will be et seq.), as amended, and/or the MMPA, number for this action. Comments responsible for providing Customs and as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), we received will be posted without Border Protection an overview of issued requested permits subject to alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, current worldwide user fees being paid certain conditions set forth therein. For including any personal information by industry, mapping how industry each permit for an endangered species, provided. Do not submit personal collects and transmits user fees to we found that (1) The application was information to this docket. Customs and Border Protection, and filed in good faith, (2) The granted Docket: For access to the docket to discussing the option of having a third permit would not operate to the read background documents or party study that would improve the disadvantage of the endangered species, comments, go to http:// committee and Customs and Border and (3) The granted permit would be www.regulations.gov and search for Protection’s understanding of the consistent with the purposes and policy Docket Number USCBP–2014–0026. To universe of Customs and Border set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

Permit number Applicant Receipt of application FEDERAL REGISTER notice Permit issuance date

36200B John House ...... 79 FR 35375; June 20, 2014 ...... September 3, 2014. 37734B Louis Degregorio ...... 79 FR 36090; June 25, 2014 ...... September 16, 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60182 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Permit number Applicant Receipt of application FEDERAL REGISTER notice Permit issuance date

38540B Arthur Erickson ...... 79 FR 39409; July 10, 2014 ...... September 16, 2014. 40124B Jan Lundberg ...... 79 FR 48244; August 15, 2014 ...... September 23, 2014.

Permit number Applicant Receipt of application FEDERAL REGISTER notice Permit issuance date

40066B Spiegel TV ...... 79 FR 48244; August 15, 2014 ...... September 23, 2014.

Availability of Documents (telephone); (703) 358–2281 (fax); Act. Before including your address, Documents and other information [email protected] (email). phone number, email address, or other submitted with these applications are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that available for review, subject to the I. Public Comment Procedures requirements of the Privacy Act and your entire comment—including your Freedom of Information Act, by any A. How do I request copies of personal identifying information—may party who submits a written request for applications or comment on submitted be made publicly available at any time. a copy of such documents to: U.S. Fish applications? While you can ask us in your comment and Wildlife Service, Division of Send your request for copies of to withhold your personal identifying Management Authority, Branch of applications or comments and materials information from public review, we Permits, MS: IA, 5275 Leesburg Pike, concerning any of the applications to cannot guarantee that we will be able to Falls Church, VA 22041; fax (703) 358– the contact listed under ADDRESSES. do so. 2281. Please include the Federal Register II. Background Brenda Tapia, notice publication date, the PRT- number, and the name of the applicant Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch To help us carry out our conservation of Permits, Division of Management in your request or submission. We will responsibilities for affected species, and Authority. not consider requests or comments sent in consideration of section 10(a)(1)(A) of to an email or address not listed under [FR Doc. 2014–23742 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as ADDRESSES. If you provide an email BILLING CODE 4310–55–P amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), along address in your request for copies of with Executive Order 13576, applications, we will attempt to respond ‘‘Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR to your request electronically. Please make your requests or Accountable Government,’’ and the President’s Memorandum for the Heads Fish and Wildlife Service comments as specific as possible. Please confine your comments to issues for of Executive Departments and Agencies [FWS–HQ–IA–2014–N210; which we seek comments in this notice, of January 21, 2009—Transparency and FXIA16710900000–156–FF09A30000] and explain the basis for your Open Government (74 FR 4685; January comments. Include sufficient 26, 2009), which call on all Federal Endangered Species; Receipt of information with your comments to agencies to promote openness and Applications for Permit allow us to authenticate any scientific or transparency in Government by AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, commercial data you include. disclosing information to the public, we Interior. The comments and recommendations invite public comment on these permit that will be most useful and likely to applications before final action is taken. ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications influence agency decisions are: (1) for permit. Those supported by quantitative III. Permit Applications SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and information or studies; and (2) Those A. Endangered Species Wildlife Service, invite the public to that include citations to, and analyses Applicant: University of Illinois- comment on the following applications of, the applicable laws and regulations. Zoological Pathology Program, to conduct certain activities with We will not consider or include in our endangered species. With some administrative record comments we Maywood, IL; PRT–187330 receive after the close of the comment exceptions, the Endangered Species Act The applicant requests a permit to period (see DATES) or comments (ESA) prohibits activities with listed import biological specimens taken species unless Federal authorization is delivered to an address other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES). worldwide from dead wild and captive- acquired that allows such activities. held threatened and endangered species DATES: We must receive comments or B. May I review comments submitted by of Canidae (wolves, foxes, dholes and requests for documents on or before others? wild dogs), Hyaenidae (hyaenas), November 5, 2014. Comments, including names and Felidae (cats), and Mustelidae (otters, ADDRESSES: Brenda Tapia, U.S. Fish and street addresses of respondents, will be not including marine and sea otters) for Wildlife Service, Division of available for public review at the street the purpose of enhancement of the Management Authority, Branch of address listed under ADDRESSES. The survival of the species through disease Permits, MS: IA, 5275 Leesburg Pike, public may review documents and other and death investigations. This Falls Church, VA 22041; fax (703) 358– information applicants have sent in notification covers activities to be 2281; or email [email protected]. support of the application unless our conducted by the applicant over a 5- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: allowing viewing would violate the year period. Brenda Tapia, (703) 358–2104 Privacy Act or Freedom of Information

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60183

Applicant: American Museum of Applicant: Peter Brownell, Grinell, LA; ACTION: Schedule for 2015 report and Natural History, New York, NY; PRT– PRT–43912B opportunity to submit information. 39265B Brenda Tapia, SUMMARY: The Commission has The applicant requests a permit to Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch prepared and published annual reports import four 6-mm green sea turtle of Permits, Division of Management in this series under investigation No. (Chelonia mydas) tissue plugs for the Authority. 332–345, Recent Trends in U.S. Services purpose of scientific research. This [FR Doc. 2014–23741 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Trade, since 1996. The 2015 report, notification covers activities to be BILLING CODE 4310–55–P which the Commission plans to publish conducted by the applicant over a 5- in April 2015, will provide aggregate year period. data on cross-border trade in services for INTERNATIONAL TRADE the period ending in 2013, and Applicant: Utah’s Hogle Zoo, Salt Lake COMMISSION transactions by affiliates based outside City, UT; PRT–45002B the country of their parent firm for the Investigation No. 731–TA–1022 period ending in 2012. The report’s The applicant requests a permit to (Second Review) import one, captive-bred, Amur leopard analysis will focus on distribution services (logistics, maritime transport, (Panthera pardus orientalis) for the Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide From and retail services). The Commission is purpose of enhancement of the survival China inviting interested members of the of the species. This notification covers Determination public to furnish information and views activities to be conducted by the 1 in connection with the 2015 report. applicant over a 1-year period. On the basis of the record developed in the subject five-year review, the DATES: November 6, 2014: Deadline for Applicant: Morani River Ranch, Uvalde, United States International Trade filing written submissions. TX; PRT–46687A Commission (‘‘Commission’’) April 30, 2015: Anticipated date for determines, pursuant to section 751(c) publishing the report. The applicant requests amendment of of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. ADDRESSES: All Commission offices are their captive-bred wildlife registration 1675(c)), that revocation of the located in the United States under 50 CFR 17.21(g) to add Cuvier’s antidumping duty order on refined International Trade Commission gazelle (Gazella cuvieri) to enhance brown aluminum oxide from China Building, 500 E St. SW., Washington, their propagation or survival. This would be likely to lead to continuation DC. All written submissions should be notification covers activities to be or recurrence of material injury to an addressed to the Secretary, United conducted by the applicant over a 5- industry in the United States within a States International Trade Commission, year period. reasonably foreseeable time. 500 E St. SW., Washington, DC 20436. Applicant: Jeff Heidecker, Jacksonville, Background The public record for this investigation FL; PRT–103836 may be viewed on the Commission’s The Commission instituted this electronic docket information system The applicant requests a captive-bred review on February 3, 2014 (79 FR 6225) (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov/edis3- wildlife registration under 50 CFR and determined on May 9, 2014 that it internal/app. would conduct an expedited review (79 17.21(g) for radiated tortoise FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FR 48248, August 15, 2014). (Astrochelys radiata) and Galapagos Project Leader Erick Oh (202–205–3033 tortoise (Chelonoidis nigra) to enhance The Commission completed and filed its determination in this review on or [email protected]) or Acting the species’ propagation or survival. Services Division Chief Jennifer Powell This notification covers activities to be October 1, 2014. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC (202–205–3250 or jennifer.powell@ conducted by the applicant over a 5- usitc.gov) for information specific to this year period. Publication 4492 (October 2014), entitled Refined Brown Aluminum investigation. For information on the Multiple Applicants Oxide from China: Investigation No. legal aspects of these investigations, 731–TA–1022 (Second Review). contact William Gearhart of the The following applicants each request Commission’s Office of the General By order of the Commission. a permit to import the sport-hunted Counsel (202–205–3091 or trophy of one male bontebok Issued: October 1, 2014. [email protected]). The media (Damaliscus pygargus pygargus) culled Lisa R. Barton, should contact Margaret O’Laughlin, from a captive herd maintained under Secretary to the Commission. Office of External Relations (202–205– the management program of the [FR Doc. 2014–23801 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 1819 or [email protected]). Republic of South Africa, for the BILLING CODE 7020–02–P Hearing-impaired individuals may purpose of enhancement of the survival obtain information on this matter by of the species. contacting the Commission’s TDD INTERNATIONAL TRADE terminal at 202–205–1810. General Applicant: Donald Harter, Weidman, COMMISSION information concerning the Commission MI; PRT–39886B [Investigation No. 332–345] may also be obtained by accessing its Applicant: Russell Pelan, Jefferson, MD; Internet server http://www.usitc.gov. PRT–43434B Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade, Persons with mobility impairments who Applicant: Brian Quaca, Groesbeck, TX; 2015 Annual Report will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should PRT–44170B AGENCY: United States International contact the Office of the Secretary at Trade Commission. Applicant: Matthew McCann, 202–205–2000. Macedonia, OH; PRT–44171B Background: The 2015 annual 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Applicant: Mark Alger, Flagstaff, AZ; Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 services trade report will provide PRT–42321B CFR § 207.2(f)). aggregate data on cross-border trade and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60184 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

affiliate transactions in services, and parties must file, at the same time as the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE more specific data and information on eight paper copies, at least four (4) trade in distribution services (logistics, additional true paper copies in which Notice of Lodging of Proposed maritime transport, and retail services). the confidential information must be Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Under Commission investigation No. deleted (see the paragraph below for Act 332–345, the Commission publishes two further information regarding annual reports, one on services trade confidential business information). Notice is hereby given that, for a (Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade), Persons with questions regarding period of 30 days, the United States will and a second on merchandise trade electronic filing should contact the receive public comments on a proposed (Shifts in U.S. Merchandise Trade). The Secretary (202–205–2000). Consent Decree in United States v. Delek Refining, Ltd. (Civil Action No. Commission’s 2014 annual report in the The Commission intends to publish series of reports on Recent Trends in 6:14–cv–0783), which was lodged with summaries of the positions of interested the United States District Court for the U.S. Services Trade is now available persons in this report. If you wish to online at http://www.usitc.gov. Eastern District of Texas on September have a summary of your position 29, 2014. The initial notice of institution of this included in an appendix of the report, The Complaint in this Clean Air Act investigation was published in the please include a summary with your case was filed against Delek Refining, Federal Register on September 8, 1993 written submission. The summary may Ltd. (‘‘Delek’’) concurrently with the (58 FR 47287) and provided for what is not exceed 500 words, should be in lodging of the proposed Consent Decree. now the report on merchandise trade. MSWord format or a format that can be This is a civil action brought pursuant The Commission expanded the scope of easily converted to MSWord, and to Section 113(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act the investigation to cover services trade should not include any confidential (‘‘CAA’’), 42 U.S.C. 7413(b)(2), against in a separate report, which it announced business information. The summary will Delek for alleged violations of Sections in a notice published in the Federal be published as provided if it meets 112(r)(1) and 112(r)(7)(E) of the CAA, 42 Register on December 28, 1994 (59 FR these requirements and is germane to U.S.C. 7412(r)(1) and 7412(r)(7)(E), and 66974). The separate report on services the subject matter of the investigation. trade has been published annually since the Chemical Accident Prevention In the report the Commission will 1996, except in 2005. As in past years, Provisions promulgated at 40 CFR Part identify the name of the organization the report will summarize trade in 68 (the ‘‘Risk Management Program’’ furnishing the summary, and will services in the aggregate and provide regulations) at Delek’s petroleum include a link to the Commission’s analyses of trends and developments in refinery located at 1702 East Commerce Electronic Document Information selected services industries during the Street in Tyler, Texas (‘‘Refinery’’). System (EDIS) where the full written latest period for which data are Delek’s alleged violations relate to acts submission can be found. published by the U.S. Department of and omissions leading up to and Commerce, Bureau of Economic Any submissions that contain following a pipe rupture and fire that Analysis. As indicated above, the 2015 confidential business information (CBI) occurred at the Refinery on November report will focus on trade in distribution must also conform with the 20, 2008. Pursuant to Section 113(b)(2) services (logistics, maritime transport, requirements in section 201.6 of the of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7413(b)(2), the and retail services). Commission’s Rules of Practice and United States seeks the assessment of Written Submissions: Interested Procedure (19 CFR 201.6). Section 201.6 civil penalties and injunctive relief parties are invited to file written of the rules requires that the cover of the based on Delek’s violations of Section submissions and other information document and the individual pages be 112(r) of the Act and the Risk concerning the matters to be addressed clearly marked as to whether they are Management Program regulations. The by the Commission in its report on this the ‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘non-confidential’’ Consent Decree proposes to resolve the investigation. For the upcoming 2015 version, and that the confidential civil action by requiring Delek to annual report, the Commission is business information is clearly perform corrective measures and pay a particularly interested in receiving identified by means of brackets. All penalty of $475,000. information relating to trade in written submissions, except for The publication of this notice opens distribution services (logistics, maritime confidential business information, will a period for public comment on the transport, and retail services). be made available for inspection by proposed Consent Decree. Comments Submissions should be addressed to the interested parties. should be addressed to the Assistant Secretary. To be assured of The Commission intends to prepare Attorney General, Environment and consideration by the Commission, only a public report in this Natural Resources Division, and should written submissions related to the investigation. The report that the refer to United States v. Delek Refining, Commission’s report should be Commission makes available to the Ltd., D.J. Ref. No. 90–5–2–1–08279/1. submitted at the earliest practical date public will not contain confidential All comments must be submitted no and should be received not later than business information. Any confidential later than thirty (30) days after the 5:15 p.m., November 6, 2014. All business information received by the publication date of this notice. written submissions must conform with Commission in this investigation and Comments may be submitted either by the provisions of section 201.8 of the used in preparing the report will not be email or by mail: Commission’s Rules of Practice and published in a manner that would Procedure (19 CFR 201.8). Section 201.8 reveal the operations of the firm To submit and the Commission’s Handbook on supplying the information. comments: Send them to: Filing Procedures require that interested Issued: October 1, 2014. parties file documents electronically on By email ...... pubcomment-ees.enrd@ or before the filing deadline and submit By order of the Commission. usdoj.gov. eight (8) true paper copies by 12:00 p.m. Lisa R. Barton, By mail ...... Assistant Attorney General, eastern time on the next business day. Secretary to the Commission. U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC [FR Doc. 2014–23753 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] In the event that confidential treatment 20044–7611. of a document is requested, interested BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60185

During the public comment period, To submit through August 31, 2013, as well as the proposed Consent Decree may be comments: Send them to: EPA’s costs at the Site costs incurred examined and downloaded at this after August 31, 2013 and through Justice Department Web site: http:// By email ..... pubcomment-ees.enrd@ September 1, 2023. www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_ usdoj.gov. The publication of this notice opens By mail ...... Assistant Attorney General, Decrees.html. We will provide a paper U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box a period for public comment on the copy of the proposed Consent Decree 7611, Washington, D.C. proposed Consent Decree. Comments upon written request and payment of 20044–7611. should be addressed to the Assistant reproduction costs. Please mail your Attorney General, Environment and request and payment to: Consent Decree During the public comment period, Natural Resources Division, and should Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box the Consent Decree may be examined refer to U.S. v. Blackwell Zinc Company, 7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611. and downloaded at this Justice Inc., et al., Case No. 5:14–cv–01050–M Please enclose a check or money order Department Web site: http:// (W.D. Okla.), D.J. Ref. No. 90–11–3– _ for $3.75 (25 cents per page www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent 08495. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the reproduction cost) payable to the United Decrees.html. We will provide a paper publication date of this notice. States Treasury. copy of the Consent Decree upon written request and payment of Comments may be submitted either by Maureen Katz, reproduction costs. Please mail your email or by mail: Assistant Section Chief, Environmental request and payment to: Enforcement Section, Environment and Consent Decree Library, Natural Resources Division. U.S. DOJ—ENRD, [FR Doc. 2014–23749 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] To submit P.O. Box 7611, comments: Send them to: BILLING CODE 4410–15–P Washington, DC 20044–7611. Please enclose a check or money order By email ...... pubcomment-ees.enrd@ for $ 5.50 (25 cents per page usdoj.gov. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE reproduction cost) payable to the United By mail ...... Assistant Attorney General, States Treasury. U.S. DOJ—ENRD, Notice of Lodging of Proposed P.O. Box 7611, Consent Decree Under the Clean Water Susan M. Akers, Washington, DC 20044– Act and the Clean Air Act Assistant Section Chief, Environmental 7611. Enforcement Section, Environment and On September 25, 2014, the Natural Resources Division. During the public comment period, Department of Justice lodged with the [FR Doc. 2014–23679 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] the proposed consent decree may be United States District Court for the BILLING CODE 4410–15–P examined and downloaded at this Southern District of Iowa a proposed Justice Department Web site: http:// _ Consent Decree in United States v. www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent Griffin Pipe Products Co., LLC, Civil DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Decrees.html. We will provide a paper Action No. 1:14-cv-00027–JAJ–RAW. copy of the proposed consent decree Notice of Lodging of Proposed upon written request and payment of This civil action asserts claims for Settlement Agreement under the reproduction costs. Please mail your civil penalties and other appropriate Comprehensive Environmental request and payment to: Consent Decree relief against Griffin Pipe Products Co., Response, Compensation, and Liability Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box LLC for alleged violations of the Clean Act 7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611. Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7410, and the Iowa On September 29, 2014, a proposed Please enclose a check or money order State Implementation Plan adopted for $8.75 (25 cents per page thereunder, and the Clean Water Act, 33 Consent Decree was lodged with the United States District Court for the reproduction cost) payable to the United U.S.C. 1311, 1317, 1318, and 1342, at States Treasury. the Defendant’s facility located in Western District of Oklahoma in the Council Bluffs, Iowa. To resolve the case entitled U.S. v. Blackwell Zinc Maureen Katz, United States’ claims Defendant will Company, Inc., et al., Case No. 5:14–cv– Assistant Section Chief, Environmental pay a civil penalty of $950,000 and 01050–M (W.D. Okla.). Enforcement Section, Environment and implement other appropriate mitigation The Consent Decree resolves claims in Natural Resources Division. measures. a Complaint filed the same day under [FR Doc. 2014–23774 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] the Comprehensive Environmental BILLING CODE 4410–15–P The publication of this notice opens Response, Compensation, and Liability a period for public comment on the Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., Consent Decree. Comments should be relating to the Blackwell Zinc LIBRARY OF CONGRESS addressed to the Assistant Attorney Superfund Site located in Blackwell, General, Environment and Natural Kay County, Oklahoma (the ‘‘Site’’). The Copyright Royalty Board Resources Division, and should refer to Complaint seeks the recovery of United States v. Griffin Pipe Products response costs at the Site against [Docket No. 14–CRB–0006 DART SR (2013)] Co., LLC, Civil Action No. 1:14–cv– Blackwell Zinc Company, Inc. and the 00027–JAJ–RAW, DJ Reference Number Blackwell Industrial Authority Distribution of 2013 DART Sound 90–5–2–1–10126. (‘‘Settling Defendants’’) and a Recordings Fund Royalties All comments must be submitted no declaratory judgment for future AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board, later than thirty (30) days after the response costs. Under the proposed Library of Congress. publication date of this notice. Consent Decree, Settling Defendants ACTION: Notice soliciting comments on will pay EPA $547,931.39 in past Comments may be submitted either by motion for partial distribution. email or by mail: response costs, i.e., costs incurred

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60186 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Judges distribution. Consequently, this Notice 401, 101 Independence Avenue SE., solicit comments on a motion for partial seeks comments from interested Washington, DC 20559–6000. distribution in connection with 2013 claimants on whether any reasonable Dated: September 30, 2014. objection exists that would preclude the DART Sound Recordings Fund Suzanne M. Barnett, royalties. distribution of 98% of the 2013 DART Sound Recordings Royalty funds Chief U.S. Copyright Royalty Judge. DATES: Comments are due on or before [FR Doc. 2014–23654 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] November 5, 2014. (Featured Recording Artists Subfund and Copyright Owners Subfund) to the BILLING CODE 1410–72–P ADDRESSES: The Notice and Request is Settling Claimants. ANY PARTY posted on the agency’s Web site WISHING TO ADVISE THE JUDGES OF (www.loc.gov/crb). Submit electronic THE EXISTENCE AND EXTENT OF AN NUCLEAR REGULATORY comments to [email protected]. See the OBJECTION MUST DO SO, IN COMMISSION Supplementary Information section WRITING, BY THE END OF THE below for instructions on submitting COMMENT PERIOD. THE JUDGES [Docket No. NRC–2013–0085] comments in other formats. WILL NOT CONSIDER ANY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OBJECTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE Agency Information Collection LaKeshia Keys, Program Specialist, by PARTIAL DISTRIBUTION MOTION Activities: Submission for the Office of telephone at (202) 707–7658 or email at THAT COME TO THEIR ATTENTION Management and Budget (OMB) [email protected]. AFTER THE CLOSE OF THAT PERIOD. Review; Comment Request SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August The Judges have received notice of AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 19, 2014, the Alliance of Artists and apparent objections from non-settling Commission. Recording Companies (‘‘AARC’’), on claimants George Clinton and Ronald ACTION: behalf of itself and claimants with Ford (by email, which is not an Notice of the OMB review of which it has reached settlements (the acceptable method of filing), and information collection and solicitation ‘‘Settling Claimants’’) filed with the Eugene Curry/Tajai Music Inc., all of public comment. Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) a appearing pro se. All three claimants SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Notice of Settlement and Request for state, inter alia, that the figures Commission (NRC) has recently Partial Distribution of the 2013 DART representing sales of their copyrighted submitted to OMB for review the Sound Recordings Fund Featured material were not accurately calculated following proposal for the collection of Recording Artists and Copyright Owners by the moving party’s expert. Notice of information under the provisions of the Subfunds Royalties (‘‘Notice and Individual Claimant Eugene Curry/Tajai Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Request’’). In the Notice and Request, Music Inc, for the Request for the U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby AARC states that the Settling Claimants Distribution of the Remaining 2% of the informs potential respondents that an have reached a settlement among Copyright Owners 2013 Subfund agency may not conduct or sponsor, and themselves concerning distribution of Royalties at 1 (September 19, 2014); that a person is not required to respond the 2013 DART Sound Recordings Fund Email to crb (Copyright Royalty Board) to, a collection of information unless it Royalties. With respect to the Featured from Carlon Thompson regarding displays a currently valid OMB control Recording Artists Subfund, AARC claimants Clinton and Ford at 2 (August number. The NRC published a Federal represents that it has reached 25, 2014, 1:43 p.m.). Register notice with a 60-day comment settlements with all but three claimants The Judges will also accept comments period on this information collection for that subfund and that the nonsettling addressing the three claimants’ informal May 14, 2013. claimants have unit sales totaling objections by the end of the comment 1. Type of submission, new, revision, 1 76,269.86 in a universe of over one period. or extension: Revision. billion claimants’ sound recordings sold How To Submit Comments 2. The title of the information in 2013. Notice and Request at 2. With Interested claimants must submit collection: 10 CFR Part 50, ‘‘Domestic respect to the Copyright Owners Licensing of Production and Utilization Subfund, AARC represents that it has comments to only one of the following addresses. Unless responding by email, Facilities.’’ reached settlements with all but five 3. Current OMB approval number: claimants. AARC represents that the claimants must submit an original, five paper copies, and an electronic version 3150–0011. nonsettling claimants have combined 4. The form number if applicable: Not unit sales of 16,693 in a universe of over on a CD. Email: [email protected]; or applicable. one billion claimants’ record sales in 5. How often the collection is 2013. Id. U.S. mail: Copyright Royalty Board, PO Box 70977, Washington, DC 20024– required: As necessary in order for the AARC requests a partial distribution NRC to meet its responsibilities to of 98% from each of the subfunds 0977; or Overnight service (only USPS Express conduct a detailed review of pursuant to Section 801(b)(3)(C) of the Mail is acceptable): Copyright Royalty applications for licenses and Copyright Act. Under that section of the Board, P.O. Box 70977, Washington, DC amendments thereto to construct and Copyright Act, before ruling on a partial 20024–0977; or operate nuclear power plants, distribution motion the Judges must Commercial courier: Address package preliminary or final design approvals, publish a notice in the Federal Register to: Copyright Royalty Board, Library of design certifications, research and test seeking responses to the motion to Congress, James Madison Memorial facilities, reprocessing plants and other ascertain whether any claimant entitled Building, LM–403, 101 Independence utilization and production facilities, to receive such royalty fees has a Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20559– licensed pursuant to the Atomic Energy reasonable objection to the proposed 6000. Deliver to: Congressional Courier Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and Acceptance Site, 2nd Street NE and D to monitor their activities. Reports are 1 The decimal in this figure represents credit for part of the sale of an album. Mr. Clinton and Mr. Street NE., Washington, DC; or submitted daily, monthly, quarterly, Ford have some tracks on albums sold, and they get Hand delivery: Library of Congress, annually, semi-annually, and on credit for those tracks. James Madison Memorial Building, LM– occasion.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60187

6. Who will be required or asked to The NRC Clearance Officer is 8. The estimated number of annual report: Licensees and applicants for Tremaine Donnell, telephone: 301–415– respondents: 6,970. nuclear power plants and research and 6258. 9. An estimate of the total number of test facilities. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day hours needed annually to complete the 7. An estimate of the number of of September, 2014. requirement or request: 1,968.1. annual responses: 45,202. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10. Abstract: Part 9 of Title 10 of the 8. The estimated number of annual Tremaine Donnell, Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), respondents: 151. NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information prescribes procedures for individuals 9. An estimate of the total number of Services. making requests for records under the hours needed annually to complete the [FR Doc. 2014–23675 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] FOIA or PA, and through the PDR. It requirement or request: 4.38M hours; BILLING CODE 7590–01–P contains information collection 1.64M hours reporting (an average of requirements for requests to waive or 36.5 hrs/response) + 2.73M hours reduce fees for searching for and recordkeeping (an average of 18.1K hrs/ NUCLEAR REGULATORY reproducing records in response to recordkeeper). COMMISSION FOIA requests; appeals of denied 10. Abstract: Part 50 of Title 10 of the requests; and requests for expedited Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [Docket No. NRC–2014–0141] processing. The information required ‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and Agency Information Collection from the public is necessary to justify Utilization Facilities,’’ specifies Activities: Submission for the Office of requests for waivers or reductions in technical information and data to be Management and Budget (OMB) searching or copying fees; or to justify provided to the NRC or maintained by Review; Comment Request expedited processing. Section 9.28(b) applicants and licensees so that the NRC provides that if the submitter of may take determinations necessary to AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory information designated to be trade protect the health and safety of the Commission. secrets or confidential commercial or public, in accordance with the Act. The ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of financial information objects to the reporting and recordkeeping information collection and solicitation disclosure, he must provide a written requirements contained in 10 CFR part of public comment. statement within 30 days that specifies 50 are mandatory for the affected all grounds why the information is a licensees and applicants. The NRC has SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory trade secret or commercial or financial removed information collections Commission (NRC) has recently information that is privileged or associated with the generic submitted to OMB for review the confidential. communications program from the part following proposal for the collection of The public may examine and have 50 clearance. The NRC intends to obtain information under the provisions of the copied for a fee publicly-available a separate OMB clearance for generic Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 documents, including the final communications. Public comment was U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby supporting statement, at the NRC’s solicited on the generic communications informs potential respondents that an Public Document Room, Room O–1F21, program on July 30, 2014 (79 FR 44208). agency may not conduct or sponsor, and One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville The public may examine and have that a person is not required to respond Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The copied for a fee publicly-available to, a collection of information unless it OMB clearance requests are available at documents, including the final displays a currently valid OMB control the NRC’s Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/ supporting statement, at the NRC’s number. The NRC published a Federal public-involve/doc-comment/omb/. The Public Document Room, Room O–1F21, Register notice with a 60-day comment document will be available on the One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville period on this information collection on NRC’s home page site for 60 days after Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The July 21, 2014. the signature date of this notice. OMB clearance requests are available at 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension. Comments and questions should be the NRC’s Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/ directed to the OMB reviewer listed public-involve/doc-comment/omb/. The 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 9, ‘‘Public below by November 5, 2014. Comments document will be available on the received after this date will be NRC’s home page site for 60 days after Records.’’ 3. Current OMB approval number: considered if it is practical to do so, but the signature date of this notice. assurance of consideration cannot be Comments and questions should be 3150–0043. 4. The form number if applicable: given to comments received after this directed to the OMB reviewer listed date. below by November 5, 2014. Comments NRC Form 509; NRC Form 509A. 5. How often the collection is received after this date will be Danielle Jones, Desk Officer, required: On Occasion. Office of Information and Regulatory considered if it is practical to do so, but 6. Who will be required or asked to assurance of consideration cannot be Affairs (3150–0043), report: Individuals requesting access to NEOB–10202, given to comments received after this records under the Freedom of date. Office of Management and Budget, Information (FOIA) or Privacy Acts Washington, DC 20503. Danielle Jones, Desk Officer, (PA), through the Public Document Office of Information and Regulatory Comments can also be emailed to Room (PDR), and submitters of _ _ Affairs (3150–0011), information containing trade secrets or Danielle Y [email protected] or NEOB–10202, confidential commercial or financial submitted by telephone at 202–395– Office of Management and Budget, information who have been notified that 1741. Washington, DC 20503. the NRC has made an initial The NRC Clearance Officer is Comments can also be emailed to determination that the information Tremaine Donnell, telephone: 301–415– [email protected] or should be disclosed. 6258. submitted by telephone at 202–395– 7. An estimate of the number of Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day 1741. annual responses: 6,970. of September, 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60188 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 7. Abstract: The NRC’s regulations in Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Tremaine Donnell, 10 CFR part 73 prescribe requirements Washington, DC 20555–0001. NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information to establish and maintain a physical Questions about the information Services. protection system and security collection requirements may be directed [FR Doc. 2014–23676 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] organization with capabilities for to the NRC Clearance Officer, Tremaine BILLING CODE 7590–01–P protection of (1) Special nuclear Donnell (T–5 F53), U.S. Nuclear material (SNM) at fixed sites, (2) SNM Regulatory Commission, Washington, in transit, and (3) plants in which SNM DC 20555–0001, by telephone at 301– NUCLEAR REGULATORY is used. The objective is to ensure that 415–6258, or by email to COMMISSION activities involving special nuclear [email protected]. material are consistent with interests of [Docket No. NRC–2014–0215] Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day common defense and security and that of September, 2014. Agency Information Collection these activities do not constitute an For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Activities: Proposed Collection; unreasonable risk to public health and Tremaine Donnell, safety. The information in the reports Comment Request NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information and records submitted by licensees is Services. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory used by the NRC staff to ensure that the [FR Doc. 2014–23674 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Commission. health and safety of the public and the BILLING CODE 7590–01–P ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to environment are protected, and licensee submit an information collection possession and use of special nuclear request to the Office of Management and material is in compliance with license NUCLEAR REGULATORY Budget (OMB) and solicitation of public and regulatory requirements. COMMISSION comment. Submit, by December 5, 2014, comments that address the following [NRC–2014–0209] SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory questions: Nonmetallic Thermal Insulation for Commission (NRC) invites public 1. Is the proposed collection of Austenitic Stainless Steel comment about our intention to request information necessary for the NRC to the OMB’s approval for renewal of an properly perform its functions? Does the AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory existing information collection that is information have practical utility? Commission. summarized below. We are required to 2. Is the burden estimate accurate? publish this notice in the Federal ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request 3. Is there a way to enhance the Register notice under the provisions of for comment. quality, utility, and clarity of the the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 information to be collected? SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). 4. How can the burden of the Commission (NRC) is issuing for public Information pertaining to the comment draft regulatory guide (DG), requirement to be submitted: information collection be minimized, including the use of automated DG–1312, ‘‘Nonmetallic Thermal 1. The title of the information Insulation for Austenitic Stainless collection: 10 CFR part 73, ‘‘Physical collection techniques or other forms of information technology? Steel,’’ also known as Regulatory Guide Protection of Plants and Materials.’’ (RG) 1.36. The NRC is proposing to 2. Current OMB approval number: The public may examine and have revise the guidance toreflect the most 3150–0002. copied for a fee publicly-available current versions of voluntary consensus 3. How often the collection is documents, including the draft standards since the initial publication of required: On occasion, with the supporting statement, at the NRC’s RG 1.36 in February 1973. The guide exception of the initial submittal of Public Document Room, Room O–1F21, describes methods and procedures that revised Cyber Security Plans, Security One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville the staff of the NRC considers Plans, Safeguards Contingency Plans, Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The acceptable when selecting and using and Security Training and Qualification OMB clearance requests are available at nonmetallic thermal insulation in the Plans. Required reports are submitted the NRC’s Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/ stainless steel portions of the reactor and evaluated as events occur. public-involve/doc-comment/omb/. The 4. Who is required or asked to report: document will be available on the coolant pressure boundary and other Nuclear power reactor licensees, NRC’s home page site for 60 days after systems, in order to minimize any licensed under part 50 or 52 of Title 10 the signature date of this notice. contamination that could promote of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 Comments submitted in writing or in stress-corrosion cracking. This RG CFR), who possess, use, import, export, electronic form will be made available applies to light-water-cooled reactors. transport, or deliver to a carrier for for public inspection. Because your DATES: Submit comments by November transport, special nuclear material; comments will not be edited to remove 5, 2014. Comments received after this actively decommissioning reactor any identifying or contact information, date will be considered if it is practical licensees, Category I fuel facilities; the NRC cautions you against including to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure Category II and III facilities; non-power any information in your submission that consideration only for comments reactors (research and test reactors); you do not want to be publicly received on or before this date. other nuclear materials licensees; and disclosed. Comments submitted should Although a time limit is given, state and Tribal contacts. reference Docket No. NRC–2014–0215. comments and suggestions in 5. The number of annual respondents: You may submit your comments by any connection with items for inclusion in 581. of the following methods: Electronic guides currently being developed or 6. The number of hours needed comments go to http:// improvements in all published guides annually to complete the requirement or www.regulations.gov and search for are encouraged at any time. request: 543,280 (21,255 hours reporting Docket No. NRC–2014–0215. Mail ADDRESSES: You may submit comments + 486,535 hours recordkeeping + 35,490 comments to the NRC Clearance Officer, by any of the following methods (unless hours third party disclosure). Tremaine Donnell (T–5 F53), U.S. this document describes a different

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60189

method for submitting comments on a • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and current industry standards which have specific subject): purchase copies of public documents at changed since the initial publication of • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One RG 1.36 in February 1973. The changes http://www.regulations.gov and search White Flint North, 11555 Rockville update the related standards to those for Docket ID NRC–2014–0209. Address Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. currently available for use. Each type of questions about NRC dockets to Carol B. Submitting Comments insulating material should meet the Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; requirements of American Society for email: [email protected]. For Please include Docket ID NRC–2014– Testing and Materials (ASTM) C795, technical questions, contact the 0209 in the subject line of your ‘‘Standard Specification for Thermal individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER comment submission, in order to ensure Insulation for Use in Contact with INFORMATION CONTACT section of this that the NRC is able to make your Austenitic Stainless Steel,’’ including, document. comment submission available to the but not limited to, a preproduction • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, public in this docket. corrosion test in accordance with ASTM Office of Administration, Mail Stop: The NRC cautions you not to include C692, ‘‘Test Method for Evaluating the 3WFN–06–A44M, U.S. Nuclear identifying or contact information in Influence of Thermal Insulation on Regulatory Commission, Washington, comment submissions that you do not External Stress Corrosion Cracking want to be publicly disclosed in your DC 20555–0001. Tendency of Austenitic Stainless Steel,’’ comment submission. The NRC will For additional direction on obtaining and a chemical analysis acceptance test post all comment submissions at information and submitting comments, for each lot of material in accordance http://www.regulations.gov as well as see ‘‘Obtaining Information and with ASTM C871, ‘‘Test Method for enter the comment submissions into Submitting Comments’’ in the Chemical Analysis of Thermal ADAMS, and the NRC does not SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Insulation Materials for Leachable routinely edit comment submissions to this document. Chloride, Fluoride, Silicate and Sodium remove identifying or contact Ions.’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information. David W. Alley, Office of Nuclear If you are requesting or aggregating III. Backfitting and Issue Finality Reactor Regulation, telephone: 301– comments from other persons for Draft regulatory guide-1312/ 415–2178, email: [email protected], submission to the NRC, then you should Regulatory Guide 1.36, Revision 1, if or Rick Jervey, Office of Nuclear inform those persons not to include finalized, would provide guidance on Regulatory Research, telephone: 301– identifying or contact information that one acceptable way of meeting the 251–7404, email: they do not want to be publicly requirements in GDC 1 and GDC 14 with [email protected]. Both are staff of disclosed in their comment submission. respect to stress-corrosion cracking in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Your request should state that the NRC austenic steel portions of the reactor Commission, Washington, DC 20555– does not routinely edit comment coolant pressure boundary which are 0001. submissions to remove such information caused in part by contact with before making the comment SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: nonmetallic thermal insulation. This submissions available to the public or DG, if finalized, would not constitute I. Obtaining Information and entering the comment into ADAMS. Submitting Comments backfitting as defined in § 50.109 of II. Additional Information Title 10 of the Code of Federal A. Obtaining Information The NRC is issuing for public Regulations (10 CFR) (the Backfit Rule), Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014– comment a draft guide in the NRC’s and is not otherwise inconsistent with 0209 when contacting the NRC about ‘‘Regulatory Guide’’ series. This series the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR the availability of information for this was developed to describe and make part 52, ‘‘Licenses, Certifications and action. You may obtain publicly- available to the public such information Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants.’’ available information related to this as methods that are acceptable to the The NRC’s position is based upon the action by any of the following methods: NRC staff for implementing specific following considerations. • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to parts of the NRC’s regulations, Existing licensees, part 50 http://www.regulations.gov and search techniques that the staff uses in construction permit holders and part 50 for Docket ID NRC–2014–0209. evaluating specific problems or operating license holders, and • NRC’s Agencywide Documents postulated accidents, and data that the applicants of final design certification Access and Management System staff needs in its review of applications rules would not be required to comply (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- for permits and licenses. with the positions set forth in DG–1312/ available documents online in the The DG, entitled, ‘‘Nonmetallic RG 1.36, Revision 1, if finalized, unless ADAMS Public Documents collection at Thermal Insulation for Austenitic the construction permit or an operating http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ Stainless Steel,’’ is temporarily license holder makes a voluntary change adams.html. To begin the search, select identified by its task number, DG–1312. to its licensing basis with respect to ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then This DG is a proposed revision 1 of RG non-metallic thermal insulation in select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS 1.36. The RG describes methods and contact with austenitic stainless steel, Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, procedures that the staff of the NRC and the NRC determines that the safety please contact the NRC’s Public considers acceptable when selecting and review must include consideration of Document Room (PDR) reference staff at using nonmetallic thermal insulation in the matters addressed in this draft 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by the stainless steel portions of the reactor regulatory guide. email to [email protected]. The coolant pressure boundary and other Existing design certification rules ADAMS accession number for each systems, to minimize any contamination would not be required to be amended to document referenced (if it is available in that could promote stress-corrosion comply with the positions set forth in ADAMS) is provided the first time that cracking. This guide applies to light- DG–1312 unless the NRC addresses the it is mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY water-cooled reactors. This guidance issue finality provisions in 10 CFR INFORMATION section. has been revised to update to the 52.63(a).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60190 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Existing combined license holders ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (referencing the AP1000 design for comment. Obtaining Information and Submitting certification rule in 10 CFR part 52, Comments Appendix D) would not be required to SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory comply with the positions set forth in Commission (NRC) is issuing for public A. Obtaining Information DG–1312 unless the NRC addresses the comment draft regulatory guide (DG), DG–8054, ‘‘Applications of Bioassay for Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014– issue finality provisions in 10 CFR 0210 when contacting the NRC about 52.63(a). Uranium.’’ This guidance provides acceptable guidance for NRC licensees, the availability of information regarding Draft Regulatory Guide-1312 may be for the development and this document. You may obtain applied to current applications for implementation of a bioassay program publicly-available information related to operating licenses, combined licenses, that will monitor the intake of mixtures this document by any of the following and certified design rules docketed by of the naturally occurring isotopes of methods: the NRC as of the date of issuance of the uranium (U–234, U–235, and U–238) by • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to revision to the regulatory guide, as well occupational workers. A bioassay is a http://www.regulations.gov and search as future applications submitted after determination of the kind, quantity, for Docket ID NRC–2014–0210. Address the issuance of the revised regulatory location, or retention of radionuclides in questions about NRC dockets to Carol guide. Such action would not constitute the body by direct (in vivo) Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; backfitting as defined in § 50.109(a)(1) measurement or by indirect (in vitro) email: [email protected]. For or be otherwise inconsistent with the analysis of material excreted or removed technical questions, contact the applicable issue finality provision in 10 from the body. individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER CFR part 52. Neither the Backfit Rule DATES: Submit comments by December INFORMATION CONTACT section of this nor the issue finality provisions under 5, 2014. Comments received after this document. part 52—with certain exclusions date will be considered if it is practical • NRC’s Agencywide Documents discussed below—were intended to to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure Access and Management System every NRC action which substantially consideration only for comments (ADAMS): You may access publicly changes the expectations of current and received on or before this date. available documents online in the NRC future applicants. Although a time limit is given, Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- The exceptions to the general comments and suggestions in rm/adams.html. To begin the search, principle are applicable whenever a connection with items for inclusion in select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and combined license applicant references a NRC regulatory guides currently being then select ‘‘Begin Web-Based ADAMS part 52 license (e.g., an early site permit) developed or improvements in all Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, and/or NRC regulatory approval (e.g., a published NRC regulatory guides are please contact the NRC’s Public design certification rule) with specified encouraged at any time. Document Room (PDR) reference staff at issue finality provisions. The NRC does ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by not, at this time, intend to impose the by any of the following methods (unless email to [email protected]. The draft positions represented in the DG, if this document describes a different regulatory guide is available finalized, on combined license method for submitting comments on a electronically under ADAMS Accession applicants in a manner that is specific subject): No. ML14133A599. The regulatory inconsistent with any issue finality • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to analysis may be found in ADAMS under provisions. If, in the future, the NRC http://www.regulations.gov and search Accession No. ML14133A612. seeks to impose a position in the DG, if for Docket ID NRC–2014–0210. Address • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and finalized, in a manner which does not questions about NRC dockets to Carol purchase copies of public documents at provide issue finality as described in the Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One applicable issue finality provision, then email: [email protected]. For White Flint North, 11555 Rockville the NRC must address the criteria for technical questions, contact the Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. avoiding issue finality as described FOR FURTHER individuals listed in the B. Submitting Comments applicable issue finality provision. INFORMATION CONTACT section of this Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day document. Please include Docket ID NRC–2014– of September, 2014. • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, 0210 in the subject line of your For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Office of Administration, Mail Stop: comment submission to ensure that the Harriet Karagiannis, 3WFN–06–A44M, U.S. Nuclear NRC is able to make your comment Regulatory Commission, Washington, submission available to the public in Acting Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic Issues Branch, Division of DC 20555–0001. this docket. Engineering, Office of Nuclear Regulatory For additional direction on obtaining The NRC cautions you not to include Research. information and submitting comments, identifying or contact information that [FR Doc. 2014–23743 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] see ‘‘Obtaining Information and you do not want to be publicly Submitting Comments’’ in the disclosed in your comment submission. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of The NRC will post all comment this document. submissions at http:// NUCLEAR REGULATORY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: www.regulations.gov as well as enters COMMISSION Harriet Karagiannis, telephone: 301– the comment submissions into ADAMS. 251–7477; email: harriet.karagiannis@ The NRC does not routinely edit nrc.gov or Casper Sun, telephone: 301– comment submissions to remove [NRC–2014–0210] 251–7912; email: [email protected]. identifying or contact information. Applications of Bioassay for Uranium Both are staff of the Office of Nuclear If you are requesting or aggregating Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear comments from other persons for AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Regulatory Commission, Washington, submission to the NRC, then you should Commission. DC 20555–0001. inform those persons not to include

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60191

identifying or contact information that in air in work areas and the quantities to Regulatory Guide (RG) 3.50, they do not want to be publicly of radionuclides in the bodies of ‘‘Standard Format and Content for a disclosed in their comment submission. occupational workers. Finally, DG–8054 License Application for an Independent Your request should state that the NRC identifies the bioassay interpretation Spent Fuel Storage Installation or a will not edit comment submissions to methods in the NRC document NUREG/ Monitored Retrievable Storage Facility.’’ remove such information before making CR–4884, ‘‘Interpretation of Bioassay This guide provides a format that the the comment submissions available to Measurement,’’ as an acceptable method NRC staff considers acceptable for the public or entering the comment to comply with NRC requirements. submitting the information for license submissions into ADAMS. III. Backfitting and Issue Finality applications to store spent nuclear fuel, II. Additional Information high-level radioactive waste, and This DG, if finalized, would apply to reactor-related Greater than Class C The NRC is issuing for public current and future holders of special (GTCC) waste. comment a DG in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory nuclear material licenses under 10 CFR ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID Guide’’ series. This series was part 70 and certificates of compliance or NRC–2013–0264 when contacting the developed to describe and make approvals of a compliance plan for NRC about the availability of available to the public and the regulated gaseous diffusion plants under 10 CFR information regarding this document. community such information as part 76 if they are also applicants for or You may obtain publicly-available methods that are acceptable to the NRC holders of special nuclear materials information related to this document staff for implementing specific parts of licenses under 10 CFR part 70. If DG– using any of the following methods: the NRC’s regulations, techniques that 8054 is finalized and issued as a • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to the staff uses in evaluating specific revision to RG 8.11, such issuance http://www.regulations.gov and search problems or postulated accidents, and would not constitute backfitting under for Docket ID NRC–2014–0021. Address data that the staff needs in its review of 10 CFR parts 70 or 76. As stated in the questions about NRC dockets to Carol applications for permits and licenses. ‘‘Implementation’’ section of DG–8054, Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; This DG, entitled, ‘‘Applications of the NRC has no current intention to email: [email protected]. For Bioassay for Uranium,’’ is temporarily impose this regulatory guide on current technical questions, contact the identified by its task number, DG–8054. holders of part 70 licenses or part 76 individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER Draft regulatory guide, DG–8054 is a certificates of compliance. proposed revision to the NRC This DG, if finalized as a revision to INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Regulatory Guide (RG) 8.11, RG 8.11, could be applied to • ‘‘Applications of Bioassay for applications for part 70 licenses and NRC’s Agencywide Documents Uranium,’’ (Revision 1 of RG 8.11). part 76 certificates of compliance Access and Management System The NRC issued RG 8.11 in June 1974 docketed by the NRC as of the date of (ADAMS): You may access publicly to provide guidance to NRC licensees on issuance of the revised RG 8.11, as well available documents online in the NRC methods of uranium bioassay that the as future such applications submitted Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- NRC staff found acceptable to after the issuance of the revised RG 8.11. rm/adams.html. To begin the search, demonstrate compliance with the then- Such action would not constitute select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and current version of NRC’s radiation backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 70.76 then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS protection regulations in part 20 of Title and 76.76 inasmuch as such applicants Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations or potential applicants are not within please contact the NRC’s Public (10 CFR), ‘‘Standards for Protection the scope of entities protected by 10 Document Room (PDR) reference staff at against Radiation.’’ In a 1991 CFR 70.76 and 76.76. 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by rulemaking, the NRC promulgated email to [email protected]. The Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day ADAMS accession number for each amendments to its radiation protection of September, 2014. regulations in 10 CFR part 20 (May 21, document referenced in this notice (if For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1991; 56 FR 23360). As such, DG–8054 that document is available in ADAMS) cross-references to the relevant sections Thomas H. Boyce, is provided the first time that a of the current 10 CFR part 20 Chief, Regulatory Guidance and Generic document is referenced. Revision 2 of regulations. In addition, DG–8054 Issues Branch, Division of Engineering, Office Regulatory Guide 3.50 is available in of Nuclear Regulatory Research. endorses for use certain sections of a ADAMS under Accession No. voluntary consensus standard, namely, [FR Doc. 2014–23719 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] ML14043A080. The regulatory analysis the American National Standards BILLING CODE 7590–01–P may be found in ADAMS under Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/ Accession No. ML12087A039. HPS) N13.22–2013 standard, ‘‘Bioassay • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and NUCLEAR REGULATORY Programs for Uranium,’’ as a means for purchase copies of public documents at COMMISSION licensees to demonstrate compliance the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One with the NRC regulations, 10 CFR [NRC–2013–0264] White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 20.1201, ‘‘Occupational Dose Limits for Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Adults,’’ and 10 CFR 20.1204, Standard Format and Content for a Regulatory guides are not ‘‘Determination of Internal Exposure.’’ License Application for an copyrighted, and NRC approval is not Specifically, 10 CFR 20.1201(e) requires Independent Spent Fuel Storage required to reproduce them. NRC licensees to limit the soluble Installation or a Monitored Retrievable FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: uranium intake to an occupational Storage Facility Bernie White, Office of Nuclear Material worker to 10 milligrams in a week, in AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301– addition to annual occupational dose Commission. 287–0810; email [email protected] limits, and 10 CFR 20.1204(a) requires ACTION: Regulatory guide; issuance. or Jazel Parks, Office of Nuclear NRC licensees to take suitable and Regulatory Research, telephone: 301– timely measurements of the SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 251–7690; email [email protected]. concentrations of radioactive materials Commission (NRC) is issuing a revision Both are staff of the U.S. Nuclear

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60192 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Regulatory Commission, Washington, license applications for an ISFSI or ACTION: Application for indirect transfer DC 20555–0001. MRS. This regulatory guide may be of license; opportunity to comment, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: applied to license applications for request a hearing, and petition for leave ISFSIs and MRSs docketed by the NRC to intervene; order. I. Introduction as of the date of issuance of the final The NRC is issuing a revision to an regulatory guide, as well as future SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory existing guide in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory applications for such licenses submitted Commission (NRC) received and is Guide’’ series. This series was after the issuance of the regulatory considering approval of an application developed to describe and make guide. filed by PPL Susquehanna, LLC (PPL available to the public information such This regulatory guide does not Susquehanna) on July 11, 2014. The as methods that are acceptable to the constitute backfitting as defined in 10 application seeks NRC approval of the indirect transfer of NPF–14 and NPF–22 NRC staff for implementing specific CFR 72.62(a). The subject matter of this for Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, parts of the agency’s regulations, regulatory guide does not concern Units 1 and 2 (SSES), as well as the techniques that the staff uses in matters dealing with either the general license for the SSES evaluating specific problems or structures, systems, or components of an Independent Spent Fuel Storage postulated accidents, and data that the ISFSI or MRS, or the procedures or Installation, from the current holder, staff needs in its review of applications organization for operating an ISFSI or PPL Corporation to Talen Energy for permits and licenses. MRS. Therefore, the matters addressed Corporation. The NRC is also Revision 2 of RG 3.50 provides a in this draft regulatory guide are not considering amending the combined format that the NRC considers within the scope of the backfitting acceptable for submitting the licenses for administrative purposes to provisions in § 72.62(a)(1) or (2). reflect the proposed transfer. information for license applications to This regulatory guide does not apply DATES: store spent nuclear fuel, high-level to entities protected by issue finality Comments must be filed by radioactive waste, and/or reactor-related provisions in 10 CFR part 52 with November 5, 2014. A request for a GTCC waste. Part 72 of Title 10 of the respect to the matters addressed in this hearing must be filed by October 27, Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), regulatory guide. Although part 52 2014. Any potential party as defined in ‘‘Licensing Requirements for the combined license applicants and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear holders may apply for specific ISFSI Regulations (10 CFR) 2.4 who believes Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and licenses, the guidance in this regulatory access to Sensitive Unclassified Non- Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C guide is directed to ISFSI applicants and Safeguards Information (SUNSI) is Waste’’ Subpart B, ‘‘License does not make a distinction between necessary to respond to this notice must Application, Form, and Contents,’’ ISFSI applicants who are also combined request document access by October 16, specifies the information that must be in license applicants or holders and ISFSI 2014. an application for a license to store applicants who are not combined ADDRESSES: You may submit comments spent nuclear fuel, high-level license applicants and holders, and by any of the following methods (unless radioactive waste, and/or power-reactor- presents no more onerous guidance for this document describes a different related GTCC waste in an independent ISFSI applicants who are also combined method for submitting comments on a spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) or specific subject): license applicants or holders versus • in a monitored retrievable storage (MRS) ISFSI applicants who are not combined Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to facility. license applicants and holders. http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2014–0211. Address II. Additional Information Accordingly, the NRC concludes that this regulatory guide is not inconsistent questions about NRC dockets to Carol The NRC issued the draft version of with any part 52 issue finality Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; Revision 2 of RG 3.50 with a temporary provisions. email: [email protected]. For identification as draft regulatory guide technical questions contact the (DG), DG–3042, and published notice of Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day individual listed in the FOR FURTHER of September, 2014. its issuance in the Federal Register on INFORMATION CONTACT section of this December 6, 2013 (78 FR 73566) for a For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. document. 30-day public comment period. The Harriett Karagiannis, • Email comments to: public comment period closed on Acting Chief, Regulatory Guidance and [email protected]. If you do not January 24, 2014. Public comments on Generic Issues Branch, Division of receive an automatic email reply DG–3042 and the staff responses to the Engineering, Office of Nuclear Regulatory confirming receipt, then contact us at public comments are available under Research. 301–415–1677. ADAMS Accession Number [FR Doc. 2014–23718 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] • Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. ML14043A068. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301– 415–1101. III. Congressional Review Act • Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. This RG is a rule as defined in the NUCLEAR REGULATORY Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. COMMISSION Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: 801–808). However, the Office of Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. [Docket Nos. 50–387, 50–388, and 72–28; • Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Management and Budget has not found NRC–2014–0211] it to be a major rule as defined in the Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland Congressional Review Act. Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal workdays; IV. Backfitting and Issue Finality Units 1 and 2; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of Licenses and telephone: 301–415–1677. This RG provides guidance on one Conforming Amendments For additional direction on accessing possible means for meeting the NRC’s information and submitting comments, regulatory requirements in 10 CFR part AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory see ‘‘Obtaining Information and 72 regarding the format and content for Commission. Submitting Comments’’ in the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60193

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of If you are requesting or aggregating of the licensee to hold the license, and this document. comments from other persons for that the transfer is otherwise consistent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: submission to the NRC, then you should with applicable provisions of law, Jeffrey A. Whited, Office of Nuclear inform those persons not to include regulations, and orders issued by the Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear identifying or contact information that Commission. Regulatory Commission, Washington, they do not want to be publicly Before issuance of the proposed DC 20555–0001, telephone: 301–415– disclosed in their comment conforming license amendment, the 4090; email: [email protected]. submissions. Your request should state Commission will have made findings SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that the NRC does not routinely edit required by the Atomic Energy Act of comment submissions to remove such 1954, as amended (the Act), and the I. Obtaining Information and information before making the comment Commission’s regulations. Submitting Comments submissions available to the public or As provided in 10 CFR 2.1315, unless otherwise determined by the A. Obtaining Information entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. Commission with regard to a specific Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014– application, the Commission has 0211 when contacting the NRC about II. Introduction determined that any amendment to the the availability of information regarding The NRC is considering the issuance license of a utilization facility, or to the this document. You may access of an order under 10 CFR 50.80 license of an Independent Spent Fuel information related to this document, approving the indirect transfer of Storage Installation, which does no which the NRC possesses and is control of the Renewed Facility more than conform the license to reflect publicly available, by any of the Operating Licenses NPF–14 and NPF–22 the transfer action, involves no following methods: for the Susquehanna Steam Electric significant hazards consideration and no • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to Station, Units 1 and 2, to the extent genuine issue as to whether the health http://www.regulations.gov and search currently held by PPL Corporation, as and safety of the public will be for Docket ID NRC–2014–0211. owner. The transfer would be to Talen significantly affected. No contrary • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Energy Corporation. The NRC is also determination has been made with Access and Management System considering amending the combined respect to this specific license (ADAMS): You may access publicly licenses for administrative purposes to amendment application. In light of the available documents online in the NRC reflect the proposed transfer. generic determination reflected in 10 Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- According to an application for CFR 2.1315, no public comments with rm/adams.html. To begin the search, approval filed by PPL Susquehanna, the respect to significant hazards select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and indirect transfer of control results from considerations are being solicited, then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS a series of transactions in which PPL notwithstanding the general comment Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, Corporation, PPL Susquehanna’s procedures contained in 10 CFR 50.91. please contact the NRC’s Public ultimate parent, will spin off PPL Document Room (PDR) reference staff at Energy Supply, LLC, which holds III. Opportunity To Comment 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by domestic competitive generation and Within 30 days from the date of email to [email protected]. The ancillary assets including PPL publication of this notice, persons may application dated July 11, 2014, Susquehanna. The transactions will submit written comments regarding the contains proprietary information and, involve creation of and changes to license transfer application, as provided accordingly, those portions are being intermediate holding companies with for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission withheld from public disclosure. A PPL Energy Supply eventually will consider and, if appropriate, redacted version of the application is becoming a direct subsidiary of a new respond to these comments, but such available electronically in ADAMS intermediate parent named Talen comments will not otherwise constitute under Accession No. ML14195A110. Energy Holdings, Inc., which in turn part of the decisional record. Comments • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and will be a direct subsidiary of a new, should be submitted as described in the purchase copies of public documents at publicly-owned ultimate parent, named ADDRESSES section of this document. the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One Talen Energy Corporation. Talen Energy IV. Opportunity To Request a Hearing; White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Corporation would acquire ownership Petition for Leave To Intervene Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. of PPL Corporation’s 90 percent interest in the Susquehanna Steam Electric Within 20 days from the date of B. Submitting Comments Station, Units 1 and 2. PPL publication of this notice, any person(s) Please include Docket ID NRC–2014– Susquehanna will continue to operate whose interest may be affected by the 0211 in the subject line of your the facility and hold the license. Commission’s action on the application comment submission, in order to ensure No physical changes to the may request a hearing and intervention that the NRC is able to make your Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, via electronic submission through the comment submission available to the Units 1 and 2, or operational changes NRC’s E-filing system. Requests for a public in this docket. are being proposed in the application. hearing and petitions for leave to The NRC cautions you not to include The NRC’s regulations at 10 CFR intervene should be filed in accordance identifying or contact information that 50.80 state that no license, or any right with the Commission’s rules of practice you do not want to be publicly thereunder, shall be transferred, directly set forth in Subpart C ‘‘Rules of General disclosed in your comment submission. or indirectly, through transfer of control Applicability: Hearing Requests, The NRC will post all comment of the license, unless the Commission Petitions to Intervene, Availability of submissions at http:// shall give its consent in writing. The Documents, Selection of Specific www.regulations.gov as well as enter the Commission will approve an Hearing Procedures, Presiding Officer comment submissions into ADAMS. application for the indirect transfer of a Powers, and General Hearing The NRC does not routinely edit license, if the Commission determines Management for NRC Adjudicatory comment submissions to remove that the proposed transaction, described Hearings,’’ of 10 CFR part 2. In identifying or contact information. above, will not affect the qualifications particular, such requests and petitions

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60194 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

must comply with the requirements set Those permitted to intervene become V. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) forth in 10 CFR 2.309, which is parties to the proceeding, subject to any All documents filed in NRC available at the NRC’s PDR, located at limitations in the order granting leave to adjudicatory proceedings, including a O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first intervene, and have the opportunity to request for hearing, a petition for leave floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The participate fully in the conduct of the to intervene, any motion or other NRC’s regulations are accessible hearing with respect to resolution of document filed in the proceeding prior electronically from the NRC Library on that person’s admitted contentions, to the submission of a request for the NRC’s public Web site at http:// including the opportunity to present hearing or petition to intervene, and www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc- evidence and to submit a cross- documents filed by interested collections/cfr/. examination plan for cross-examination governmental entities participating A petition for leave to intervene shall of witnesses, consistent with NRC under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in regulations, policies, and procedures. set forth with particularity the interest accordance with the NRC’s E-Filing rule The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of the petitioner in the proceeding and (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E- will set the time and place for any how that interest may be affected by the Filing process requires participants to prehearing conferences and evidentiary results of the proceeding. The petition submit and serve all adjudicatory hearings, and the appropriate notices must provide the name, address, and documents over the Internet, or in some telephone number of the petitioner and will be provided. Requests for hearing, petitions for cases to mail copies on electronic specifically explain the reasons why storage media. Participants may not intervention should be permitted with leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file contentions after the deadline in submit paper copies of their filings particular reference to the following unless they seek an exemption in factors: (1) The nature of the petitioner’s 10 CFR 2.309(b) will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding accordance with the procedures right under the Act to be made a party described below. to the proceeding; (2) the nature and officer that the new or amended filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying To comply with the procedural extent of the petitioner’s property, requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 financial, or other interest in the the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1). A State, local governmental body, days prior to the filing deadline, the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of Federally-recognized Indian tribe, or participant should contact the Office of any order that may be entered in the agency thereof may submit a petition to the Secretary by email at proceeding on the petitioner’s interest. the Commission to participate as a party [email protected], or by telephone A petition for leave to intervene must under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition at 301–415–1677, to request (1) a digital also include a specification of the should state the nature and extent of the identification (ID) certificate, which contentions that the petitioner seeks to petitioner’s interest in the proceeding. allows the participant (or its counsel or have litigated in the hearing. For each The petition should be submitted to the representative) to digitally sign contention, the petitioner must provide Commission by October 27, 2014. The documents and access the E-Submittal a specific statement of the issue of law petition must be filed in accordance server for any proceeding in which it is or fact to be raised or controverted, as with the filing instructions in Section IV participating; and (2) advise the well as a brief explanation of the basis of this document, and should meet the Secretary that the participant will be for the contention. Additionally, the requirements for petitions for leave to submitting a request or petition for petitioner must demonstrate that the intervene set forth in this section, hearing (even in instances in which the issue raised by each contention is except that under § 2.309(h)(2) a State, participant, or its counsel or within the scope of the proceeding and local governmental body, or Federally- representative, already holds an NRC- is material to the findings that the NRC recognized Indian tribe, or agency issued digital ID certificate). Based upon must make to support the granting of a thereof does not need to address the this information, the Secretary will license amendment in response to the standing requirements in 10 CFR establish an electronic docket for the application. The petition must also 2.309(d) if the facility is located within hearing in this proceeding if the include a concise statement of the its boundaries. A State, local Secretary has not already established an alleged facts or expert opinions which governmental body, Federally- electronic docket. support the position of the petitioner recognized Indian tribe, or agency Information about applying for a and on which the petitioner intends to thereof may also have the opportunity to digital ID certificate is available on the rely at the hearing, together with participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c). NRC’s public Web site at http:// references to the specific sources and If a hearing is granted, any person www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ documents on which the petitioner who does not wish, or is not qualified, getting-started.html. System intends to rely. Finally, the petition to become a party to the proceeding requirements for accessing the E- must provide sufficient information to may, in the discretion of the presiding Submittal server are detailed in the show that a genuine dispute exists with officer, be permitted to make a limited NRC’s ‘‘Guidance for Electronic the applicant on a material issue of law appearance pursuant to the provisions Submission,’’ which is available on the or fact, including references to specific of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a NRC’s public Web site at http:// portions of the application for limited appearance may make an oral or www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- amendment that the petitioner disputes written statement of position on the submittals.html. Participants may and the supporting reasons for each issues, but may not otherwise attempt to use other software not listed dispute, or, if the petitioner believes participate in the proceeding. A limited on the Web site, but should note that the that the application for amendment fails appearance may be made at any session NRC’s E-Filing system does not support to contain information on a relevant of the hearing or at any prehearing unlisted software, and the NRC Meta matter as required by law, the conference, subject to the limits and System Help Desk will not be able to identification of each failure, and the conditions as may be imposed by the offer assistance in using unlisted supporting reasons for the petitioner’s presiding officer. Persons desiring to software. belief. Each contention must be one make a limited appearance are If a participant is electronically that, if proven, would entitle the requested to inform the Secretary of the submitting a document to the NRC in petitioner to relief. Commission by December 5, 2014. accordance with the E-Filing rule, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60195

participant must file the document continue to submit documents in paper Order Imposing Procedures for Access using the NRC’s online, Web-based format. Such filings must be submitted to Sensitive Unclassified Non- submission form. In order to serve by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Safeguards Information for Contention documents through the Electronic Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Preparation Information Exchange System, users Regulatory Commission, Washington, A. This Order contains instructions will be required to install a Web DC 20555–0001, Attention: Rulemaking regarding how potential parties to this browser plug-in from the NRC’s public and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, proceeding may request access to Web site. Further information on the express mail, or expedited delivery documents containing Sensitive Web-based submission form, including service to the Office of the Secretary, Unclassified Non-Safeguards the installation of the Web browser Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, Information (SUNSI). plug-in, is available on the NRC’s public 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, B. Within 10 days after publication of Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site- this notice of hearing and opportunity to help/e-submittals.html. Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking petition for leave to intervene, any Once a participant has obtained a and Adjudications Staff. Participants digital ID certificate and a docket has filing a document in this manner are potential party who believes access to been created, the participant can then responsible for serving the document on SUNSI is necessary to respond to this submit a request for hearing or petition all other participants. Filing is notice may request such access. A for leave to intervene. Submissions considered complete by first-class mail ‘‘potential party’’ is any person who should be in Portable Document Format as of the time of deposit in the mail, or intends to participate as a party by (PDF) in accordance with the NRC’s by courier, express mail, or expedited demonstrating standing and filing an guidance available on the NRC’s public delivery service upon depositing the admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site- document with the provider of the submitted later than 10 days after help/e-submittals.html. A filing is service. A presiding officer, having publication will not be considered considered complete at the time the granted an exemption request from absent a showing of good cause for the documents are submitted through the using E-Filing, may require a participant NRC’s E-Filing system. To be timely, an late filing, addressing why the request or party to use E-Filing if the presiding could not have been filed earlier. electronic filing must be submitted to officer subsequently determines that the the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 C. The requestor shall submit a letter reason for granting the exemption from requesting permission to access SUNSI p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. use of E-Filing no longer exists. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E- to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Filing system time-stamps the document Documents submitted in adjudicatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and sends the submitter an email notice proceedings will appear in NRC’s Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: confirming receipt of the document. The electronic hearing docket which is Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, E-Filing system also distributes an email available to the public at http:// and provide a copy to the Associate notice that provides access to the ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded General Counsel for Hearings, document to the NRC’s Office of the pursuant to an order of the Commission, Enforcement and Administration, Office General Counsel and any others who or the presiding officer. Participants are of the General Counsel, Washington, DC have advised the Office of the Secretary requested not to include personal 20555–0001. The expedited delivery or that they wish to participate in the privacy information, such as social courier mail address for both offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, proceeding, so that the filer need not security numbers, home addresses, or 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, serve the documents on those home phone numbers in their filings, Maryland 20852. The email address for participants separately. Therefore, unless an NRC regulation or other law applicants and other participants (or the Office of the Secretary and the requires submission of such Office of the General Counsel are their counsel or representative) must information. However, a request to apply for and receive a digital ID [email protected] and intervene will require including certificate before a hearing request/ [email protected], respectively.1 information on local residence in order petition to intervene is filed so that they The request must include the following can obtain access to the document via to demonstrate a proximity assertion of information: the E-Filing system. interest in the proceeding. With respect (1) A description of the licensing A person filing electronically using to copyrighted works, except for limited action with a citation to this Federal the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system excerpts that serve the purpose of the Register notice; may seek assistance by contacting the adjudicatory filings and would (2) The name and address of the NRC Meta System Help Desk through constitute a Fair Use application, potential party and a description of the the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the participants are requested not to include potential party’s particularized interest NRC’s public Web site at http:// copyrighted materials in their that could be harmed by the action www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- submission. identified in C.(1); and submittals.html, by email to The Commission will issue a notice or (3) The identity of the individual or [email protected], or by a toll- order granting or denying a hearing entity requesting access to SUNSI and free call to 1–866–672–7640. The NRC request or intervention petition, the requestor’s basis for the need for the Meta System Help Desk is available designating the issues for any hearing information in order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern that will be held and designating the Time, Monday through Friday, proceeding. In particular, the request Presiding Officer. A notice granting a excluding government holidays. must explain why publicly available Participants who believe that they hearing will be published in the Federal Register and served on the parties to the have a good cause for not submitting 1 While a request for hearing or petition to documents electronically must file an hearing. intervene in this proceeding must comply with the For further details with respect to this filing requirements of the NRC’s ‘‘E-Filing Rule,’’ exemption request, in accordance with the initial request to access SUNSI under these 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper application, see the application dated procedures should be submitted as described in this filing requesting authorization to July 11, 2014. paragraph.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60196 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

versions of the information requested granted access to the information and Administrative Judge within five days of would not be sufficient to provide the the deadline for filing all other the notification by the NRC staff of its basis and specificity for a proffered contentions (as established in the notice grant of access. contention. of hearing or opportunity for hearing), If challenges to the NRC staff D. Based on an evaluation of the the petitioner may file its SUNSI determinations are filed, these information submitted under paragraph contentions by that later deadline. This procedures give way to the normal C.(3) the NRC staff will determine provision does not extend the time for process for litigating disputes within 10 days of receipt of the request filing a request for a hearing and concerning access to information. The whether: petition to intervene, which must availability of interlocutory review by (1) There is a reasonable basis to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR the Commission of orders ruling on believe the petitioner is likely to 2.309. such NRC staff determinations (whether establish standing to participate in this G. Review of Denials of Access. granting or denying access) is governed NRC proceeding; and (1) If the request for access to SUNSI by 10 CFR 2.311.3 (2) The requestor has established a is denied by the NRC staff either after legitimate need for access to SUNSI. a determination on standing and need I. The Commission expects that the E. If the NRC staff determines that the for access, or after a determination on NRC staff and presiding officers (and requestor satisfies both D.(1) and D.(2) trustworthiness and reliability, the NRC any other reviewing officers) will above, the NRC staff will notify the staff shall immediately notify the consider and resolve requests for access requestor in writing that access to requestor in writing, briefly stating the to SUNSI, and motions for protective SUNSI has been granted. The written reason or reasons for the denial. orders, in a timely fashion in order to notification will contain instructions on (2) The requestor may challenge the minimize any unnecessary delays in how the requestor may obtain copies of NRC staff’s adverse determination by identifying those petitioners who have the requested documents, and any other filing a challenge within five days of standing and who have propounded conditions that may apply to access to receipt of that determination with: (a) contentions meeting the specificity and those documents. These conditions may the presiding officer designated in this basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2. include, but are not limited to, the proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement has been appointed, the Chief the general target schedule for or Affidavit, or Protective Order 2 setting Administrative Judge, or if he or she is processing and resolving requests under forth terms and conditions to prevent unavailable, another administrative these procedures. the unauthorized or inadvertent judge, or an administrative law judge It is so ordered. disclosure of SUNSI by each individual with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day who will be granted access to SUNSI. 2.318(a); or (c) officer if that officer has of September, 2014. F. Filing of Contentions. Any been designated to rule on information For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. contentions in these proceedings that access issues. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, are based upon the information received H. Review of Grants of Access. A Secretary of the Commission. as a result of the request made for party other than the requestor may SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no challenge an NRC staff determination ATTACHMENT 1—General Target later than 20 days after the requestor is granting access to SUNSI whose release Schedule for Processing and Resolving granted access to that information. would harm that party’s interest Requests for Access to Sensitive However, if more than 20 days remain independent of the proceeding. Such a Unclassified Non-Safeguards between the date the petitioner is challenge must be filed with the Chief Information in This Proceeding

Day Event/Activity

0 ...... Publication of Federal Register notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, including order with instruc- tions for access requests. 10 ...... Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with information: sup- porting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding. 20 ...... Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 requestor/petitioner reply). 20 ...... Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff informs the requestor of the staff’s determination whether the request for access provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows need for SUNSI. (NRC staff also informs any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents). 25 ...... If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need’’ or no likelihood of standing, the deadline for requestor/petitioner to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief Ad- ministrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds ‘‘need’’ for SUNSI, the deadline for any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s grant of access. 30 ...... Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s). 40 ...... (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI.

2 Any motion for Protective Order or draft Non- yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline staff determinations (because they must be served Disclosure Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must for the receipt of the written access request. on a presiding officer or the Commission, as be filed with the presiding officer or the Chief 3 Requestors should note that the filing applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI request Administrative Judge if the presiding officer has not requirements of the NRC’s E-Filing Rule (72 FR submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures. 49139; August 28, 2007) apply to appeals of NRC

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60197

Day Event/Activity

A ...... If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a final ad- verse determination by the NRC staff. A + 3 ...... Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent with decision issuing the protective order. A + 23 ...... Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days re- main between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as es- tablished in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later dead- line. A + 48 ...... (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. A + 55 ...... (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers. >A + 55 ...... Decision on contention admission.

[FR Doc. 2014–23800 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] email to [email protected]. The engineering judgment during the BILLING CODE 7590–01–P ADAMS accession number for each evaluation of the lodged PCP impeller document referenced in this document piece and during the operability (if that document is available in evaluation of the existing PCP impellers. NUCLEAR REGULATORY ADAMS) is provided the first time that • The petitioner asserts that the NRC COMMISSION a document is referenced. staff was not being aggressive in • [Docket No. 50–255; NRC–2014–0216] NRC’s PDR: You may examine and resolving plant equipment issues, not purchase copies of public documents at resolving PCP equipment issues Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One uniformly across the NRC regions, and Palisades Nuclear Plant White Flint North, 11555 Rockville accommodating the nuclear industry. Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The request is being treated pursuant AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to § 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Commission. Notice is hereby given that by petition dated Federal Regulations (10 CFR), and has ACTION: 10 CFR 2.206 request; receipt. March 5, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. been referred to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ML14071A006), as supplemented by Commission (NRC) is giving notice that email dated May 21, 2014 (ADAMS (NRR). In accordance with 10 CFR by petition dated March 5, 2014, as Accession No. ML14142A101), and the 2.206, the NRC will take appropriate supplemented by email dated May 21, petitioner’s addresses to the Petition action on this petition within a 2014, Michael Mulligan (the petitioner) Review Board dated April 8 and reasonable period of time. The has requested that the NRC take September 3, 2014 (ADAMS Accession petitioner met with the NRR’s Petition enforcement action against Entergy Nos. ML14143A212 and ML14259A135, Review Board on April 8 and September Nuclear Operations, Inc., due to recent respectively), the petitioner, has asked 3, 2014, to discuss the petition. The plant events and equipment failures at the NRC to take enforcement action Petition Review Board considered the Palisades Nuclear Plant (PNP). The against Entergy Nuclear Operations, results of that discussion in its petitioner’s requests are included in the Inc., due to recent plant events and determination of the petitioner’s request SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of equipment failures at PNP. The for immediate action and in the this document. petitioner was particularly concerned establishment of the schedule for the review of the petition. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID with primary coolant pump (PCP) NRC–2014–0216 when contacting the impeller pieces breaking off and lodging Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day NRC about the availability of in the reactor vessel. of September 2014. information regarding this document. The petitioner requests the following For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. You may obtain publicly-available actions: Daniel H. Dorman, • information related to this document Require PNP to open every PCP for Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor using any of the following methods: inspection and clear up all flaws. Regulation. • • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to Require PNP to replace the PCPs [FR Doc. 2014–23802 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] http://www.regulations.gov and search with a design for their intended duty. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P for Docket ID NRC–2014–0216. Address • An Office of Inspector General questions about NRC dockets to Carol (OIG) inspection on why there are Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; different analysis criteria for similar NUCLEAR REGULATORY email: [email protected]. PCP events between the NRC regions. COMMISSION • NRC’s Agencywide Documents • A ten million dollar fine for these Access and Management System events. [NRC–2014–0093] (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly • Intensify NRC monitoring of PNP, Medical Evaluation of Licensed available documents online in the and return them to yellow or red status. Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants ADAMS Public Documents collection at As the basis for the request, the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ petitioner stated, in part, the following: AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory adams.html. To begin the search, select • The petitioner cited other recent Commission. ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then plant events and equipment failures, ACTION: Regulatory guide; issuance. select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS such as leakage from the safety injection Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, refueling water tank, and flaws in the SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory please contact the NRC’s Public control rod drive mechanisms. Commission (NRC) is issuing revision 4 Document Room (PDR) reference staff at • The petitioner asserted the licensee to Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.134, 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by and the NRC staff used non-conservative ‘‘Medical Assessment of Licensed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60198 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

Operators or Applicants for Operator 415–3181, email: Federal Aviation Administration as well Licenses at Nuclear Power Plants.’’ The [email protected], or Richard as medical criteria that reflected NRC is updating RG 1.134 based upon Jervey, Office of Nuclear Regulatory progressions in medical science the regulatory experience gained since Research, telephone: 301–251–7404, including updated terminology, current the previous revision was issued and to email: [email protected]. Both are medical practices, criteria for normality, endorse the 2013 revision to the staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory and risk assessments. underlying consensus standard, Commission, Washington, DC 20555– Regulatory Guide 1.134 was revised to American National Standard Institute/ 0001. identify to licensees that ANSI/ANS 3.4–2013 is acceptable for their use. The American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Standard 3.4, ‘‘Medical Certification and guide helps to ensure that medical Monitoring of Personnel Requiring I. Introduction certifications (and related medical Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants.’’ The The NRC is issuing a revision to an evidence) used to meet the operator licensing requirements of 10 CFR part guide helps to ensure that medical existing guide in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory 55 are sufficient with respect to (1) an certifications (and related medical Guide’’ series. This series was applicant’s or operator licensee’s evidence) are sufficient to meet the developed to describe and make medical examination, as described in 10 NRC’s nuclear power reactor operator available to the public information such CFR 55.21, ‘‘Medical Examination’’; (2) licensing requirements. as methods that are acceptable to the a facility licensee’s medical ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC staff for implementing specific certification, as described in 10 CFR NRC–2014–0093 when contacting the parts of the agency’s regulations, 55.23, ‘‘Certification’’; (3) an operator NRC about the availability of techniques that the staff uses in licensee’s incapacitation because of information regarding this document. evaluating specific problems or disability or illness, as described in 10 You may obtain publicly-available postulated accidents, and data that the CFR 55.25, ‘‘Incapacitation Because of information related to this document staff needs in its review of applications Disability or Illness’’; and (4) a facility using any of the following methods: for permits and licenses. • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to Revision 4 of RG 1.134 was issued licensee’s medical documentation, as http://www.regulations.gov and search with a temporary identification as draft described in 10 CFR 55.27, for Docket ID NRC–2014–0093. Address regulatory guide (DG), DG–1310. The ‘‘Documentation.’’ questions about NRC dockets to Carol guidance is intended for use by nuclear II. Additional Information Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; power plant license holders under part The DG–1310 was published in the email: [email protected]. For 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Federal Register on April 25, 2014 (79 technical questions, contact the Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Domestic FR 23017), for a 30-day public comment individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER Licensing of Production and Utilization period. The public comment period INFORMATION CONTACT section of this Facilities,’’ and 10 CFR Part 52, closed on May 27, 2014. There were no document. ‘‘Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals public comments received • NRC’s Agencywide Documents for Nuclear Power Plants.’’ Licensees of Access and Management System these facilities are required under 10 III. Congressional Review Act (ADAMS): You may access publicly CFR 50.54, ‘‘Conditions of Licensees,’’ This RG is a rule as defined in the available documents online in the NRC to use qualified licensed operators as Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- described in 10 CFR Part 55, ‘‘Operators’ 801–808). However, the Office of rm/adams.html. To begin the search, Licenses.’’ Management and Budget has not found select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and Regulatory Guide 1.134, Revision 3, it to be a major rule as defined in the then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS ‘‘Medical Evaluation of Licensed Congressional Review Act. Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ please contact the NRC’s Public was issued in 1998 to identify that IV. Backfitting and Issue Finality Document Room (PDR) reference staff at consensus standard ANSI/ANS 3.4 Regulatory Guide 1.134, Revision 4, 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by (1996), ‘‘Medical Certification and provides updated guidance on the email to [email protected]. The Monitoring of Personnel Requiring methods acceptable to the NRC staff for ADAMS accession number for each Operator Licenses for Nuclear Power complying with the NRC’s regulations document referenced in this notice (if Plants,’’ was a method acceptable to the associated with approval or acceptance that document is available in ADAMS) staff for complying with those portions of the medical assessment of an is provided the first time that a of the NRC’s regulations associated with applicant for, or holder of, an operator document is referenced. Revision 4 of approval or acceptance of medical or senior operator license at a nuclear Regulatory Guide 1.134 is available in examination certifications at nuclear power plant. The guide applies to ADAMS under Accession No. power plants. current and future applicants for, and ML14189A385. The regulatory analysis The consensus standard ANSI/ANS holders of, power reactor licenses under may be found in ADAMS under 3.4 was issued in 2013 to provide 10 CFR parts 50 and 52 and power Accession No. ML13352A279. clarification and comprehensive reactor operating licenses under 10 CFR • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and medical guidance to improve industry’s part 55. Issuance of RG 1.134, revision purchase copies of public documents at consistent implementation of the 4, does not constitute backfitting under the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One standard. This included clarification of 10 CFR part 50 and is not otherwise White Flint North, 11555 Rockville specific minimum requirements, inconsistent with the issue finality Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. disqualifying conditions, conditional provisions in 10 CFR Part 52. As Regulatory guides are not restrictions, examination methods, and discussed in the ‘‘Implementation’’ copyrighted, and NRC approval is not monitoring methods for each medical section of RG 1.134, revision 4, the NRC required to reproduce them. area. The 2013 issue also included has no current intention to impose the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: consideration of other industry medical RG on current holders of 10 CFR part 50 Lawrence Vick, Office of Nuclear standards, including those of the U.S. operating licenses or 10 CFR part 52 Reactor Regulation, telephone: 301– Department of Transportation and combined licenses. Part 55 does not

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60199

contain backfitting or issue finality II. Notice of Commission Action By the Commission. regulations, and power reactor operating III. Ordering Paragraphs Shoshana M. Grove, licensees are not protected by the I. Introduction Secretary. backfitting provisions in 10 CFR 50.109 In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 [FR Doc. 2014–23669 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] or the 10 CFR part 52 issue finality BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P provisions because neither 10 CFR and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal 50.109 nor 10 CFR part 52 applies to 10 Service filed a formal request and associated supporting information to CFR part 55 power reactor operating POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION licensees. add Priority Mail Contract 94 to the 1 This RG could be applied to competitive product list. [Docket Nos. MC2014–49 and CP2014–85; applications for 10 CFR part 50 The Postal Service Order No. 2199] contemporaneously filed a redacted operating licenses, 10 CFR part 52 New Postal Product combined licenses, or 10 CFR part 55 contract related to the proposed new operator licenses. Such action would product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. not constitute backfitting as defined in 39 CFR 3015.5. Id. Attachment B. To support its Request, the Postal ACTION: Notice. 10 CFR 50.109 or be otherwise Service filed a copy of the contract, a inconsistent with the applicable issue SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a copy of the Governors’ Decision finality provision in 10 CFR part 52, recent Postal Service filing concerning authorizing the product, proposed inasmuch as such applicants are not an addition of Priority Mail Contract 95 changes to the Mail Classification within the scope of entities protected by to the competitive product list. This Schedule, a Statement of Supporting 10 CFR 50.109 or the relevant issue notice informs the public of the filing, Justification, a certification of finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52. invites public comment, and takes other compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and administrative steps. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day an application for non-public treatment DATES: Comments are due: October 7, of September, 2014. of certain materials. It also filed 2014. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. supporting financial workpapers. Harriet Karagiannis, ADDRESSES: Submit comments II. Notice of Commission Action Acting Chief, Regulatory Guidance and electronically via the Commission’s Generic Issues Branch, Division of The Commission establishes Docket Filing Online system at http:// Engineering, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Nos. MC2014–48 and CP2014–84 to www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit Research. consider the Request pertaining to the comments electronically should contact [FR Doc. 2014–23717 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] proposed Priority Mail Contract 94 the person identified in the FOR FURTHER BILLING CODE 7590–01–P product and the related contract, INFORMATION CONTACT section by respectively. telephone for advice on filing The Commission invites comments on alternatives. whether the Postal Service’s filings in POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the captioned dockets are consistent [Docket Nos. MC2014–48 and CP2014–84; with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at Order No. 2200] 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 202–789–6820. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: New Postal Product CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than October 7, 2014. The Table of Contents AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. public portions of these filings can be ACTION: Notice. accessed via the Commission’s Web site I. Introduction (http://www.prc.gov). II. Notice of Commission Action SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a The Commission appoints James F. III. Ordering Paragraphs recent Postal Service filing concerning Callow to serve as Public Representative I. Introduction an addition of Priority Mail Contract 94 in these dockets. to the competitive product list. This In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 notice informs the public of the filing, III. Ordering Paragraphs and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal invites public comment, and takes other It is ordered: Service filed a formal request and administrative steps. 1. The Commission establishes Docket associated supporting information to add Priority Mail Contract 95 to the DATES: Nos. MC2014–48 and CP2014–84 to Comments are due: October 7, 1 2014. consider the matters raised in each competitive product list. docket. The Postal Service ADDRESSES: Submit comments 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, James F. contemporaneously filed a redacted electronically via the Commission’s Callow is appointed to serve as an contract related to the proposed new Filing Online system at http:// officer of the Commission to represent product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit the interests of the general public in 39 CFR 3015.5. Id. Attachment B. comments electronically should contact these proceedings (Public To support its Request, the Postal the person identified in the FOR FURTHER Representative). Service filed a copy of the contract, a INFORMATION CONTACT section by 3. Comments are due no later than copy of the Governors’ Decision telephone for advice on filing October 7, 2014. authorizing the product, proposed alternatives. 4. The Secretary shall arrange for changes to the Mail Classification FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: publication of this order in the Federal Schedule, a Statement of Supporting David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at Register. Justification, a certification of 202–789–6820. 1 1 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request of the United States Postal Service to Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail Contract 94 to Competitive Add Priority Mail Contract 95 to Competitive Table of Contents Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors’ Decision, Contract, and Unredacted Governors’ Decision, Contract, and I. Introduction Supporting Data, September 29, 2014 (Request). Supporting Data, September 29, 2014 (Request).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60200 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), and Filing Online system at http:// The Commission appoints John P. an application for non-public treatment www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit Klingenberg to represent the interests of of certain materials. It also filed comments electronically should contact the general public (Public supporting financial workpapers. the person identified in the FOR FURTHER Representative) in this docket. INFORMATION CONTACT section by II. Notice of Commission Action III. Ordering Paragraphs telephone for advice on filing The Commission establishes Docket alternatives. It is ordered: Nos. MC2014–49 and CP2014–85 to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: consider the Request pertaining to the 1. The Commission reopens Docket proposed Priority Mail Contract 95 David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at No. CP2011–49 for consideration of product and the related contract, 202–789–6820. matters raised by the Postal Service’s respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice. The Commission invites comments on Table of Contents 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the whether the Postal Service’s filings in Commission appoints John P. the captioned dockets are consistent I. Introduction Klingenberg to serve as an officer of the with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, II. Notice of Filing Commission (Public Representative) to 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 III. Ordering Paragraphs represent the interests of the general CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are public in this proceeding. due no later than October 7, 2014. The I. Introduction public portions of these filings can be 3. Comments are due no later than On September 29, 2014, the Postal October 7, 2014. accessed via the Commission’s Web site Service filed notice that it has agreed to (http://www.prc.gov). an Amendment to the existing Priority 4. The Secretary shall arrange for The Commission appoints Cassie Mail Contract 33 negotiated service publication of this order in the Federal D’Souza to serve as Public agreement approved in this docket.1 In Register. Representative in these dockets. support of its Notice, the Postal Service By the Commission. III. Ordering Paragraphs includes a redacted copy of the Shoshana M. Grove, Amendment. It also provides a It is ordered: Secretary. certification of compliance with 39 1. The Commission establishes Docket [FR Doc. 2014–23678 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] U.S.C. 3633(a), as required by 39 CFR Nos. MC2014–49 and CP2014–85 to BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P consider the matters raised in each 3015.5. docket. The Postal Service also filed the 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Cassie unredacted Amendment and supporting financial information under seal. The D’Souza is appointed to serve as an POSTAL SERVICE officer of the Commission to represent Postal Service seeks to incorporate by the interests of the general public in reference the Application for Non- Product Change—Priority Mail these proceedings (Public Public Treatment originally filed in this Negotiated Service Agreement Representative). docket for the protection of information 3. Comments are due no later than that it has filed under seal. Notice at 1. AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. October 7, 2014. The Amendment changes contract 4. The Secretary shall arrange for prices. ACTION: Notice. publication of this order in the Federal The Postal Service intends for the Register. Amendment to become effective one SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives business day after the date that the By the Commission. notice of filing a request with the Postal Commission completes its review of the Regulatory Commission to add a Shoshana M. Grove, Notice. Id. The Postal Service asserts domestic shipping services contract to Secretary. that the Amendment should not impair the list of Negotiated Service [FR Doc. 2014–23668 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] the ability of competitive products on Agreements in the Mail Classification BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P the whole to cover an appropriate share Schedule’s Competitive Products List. of institutional costs. Supplemental Notice, Attachment B at 1. DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2014. POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION II. Notice of Filing FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [Docket No. CP2011–49; Order No. 2201] Elizabeth A. Reed, 202–268–3179. The Commission invites comments on Amendment to Postal Product whether the changes presented in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ® Postal Service’s Notice are consistent United States Postal Service hereby AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. ACTION: Notice. 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 3015.5, and 39 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on September 29, 2014, it filed with the Postal Regulatory SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are Commission a Request of the United recent Postal Service filing concerning due no later than October 7, 2014. The States Postal Service to Add Priority an amendment to Priority Mail Contract public portions of these filings can be Mail Contract 95 to Competitive Product 33 to the competitive product list. This accessed via the Commission’s Web site List. Documents are available at notice informs the public of the filing, (http://www.prc.gov). www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2014–49, invites public comment, and takes other 1 CP2014–85. administrative steps. Notice of United States Postal Service of Change in Prices Pursuant to Amendment to Priority Mail DATES: Comments are due: October 7, Contract 33, September 29, 2014 (Notice). See also Stanley F. Mires, 2014. Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing Attorney, Federal Requirements. Certified Statement for Amendment to Priority Mail ADDRESSES: Submit comments Contract 33, September 30, 2014 (Supplemental [FR Doc. 2014–23685 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] electronically via the Commission’s Notice). BILLING CODE 7710–12–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60201

POSTAL SERVICE Securities with Members of National information unless it displays a Securities Exchanges,’’ which sets forth currently valid control number. Product Change—Priority Mail the conditions under which a fund may The public may view the background Negotiated Service Agreement place its assets in the custody of a documentation for this information member of a national securities collection at the following Web site, AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. exchange. Rule 17f–1 requires, among www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be ACTION: Notice. other things, that an independent public directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives accountant verify the fund’s assets at the Office of Information and Regulatory notice of filing a request with the Postal end of every annual and semi-annual Affairs, Office of Management and Regulatory Commission to add a fiscal period, and at least one other time Budget, Room 10102, New Executive domestic shipping services contract to during the fiscal year as chosen by the Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, the list of Negotiated Service independent accountant. Requiring an or by sending an email to: Shagufta_ Agreements in the Mail Classification independent accountant to examine the [email protected]; and (ii) Thomas Schedule’s Competitive Products List. fund’s assets in the custody of a member of a national securities exchange assists Bayer, Chief Information Officer, DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2014. Commission staff in its inspection Securities and Exchange Commission, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: program and helps to ensure that the c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street Elizabeth A. Reed, 202–268–3179. fund assets are subject to proper NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an _ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The auditing procedures. The accountant’s email to: PRA [email protected]. ® United States Postal Service hereby certificate stating that it has made an Comments must be submitted to OMB gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. examination, and describing the nature within 30 days of this notice. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on September 29, and the extent of the examination, must Dated: September 30, 2014. 2014, it filed with the Postal Regulatory be attached to Form N–17f–1 and filed Kevin M. O’Neill, Commission a Request of the United with the Commission promptly after Deputy Secretary. States Postal Service to Add Priority each examination. The form facilitates [FR Doc. 2014–23707 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Mail Contract 94 to Competitive Product the filing of the accountant’s certificates, BILLING CODE 8011–01–P List. Documents are available at and increases the accessibility of the www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2014–48, certificates to both Commission staff CP2014–84. and interested investors. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Stanley F. Mires, Commission staff estimates that it COMMISSION Attorney, Federal Requirements. takes: (i) 1 hour of clerical time to Submission for OMB Review; [FR Doc. 2014–23683 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] prepare and file Form N–17f–1; and (ii) 0.5 hour for the fund’s chief compliance Comment Request BILLING CODE 7710–12–P officer to review Form N–17f–1 prior to Upon Written Request, Copies Available filing with the Commission, for a total From: Securities and Exchange of 1.5 hours. Each fund is required to SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Commission, Office of FOIA Services, make 3 filings annually, for a total COMMISSION 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC annual burden per fund of 20549–2736. 1 Submission for OMB Review; approximately 4.5 hours. Commission Extension: Comment Request staff estimates that an average of 4 funds Form N–17f–2, OMB Control No. 3235– currently file Form N–17f–1 with the 0360, SEC File No. 270–317. Upon Written Request, Copies Available Commission 3 times each year, for a Notice is hereby given that, pursuant From: Securities and Exchange total of 12 responses annually.2 The to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Commission, Office of FOIA Services, total annual hour burden for Form N– (44 U.S.C. 350l et seq.), the Securities 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 17f–1 is therefore estimated to be and Exchange Commission (the 20549–2736. approximately 18 hours.3 ‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the Extension: Form N–17f–1, OMB Control No. The estimate of average burden hours Office of Management and Budget a 3235–0359, SEC File No. 270–316. is made solely for the purposes of the request for extension of the previously Notice is hereby given that pursuant Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not approved collection of information to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 derived from a comprehensive or even discussed below. (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities a representative survey or study of the Form N–17f–2 (17 CFR 274.220) and Exchange Commission (the costs of Commission rules. Compliance under the Investment Company Act is ‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the with the collections of information entitled ‘‘Certificate of Accounting of Office of Management and Budget a required by Form N–17f–1 is mandatory Securities and Similar Investments in request for extension of the previously for funds that place their assets in the the Custody of Management Investment approved collection of information custody of a national securities Companies.’’ Form N–17f–2 is the cover discussed below. exchange member. Responses will not sheet for the accountant examination Form N–17f–1 (17 CFR 274.219) is be kept confidential. An agency may not certificates filed under rule 17f–2 (17 entitled ‘‘Certificate of Accounting of conduct or sponsor, and a person is not CFR 270.17f–2) by registered Securities and Similar Investments of a required to respond to a collection of management investment companies Management Investment Company in (‘‘funds’’) maintaining custody of the Custody of Members of National 1 This estimate is based on the following securities or other investments. Form Securities Exchanges.’’ The form serves calculation: (1.5 hours × 3 responses annually = 4.5 N–17f–2 facilitates the filing of the as a cover sheet to the accountant’s hours). accountant’s examination certificates certificate that is required to be filed 2 This estimate is based on a review of Form N– prepared under rule 17f–2. The use of 17f–1 filings made with the Commission over the periodically with the Commission last three years. the form allows the certificates to be pursuant to rule 17f–1 (17 CFR 270.17f– 3 This estimate is based on the following filed electronically, and increases the 1) under the Act, entitled ‘‘Custody of calculations: (4.5 hours × 4 funds = 18 total hours). accessibility of the examination

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60202 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

certificates to both the Commission’s or send an email to: the custodial contracts; and (ii) 3 hours examination staff and interested [email protected]. Comments must for the fund’s controller to assist the investors by ensuring that the be submitted to OMB within 30 days of fund’s independent public auditors in certificates are filed under the proper this notice. verifying the fund’s assets. Commission file number and the correct Dated: September 30, 2014. Approximately 4 funds rely on the rule name of a fund. annually, with a total of 4 responses.2 Kevin M. O’Neill, Commission staff estimates that it Thus, the total annual hour burden for takes: (i) On average 1.25 hours of fund Deputy Secretary. rule 17f–1 is approximately 14 hours.3 accounting personnel at a total cost of [FR Doc. 2014–23708 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Funds that rely on rule 17f–1 $247.5 to prepare each Form N–17f–2; 1 BILLING CODE 8011–01–P generally use outside counsel to prepare and (ii) .75 hours of administrative the custodial contract for the board’s assistant time at a total cost of $55.50 to review and to transmit the contract to file the Form N–17f–2 with the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE the Commission. Commission staff Commission.2 Approximately 188 funds COMMISSION estimates the cost of outside counsel to currently file Form N–17f–2 with the perform these tasks for a fund each year Submission for OMB Review; Commission. Commission staff is $800.4 Funds also must have an Comment Request estimates that on average each fund files independent public accountant verify Form N–17f–2 four times annually for a Upon Written Request, Copies Available the fund’s assets three times each year total annual hourly burden per fund of From: Securities and Exchange and prepare the certificate of approximately 8 hours at a total cost of Commission, Office of FOIA Services, examination. Commission staff $1,212.00. The total annual hour burden 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC estimates the annual cost for an for Form N–17f–2 is therefore estimated 20549–2736. independent public accountant to 5 to be approximately 1504 hours. Based Extension: perform this service is $8,500. on the total annual costs per fund listed Rule 17f–1, OMB Control No. 3235–0222, Therefore, the total annual cost burden above, the total cost of Form N–17f–2’s SEC File No. 270–236. for a fund that relies on rule 17f–1 collection of information requirements Notice is hereby given that pursuant would be approximately $9,300.6 As is estimated to be approximately to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 noted above, the staff estimates that 4 $227,856.3 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities funds rely on rule 17f–1 each year, for The estimate of average burden hours and Exchange Commission (the an estimated total annualized cost is made solely for the purposes of the ‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the burden of $37,200.7 Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not Office of Management and Budget a The estimate of average burden hours derived from a comprehensive or even request for extension of the previously is made solely for the purposes of the a representative survey or study of the approved collection of information Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not costs of Commission rules and forms. discussed below. derived from a comprehensive or even Complying with the collections of Rule 17f–1 (17 CFR 270.17f–1) under a representative survey or study of the information required by Form N–17f–2 the Investment Company Act of 1940 costs of Commission rules. Compliance is mandatory for those funds that (the ‘‘Act’’) (15 U.S.C. 80a) is entitled: with the collections of information maintain custody of their own assets. ‘‘Custody of Securities with Members of required by rule 17f–1 is mandatory for Responses will not be kept confidential. National Securities Exchanges.’’ Rule funds that place their assets in the An agency may not conduct or sponsor, 17f–1 provides that any registered custody of a national securities and a person is not required to respond management investment company exchange member. Responses will not to, a collection of information unless it (‘‘fund’’) that wishes to place its assets be kept confidential. An agency may not displays a currently valid control in the custody of a national securities conduct or sponsor, and a person is not number. exchange member may do so only under The public may view the background a written contract that must be ratified hours may vary significantly depending on individual fund assets. The hour burden for rule documentation for this information initially and approved annually by a 17f–1 does not include preparing the custody collection at the following Web site, majority of the fund’s board of directors. contract because that would be part of customary www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be The written contract also must contain and usual business practice. directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the certain specified provisions. In addition, 2 Based on a review of Form N–17f–1 filings over Securities and Exchange Commission, the last three years the Commission staff estimates the rule requires an independent public that an average of 4 funds rely on rule 17f–1 each Office of Information and Regulatory accountant to examine the fund’s assets year. Affairs, Office of Management and in the custody of the exchange member 3 This estimate is based on the following Budget, Room 10102, New Executive at least three times during the fund’s calculation: (4 respondents × 3.5 hours = 14 hours). Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, fiscal year. The rule requires the written The annual burden for rule 17f–1 does not include time spent preparing Form N–17f–1. The burden for or by sending an email to: contract and the certificate of each Form N–17f–1 is included in a separate collection [email protected]; and (ii) examination to be transmitted to the of information. Thomas Bayer, Chief Information Commission. The purpose of the rule is 4 This estimate is based on the following Officer, Securities and Exchange to ensure the safekeeping of fund assets. calculation: (2 hours of outside counsel time × $400 Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, = $800). The staff has estimated the average cost of Commission staff estimates that each outside counsel at $400 per hour, based on 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 fund makes 1 response and spends an information received from funds, fund average of 3.5 hours annually in intermediaries, and their counsel. 1 This estimate is based on the following complying with the rule’s requirements. 5 This estimate is based on information received calculation: 1.25 × $198 (fund senior accountant’s Commission staff estimates that on an from fund representatives estimating the aggregate hourly rate) = $247.5. annual cost of an independent public accountant’s 2 This estimate is based on the following annual basis it takes: (i) 0.5 hours for the periodic verification of assets and preparation of the 1 calculation: .75 × $74 (administrative assistant board of directors to review and ratify certificate of examination. hourly rate) = $55.50. 6 This estimate is based on the following 3 This estimate is based on the following 1 Estimates of the number of hours are based on calculation: ($800 + $8,500 = $9,300). calculation: 188 funds × $1,212.00 (total annual cost conversations with representatives of mutual funds 7 This estimate is based on the following per fund) = $227,856. that comply with the rule. The actual number of calculation: (4 funds × $9,300 = $37,200).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60203

required to respond to a collection of Regulatory Organization Plan Governing • to change the voting requirement information unless it displays a the Collection, Consolidation, and needed to approve procedures for currently valid control number. Dissemination of Quotation and selecting a successor processor from The public may view the background Transaction Information for Nasdaq- unanimity to the affirmative vote of two- documentation for this information Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges thirds of all Participants entitled to vote; collection at the following Web site, on an Unlisted Trading Privilege Basis • to establish that selecting a new www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be (‘‘Nasdaq/UTP Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’) filed processor requires the affirmative vote directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the with the Securities and Exchange of two-thirds of all Participants entitled Securities and Exchange Commission, Commission (‘‘Commission’’) an to vote; Office of Information and Regulatory amendment to the Plan.3 This • to change the voting requirement Affairs, Office of Management and amendment represents Amendment No. needed if the Plan does not specify Budget, Room 10102, New Executive 32 to the Plan and reflects changes another voting requirement from Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, unanimously adopted by the Plan’s unanimity to the affirmative vote of a or by sending an email to: Shagufta_ Participants. The amendment proposes majority of all Participants entitled to [email protected]; and (ii) Thomas to change certain of the voting vote. Bayer, Chief Information Officer, requirements under the Plan. The (a) Fee Setting Securities and Exchange Commission, Commission is publishing this notice to c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street solicit comments from interested In the Participants’ view, a two-thirds NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an persons on the proposed Amendment. vote of the Participants, rather than email to: [email protected]. unanimity, is the appropriate voting A. Rule 608(a) Comments must be submitted to OMB requirement for the Participants to within 30 days of this notice. 1. Purpose of the Amendment eliminate or reduce an existing fee. The Plan currently requires a unanimous Dated: September 30, 2014. The amendment proposes to change vote to eliminate a fee. The change with Kevin M. O’Neill, certain of the voting requirements under respect to eliminating a fee would the Plan. The changes seek to harmonize Deputy Secretary. harmonize that voting requirement with voting requirements under the Plan with [FR Doc. 2014–23706 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] the voting requirements under the CTA voting requirements under the CTA Plan BILLING CODE 8011–01–P and CQ Plans. and the CQ Plan. The Participants The Plan currently requires a understand that the Participants under unanimous vote to reduce a fee. The SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE the CTA Plan and the CQ Plan intend CTA and CQ Plans also require to submit certain changes to the voting COMMISSION unanimity to reduce a fee. However, the requirements under those plans to cause Participants understand that the [Release No. 34–73239; File No. S7–24–89] them to harmonize with voting under Participants under the CTA and CQ Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Filing of the Nasdaq/UTP Plan. The voting requirements that this Plans intend to amend those plans to Amendment No. 32 to the Joint Self- amendment seeks to revise include the require a two-thirds vote to reduce a fee. Regulatory Organization Plan following: In addition, subjecting fee reductions to Governing the Collection, • To change the voting requirement a two-thirds vote would harmonize the Consolidation and Dissemination of needed to eliminate an existing fee, or Plan with the counterpart requirement Quotation and Transaction Information to reduce an existing fee, from under the OPRA Plan. for Nasdaq-Listed Securities Traded on unanimity to the affirmative vote of two- The Participants note that, after the Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading thirds of all Participants entitled to vote; amendment to the Plan and the Privileges Basis Submitted by the • to change the voting requirement anticipated amendments to the CTA and BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS Y- needed to request system changes other CQ Plans, all three plans will require a Exchange, Inc., Chicago Board than those related to the processor two-thirds vote to add, delete or Options Exchange, Incorporated, function from a unanimous vote to the eliminate a fee or to establish a new fee. Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA affirmative vote of a majority of all These changes would provide the Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., Participants entitled to vote; Participants with greater flexibility in Financial Industry Regulatory respect of the plan’s fee schedule. Authority, Inc., International Securities (‘‘CBOE’’); Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CHX’’); (b) System Changes Exchange LLC, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGA’’); EDGX Exchange, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc., Nasdaq Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’); Financial Industry Regulatory The Plan currently requires a majority Stock Market LLC, National Stock Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’); International Securities vote to approve system changes related Exchange LLC (‘‘ISE’’); NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. to the processor function, but requires a Exchange, Inc., New York Stock (‘‘BX’’); NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (‘‘PHLX’’); Exchange LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc. and Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’); National unanimous vote to approve other system NYSE MKT, LLC Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘NSX’’); New York Stock changes. The Participants do not believe Exchange LLC (‘‘NYSE’’); NYSE Arca, Inc. that this anomaly is warranted. Rather, September 26, 2014. (‘‘NYSEArca’’); and NYSE MKT LLC. in their view, the Plan should subject all 3 Pursuant to Rule 608 of the Securities The Plan governs the collection, processing, and system changes to the same voting 1 dissemination on a consolidated basis of quotation Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) notice is information and transaction reports in Eligible requirement. They believe that that hereby given that on September 12, Securities for each of its Participants. This voting requirement should be a majority 2014, the Chicago Board Options consolidated information informs investors of the vote. A majority voting requirement Exchange, Incorporated, on behalf of current quotation and recent trade prices of Nasdaq rather than unanimity would afford the 2 securities. It enables investors to ascertain from one Participants in the Joint Self- data source the current prices in all the markets Participants greater flexibility and make trading Nasdaq securities. The Plan serves as the it easier for the Participants to arrive at 1 17 CFR 242.608. required transaction reporting plan for its decisions regarding necessary system 2 The Plan Participants (collectively, Participants, which is a prerequisite for their ‘‘Participants’’) are the: BATS Exchange, Inc. trading Eligible Securities. See Securities Exchange upgrades and changes. The Participants (‘‘BATS’’); BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.(‘‘BATS Y’’); Act Release No. 55647 (April 19, 2007) 72 FR 20891 note that the CTA Plan, the CQ Plan and Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (April 26, 2007). the OPRA Plan all require a majority

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60204 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

vote for decisions relating to system matters for which those plans do not 3. Manner of Consolidation changes. specify a voting requirement. Not applicable. (c) Processor Selection Procedures 2. Governing or Constituent Documents 4. Standards and Methods Ensuring Section V (E) of the Plan sets forth a Not applicable. Promptness, Accuracy and series of guidelines for the Participants 3. Implementation of Amendment Completeness of Transaction Reports to follow in establishing procedures for selecting a new processor. That section All of the Participants have Not applicable. currently subjects the Participants’ manifested their approval of the approval of those procedures to a two- proposed amendment by means of their 5. Rules and Procedures Addressed to thirds majority vote. In the Participants’ execution of the amendment. The Plan Fraudulent or Manipulative view, a majority vote of the Participants, amendment would become operational Dissemination rather than a two-thirds vote, is the upon approval by the Commission. Not applicable. appropriate voting requirement for 4. Development and Implementation approval of the procedures for selecting Phases 6. Terms of Access to Transaction a new processor. This vote is only to Reports establish the selection procedures. Not applicable. Because the Participants may have 5. Analysis of Impact on Competition Not applicable. divergent views on the form that those procedures should take, a majority vote The proposed amendment does not 7. Identification of Marketplace of makes it easier for the Participants to impose any burden on competition that Execution is not necessary or appropriate in arrive at a decision. The Participants Not Applicable. note that the CTA Plan, the CQ Plan and furtherance of the purposes of the the OPRA Plan all require a majority Exchange Act. The Participants do not III. Solicitation of Comments vote for decisions relating to procedures believe that the proposed plan for selecting a new processor. amendments introduce terms that are The Commission seeks general unreasonably discriminatory for the comments on Amendment No. 32. (d) Processor Selection purposes of Section 11A(c)(1)(D) of the Interested persons are invited to submit The Plan does not currently specify Exchange Act. written data, views, and arguments the voting requirement for selecting a 6. Written Understanding or Agreements concerning the foregoing, including new processor. Since the Plan is silent, Relating to Interpretation of, or whether the proposal is consistent with the applicable voting requirement Participation in, Plan the Act. Comments may be submitted by would be the requirement that applies any of the following methods: to matters for which the Plan does not Not applicable. Electronic Comments specify a voting requirement. That 7. Approval by Sponsors in Accordance default voting requirement is currently With Plan • Use the Commission’s Internet unanimity, but, as discussed above, the See Item A(3) above. comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ amendment seeks to change that to a rules/sro.shtml); or majority vote. The Participants believe 8. Description of Operation of Facility • that a unanimous vote could make it too Contemplated by the Proposed Send an email to rule-comments@ difficult for the Participants to arrive at Amendment sec.gov. Please include File Number S7– 24–89 on the subject line. a decision and that a matter as Not applicable. significant as selecting a Plan processor Paper Comments should require more than a simple 9. Terms and Conditions of Access majority vote. In their view, a two-thirds See Item A(1) above. • Send paper comments in triplicate majority vote strikes the right balance of to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities requiring a strong consensus without 10. Method of Determination and and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street Imposition, and Amount of, Fees and allowing a single Participant or a small NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. number of Participants to block the Charges selection of a new processor. See Item A(1) above. All submissions should refer to File Number S7–24–89. This file number (e) Default Voting Requirement 11. Method and Frequency of Processor should be included on the subject line The Plan currently requires a Evaluation if email is used. To help the unanimous vote in respect of any matter Not applicable. Commission process and review your for which the Plan does not specify a comments more efficiently, please use 12. Dispute Resolution voting requirement. This requirement only one method. The Commission will can make it unwieldy for the Not applicable. post all comments on the Commission’s Participants to act, as all Participants do B. Rule 601(a) Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/ not always agree on every matter. The sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all Participants believe that the affirmative 1. Reporting Requirements written statements with respect to the vote of a majority of Participants Not applicable. proposed Plan amendment that are filed provides greater flexibility and with the Commission, and all written facilitates their ability to take action 2. Manner of Collecting, Processing, communications relating to the under the Plan. They note that the CTA Sequencing, Making Available and proposed Plan amendment between the Plan, the CQ Plan and the OPRA Plan Disseminating Last Sale Information Commission and any person, other than all require majority votes to act on Not applicable. those that may be withheld from the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60205

public in accordance with the September 19, 2014, the Chicago Stock Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 4 and Rule provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CHX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) 19b–4 thereunder,5 to, inter alia, adopt available for Web site viewing and filed with the Securities and Exchange the CHX Routing Services.6 The filing printing in the Commission’s Public Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the was immediately effective upon filing, Reference Room on official business proposed rule change as described in but the proposed rule change will be days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. Items I, II and III below, which Items implemented upon two weeks’ notice and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also have been prepared by the self- from the Exchange to its Participants. will be available for Web site viewing regulatory organization. The and printing at the Office of the Commission is publishing this notice to The Exchange now proposes (1) to Secretary of the Committee, currently solicit comments on the proposed rule amend Section E.6 of the Fee Schedule located at the CBOE, 400 S. LaSalle change from interested persons. to adopt fees for the CHX Routing Services and (2) to amend Section E.8(c) Street, Chicago, IL 60605. All comments I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s received will be posted without change; of the Fee Schedule to clarify that the Statement of the Terms of Substance of Average Daily Volume (‘‘ADV’’) the Commission does not edit personal the Proposed Rule Change identifying information from exemption from the Order Cancellation submissions. You should submit only CHX proposes to amend its Schedule Fee is based on all executions resulting information that you wish to make of Fees and Assessments (the ‘‘Fee from single-sided orders submitted to available publicly. All submissions Schedule’’) to adopt and amend fees for the CHX Matching System (‘‘Matching should refer to File Number S7–24–89 the CHX Routing Services. The text of System’’), which includes executions and should be submitted on or before this proposed rule change is available within the Matching System and at October 27, 2014. on the Exchange’s Web site at away markets pursuant to the CHX (www.chx.com) and in the Routing Services. For the Commission, by the Division of Commission’s Public Reference Room. Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Proposed CHX Routing Services Fees authority.4 II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Kevin M. O’Neill, Statement of the Purpose of, and In sum, the CHX Routing Services Deputy Secretary. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule will permit Routable Orders 7 submitted [FR Doc. 2014–23655 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Change to the Matching System to be routed BILLING CODE 8011–01–P In its filing with the Commission, the away from the Matching System if a CHX included statements concerning Routing Event 8 is triggered. Orders that the purpose of and basis for the are not Routable Orders and orders that SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE proposed rule changes and discussed have either been cancelled from or have COMMISSION any comments it received on the not been submitted to the Matching proposed rule change. The text of these System are not eligible for the CHX [Release No. 34–73268; File No. SR–CHX– statements may be examined at the Routing Services. 2014–17] places specified in Item IV below. The CHX has prepared summaries, set forth Proposed Section E.6 of the Fee Self-Regulatory Organizations; in sections A, B and C below, of the Schedule, entitled ‘‘CHX Routing Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice most significant aspects of such Services Fees,’’ provides that executions of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness statements. that result from orders that have been of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt routed away from the Matching System A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and Amend Fees for the CHX Routing pursuant to the CHX Routing Services Services Statement of the Purpose of, and shall be subject to the following fees: Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule September 30, 2014. Changes Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 1. Purpose (‘‘Act’’),2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 On September 8, 2014, the Exchange notice is hereby given that on filed SR–CHX–2014–15 pursuant to

Order size as submitted to the matching system Security price Routing fee

Odd Lots ...... All Prices ...... $0.0040/share. <$1.00/share. Round and Mixed Lots ...... ≥$1.00/share ...... $0.0030/share. 0.30% of trade value.

The proposed CHX Routing Fee for orders 9 submitted to the Matching which provides that $0.0030/share will Odd Lots is identical to current Section System. Also, the proposed CHX be charged for any executions resulting E.4 of the Fee Schedule, which provides Routing Fees for Round Lot 10 and from Round Lot or Mixed Lot orders that $0.0040/share will be charged for Mixed Lot 11 orders are identical to where the execution price was at or all executions resulting from Odd Lot current Section E.1 of the Fee Schedule, greater than $1.00/share and 0.30% of

4 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(27). 6 See CHX Article 19. listed under Article 1, Rule 2 that prohibit the 1 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1). 7 CHX Article 1, Rule 1(oo) defines ‘‘Routable routing of the order to another Trading Center.’’ 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. Order’’ as ‘‘any incoming Limit order, as defined 8 See CHX Article 19, Rule 3(a). 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. under Article 1, Rule 2(a)(1), of any size, not 9 See CHX Article 1, Rule 2(f)(2). 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). marked by any order modifiers or related terms 10 See CHX Article 1, Rule 2(f)(3). 5 Id. 11 See CHX Article 1, Rule 2(f)(1).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60206 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

the trade value where the execution CHX Routing Services will continue to activity by clarifying that executions price was below $1.00/share. not be included in the ADV calculation resulting from the CHX Routing Services since such executions are never will be included in the ADV calculation. Amended ADV Exemption to the Order attributed to a Trading Account. As Similar to executions within the Cancellation Fee such, the Exchange also proposes to Matching System, a Participant that Under SR–CHX–2012–15,12 the adopt language that states that eligible submits Routable Orders that are Exchange adopted the current formula- executions shall not include away executed at away market(s) pursuant to based Order Cancellation Fee detailed executions effected outside of the CHX the CHX Routing Services will provide under Section E.8 of the Fee Schedule, Routing Services. additional revenue to the Exchange in amended under SR–CHX–2013–11,13 The Exchange notes that current the form of the proposed CHX Routing SR–CHX–2013–12,14 and SR–CHX– Section E.8(c) already contemplates the Services fees, which may be used to 2014–01,15 which assesses a daily inclusion of away executions pursuant recoup some of the costs of cancellation fee per account symbol 16 to the CHX Routing Services because administering and processing cancelled and security, if the order cancellation such away executions will only result orders. Thus, the Exchange believes that ratio exceeds a designated threshold, from Routable Orders submitted to the Participants that meet the ADV which is billed monthly. However, Matching System, which will always be exemption through executions within current Section E.8(c) provides an ADV attributed to a Trading Account. As the Matching System and/or at away exemption from the Order Cancellation such, the proposed amendment merely markets pursuant to the CHX Routing Fees per account symbol per month if clarifies the scope of the current ADV Services should not be billed Order the ADV attributable to an account exemption. The Exchange does not Cancellation Fees assessed to applicable symbol for a given month is at least propose to otherwise amend the Trading Accounts for that month. 100,000 shares from single-sided orders operation of the Order Cancellation Fee In addition, these changes to the Fee executed at or greater than $1.00/share. or the ADV exemption. Given that the Exchange does not Schedule would equitably allocate currently route orders away from the 2. Statutory Basis reasonable fees among Participants in a Matching System, the only executions The Exchange believes that the non-discriminatory manner by assessing that are currently included in the ADV proposed rule change is consistent with cancellation fees on all Trading calculation are single-sided order Section 6(b) of the Act 17 in general, and Accounts that exceed a fixed executions within the Matching System. furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) Cancellation Ratio and by waiving However, in light of the CHX Routing of the Act 18 in particular, in that it cancellation fees on all Trading Services, the Exchange now proposes to provides for the equitable allocation of Accounts that satisfy the requirements adopt language that clarifies that eligible reasonable dues, fees and other charges of the amended ADV exemption. Since executions (i.e., executions that are among members and other persons all Participants are subject to the Order included in the ADV calculation) shall using its facilities. Cancellation Fee and given that the only include executions resulting from The Exchange believes that the amended ADV exemption and the CHX single-sided orders submitted to the proposed CHX Routing Services fees Routing Services will be available to all Matching System, which will include equitably allocate fees among Participants, the Exchange submits that executions within the Matching System Participants in a non-discriminatory the amended Order Cancellation Fee is and executions at away markets manner as the fee is assessed according non-discriminatory. resulting from orders routed away from to a Participant’s use of the CHX B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Matching System pursuant to the Routing Services. Moreover, the CHX Statement of Burden on Competition CHX Routing Services. Executions that Routing Services Fee is reasonable in result from single-sided orders that were light of the fact that the proposed fees The Exchange does not believe that never submitted to the Matching System are identical to the current liquidity the proposed rule change will impose or executions resulting from orders removing fee for single-sided order any burden on competition that is not routed to away markets outside of the executions within the Matching System necessary or appropriate in furtherance detailed under Section E of the Fee of the purposes of the Act. The 12 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68219 Schedule and is similar to the routing Exchange does not believe that the (November 13, 2012), 77 FR 69673 (November 20, fees of other exchanges, such as BATS proposed CHX Routing Services fee and 2012) (SR–CHX–2012–15) (‘‘Notice of Filing and 19 the proposed amended ADV exemption Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Y-Exchange (‘‘BYX’’). To Amend Its Order Cancellation Fee’’). The Exchange also believes that the from the Order Cancellation Fee will 13 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69701 proposed amended ADV exemption burden competition, but instead, (June 5, 2013), 78 FR 35082 (June 11, 2013) (SR– from the Order Cancellation Fee enhance competition, as it is intended CHX–2013–11) (‘‘Notice of Filing and Immediate described herein will promote the to increase the competitiveness of, and Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Order Cancellation Fee’’). equitable allocation of the Order draw additional volume to, the 14 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69903 Cancellation Fee as it will continue to Exchange. The Exchange operates in a (July 1, 2013), 78 FR 40788 (July 8, 2013) (SR–CHX– fairly allocate costs among Participants highly competitive market in which 2013–12) (‘‘Notice of Filing and Immediate according to their respective trading market participants can readily direct Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend order flow to competing venues if they the Single-Sided Order Fees and Credits and the Order Cancellation Fee’’). 17 15 U.S.C. 78f. deem fee levels set by the Exchange to 15 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71404 18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). be excessive. The proposed CHX (January 27, 2014), 79 FR 5476 (January 31, 2014) 19 See BYX Fee Schedule. The BYX Fee Schedule Routing Services fee is similar to that of (SR–CHX–2014–01) (‘‘Notice of Filing and provides different fees depending on, inter alia, the other exchanges, such as BYX.20 Thus, Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change type of routing destination and/or routing option To Amend the Order Cancellation Fee’’). selected. The proposed CHX Routing Fees are most the proposed rule change is a 16 An account symbol identifies a specific CHX analogous with the BYX routing fees of $0.0029/ competitive proposal that is intended to Trading Account. CHX Article 1, Rule 1(ll) defines share or $0.0033/share, which are assessed for add additional liquidity and order ‘‘Trading Account,’’ in pertinent part, as ‘‘an executions for routed orders at venues other than executions to the Exchange, which will, account under a Trading Permit, identified by a ‘‘dark liquidity’’ venues. As currently unique CHX account symbol, from which orders are contemplated, the CHX Routing Services will not sent to the Exchange’s Trading Facilities.’’ route orders to dark liquidity venues. 20 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60207

in turn, benefit the Exchange and all submission, all subsequent solicit comments on the proposed rule Participants. amendments, all written statements change from interested persons. with respect to the proposed rule C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s change that are filed with the Statement on Comments Regarding the Statement of the Terms of Substance of Commission, and all written Proposed Rule Changes Received From the Proposed Rule Change communications relating to the Members, Participants, or Others proposed rule change between the NASDAQ proposes a rule change to No written comments were either Commission and any person, other than provide a new optional functionality to solicited or received. those that may be withheld from the Minimum Quantity Orders. The text of the proposed rule change is available III. Date of Effectiveness of the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be from NASDAQ’s Web site at http:// Proposed Rule Change and Timing for nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/Filings/, at Commission Action available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission’s Public NASDAQ’s principal office, and at the The foregoing rule change is effective Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Commission’s Public Reference Room. upon filing pursuant to Section Washington, DC 20549, on official II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act 21 and business days between the hours of Statement of the Purpose of, and subparagraph(f)(2) of Rule 19b–4 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the 22 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule thereunder because it establishes or filing also will be available for Change changes a due, fee or other charge inspection and copying at the principal In its filing with the Commission, imposed by the Exchange. office of the CHX. All comments NASDAQ included statements At any time within 60 days of the received will be posted without change; concerning the purpose of and basis for filing of the proposed rule change, the the Commission does not edit personal the proposed rule change and discussed Commission summarily may identifying information from any comments it received on the temporarily suspend such rule change if submissions. You should submit only proposed rule change. The text of these it appears to the Commission that such information that you wish to make statements may be examined at the action is necessary or appropriate in the available publicly. All submissions places specified in Item IV below. public interest, for the protection of should refer to File Number SR–CHX– NASDAQ has prepared summaries, set investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 2014–17 and should be submitted on or forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the purposes of the Act. If the before October 27, 2014. Commission takes such action, the the most significant aspects of such Commission shall institute proceedings For the Commission, by the Division of statements. to determine whether the proposed rule Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.23 A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s should be approved or disapproved. Kevin M. O’Neill, Statement of the Purpose of, and IV. Solicitation of Comments Deputy Secretary. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change Interested persons are invited to [FR Doc. 2014–23705 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] submit written data, views, and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 1. Purpose arguments concerning the foregoing, The Exchange is proposing to provide including whether the proposed rule a new optional functionality to SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE change is consistent with the Act. Minimum Quantity Orders.3 A COMMISSION Comments may be submitted by any of Minimum Quantity Order allows a the following methods: market participant to specify a Electronic Comments [Release No. 34–73266; File No. SR– minimum share amount at which it will NASDAQ–2014–095] • execute. For example, a market Use the Commission’s Internet participant seeking to buy or sell a large Self-Regulatory Organizations; The comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ position may desire to execute only if a NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of rules/sro.shtml ); or large quantity of shares can be traded to • Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Send an email to rule-comments@ reduce the price impact of the security Provide a New Optional Functionality sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– being bought or sold. A Minimum to Minimum Quantity Orders CHX–2014–17 on the subject line. Quantity Order will not execute unless Paper Comments September 30, 2014. the volume of contra-side liquidity available to execute against the order • Send paper comments in triplicate Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the to Secretary, Securities and Exchange meets or exceeds the designated Securities Exchange Act of 1934 minimum. When a Minimum Quantity Commission, 100 F Street NE., 1 2 (‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, Order is received by the Exchange, it Washington, DC 20549–1090. notice is hereby given that on will execute immediately 4 if there is September 18, 2014, The NASDAQ All submissions should refer to File sufficient liquidity available on the Stock Market LLC (‘‘NASDAQ’’ or Number SR–CHX–2014–17. This file Exchange within the limit price of the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities number should be included on the Minimum Quantity Order. Furthermore, and Exchange Commission subject line if email is used. To help the the order will execute if the sum of the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule Commission process and review your shares of one or more orders is equal to change as described in Items I, II, and comments more efficiently, please use or greater than its minimum quantity. In III, below, which Items have been only one method. The Commission will the case of multiple orders being prepared by the Exchange. The post all comments on the Commission’s aggregated to meet the minimum Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Commission is publishing this notice to rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the 3 Rule 4751(f)(5). 23 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 4 A Minimum Quantity Order would satisfy the 21 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). requirements of Regulation NMS and not trade 22 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. through a protected quotation.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60208 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

quantity, each contra-side order creates Quantity Orders to market participants.8 Accordingly, to attract larger a separate execution and thus there can In particular, some market participants Minimum Quantity Orders to the be multiple executions that, in have noted that they avoid sending large Exchange NASDAQ is proposing new aggregate, equal or exceed the minimum Minimum Quantity Orders to NASDAQ optional functionality that will allow a quantity. If a Minimum Quantity Order out of concern that such orders may market participant to designate a does not execute immediately due to interact against small orders entered by minimum individual execution size, lack of contra-side liquidity that is equal professional traders. These participants and thus allow users to avoid to or greater than the designated are concerned that such interaction may interaction with such smaller orders minimum, the order will post 5 to the negatively impact the execution of their resting on the book. As discussed above, NASDAQ order book as a Non- larger orders. Often institutional orders under the current rule a Minimum Displayed Order.6 Once posted, a are much larger in size than the average Quantity Order will execute against any Minimum Quantity Order will execute order in the marketplace. Furthermore, number of smaller contra-side orders only if an incoming order is marketable in order to facilitate the liquidation or that, in aggregate, meet the minimum against the resting Minimum Quantity acquisition of a large position, multiple quantity set by the market participant. Order and is equal to or greater than the orders are submitted into the market, For example, if a market participant minimum quantity set on the resting which although larger than the average entered a Minimum Quantity Order to Minimum Quantity Order. Once posted, order in the market, only represent a buy with a price of $10, a size of 1,000 multiple potential executions cannot be small proportion of the overall and a minimum quantity of 500, and the aggregated to meet the minimum institutional position to be executed. order was marketable against two quantity requirement of the Minimum The various strategies used to execute resting sell orders for 300 and 400 Quantity Order. If a Minimum Quantity large size are based on a desire to limit shares, the System would aggregate both Order executes partially and the number price movement of the stock the orders for purposes of meeting the of shares remaining is less than the institution is pursuing. Executing in minimum quantity, thus resulting in minimum quantity of the order, the small sizes, even if in aggregate it meets executions of 300 shares and 400 shares minimum quantity of the order is a minimum quantity designation, may respectively with the remaining 300 reduced to the remaining share size. If impact the market such that the shares of the Minimum Quantity Order a Minimum Quantity Order is received additional orders that the institution has posting to the book with a minimum that is marketable against a resting yet to submit to the market may be more quantity restriction of 300 shares. The contra-side order with size that does not costly to execute. If an institution is able proposed new optional functionality meet the minimum quantity to execute in larger sizes, the contra- will not allow aggregation of smaller requirement, the Minimum Quantity party to the execution is less likely to executions to satisfy the minimum Order will be posted on the book as a be a participant that reacts to short term quantity of a Minimum Quantity Order. Non-Displayed Order at the locking changes in the stock price and as such Using the same scenario as above, but price.7 For example, if a Minimum the price impact to the stock could be with the proposed new functionality Quantity Order is received to buy 1,000 less acute when larger individual and a minimum execution size shares at $10 with a minimum quantity executions are obtained by the requirement of 400 shares selected by restriction of 500 shares and there is a institution.9 As a consequence of this the market participant, the Minimum resting sell order for 300 shares at $10, concern, these orders are often executed Quantity Order would not execute the Minimum Quantity Order will be away from the Exchange in dark pools, against the two sell orders because the posted as a Non-Displayed Order at $10. at least some of which have the order at the top of the NASDAQ order Furthermore, the Exchange notes that a functionality proposed herein,10 or via book is less than 400 shares. The new subsequent order without a minimum broker-dealer internalization. functionality will reprice the Minimum quantity restriction that is marketable Quantity Order to the next best price against the resting contra-side interest 8 The option is available at the port level. and post the order to the NASDAQ will result in an execution because the Accordingly, all orders entered through a particular order book as a Non-Displayed Order port will receive the selected functionality. All market participant entering the trading ports default to the current functionality. when the top of the NASDAQ order Minimum Quantity Order has expressed 9 The Commission has long recognized this book is of insufficient size to satisfy the its intention not to execute against concern: ‘‘Another type of implicit transaction cost minimum execution size requirement. liquidity below a certain minimum size, reflected in the price of a security is short-term Applied to the example above, the order and therefore cedes execution priority to price volatility caused by temporary imbalances in would post to the NASDAQ order book trading interest. For example, a significant implicit any new orders that would otherwise cost for large investors (who often represent the as a Non-Displayed Order to buy 1,000 have a lower priority. consolidated investments of many individuals) is shares at $9.99. NASDAQ notes that the NASDAQ is proposing to add a new the price impact that their large trades can have on market participant entering the optional functionality to further the market. Indeed, disclosure of these large orders Minimum Quantity Order has expressed can reduce the likelihood of their being filled.’’ See enhance the utility of Minimum Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42450 its intention not to execute against (February 23, 2000), 65 FR 10577, 10581 (February liquidity below a certain minimum size, 5 Orders post to the NASDAQ book only if they 28, 2000) (SR–NYSE–99–48) (emphasis added). and therefore cedes execution priority are designated with a time in force that allows for 10 For example, IEX Services LLC (‘‘IEX’’) is an when it would lock resting orders posting. For example, an IOC order never posts to alternative trading venue, regulated by the SEC the book. pursuant to Regulation ATS. 17 CFR 242.300–303. 6 A Non-Displayed Order is a limit order that is IEX describes itself as ‘‘Dedicated to execution of the order if the resting order with the not displayed in the NASDAQ system, but institutionalizing fairness in the markets. . . .’’ highest priority which would trade with the active nevertheless remains available for potential (See http://www.iextrading.com/about/). IEX order would trade shares equal to or greater than execution against all incoming orders until provides a Minimum Quantity order parameter the minimum quantity defined on the active order. executed in full or cancelled. See Rule 4751(e)(3). (‘‘MQTY’’), which allows a subscriber to designate This is precisely the functionality the Exchange is Minimum Quantity Orders are always Non- a minimum indicated share size that must be proposing. The Exchange notes that the BIDS Displayed when posted on the Exchange book. satisfied for the order to be executed. See http:// Alternative Trading System also has functionality 7 SEC Rule 610(d) under Regulation NMS restricts www.iextrading.com/services/. There are two that allows its subscribers to select a minimum size displayed quotations that lock or cross protected methods that IEX will apply to determine the requirement, which prevents a subscriber’s interest quotations in NMS stock, but does not apply to non- satisfaction of MQTY condition of orders. Under from interacting with contra-side interest if its size displayed trading interest, like a resting Minimum ‘‘Method #2,’’ an MQTY order may have a is less than the specified minimum. See http:// Quantity Order. See 17 CFR 242.610(d). Minimum Execution size, which provides www.bidstrading.com/solutions/faqs/.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60209

against which it would otherwise meaningfully to price discovery than an the minimum execution size required by execute if it were not for the minimum order in a dark pool because it is part the order. NASDAQ believes this is execution size restriction. of the continuous auction market on acceptable because the Minimum NASDAQ believes that it is NASDAQ 11 but, similar to a regular Quantity Order has already partially appropriate to adjust the price to the non-displayed order ceding priority to executed for a size of at least one round next best price prior to posting on the displayed orders on the Exchange, the lot and thus the order submitter has NASDAQ order book because, by using enhanced MAQ order will cede price taken on risk due to the execution and the minimum execution size option, the priority to orders that do not contain the therefore contributed to price discovery submitter of the order is choosing to minimum execution size restriction. in the market place. Furthermore, this is reduce the number of situations in Also unlike the current process, the not unlike the information that is which the order could potentially proposed new functionality will cancel obtained when a Post-Only Order 12 is execute. Thus an order without this the remainder of a marketable Minimum repriced due to resting Non-Displayed further restriction provides greater Quantity Order that is partially filled contra-side liquidity. In fact, this contribution to the price discovery upon entry if the partially executed Minimum Quantity Order scenario is process of the market. All bona fide Minimum Quantity Order would lock more beneficial to the market as it market participation that results in an resting contra-side liquidity that does results in an execution which provides execution on a data feed contributes to not meet the minimum execution size a greater contribution to price discovery. the price discovery process that is requirement. Under the current process, Under the proposed change, a resting essential to a proper functioning market. a Minimum Quantity Order that MAQ order will operate the same way However, there are different degrees to receives a partial execution has the as it does currently. When an order with which activity within the market remainder of the order posted to the a minimum quantity is posted on the contributes to price discovery. A NASDAQ order book as a Non- book, it will only execute against displayed order at the NBBO of an Displayed Order. The proposed new incoming orders if the individual Exchange, and the subsequent execution functionality will, instead, cancel any incoming order is equal to or greater thereof, contributes significantly to shares not executed after a partial than the minimum designated on the price discovery because both the execution of a Minimum Quantity Order order. The primary difference between displayed order prior to execution, and if there are more shares that remain the current functionality and the the execution itself, provide a reference resting on the book at a price that would proposed new functionality is that upon price to the market. Further, a non- satisfy the limit price of the Minimum receipt, an incoming order with a displayed order on an exchange Quantity Order but that are not minimum quantity designation will contributes to price discovery as it is executable against the incoming only execute against individual resting part of the continuous auction on a Minimum Quantity Order due to the orders if the order at the top of the book market with publicly displayed orders minimum execution size set on the meets or exceeds the minimum on the and quotes—albeit the contribution of a order. For example, a Minimum order. The Exchange believes that this is non-displayed order on an exchange is Quantity Order to buy priced at $10 no different than a recently-adopted less than the contribution of a displayed with a size of 1,000 and a minimum change to the NYSE Arca MPL–IOC order on the exchange. Furthermore, a quantity of 500, that is marketable order type,13 which allows ETP holders non-displayed order on a dark pool against two sell orders on the NASDAQ to designate a minimum execution size contributes less to price discovery order book, one for 500 shares and one when checking the book for liquidity because it is resting in a less transparent for 400 shares, would result in the and does not allow an execution unless trading venue that is not part of the execution of 500 shares and the it is against an order that is equal to or continuous auction of a lit exchange. If cancellation of the remaining 500 greater than the minimum designated on one were to rank the contribution to shares. Under the current process, the the order. price discovery that different market order would receive two partial 2. Statutory Basis activity provides, it would include the executions of 500 and 400 shares, and following (listed from least price the remaining 100 shares would be NASDAQ believes that the proposed discovery contribution to most): posted to the NASDAQ order book as a rule change is consistent with the • 14 Order resting in dark pool (no Non-Displayed Order to buy priced at provisions of Section 6 of the Act, in contribution) $10. general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the • 15 Non-Displayed order on exchange NASDAQ notes that when a non-IOC Act, in particular, in that the proposal (no or very little contribution) is designed to prevent fraudulent and • Minimum Quantity Order is partially Order execution in dark pool (some executed and cancelled in this situation, manipulative acts and practices, to contribution, execution reported the contra-side liquidity that is not promote just and equitable principles of publicly via TRF) trade, to foster cooperation and • executed may be Non-Displayed. If a Non-Displayed order execution on Minimum Quantity Order is cancelled coordination with persons engaged in Exchange (contribution as part of due to Non-Displayed contra-side regulating, clearing, settling, processing continuous auction, execution reported liquidity, the submitter of the order will information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to publicly, and priority is behind know that there may be a resting order remove impediments to and perfect the displayed—i.e., priority is ceded to or orders at the price of the Minimum mechanism of a free and open market orders that contribute more to price Quantity Order and also that the resting and a national market system, and, in discovery) order or orders are for fewer shares than • Displayed order on exchange general, to protect investors and the (significant contribution) 11 It is worth noting that NASDAQ has the single • 12 Displayed order execution on biggest pool of liquidity among individual Rule 4751(f)(10). exchange (significant contribution, exchanges. For example, in July The NASDAQ 13 See NYSE Arca Rule 7.31(h)(6); see also publicly displayed order plus execution Stock Market accounted for 16.3% of consolidated Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71366 (January reported publicly) NMS security volume. The next biggest single pool 22, 2014), 79 FR 4515 (January 28, 2014) (SR– of liquidity was NYSE with 11.2%. See http:// NYSEArca–2014–01). In this sense the proposed change www.NASDAQTrader.com historical volume for 14 15 U.S.C. 78f. continues to contribute more more information. 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60210 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

public interest. Specifically, the notes that the proposed new optional approve or disapprove such proposed proposed change to the functioning of functionality may improve the rule change, or (b) institute proceedings the Minimum Quantity Order will NASDAQ market by attracting more to determine whether the proposed rule provide market participants, including order flow, which is currently trading change should be disapproved. institutional firms who ultimately on less transparent venues that IV. Solicitation of Comments represent individual retail investors in contribute less to price discovery and many cases, with better control over price competition than executions and Interested persons are invited to their orders, thereby providing them quotes that occur on lit exchanges. Such submit written data, views, and with greater potential to improve the new order flow will further enhance the arguments concerning the foregoing, quality of their order executions. depth and liquidity on the Exchange, including whether the proposed rule Currently, the rule allows the market which supports just and equitable change is consistent with the Act. participant to designate a minimum principals of trade. Furthermore, the Comments may be submitted by any of acceptable quantity on an order that, proposed modification to the Minimum the following methods: upon entry, may aggregate multiple Quantity Order is consistent with executions to meet the minimum providing market participants with Electronic Comments quantity requirement. Once posted to greater control over the nature of their • Use the Commission’s Internet the book, however, the minimum executions so that they may achieve comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ quantity requirement is equivalent to a their trading goals and improve the rules/sro.shtml); or minimum execution size requirement. quality of their executions. • Send an email to rule-comments@ The Exchange is now proposing to B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– provide a market participant with Statement on Burden on Competition NASDAQ–2014–095 on the subject line. control over the execution of their Minimum Quantity Order by allowing The Exchange does not believe that Paper Comments the proposed rule change will result in them an option to designate the • minimum individual execution size any burden on competition that is not Send paper comments in triplicate upon entry. The control offered by the necessary or appropriate in furtherance to Secretary, Securities and Exchange proposed change is consistent with the of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Commission, 100 F Street NE., various types of control currently Specifically, the proposed change Washington, DC 20549–1090. provided by exchange order types. For allows market participants to condition All submissions should refer to File the processing of their orders based on example, NASDAQ and other exchanges Number SR–NASDAQ–2014–095. This a minimum execution size. The changes offer limit orders, which allow a market file number should be included on the to the Minimum Quantity Order will participant control over the price it will subject line if email is used. To help the enhance the functionality offered by pay or receive for a stock.16 Similarly, Commission process and review your NASDAQ to its members, thereby exchanges offer order types that allow comments more efficiently, please use promoting its competitiveness with market participants to structure their only one method. The Commission will other exchanges and non-exchange trading activity in a manner that is more post all comments on the Commission’s trading venues that plan to, or already, likely to avoid certain transaction cost Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ offer similar functionality. As a related economic outcomes.17 Moreover rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the consequence, the proposed change will and as discussed above, other trading submission, all subsequent promote competition among exchanges venues provide the very functionality amendments, all written statements and their peers, which, in turn, will that the Exchange is proposing. with respect to the proposed rule decrease the burden on competition As discussed above, some market change that are filed with the rather than place an unnecessary burden participants have requested the Commission, and all written thereon. functionality proposed herein so they communications relating to the may avoid transacting with smaller C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change between the orders that they believe ultimately Statement on Comments on the Commission and any person, other than increases the cost of the transaction. Proposed Rule Change Received From those that may be withheld from the Market participants such as large Members, Participants, or Others public in accordance with the institutions that transact a large number Written comments were neither provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be of orders on behalf of retail investors solicited nor received. available for Web site viewing and have noted that, because NASDAQ does printing in the Commission’s Public not have this functionality, they avoid III. Date of Effectiveness of the Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., sending large orders to NASDAQ to Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Washington, DC 20549, on official avoid potentially more expensive Commission Action business days between the hours of transactions.18 In this regard, NASDAQ Within 45 days of the date of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the publication of this notice in the Federal filing also will be available for 16 See, e.g., Rule 4751(f)(3). Register or within such longer period (i) inspection and copying at the principal 17 For example, NASDAQ’s Post-Only Order. See as the Commission may designate up to office of the Exchange. All comments Rule 4751(f)(10). 18 As noted, the proposal is designed to attract 90 days of such date if it finds such received will be posted without change; liquidity to the Exchange by allowing market longer period to be appropriate and the Commission does not edit personal participants to designate a minimum size of contra- publishes its reasons for so finding or identifying information from side order to interact with, thus providing them (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, submissions. You should submit only with functionality available to them on dark markets. The designation of a minimum size may the Commission shall: (a) By order information that you wish to make reduce the interaction that such new order flow available publicly. All submissions would have with smaller contra-side orders on the order flow currently on the Exchange, market should refer to File Number SR– Exchange, some of which may be retail order flow. quality for retail investors should not be negatively NASDAQ–2014–095 and should be The Exchange notes that, since the order flow impacted ultimately. Accordingly, the Exchange attracted by this functionality may also represent does not believe that retail orders will be submitted on or before October 27, retail investors and is in addition to the existing disadvantaged by the proposed change. 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60211

For the Commission, by the Division of of the Act,3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(4)(ii) 4 A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated thereunder, so that the proposal was Statement of the Purpose of, and 19 authority. effective upon filing with the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Kevin M. O’Neill, Commission. The Commission is Change Deputy Secretary. publishing this notice to solicit [FR Doc. 2014–23703 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] comments on the proposed rule change CME is registered as a DCO with the BILLING CODE 8011–01–P from interested persons. Commodity Futures Trading Commission and offers clearing services I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s for many different futures and swaps SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statement of the Terms of Substance of products, including certain credit COMMISSION the Proposed Rule Change default swap index products. Currently, CME offers clearing of the Markit CDX [Release No. 34–73259; File No. SR–CME– CME is filing proposed rules changes North American Investment Grade 2014–37] that are limited to its business as a Index Series 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, derivatives clearing organization. More 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22. CME also Self-Regulatory Organizations; specifically, the proposed rule change offers clearing of the Markit CDX North Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc.; involves CME’s acceptance of a new American High Yield Index Series 11, Notice of Filing and Immediate credit default swap index product 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and Effectiveness of Proposed Rule series. Change Regarding Acceptance of a 22. New Series of Credit Default Swap II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The proposed rule change would Index Product Statement of the Purpose of, and expand CME’s Markit CDX North Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule American Investment Grade (‘‘CDX IG’’) September 30, 2014. Change Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Index and Markit CDX North American Securities Exchange Act of 1934 In its filing with the Commission, High Yield (‘‘CDX HY’’) Index product (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder 2 CME included statements concerning offerings by incorporating the upcoming notice is hereby given that on the purpose of and basis for the Series 23 for both sets of index September 19, 2014, Chicago Mercantile proposed rule change and discussed any products. Exchange Inc. (‘‘CME’’) filed with the comments it received on the proposed In addition to the changes to expand Securities and Exchange Commission rule change. The text of these statements CME’s CDX offering, CME also proposes (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule may be examined at the places specified to remove from the current list of change as described in Items I, II and III in Item IV below. CME has prepared accepted CDX indices certain products below, which Items have been prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, whose termination dates have passed. primarily by CME. CME filed the and C below, of the most significant These products are set forth in the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) aspects of these statements. following table:

Termination date CDX Index Series (scheduled termination date)

CDX North American Investment Grade (CDX.NA.IG) ...... 8 20 Jun 2014. CDX North American Investment Grade (CDX.NA.IG) ...... 12 20 Jun 2014. CDX North American Investment Grade (CDX.NA.IG) ...... 16 20 Jun 2014. CDX North American High Yield (CDX.NA.HY) ...... 12 20 Jun 2014.

Although these changes will be any way. CME notes that it has also clearing (and would also remove certain effective on filing, CME plans to certified the proposed rule change that products whose termination dates have operationalize the proposed changes as is the subject of this filing to its primary passed). As such, the proposed changes follows: CDX IG 23 will become regulator, the Commodity Futures are designed to promote the prompt and available for clearing on September 22, Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’), in a accurate clearance and settlement of 2014 and CDX HY 23 will become separate filing, CME Submission 14– securities transactions and, to the extent available for clearing on September 29, 405. The text of the CME proposed rule applicable, derivatives agreements, 2014; provided that CME expects market amendments is attached, with additions contracts, and transactions, to assure the participants to begin clearing CDX IG 23 underlined and deletions in brackets. safeguarding of securities and funds and CDX HY beginning October 6, 2014 CME believes the proposed rule which are in the custody or control of consistent with the ISDA protocol change is consistent with the the clearing agency or for which it is adopting the 2014 Credit Derivatives requirements of the Exchange Act, responsible, and, in general, to protect Definitions. The product deletions including Section 17A of the Exchange investors and the public interest would be effective immediately. Act.5 The proposed rule change would consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of The changes that are described in this expand CME’s CDX IG and CDX HY the Exchange Act.6 filing are limited to CME’s business as product offerings by incorporating the Furthermore, the proposed changes a DCO clearing products under the upcoming Series 23 for both sets of are limited in their effect to swaps exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC and index products and would therefore products offered under CME’s authority do not materially impact CME’s provide investors with an expanded to act as a DCO. These products are security-based swap clearing business in range of derivatives products for under the exclusive jurisdiction of the

19 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60212 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

CFTC. As such, the proposed CME proposed rule change, the Commission submissions should refer to File changes are limited to CME’s activities summarily may temporarily suspend Number SR–CME–2014–37 and should as a DCO clearing swaps that are not such rule change if it appears to the be submitted on or before October 27, security-based swaps; CME notes that Commission that such action is 2014. the policies of the CFTC with respect to necessary or appropriate in the public For the Commission, by the Division of administering the Commodity Exchange interest, for the protection of investors, Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Act are comparable to a number of the or otherwise in furtherance of the authority.12 policies underlying the Exchange Act, purposes of the Act. Kevin M. O’Neill, such as promoting market transparency IV. Solicitation of Comments Deputy Secretary. for over-the-counter derivatives markets, [FR Doc. 2014–23700 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] promoting the prompt and accurate Interested persons are invited to BILLING CODE 8011–01–P clearance of transactions and protecting submit written data, views, and investors and the public interest. arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule Because the proposed changes are SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE change is consistent with the Act. limited in their effect to swaps products COMMISSION offered under CME’s authority to act as Comments may be submitted by any of a DCO, the proposed changes are the following methods: [Release No. 34–73256; File No. SR– NYSEARCA–2014–111] properly classified as effecting a change Electronic Comments in an existing service of CME that: (a) Primarily affects the clearing • Use the Commission’s Internet Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE operations of CME with respect to comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and products that are not securities, rules/sro.shtml); or Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed • including futures that are not security Send an email to rule-comments@ Rule Change Amending Rule 6.62 futures, and swaps that are not security- sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– (Certain Types of Orders Defined) by based swaps or mixed swaps; and CME–2014–37 on the subject line. Deleting WAIT Orders From Its Rules (b) does not significantly affect any Paper Comments September 30, 2014. securities clearing operations of CME or • Send paper comments in triplicate Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the any rights or obligations of CME with Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the respect to securities clearing or persons to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., ‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 using such securities-clearing service. notice is hereby given that, on As such, the changes are therefore Washington, DC 20549–1090. September 24, 2014, NYSE Arca, Inc. consistent with the requirements of All submissions should refer to File (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) filed Section 17A of the Exchange Act 7 and Number SR–CME–2014–37. This file with the Securities and Exchange are properly filed under Section number should be included on the Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the 19(b)(3)(A) 8 and Rule 19b–4(f)(4)(ii) 9 subject line if email is used. To help the thereunder. Commission process and review your proposed rule change as described in comments more efficiently, please use Items I and II below, which Items have B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s only one method. The Commission will been prepared by the self-regulatory Statement on Burden on Competition post all comments on the Commission’s organization. The Commission is CME does not believe that the Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ publishing this notice to solicit proposed rule change will have any rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the comments on the proposed rule change impact, or impose any burden, on submission, all subsequent from interested persons. competition. The rule change simply amendments, all written statements I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s facilitates the offering of two new series with respect to the proposed rule Statement of the Terms of Substance of of credit default swap index products. change that are filed with the the Proposed Rule Change Commission, and all written C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The Exchange proposes to amend communications relating to the Statement on Comments on the Rule 6.62 (Certain Types of Orders proposed rule change between the Proposed Rule Change Received From Defined) by deleting WAIT Orders from Commission and any person, other than Members, Participants or Others its Rules. The text of the proposed rule those that may be withheld from the change is available on the Exchange’s CME has not solicited, and does not public in accordance with the Web site at www.nyse.com, at the intend to solicit, comments regarding provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be principal office of the Exchange, and at this proposed rule change. CME has not available for Web site viewing and the Commission’s Public Reference received any unsolicited written printing in the Commission’s Public Room. comments from interested parties. Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., III. Date of Effectiveness of the Washington, DC 20549, on official II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Proposed Rule Change and Timing for business days between the hours of Statement of the Purpose of, and Commission Action 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule The foregoing rule change has become filings will also be available for Change effective upon filing pursuant to Section inspection and copying at the principal In its filing with the Commission, the 19(b)(3)(A)10 of the Act and Rule 19b– office of CME and on CME’s Web site at self-regulatory organization included 4(f)(4)(ii) 11 thereunder. At any time http://www.cmegroup.com/market- statements concerning the purpose of, within 60 days of the filing of the regulation/rule-filings.html. and basis for, the proposed rule change All comments received will be posted and discussed any comments it received 7 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. without change; the Commission does 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). not edit personal identifying 12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii). information from submissions. You 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). should submit only information that 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 11 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii). you wish to make available publicly. All 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60213

on the proposed rule change. The text the elimination of WAIT Orders will IV. Solicitation of Comments of those statements may be examined at simplify order processing and reduce the places specified in Item IV below. the burden on system capacity, which Interested persons are invited to The Exchange has prepared summaries, the Exchange believes is consistent with submit written data, views, and set forth in sections A, B, and C below, promoting just and equitable principles arguments concerning the foregoing, of the most significant parts of such of trade as well as protecting investors including whether the proposed rule statements. and the public interest. change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the following methods: Statement of the Purpose of, and Statement on Burden on Competition Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule The Exchange does not believe that Electronic Comments Change the proposed rule change will impose • Use the Commission’s Internet 1. Purpose any burden on competition that is not comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ necessary or appropriate in furtherance The Exchange proposes to amend rules/sro.shtml); or of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, Rule 6.62 (Certain Types of Orders • the Exchange believes that the proposed Send an email to rule-comments@ Defined) to delete WAIT Orders from its rule change will relieve a burden on sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– rules. NYSEARCA–2014–111 on the subject Per Rule 6.62(w), an order designated competition in no longer offering a line. as a WAIT Order, ‘‘is held for one seldom used rule type. In doing so, the proposed rule change will also serve to second without processing for potential Paper Comments display and/or execution. After one promote regulatory clarity and • second, the order is processed for consistency, thereby reducing burdens Send paper comments in triplicate potential display and/or execution in on the marketplace and facilitating to Secretary, Securities and Exchange accordance with all order entry investor protection. Commission, 100 F Street NE., instructions as determined by the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Washington, DC 20549–1090. entering party.’’ Due to a lack of demand Statement on Comments on the All submissions should refer to File for WAIT Orders, the Exchange Proposed Rule Change Received From Number SR–NYSEARCA–2014–111. proposes to discontinue functionality Members, Participants, or Others This file number should be included on supporting the order type. Accordingly, No written comments were solicited the subject line if email is used. To help the Exchange proposes to delete the or received with respect to the proposed the Commission process and review definition of WAIT Order from Rule rule change. your comments more efficiently, please 6.62(w) and hold this provision as use only one method. The Commission Reserved. The Exchange will announce III. Date of Effectiveness of the will post all comments on the the implementation date of this change Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission’s Internet Web site (http:// through a Trader Update. Commission Action www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Because the foregoing proposed rule 2. Statutory Basis Copies of the submission, all change does not: (i) Significantly affect The proposed rule change is the protection of investors or the public subsequent amendments, all written consistent with Section 6(b) of the interest; (ii) impose any significant statements with respect to the proposed Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the burden on competition; and (iii) become rule change that are filed with the ‘‘Act’’), in general, and furthers the operative for 30 days from the date on Commission, and all written objectives of Section 6(b)(5), in which it was filed, or such shorter time communications relating to the particular, in that it is designed to as the Commission may designate, it has proposed rule change between the prevent fraudulent and manipulative become effective pursuant to Section Commission and any person, other than acts and practices, to promote just and 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 4 and Rule 19b– those that may be withheld from the equitable principles of trade, to foster 4(f)(6) thereunder.5 public in accordance with the cooperation and coordination with At any time within 60 days of the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be persons engaged in facilitating filing of the proposed rule change, the available for Web site viewing and transactions in securities, and to remove Commission summarily may printing in the Commission’s Public impediments to and perfect the temporarily suspend such rule change if Reference Section, 100 F Street NE., mechanism of a free and open market it appears to the Commission that such and a national market system. Washington, DC 20549, on official action is necessary or appropriate in the Specifically, the Exchange believes that business days between the hours of public interest, for the protection of by eliminating a little-used order type 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the proposal will remove impediments filing will also be available for the purposes of the Act. If the to and perfect the mechanisms of a free inspection and copying at the principal Commission takes such action, the and open market and add transparency office of the Exchange. All comments Commission shall institute proceedings and clarity to the Exchange’s rules. The received will be posted without change; to determine whether the proposed rule Exchange further believes that deleting the Commission does not edit personal should be approved or disapproved. an order type rarely used by investors identifying information from submissions. You should submit only also removes impediments to and 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). information that you wish to make perfects the mechanism of a free and 5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– open market by ensuring that members, 4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give available publicly. All submissions regulators and the public can more the Commission written notice of its intent to file should refer to File Number SR– easily navigate the Exchange’s rulebook the proposed rule change at least five business days NYSEARCA–2014–111 and should be prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule and better understand the orders types change, or such shorter time as designated by the submitted on or before October 27, available for trading on the Exchange. Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this 2014. Moreover, the Exchange believes that requirement.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60214 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

For the Commission, by the Division of out of the default or suspension of a The Existing Facility is set to expire Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated clearing member, in anticipation of a on October 9, 2014 and OCC is therefore authority.6 potential default by a clearing member, currently negotiating the terms of a new Kevin M. O’Neill, or the failure of a bank or securities or credit facility (the ‘‘New Facility’’) on Deputy Secretary. commodities clearing organization to substantially similar terms as the [FR Doc. 2014–23697 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] perform its obligations due to its Existing Facility, except that BILLING CODE 8011–01–P bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or enhancements are being added for a suspension of operations. back-up administrative agent in case the II. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the primary administrative agent is unable SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the to perform its obligations and to allow COMMISSION Advance Notice OCC to request borrowings directly from individual lenders. A back-up [Release No. 34–73257; File No. SR–OCC– In its filing with the Commission, 2014–806] administrative agent would provide OCC included statements concerning OCC with additional safety and stability Self-Regulatory Organizations; The the purpose of and basis for the advance in the event the primary administrative Options Clearing Corporation; Notice notice and discussed any comments it agent is not able to perform its duties of Filing of Advance Notice of and No received on the advance notice. The text under the new Facility. On September 5, Objection to The Options Clearing of these statements may be examined at 2014, OCC received a Commitment Corporation’s Proposal To Enter a New the places specified in Item IV below. Letter with regard to the New Facility Credit Facility Agreement OCC has prepared summaries, set forth from: JPMorgan, the administrative in sections A and B below, of the most agent, collateral agent, and a lender for September 30, 2014. significant aspects of these statements. the New Facility; J.P. Morgan Securities Notice is hereby given that, on A. Clearing Agency’s Statement on LLC (‘‘JPMorgan Securities’’), the joint September 11, 2014, The Options Comments on the Advance Notice lead arranger for the New Facility; Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) filed an Received From Members, Participants or Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith advance notice with the Securities and Others Incorporated (‘‘MLPF&S’’), the joint lead Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) arranger for the New Facility; and Bank pursuant to Section 806(e) of Title VIII Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with respect of America, N.A. (‘‘BANA’’), the of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform syndication agent and a lender for the and Consumer Protection Act,1 entitled to the advance notice and none have been received. New Facility. the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement The terms and conditions applicable Supervision Act of 2010 (‘‘Payment, B. Advance Notices Filed Pursuant to to the New Facility are set forth in the Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Section 806(e) of the Payment, Clearing, Summary of Terms and Conditions Act’’), and Rule 19b–4(n)(1)(i) of the and Settlement Supervision Act attached to this filing as Exhibit 3. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (i) Description of Change conditions to the availability of the new (‘‘Exchange Act’’).2 The advance notice facility include the execution and is described in Items I and II below, This advance notice is being filed in delivery of (i) a credit agreement which Items have been prepared by connection with a proposed change in between OCC, JPMorgan, BANA and the OCC. The Commission is publishing the form of the replacement of a credit various lenders under the New Facility, this notice to solicit comments from facility that OCC maintains for the (ii) a pledge agreement between OCC interested persons, and to provide purposes of meeting obligations arising and JPMorgan, and (iii) a custodian notice that the Commission has no out of the default or suspension of a agreement between OCC and JPMorgan objection to the changes set forth in the clearing member, in anticipation of a which OCC anticipates will occur on or advance notice and authorizes OCC to potential default by a clearing member, before October 7, 2014. implement those changes earlier than 60 or the failure of a bank or securities or Upon the successful syndication of days after the filing of the advance commodities clearing organization to the New Facility, a syndicate of banks, notice. perform its obligations due to its financial institutions and other entities bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or I. Clearing Agency’s Statement of the will make loans to OCC on request. The suspension of operations. OCC’s aggregate amount of loans available Terms of Substance of the Advance existing credit facility (the ‘‘Existing Notice under the facility, subject to the value Facility’’) was implemented on October of eligible collateral, is up to $2 billion. This advance notice is filed by OCC 10, 2013 through the execution of a During the term of the New Facility, the in connection with a proposed change Credit Agreement among OCC, amount of the New Facility may be to its operations to replace an existing JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. increased to up to $3 billion if OCC so credit facility OCC maintains for the (‘‘JPMorgan’’), as administrative agent, requests and if sufficient commitments purposes of meeting obligations arising and the lenders that are parties to the from lenders are received and agreement from time to time, which accepted.4 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). provides short-term secured borrowings The Existing Facility included a 1 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer in an aggregate principal amount of $2 Protection Act, Pub. L. 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376 tranche that could be drawn on in (2010). OCC was designated as a systemically billion and may be increased to $3 3 important financial market utility by the Financial billion. Facility. OCC and JPMorgan executed an English Stability Oversight Council on July 18, 2012. See law governed charge agreement pursuant to which Financial Stability Oversight Council 2012 Annual 3 On May 12, 2014, OCC executed an amendment OCC pledged the securities and cash at any time Report, Appendix A, http://www.treasury.gov/ to the Existing Facility regarding its ability to deposited in such accounts. A new English law initiatives/fsoc/Documents/ pledge Canadian Government securities to support governed charge agreement is expected to be 2012%20Annual%20Report.pdf. Therefore, OCC is borrowings. To hold Canadian Government entered into in connection with the New Facility. required to comply with Title VIII of the Dodd- securities and Canadian dollars pledged by OCC, 4 OCC is in the process of finalizing an additional Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection JPMorgan established at its London branch a $1 billion of liquidity with a non-bank provider to Act. securities and a deposit account in the name of promote observance of its minimum liquidity 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4(n)(1)(i). JPMorgan, as administrative agent for the Existing requirements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60215

dollars or euros and a dollar-only will only be eligible to be pledged as provisions that restrict the defaulting tranche. The dollar equivalent of the collateral if they have a minimum rating lender’s voting rights, permit set-offs of total loans denominated in euros under of AAA/Aaa as determined by S&P or payments against the defaulting lender the euro/dollar tranche of the Existing Moody’s. OCC has the authority to and suspend the defaulting lender’s Facility could not exceed $100 million. pledge these assets in connection with right to receive commitment fees. The New Facility does not contain a borrowings under Section 5(e) of Article The New Facility involves a variety of euro/dollar tranche, the ability to VIII of its By-Laws and Rule 1104(b). customary fees payable by OCC, borrow in euros or a euro administrative The amount available under the New including: (1) A one-time arrangement agent because OCC no longer has any Facility at any given point in time is fee payable to JPMorgan Securities and euro-denominated product lines. equal to the lesser of (i) $2 billion, or the MLPF&S; (2) a one-time administrative Additionally, the Existing Facility increased size of the facility, if and collateral agent fee payable to provided OCC with the ability to make applicable, and (ii) the sum of (A) 90% JPMorgan if the New Facility closes; (3) test borrowings, which become due and of the value of OCC’s clearing fund that upfront commitment fees payable to the payable on the day after such is not subject to liens or encumbrances lenders based on the amount of their borrowings are made, in an amount not granted by OCC other than in commitments; and (4) an ongoing greater than $10,000,000 for the purpose connection with the New Facility and quarterly commitment fee based on the of testing communication and draw (B) 90% of the value of unencumbered unused amount of the New Facility. margin deposits of suspended clearing procedures. Under the New Facility, the (ii) Anticipated Effect on and members that are not subject to liens or $10,000,000 cap on test borrowings will Management of Risk be removed so that test draws can more encumbrances granted by OCC other closely simulate the dollar amount of an than in connection with the New Overall, the New Facility reduces the risks to OCC, its clearing members and actual draw and to be consistent with Facility. If the aggregate principal the options market in general because it other credit facilities in the marketplace amount of loans under the New Facility will allow OCC to obtain short-term that do not have caps on test draws. exceeds the amount available under this formula, OCC must prepay loans, obtain funds to address liquidity demands The New Facility is available on a the release of liens and/or require arising out of the default or suspension revolving basis for a 364-day term. OCC additional margin and/or clearing fund of a clearing member, in anticipation of may request a loan under the New deposits to cure the deficiency. A a potential default or suspension of Facility on any business day by condition to the making of any loan clearing members or the insolvency of a providing a notice to JPMorgan, as under the New Facility is that, after bank or another securities or administrative agent, which will then giving effect to the loan, the dollar value commodities clearing organization. The notify the lenders, who will be required of the aggregate loans under the New existence of the New Facility could to fund their pro rata share of any Facility may not exceed the ‘‘borrowing enable OCC to minimize losses in the requested loan within a specified period base.’’ The borrowing base is event of such a default, suspension or of time after receiving notice from determined by adding the value of all insolvency, by allowing it to obtain JPMorgan. The funding deadline is collateral pledged in connection with all funds on extremely short notice to designed to permit OCC to obtain funds loans under the New Facility, after ensure that the clearance and settlement on the date of the request, subject to a applying ‘‘haircuts’’ to U.S. and of transactions in options and other cutoff time after which funding will Canadian Government securities based contracts occurs without interruption. occur on the next business day. Each on their remaining maturity. If the By drawing on the facility OCC would loan issued pursuant to the New Facility borrowing base is less than the sum of be able to avoid liquidating margin or matures and is payable 30 days after the 100% of the outstanding loans under clearing fund assets in what would borrowing date, except for test the New Facility, OCC must repay loans likely be volatile market conditions, borrowings under the facility, which or pledge additional collateral to cure which would preserve funds available mature and are payable one business the deficiency. There are additional to cover any losses resulting from the day after the borrowing date. Proceeds customary conditions to the making of failure of a clearing member, bank or of loans under the New Facility must be any loan under the New Facility, another clearing organization. OCC’s used to meet the obligations of OCC including that OCC is not in default. entering into the New Facility will not arising out of the default or suspension Importantly, however, the absence of a increase the risks associated with its of a clearing member, in anticipation of material adverse change affecting OCC clearing function because it is entered a potential default by a clearing is not a condition to the making of a into on substantially the same terms as member, or the failure of a bank or loan. Loans may be prepaid at any time the Existing Facility. securities or commodities clearing without penalty. Two additional features carried organization to perform its obligations Events of default by OCC under the through from the Existing Facility to the to OCC. In order to obtain a loan under New Facility include, but are not New Facility will enhance OCC the facility, OCC must pledge as limited to, non-payment of principal, liquidity and reduce risk. The inclusion collateral U.S. dollars or securities interest, fees or other amounts when of Canadian Government securities as issued or guaranteed by the U.S. due; non-compliance with a daily eligible collateral will increase the Government or the Government of borrowing base when loans are amount of OCC collateral that can be Canada that are margin deposits of outstanding; material inaccuracy of pledged to support borrowings under suspended members or that are held in representations and warranties; the New Facility, resulting in increased OCC’s clearing fund, and in either case bankruptcy events; fundamental availability of loans. The clarification the administrative agent must have a changes; and failure to maintain a first that OCC may borrow under the New valid and enforceable first priority priority perfected security interest in Facility in anticipation of a potential perfected lien and security interest in collateral. In the event of a default, the default by or suspension of a clearing such collateral under the applicable interest rate applicable to outstanding member may be subject to a requirement laws of the United States or other loans would increase by 2.00%. The that OCC provide JPMorgan with applicable jurisdiction. Securities New Facility also includes customary documentation supporting its issued by the Government of Canada defaulting lender provisions, including authorization to do so.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60216 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

While the New Facility will, in of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement be implemented in less than 60 days general, reduce the risks associated with Supervision Act 5 because it will from the date the advance notice is OCC’s clearing function, like any promote robust risk management.6 The filed, or the date further information lending arrangement the New Facility New Facility would provide OCC with requested by the Commission is involves risks. One of the primary risks an additional source of liquidity to meet received, if the Commission notifies the to OCC and its clearing function its settlement obligations while at the clearing agency in writing that it does associated with the New Facility is the same time being structured to address not object to the proposed change and risk that a lender fails to fund when certain risks, as described above, that authorizes the clearing agency to OCC requests a loan, because of the arise in connection with the New implement the proposed change on an lender’s insolvency or otherwise. This Facility. The New Facility could also earlier date, subject to any conditions risk is mitigated through the use of a enable OCC to minimize losses in the imposed by the Commission. syndicated facility, which does not event of a default, suspension or The clearing agency shall post notice depend on the creditworthiness of a insolvency, by allowing it to obtain on its Web site of proposed changes that small number of lenders. In addition, funds on extremely short notice to are implemented. the New Facility has lender default ensure that the clearance and settlement The proposal shall not take effect provisions designed to discourage of transactions in options and other until all regulatory actions required lenders from failing to fund loans. contracts occurs without interruption. with respect to the proposal are Moreover, OCC has the ability under the Moreover, the New Facility would completed. New Facility to replace a defaulting permit OCC to avoid liquidating margin IV. Solicitation of Comments lender. Finally, in the event a particular or clearing fund assets in what would lender fails to fund its portion of the likely be volatile market conditions and Interested persons are invited to requested loan, the New Facility preserve sufficient financial resources to submit written data, views and includes provisions pursuant to which cover any losses resulting from the arguments concerning the foregoing. OCC may request ‘‘covering’’ loans from failure of a clearing member, bank or Comments may be submitted by any of non-defaulting lenders to make up the other clearing organization. the following methods: shortfall. Alternatively, OCC may (iv) Accelerated Commission Action Electronic Comments simply make a second borrowing • request for the shortfall amount that Requested Use the Commission’s Internet lenders are committed to make, subject Pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(I) of the comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ to OCC’s satisfying the borrowing Payment, Clearing and Settlement rules/sro.shtml); or • Send an email to rule-comments@ conditions for the second loan, although Supervision Act,7 OCC requests that the sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– in either case the total amount available Commission notify OCC that it has no OCC–2014–806 on the subject line. for borrowing under the New Facility objection to the change no later than would be reduced by the unfunded September 30, 2014, which is one week Paper Comments commitment of the defaulting lender. prior to the October 7, 2014 effective • Send paper comments in triplicate The failure by one or more lenders to date of the New Facility. OCC requests to Secretary, Securities and Exchange fund the first loan does not relieve the Commission action one week in Commission, 100 F Street NE., lenders of their commitment to fund the advance of the effective date to ensure Washington, DC 20549–1090. second loan. that there is no period of time that OCC All submissions should refer to File A second risk associated with the operates without a credit facility, given Number SR–OCC–2014–806. This file New Facility is the risk that OCC is the importance of the borrowing number should be included on the unable to repay a loan within 30 days, capacity in connection with OCC’s risk subject line if email is used. To help the which would allow the lenders to seize management. the pledged collateral and liquidate it, Commission process and review your potentially at depressed prices that III. Date of Effectiveness of the Advance comments more efficiently, please use would result in losses to OCC. OCC Notice and Timing for Commission only one method of submission. The believes that this risk is at a manageable Action Commission will post all comments on level, because 30 days should be an The proposed change may be the Commission’s Internet Web site adequate period of time to allow OCC to implemented if the Commission does (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). generate funds to repay the loans under not object to the proposed change Copies of the submission, all subsequent the New Facility, such as by liquidating within 60 days of the later of (i) the date amendments, all written statements clearing fund assets other than those that the proposed change was filed with with respect to the proposed change that pledged to secure the loans. As the Commission or (ii) the date that any are filed with the Commission, and all provided in Section 5(e) of Article VIII additional information requested by the written communications relating to the of its By-Laws, if the loans have not Commission is received. The clearing proposed change between the been repaid within 30 days, the amount agency shall not implement the Commission and any person, other than of clearing fund assets used to secure proposed change if the Commission has those that may be withheld from the the loans will be considered to be an any objection to the proposed change. public in accordance with the actual loss to the clearing fund, which The Commission may extend the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be will be allocated in accordance with period for review by an additional 60 available for Web site viewing and Section 5 of Article VIII, and the days if the proposed change raises novel printing in the Commission’s Public proceeds of such allocation can be used or complex issues, subject to the Reference Section, 100 F Street NE., to repay the loans. Commission providing the clearing Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of (iii) Consistency With the Payment, agency with prompt written notice of the extension. A proposed change may 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such Clearing, and Settlement Supervision filing also will be available for Act 5 12 U.S.C. 5464(b). inspection and copying at the principal OCC believes that the proposed 6 12 U.S.C. 5464(b)(1). office of OCC and on OCC’s Web site at change is consistent with Section 805(b) 7 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(I). http://www.theocc.com/components/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60217

docs/legal/rules_and_bylaws/sr_occ_14_ failure by allowing it to access funds on II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 806.pdf. extremely short notice, and without Statement of the Purpose of, and All comments received will be posted having to liquidate assets at a time when Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule without change; the Commission does market prices could be falling Change not edit personal identifying precipitously. In its filing with the Commission, the information from submissions. You VI. Conclusion self-regulatory organization included should submit only information that statements concerning the purpose of, you wish to make available publicly. All Pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(I) of the and basis for, the proposed rule change submissions should refer to File Payment, Clearing, and Settlement and discussed any comments it received Number SR–OCC–2014–806 and should Supervision Act,9 the Commission does on the proposed rule change. The text be submitted on or before October 27, not object to the proposed change, and of those statements may be examined at 2014. authorizes OCC to implement the the places specified in Item IV below. V. Commission’s Findings and Notice of change (SR–OCC–2014–806) as of the The Exchange has prepared summaries, No Objection date of this Order. set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such Section 806(e)(1)(G) of the Payment, By the Commission. statements. Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Kevin M. O’Neill, 8 Act provides that a designated Deputy Secretary. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s financial market utility may implement [FR Doc. 2014–23698 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Statement of the Purpose of, and a change if it has not received an Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule BILLING CODE 8011–01–P objection from the Commission within Change 60 days of the later of (i) the date that the Commission receives notice of the 1. Purpose SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE proposed change or (ii) the date the The Exchange proposes to amend COMMISSION Commission receives any further Rule 900.3NY (Orders Defined) to delete information it requests for consideration WAIT Orders from its rules. of the notice. A designated financial [Release No. 34–73255; File No. SR– Per Rule 900.3NY(t), an order market utility may implement a NYSEMKT–2014–82] designated as a WAIT Order, ‘‘is held proposed change in less than 60 days for one second without processing for from the date of receipt of the notice of Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE potential display and/or execution. the change by the Commission, or the MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and After one second, the order is processed date the Commission receives any Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed for potential display and/or execution in further information it requested, if the Rule Change Amending Exchange accordance with all order entry Commission notifies the designated Rule 900.3NY (Orders Defined) To instructions as determined by the financial market utility in writing that it Delete WAIT Orders From Its Rules entering party.’’ Due to a lack of demand does not object to the proposed change September 30, 2014. for WAIT Orders, the Exchange and authorizes the designated financial proposes to discontinue functionality market utility to implement the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the supporting the order type. Accordingly, proposed change on an earlier date, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the the Exchange proposes to delete the subject to any conditions imposed by ‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 definition of WAIT Order from Rule the Commission. notice is hereby given that on 900.3NY(t) and hold this provision as In its filing with the Commission, September 24, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC Reserved. The Exchange will announce OCC requested that the Commission (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE MKT’’) filed the implementation date of this change notify OCC that it has no objection to with the Securities and Exchange through a Trader Update. the change no later than September 30, Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the 2. Statutory Basis 2014, which is one week before the proposed rule change as described in October 7, 2014 effective date of the Items I and II below, which Items have The proposed rule change is New Facility. OCC requested been prepared by the self-regulatory consistent with Section 6(b) of the Commission action by this date to organization. The Commission is Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ensure that there is no period of time publishing this notice to solicit ‘‘Act’’), in general, and furthers the that OCC operates without a credit comments on the proposed rule change objectives of Section 6(b)(5), in facility, given the importance of the from interested persons. particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative borrowing capacity in connection with I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s acts and practices, to promote just and OCC’s risk-management framework. Statement of the Terms of Substance of equitable principles of trade, to foster The Commission does not object to the Proposed Rule Change the proposed change. Ensuring that OCC cooperation and coordination with has uninterrupted access to a credit The Exchange proposes to amend persons engaged in facilitating facility will promote the safety and Rule 900.3NY (Orders Defined) by transactions in securities, and to remove soundness of the broader financial deleting WAIT orders from its rules. The impediments to and perfect the system by providing OCC with an text of the proposed rule change is mechanism of a free and open market additional source of liquidity to meet its available on the Exchange’s Web site at and a national market system. clearance and settlement obligations in www.nyse.com, at the principal office of Specifically, the Exchange believes that the event of the failure of a clearing the Exchange, and at the Commission’s by eliminating a little-used order type member, bank, or clearing organization Public Reference Room. the proposal will remove impediments doing business with OCC. Having access to and perfect the mechanisms of a free to a credit facility will help OCC 9 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(I). and open market and add transparency minimize losses in the event of such a 1 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1). and clarity to the Exchange’s rules. The 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. Exchange further believes that deleting 8 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(G). 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. an order type rarely used by investors

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60218 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

also removes impediments to and public interest, for the protection of submitted on or before October 27, perfects the mechanism of a free and investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 2014. open market by ensuring that members, the purposes of the Act. If the For the Commission, by the Division of regulators and the public can more Commission takes such action, the Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated easily navigate the Exchange’s rulebook Commission shall institute proceedings authority.6 and better understand the orders types to determine whether the proposed rule Kevin M. O’Neill, available for trading on the Exchange. should be approved or disapproved. Moreover, the Exchange believes that Deputy Secretary. the elimination of WAIT Orders will IV. Solicitation of Comments [FR Doc. 2014–23696 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] simplify order processing and reduce Interested persons are invited to BILLING CODE 8011–01–P the burden on system capacity, which submit written data, views, and the Exchange believes is consistent with arguments concerning the foregoing, promoting just and equitable principles including whether the proposed rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE of trade as well as protecting investors change is consistent with the Act. COMMISSION and the public interest. Comments may be submitted by any of B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the following methods: [Release No. 34–73265; File No. SR–NYSE– 2014–52] Statement on Burden on Competition Electronic Comments The Exchange does not believe that • Use the Commission’s Internet Self-Regulatory Organizations; New the proposed rule change will impose comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of any burden on competition that is not rules/sro.shtml); or Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of necessary or appropriate in furtherance • Send an email to rule-comments@ Proposed Rule Change Amending of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Section 102.01C of the NYSE Listed the Exchange believes that the proposed NYSEMKT–2014–82 on the subject line. Company Manual To Adopt a New rule change will relieve a burden on Global Market Capitalization Test Initial competition in no longer offering a Paper Comments Listing Standard for Operating seldom used rule type. In doing so, the • Send paper comments in triplicate Companies and To Eliminate All of the proposed rule change will also serve to to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Current Initial Listing Standards for promote regulatory clarity and Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Operating Companies Except the consistency, thereby reducing burdens Earnings Test on the marketplace and facilitating Washington, DC 20549–1090. investor protection. All submissions should refer to File September 30, 2014. Number SR–NYSEMKT–2014–82. This C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s file number should be included on the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Statement on Comments on the subject line if email is used. To help the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission process and review your (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Members, Participants, or Others comments more efficiently, please use notice is hereby given that on No written comments were solicited only one method. The Commission will September 19, 2014, New York Stock or received with respect to the proposed post all comments on the Commission’s Exchange LLC (‘‘NYSE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) rule change. Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ filed with the Securities and Exchange rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the III. Date of Effectiveness of the submission, all subsequent proposed rule change as described in Proposed Rule Change and Timing for amendments, all written statements Items I and II below, which Items have Commission Action with respect to the proposed rule been prepared by the self-regulatory Because the foregoing proposed rule change that are filed with the organization. The Commission is change does not: (i) Significantly affect Commission, and all written publishing this notice to solicit the protection of investors or the public communications relating to the comments on the proposed rule change interest; (ii) impose any significant proposed rule change between the from interested persons. burden on competition; and (iii) become Commission and any person, other than I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s operative for 30 days from the date on those that may be withheld from the which it was filed, or such shorter time Statement of the Terms of Substance of public in accordance with the the Proposed Rule Change as the Commission may designate, it has provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be become effective pursuant to Section available for Web site viewing and The Exchange proposes to amend 4 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b– printing in the Commission’s Public Section 102.01C of the NYSE Listed 5 4(f)(6) thereunder. Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Company Manual (the ‘‘Manual’’) to At any time within 60 days of the Washington, DC 20549, on official adopt a new initial listing standard for filing of the proposed rule change, the business days between the hours of operating companies and to eliminate Commission summarily may 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the all of the current initial listing standards temporarily suspend such rule change if filing will also be available for for operating companies with one it appears to the Commission that such inspection and copying at the principal exception. The text of the proposed rule action is necessary or appropriate in the office of the Exchange. All comments change is available on the Exchange’s received will be posted without change; 4 Web site at www.nyse.com, at the 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). the Commission does not edit personal 5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b– principal office of the Exchange, and at 4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give identifying information from the Commission’s Public Reference the Commission written notice of its intent to file submissions. You should submit only Room. the proposed rule change at least five business days information that you wish to make prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule available publicly. All submissions 6 change, or such shorter time as designated by the 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this should refer to File Number SR– 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). requirement. NYSEMKT–2014–82 and should be 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60219

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s adoption of the Global Market capitalization of $200 million at the Statement of the Purpose of, and Capitalization Test, the Exchange time of initial listing, the Exchange Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule proposes to eliminate the Valuation/ proposes to eliminate the Valuation/ Change Revenue with Cash Flow Test, the Pure Revenue with Cash Flow Test, the Pure In its filing with the Commission, the Valuation/Revenue Test, the Affiliated Valuation/Revenue Test, the Affiliated self-regulatory organization included Company Test and the Assets and Company Test and the Assets and statements concerning the purpose of, Equity Test. The Earnings Test will Equity Test as they require an issuer to 5 and basis for, the proposed rule change remain in effect. demonstrate a global market and discussed any comments it received The Exchange currently has five capitalization of more than $200 million on the proposed rule change. The text initial listing standards for operating and would therefore no longer be of those statements may be examined at companies: The Earnings Test; the relevant. the places specified in Item IV below. Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow In recent times, a number of The Exchange has prepared summaries, Test; the Pure Valuation/Revenue Test; companies have successfully completed set forth in sections A, B, and C below, the Affiliated Company Test; and the sizable initial public offerings but have of the most significant parts of such Assets and Equity Test. All of these not qualified for listing on the NYSE. statements. initial listing standards other than the Typically, these companies are involved Earnings Test include a global market solely or primarily in research and A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s capitalization requirement component development (‘‘r&d’’) activities at the Statement of the Purpose of, and the ($500 million for the Valuation/Revenue time of their IPO and are raising funds Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule with Cash Flow Test; $750 million for in the IPO to continue their research. As Change the Pure Valuation/Revenue Test; $500 these companies are not at a stage in 1. Purpose million for the Affiliated Company Test; their development where they are and $150 million for the Assets and The NYSE proposes to amend Section generating revenue, they do not qualify Equity Test). Because the Global Market to list under the current initial listing 102.01C of the Manual to adopt a new Capitalization Test that the Exchange initial listing standard for operating standards that include requirements that proposes to adopt will require only a are more suitable to companies that companies and eliminate all of the minimum total global market current initial listing standards for generate revenue (i.e., the Earnings Test, operating companies with one the Valuation/Revenue with Cash Flow have 400 holders of round lots of their common Test, and the Pure Valuation/Revenue exception. stock and 1.1 million publicly-held shares at the The Exchange proposes to amend time of initial listing. Companies listing in Test). Many of these companies also do Section 102.01C of the Manual to adopt connection with a transfer or quotation are required not have any appreciable amount of by Section 102.01A of the Manual to have 1.1 stockholders’ equity at the time of their a new initial listing standard for million publicly-held shares and either: (i) 400 operating companies (the ‘‘Global holders of round lots; (ii) 2,200 total stockholders IPOs and they therefore are unable to Market Capitalization Test’’) consisting together with average monthly trading volume of meet the $50 million stockholders’ solely of a requirement that the listing 100,000 shares (for the most recent six months); or equity requirement of the Assets and (iii) 500 total stockholders together with average Equity Test. Consequently, a company applicant must have a minimum total monthly trading volume of one million shares (for global market capitalization of $200 the most recent 12 months). The Exchange notes of this type may be able to raise a million at the time of initial listing.3 that these requirements are at least as stringent as significant amount of capital in an IPO Companies listing under the Global the parallel requirement for listing on the Nasdaq and not meet any of the current NYSE Global Market that an applicant must have 400 initial listing standards. However, these Market Capitalization Test will also be round lot holders plus 1.1 million publicly-held required to meet the existing shares. Section 102.01B of the Manual provides that companies are not precluded from distribution requirements of Section any company listing in connection with an IPO or listing on Nasdaq as the Nasdaq Global 102.01A of the Manual and the stock a spin-off must have $40 million in market value Market has a listing standard that of publicly-held shares at the time of initial listing price and market value of publicly-held and requires all other applicants to have $100 permits the qualification of a company shares requirements of Section 102.01B million in market value of publicly-held shares. The solely on the basis of a total market of the Manual.4 In connection with the Exchange notes that these requirements are capitalization of $75 million 6 (in significantly higher than the comparable addition to the stock price, distribution, requirements for listing under any of the Nasdaq 3 If a company is currently publicly traded at the Global Market initial listing standards. For example, and market value of publicly-held time it applies to list on the Exchange and is being under the various initial listing standards set forth shares requirements discussed in qualified for listing under the Global Market in Nasdaq Marketplace Rule 5405(b), the highest Footnote 5 above).7 The NYSE wishes to Capitalization Test, it will be required to meet the market value of publicly-held shares that an issuer adopt the proposed new Global Market $200 million global market capitalization is required to demonstrate is $20 million. requirement for at least the 90 consecutive trading 5 Pursuant to Section 102.01C of the Manual, a Capitalization Test to address this days immediately preceding the date on which it company can qualify for initial listing under the competitive disadvantage it faces in receives clearance to submit an application to list Earnings Test if it can demonstrate that it has pre- competing with Nasdaq for the listing of on the Exchange. The Commission notes a company tax earnings from continuing operations, as these r&d-focused companies. which is currently publicly traded at the time it adjusted, of (i) at least $10,000,000 in the aggregate applies to list on the Exchange and is being for the last three fiscal years together with a The Exchange believes that by setting qualified for listing under the Global Market minimum of $2,000,000 in each of the two most its market capitalization requirement Capitalization Test will also need to maintain a recent fiscal years, and positive amounts in all three under the proposed new standard at closing price of at least $4 per share for a period years or (ii) at least $12,000,000 in the aggregate for $200 million (more than twice the $75 of at least 90 consecutive trading days prior to the last three fiscal years together with a minimum receipt of clearance to make application to list on of $5,000,000 in the most recent fiscal year and million required by the comparable the Exchange. See proposed NYSE Manual Section $2,000,000 in the next most recent fiscal year. A Nasdaq Global Market standard) it will 102.01C(II)**. company that qualifies as an emerging growth ensure that companies listed under the 4 All operating companies listing on the NYSE are company as defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the new standard will be of a size that required by Section 102.01B of the Manual to have Securities Act of 1933 and Section 3(a)(80) of the a stock price of at least $4 per share at the time of Act can qualify for initial listing under the Earnings listing, which the Exchange notes is identical to the Test if it can demonstrate that it has pre-tax 6 See Nasdaq Marketplace Rule 5405(b)(3). comparable requirement for listing on the Nasdaq earnings from continuing operations, as adjusted, of 7 See, supra, Footnote 4 for a discussion of the Global Market. Companies listing in connection at least $10,000,000 in the aggregate for the last two stock price, distribution, and market value of with an IPO or upon emergence from bankruptcy fiscal years with a minimum of $2,000,000 in both publicly-held shares requirements of the Nasdaq are required by Section 102.01A of the Manual to years. Global Market.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60220 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

makes them suitable for trading on the are less stringent than the proposed the Global Market Capitalization Test Exchange. The Exchange believes that Global Market Capitalization Test for a will also have to comply with all other the substantial size of companies significant period of time and there is applicable Exchange listing rules, seeking to list under the proposed consequently a great deal of experience including the Exchange’s corporate Global Market Capitalization Test in that demonstrates that companies listing governance requirements. The combination with the Exchange’s under these lower standards are suitable Exchange’s continued listing standard aforementioned stock price, for listing on a national securities set forth in Section 802.01B of the distribution, and market-value of exchange. Manual that requires a listed company publicly-held shares requirements will The Exchange’s listing standards after to maintain an average global market ensure that the Exchange provides listed adoption of the proposed Global Market capitalization over a consecutive 30 status only to bona fide companies that Capitalization Test will exceed those trading-day period of at least have or, in the case of an IPO, will have established by Exchange Act Rule 3a51– $50,000,000 or stockholders’ equity of at sufficient public float, investor base, 1(a)(2) (the ‘‘Penny Stock Rule’’).8 least $50,000,000 in order to remain in and trading interest to provide the depth Specifically, the Exchange notes that the compliance with Exchange rules will be and liquidity necessary to promote fair $200 million total market capitalization applicable to companies that list under and orderly markets. The Exchange required by the proposed standard far the Global Market Capitalization Test. exceeds the $50 million total market notes that it has reviewed the IPOs that 2. Statutory Basis listed on Nasdaq over the last few years capitalization option of the Penny Stock and that only a small number of those Rule. While, in the case of newly-public The Exchange believes that the that were not qualified for listing on the companies, this requirement in the proposed rule change is consistent with 11 NYSE would have been eligible for an proposed standard would be measured Section 6(b) of the Act, in general, and NYSE listing under the proposed new at a point in time rather than over a 90 furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) 12 standard. As such, the Exchange does consecutive day period prior to listing of the Act, in particular in that it is not anticipate a significant increase in as provided in the Penny Stock Rule, designed to promote just and equitable the number of qualified IPOs as a result the Exchange believes that the far principles of trade, to foster cooperation of the proposed new standard and does greater amount required by the and coordination with persons engaged not anticipate any meaningful reduction proposed standard makes it a far more in regulating, clearing, settling, in the size and quality of companies stringent standard than that of the processing information with respect to, listing on the Exchange as a Penny Stock Rule notwithstanding the and facilitating transactions in 9 securities, to remove impediments to consequence of the adoption of the different approach to measurement. and perfect the mechanism of a free and proposed new standard. Further, Nasdaq currently has an initial listing standard that requires that a open market and a national market As with all other listing applicants, company only demonstrate a total system, and, in general, to protect the Exchange reserves the right to deny market capitalization of $75 million.10 investors and the public interest. The listing to any company seeking to list In addition, the Exchange requires all Exchange believes that the proposed under the Global Market Capitalization initial listings, regardless of which amendment to the initial listing Test if the Exchange determines that the standard they are listed under, to meet standards is consistent with the investor listing of any such company is the stock price, distribution and market protection objectives of Section 6(b)(5). inadvisable or unwarranted in the value of publicly-held shares The Exchange has reached this opinion of the Exchange. Similarly, as requirements described in Footnote 5 conclusion because: (i) As described in with all companies applying to list on above, all of which meet or exceed all the ‘‘Purpose’’ section above, the the Exchange, in determining the of the Penny Stock Rule’s remaining Exchange will continue to consider suitability for listing of any company requirements. Companies listing under factors other than an applicant’s seeking to list under the Global Market satisfaction of numerical criteria in Capitalization Test, the staff of NYSE 8 17 CFR 240.[sic]a51–1(a)(ii). exercising its discretion to list a Regulation will carefully review the 9 The Exchange notes, however, that current company; and (ii) the Nasdaq Global company’s financial statements and its publicly-traded companies seeking to list on the Market has been applying initial listing disclosures in its public filings, as well Exchange under the proposed Global Market Capitalization Test will be required to (i) standards that are less stringent than the as conducting a background review of demonstrate the proposed market capitalization for proposed Global Market Capitalization the company’s officers, directors and a period of at least 90 consecutive trading days Test for a significant period of time and significant shareholders. In particular, prior to receipt of clearance to make application to there is consequently a great deal of list on the Exchange and (ii) maintain a closing staff will review whether any company price of at least $4 per share for a period of at least experience that demonstrates that listing under the Global Market 90 consecutive trading days prior to receipt of companies listing under these lower Capitalization Test has access to clearance to make application to list on the standards are suitable for listing on a sufficient funds to carry out its business Exchange. national securities exchange. Further, 10 Further, the Exchange has reviewed the initial strategy as disclosed. As a consequence listing standards of the American Stock Exchange the Exchange believes that the of its ability to consider these and other (the ‘‘Amex’’) as in effect at the time of the adoption substantial size of companies seeking to factors in addition to the market of the National Securities Market Improvement Act list under the proposed Global Market capitalization and other numerical of 1996 (‘‘NSMIA’’) and notes that the Amex had an initial listing standard at that time permitting the Capitalization Test in combination with requirements, the Exchange believes listing of a company that had $15 million in market the Exchange’s stock price, distribution, that it will be able to exercise informed capitalization, $4 million in stockholders’ equity and market-value of publicly-held discretion in listing companies under and three years of operating history. While the shares requirements will ensure that the the proposed standard and that the proposed Global Market Capitalization Standard does not include any stockholders’ equity or Exchange provides listed status only to adoption of the proposed standard is operating history requirements, its $200 million bona fide companies that have or, in the therefore consistent with the protection market capitalization requirement is far greater than case of an IPO, will have sufficient of investors. In reaching this conclusion, the $15 million required by the Amex standard in public float, investor base, and trading the Exchange also relied on the fact that effect at the time of adoption of NSMIA. As such, the Exchange believes that the proposed Global the Nasdaq Global Market has been Market Capitalization Test does not set a new low 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). applying initial listing standards that for a named market under NSMIA. 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60221

interest to provide the depth and protection of investors and the public 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such liquidity necessary to promote fair and interest. filing also will be available for orderly markets. At any time within 60 days of the inspection and copying at the principal filing of such proposed rule change, the office of the Exchange. All comments B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission summarily may received will be posted without change; Statement on Burden on Competition temporarily suspend such rule change if the Commission does not edit personal The Exchange does not believe that it appears to the Commission that such identifying information from the proposed rule changes will impose action is necessary or appropriate in the submissions. You should submit only any burden on competition that is not public interest, for the protection of information that you wish to make necessary or appropriate in furtherance investors, or otherwise in furtherance of available publicly. All submissions of the purpose of the Act. The proposed the purposes of the Act. If the should refer to File Number SR–NYSE– rule changes will expand the Commission takes such action, the 2014–52 and should be submitted on or competition for the listing of equity Commission shall institute proceedings before October 27, 2014. under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 18 of the Act to securities of operating companies as For the Commission, by the Division of they will enable the NYSE to compete determine whether the proposed rule Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated for the listing of companies that are change should be approved or authority.19 currently not qualified for listing on the disapproved. Kevin M. O’Neill, NYSE but are qualified to list on other IV. Solicitation of Comments Deputy Secretary. national securities exchanges. Interested persons are invited to [FR Doc. 2014–23702 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s submit written data, views, and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Statement on Comments on the arguments concerning the foregoing, Proposed Rule Change Received From including whether the proposed rule SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Members, Participants, or Others change is consistent with the Act. COMMISSION No written comments were solicited Comments may be submitted by any of or received with respect to the proposed the following methods: [Release No. 34–73258; File No. SR–CME– 2014–38] rule change. Electronic Comments III. Date of Effectiveness of the • Use the Commission’s Internet Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Change and Timing for comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.; Commission Action rules/sro.shtml); or Notice of Filing and Immediate • Send an email to rule- Effectiveness of Proposed Rule The Exchange has filed the proposed [email protected]. Please include File Change to Settlement Procedures rule change pursuant to Section Number SR–NYSE–2014–52 on the Regarding a CME Cleared OTC FX 13 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act and Rule subject line. Spot, Forward and Swap Contract 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.14 Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Paper Comments September 30, 2014. Significantly affect the protection of • Send paper comments in triplicate Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the investors or the public interest; (ii) to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Securities Exchange Act of 1934 impose any significant burden on Commission, 100 F Street NE., (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder 2 competition; and (iii) become operative Washington, DC 20549–1090. notice is hereby given that on prior to 30 days from the date on which All submissions should refer to File September 22, 2014, Chicago Mercantile it was filed, or such shorter time as the Number SR–NSYE–2014–52. This file Exchange Inc. (‘‘CME’’) filed with the Commission may designate, if number should be included on the Securities and Exchange Commission consistent with the protection of subject line if email is used. To help the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule investors and the public interest, the Commission process and review your change as described in Items I, II and III proposed rule change has become comments more efficiently, please use below, which Items have been prepared effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) only one method. The Commission will primarily by CME. CME filed the of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) post all comments on the Commission’s 3 4 thereunder.15 Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ of the Act, and Rule 19b–4(f)(4)(ii) A proposed rule change filed under rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the thereunder, so that the proposal was Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 16 normally does not submission, all subsequent effective upon filing with the become operative prior to 30 days after amendments, all written statements Commission. The Commission is the date of the filing. However, pursuant with respect to the proposed rule publishing this notice to solicit to Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii),17 the change that are filed with the comments on the proposed rule change Commission may designate a shorter Commission, and all written from interested persons. time if such action is consistent with the communications relating to the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change between the Statement of the Terms of Substance of 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). Commission and any person, other than the Proposed Rule Change 14 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). those that may be withheld from the CME is filing proposed rule changes 15 In addition, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) requires the public in accordance with the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of that are limited to its business as a the Exchange’s intent to file the proposed rule provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be derivatives clearing organization. More change, along with a brief description and text of available for Web site viewing and specifically, the proposed rule change the proposed rule change, at least five business days printing in the Commission’s Public prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., change, or such shorter time as designated by the 19 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this Washington, DC 20549, on official 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). requirement. business days between the hours of 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 16 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 17 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). 18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60222 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

contains amendments to certain aspects security-based swap clearing business in products that are not securities, of CME’s settlement procedures for one any way. The changes will be effective including futures that are not security of CME’s Cleared Over-the-Counter on filing. CME notes that it has also futures, swaps that are not security- Foreign Exchange Spot, Forward and certified the proposed rule change that based swaps or mixed swaps, and Swap Contracts. is the subject of this filing to its primary forwards that are not security forwards; regulator, the Commodity Futures and II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’), in a (b) does not significantly affect any Statement of the Purpose of, and separate filing, CME Submission No. securities clearing operations of CME or Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 14–388. The text of the CME proposed any rights or obligations of CME with Change rule amendments is attached, with respect to securities clearing or persons In its filing with the Commission, additions underlined and deletions in using such securities-clearing service. CME included statements concerning brackets. As such, the changes are therefore the purpose of and basis for the CME believes the proposed rule consistent with the requirements of proposed rule change and discussed any change is consistent with the Section 17A of the Exchange Act 8 and comments it received on the proposed requirements of the Exchange Act are properly filed under Section rule change. The text of these statements including Section 17A of the Exchange 19(b)(3)(A) 9 and Rule 19b–4(f)(4)(ii) 10 may be examined at the places specified Act.6 CME is updating its rules to reflect thereunder. in Item IV below. CME has prepared new practices by the Reserve Bank of summaries, set forth in sections A, B, India, that is, changes to when the B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and C below, of the most significant relevant spot exchange rate is Statement on Burden on Competition aspects of these statements. published. Conforming to these changes CME does not believe that the will benefit market participants clearing proposed rule change will have any A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s OTC FX swaps contracts with CME and, Statement of the Purpose of, and impact, or impose any burden, on as such, should be seen to be designed competition. The amendments would Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule to promote the prompt and accurate Change update CME rules to reflect the clearance and settlement of securities amended time when the Reserve Bank CME is registered as a DCO with the transactions and, to the extent of India publishes the relevant spot Commodity Futures Trading applicable, derivatives agreements, exchange rate. Therefore, the changes Commission and offers clearing services contracts, and transactions, to assure the merely conform CME’s contracts and for many different futures and swaps safeguarding of securities and funds practices to relevant international products. The proposed rule change that which are in the custody or control of standards. Further, the changes are is the subject of this filing is limited to the clearing agency or for which it is limited to CME’s derivatives clearing CME’s business as a DCO offering responsible, and, in general, to protect business and, as such, do not affect the clearing services for CFTC-regulated investors and the public interest security-based swap clearing activities swaps products. CME currently offers consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of of CME in any way and therefore would 7 clearing services for cleared-only OTC the Exchange Act. not impose any burden on competition FX contracts on a number of different Furthermore, the proposed changes that is inappropriate in furtherance of currency pairs. These CME Cleared OTC are limited in their effect to products the purposes of the Act. FX Spot, Forward and Swap Contracts offered under CME’s authority to act as are non-deliverable foreign currency a DCO. The products that are the subject C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s forward contracts and, as such, are of this filing are under the exclusive Statement on Comments on the considered to be ‘‘swaps’’ under jurisdiction of the CFTC. As such, the Proposed Rule Change Received From applicable regulatory definitions.5 CME proposed CME changes are limited to Members, Participants or Others proposes to make amendments to one of CME’s activities as a DCO clearing CME has not solicited, and does not these contracts. swaps that are not security-based swaps, intend to solicit, comments regarding The proposed amendments would futures that are not security futures and this proposed rule change. CME has not affect CME Rule 279H.02.A (‘‘Day of forwards that are not security forwards. received any unsolicited written Cash Settlement’’) of Chapter 279H— CME notes that the policies of the CFTC comments from interested parties. Cleared OTC U.S. Dollar/Indian Rupee with respect to administering the (USD/INR) Spot, Forwards and Swaps Commodity Exchange Act are III. Date of Effectiveness of the (Commodity Code: USDINR). More comparable to a number of the policies Proposed Rule Change and Timing for specifically, CME is proposing to update underlying the Exchange Act, such as Commission Action Rule 279H.02.A with this filing to promoting market transparency for over- The foregoing rule change has become reflect the amended time that the the-counter derivatives markets, effective upon filing pursuant to Section Reserve Bank of India will publish the promoting the prompt and accurate 19(b)(3)(A) 11 of the Act and Rule 19b– spot exchange rate. There is currently clearance of transactions and protecting 4(f)(4)(ii) 12 thereunder. At any time no open interest in this contract. investors and the public interest. within 60 days of the filing of the The changes that are described in this Because the proposed changes are proposed rule change, the Commission filing are limited to CME’s business as limited in their effect to OTC FX summarily may temporarily suspend a DCO clearing products under the products offered under CME’s authority such rule change if it appears to the exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC and to act as a DCO, the proposed changes Commission that such action is do not materially impact CME’s are properly classified as effecting a necessary or appropriate in the public change in an existing service of CME interest, for the protection of investors, 5 See Commodity Futures Trading Commission that: and Securities and Exchange Commission Joint (a) Primarily affects the clearing 8 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. Final Rule Defining ‘‘Swap,’’ ‘‘Security-Based operations of CME with respect to 9 Swap,’’ and ‘‘Security-Based Swap Agreement;’’ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). Mixed Swaps; Security-Based Swap Agreement 10 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii). Recordkeeping; Final Rule, 77 FR 48207, 48255 6 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). (Aug. 13, 2012). 7 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60223

or otherwise in furtherance of the For the Commission, by the Division the places specified in Item IV below. purposes of the Act. of Trading and Markets, pursuant to The Exchange has prepared summaries, delegated authority.13 set forth in sections A, B, and C below, IV. Solicitation of Comments of the most significant parts of such Kevin M. O’Neill, Interested persons are invited to statements. submit written data, views, and Deputy Secretary. arguments concerning the foregoing, [FR Doc. 2014–23699 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s including whether the proposed rule BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Statement of the Purpose of, and the change is consistent with the Act. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Comments may be submitted by any of Change the following methods: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 1. Purpose COMMISSION Electronic Comments The Exchange proposes to amend • [Release No. 34–73267; File No. SR– Rule 6.1A to adopt definitions for the Use the Commission’s Internet NYSEArca–2014–108] comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ terms Complex BBO and Complex rules/sro.shtml); or Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE NBBO. Additionally, the Exchange • Send an email to rule-comments@ Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and proposes to amend Rule 6.62(y) by sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed revising the definition of PNP Plus CME–2014–38 on the subject line. Rule Change Amending Exchange orders, to specify that the order type is Rule 6.1A To Codify the Terms available solely for Electronic Complex Paper Comments 4 Complex BBO and Complex NBBO and Orders, and to describe the processing • Send paper comments in triplicate To Amend Rule 6.62(y) To Revise the of an Electronic Complex Order to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Definition of a PNP Plus Order designated as PNP Plus. Commission, 100 F Street NE., Complex BBO and Complex NBBO Washington, DC 20549–1090. September 30, 2014. All submissions should refer to File Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the The term BBO is defined in Exchange Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Rule 6.1A(a)(2) as the best bid or offer Number SR–CME–2014–38. This file 5 number should be included on the ‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3 on OX, and the term NBBO is defined subject line if email is used. To help the notice is hereby given that, on in Exchange Rule 6.1A(a)(11) as the Commission process and review your September 17, 2014, NYSE Arca, Inc. national best bid or offer. In both cases comments more efficiently, please use (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE Arca’’) filed the best bid and offer represents the best only one method. The Commission will with the Securities and Exchange price available in an individual option post all comments on the Commission’s Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the series as disseminated by either the Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ proposed rule change as described in Exchange (in the case of the BBO) or the rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the Items I and II below, which Items have Options Price Reporting Authority submission, all subsequent been prepared by the self-regulatory (‘‘OPRA’’) (in the case of the NBBO). amendments, all written statements organization. The Commission is Unlike bids and offers for each with respect to the proposed rule publishing this notice to solicit individual option series, derived bids change that are filed with the comments on the proposed rule change and offers for Complex Orders are not Commission, and all written from interested persons. disseminated by either the Exchange or communications relating to the OPRA. I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Even though there is not a published proposed rule change between the Statement of the Terms of Substance of bid or offer for every complex order Commission and any person, other than the Proposed Rule Change strategy, there are situations where it is those that may be withheld from the The Exchange proposes to amend necessary to derive a (theoretical) bid or public in accordance with the Exchange Rule 6.1A to codify the terms offer for a particular strategy.6 In order provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Complex BBO and Complex NBBO and to derive the best bid or best offer for a available for Web site viewing and to amend Rule 6.62(y) to revise the given complex order strategy the printing in the Commission’s Public definition of a PNP Plus order. The text Exchange takes the best bid and best Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., of the proposed rule change is available offer in the individual leg markets Washington, DC 20549, on official on the Exchange’s Web site at comprising the complex order strategy, business days between the hours of www.nyse.com, at the principal office of that when aggregated create either a 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such the Exchange, and at the Commission’s derived Complex BBO or derived filings will also be available for Public Reference Room. Complex NBBO for that same strategy. inspection and copying at the principal The Exchange uses the best quotes office of CME and on CME’s Web site at II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s available on the Exchange in each http://www.cmegroup.com/market- Statement of the Purpose of, and component series (as shown in OX) to regulation/rule-filings.html. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule All comments received will be posted Change create the Complex BBO and the best without change; the Commission does quotes available nationally in each In its filing with the Commission, the component series (as disseminated by not edit personal identifying self-regulatory organization included information from submissions. You statements concerning the purpose of, 4 should submit only information that See Rule 6.91. and basis for, the proposed rule change 5 OX is the Exchange’s electronic order delivery, you wish to make available publicly. All and discussed any comments it received execution and reporting system for options through submissions should refer to File on the proposed rule change. The text which orders and quotes are consolidated for Number SR–CME–2014–38 and should of those statements may be examined at execution and/or display. See Rule 6.1A(a)(13). be submitted on or before October 27, 6 For example, the Complex Matching Engine utilizes a Complex NBBO when establishing the 2014. 1 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1). acceptable price range applicable to the opening 2 15 U.S.C. 78a. auction process for Electronic Complex Orders. See 13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Rule 6.91(a)(2)(i)(B).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60224 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

OPRA) to establish the Complex NBBO. minimum price variation (‘‘MPV’’) as PNP Plus, the order would be re- When deriving the Complex BBO or higher (lower) than the NBBO bid (offer) priced one MPV lower (higher) than the Complex NBBO the Exchange only if it were to lock or cross the NBBO. The Complex BBO if it were to lock or cross factors in the best prices available in the re-priced order is then posted in the the Complex BBO. individual leg markets and does not take Consolidated Book. PNP Plus orders Accordingly, as amended, Rule into consideration prices of individual continue to be re-priced and re-posted 6.62(y) would state that an Electronic Complex Orders that may be resting on in the Consolidated Book with each Complex Order designated as PNP Plus the Exchange or in another exchange’s change in the NBBO until such time as is automatically re-priced by the complex order book (spread book, the NBBO has moved to a price where Exchange to an MPV higher (for sell contingency book). the original limit price of the PNP Plus orders) than the Complex BBO bid for The Exchange proposes to add order no longer locks or crosses the that same Complex Order strategy or at definitions of the terms Complex BBO NBBO, at which time the PNP Plus an MPV lower (for buy orders) than the and Complex NBBO in Rule 6.1A. The order will revert to the original limit Complex BBO offer for that same term ‘‘Complex BBO’’ would be defined price of such order. Orders designated Complex Order strategy for any in Rule 6.1A(a)(2)(ii) as the BBO for a as PNP Plus are ranked in the unexecuted portion of the Electronic given complex order strategy as derived Consolidated Book pursuant to Rule Complex Order designated as PNP Plus from the best bid on OX and best offer 6.76 and assigned a new price time that would otherwise lock or cross the on OX for each individual component priority as of the time of each reposting. Complex BBO. The Exchange notes that series of a Complex Order. The term Because an order designated as PNP because bids and offers for Electronic ‘‘Complex NBBO’’ would be defined in Plus would be posted at a price that is Complex Orders are priced on a net Rule 6.1A(a)(11)(ii) as the NBBO for a higher (lower) that [sic] the best contra- debit/credit basis and may be expressed given complex order strategy as derived side market, by designating an order as in any decimal price, and the legs(s) of from the national best bid and national PNP Plus, a market participant could an Electronic Complex Order may be best offer for each individual guarantee that if its order were to be executed in one cent increments component series of a Complex Order. executed, it would be executed at a regardless of the MPV otherwise An example of how the Complex BBO price that is better than the applicable to the individual legs of the 9 and Complex NBBO is derived for a disseminated contra-side market. order, the MPV applicable to an given strategy is shown below; Accordingly, PNP Plus provides OTP Electronic Complex Order designated as PNP Plus will always be $0.01 cent. The Jan 20 calls BBO 2.00 × 2.20 NBBO Holders with additional processing re-priced order would then be posted in 2.05¥2.20 capability to control the circumstances the Consolidated Book pursuant to Rule Jan 25 calls BBO 1.00 × 1.20 NBBO under which their orders are executed. ¥ The Exchange notes that the PNP Plus 6.91(a)(1). 1.05 1.20 Finally, the Exchange proposes to To derive the bid side of the Complex order type is currently not operable for single-leg orders, nor does the Exchange change the existing cross reference in BBO for the Jan 20/25 call spread using Rule 6.62(y) from Rule 6.76 to 6.91(a)(1). the markets available on the Exchange, intend to introduce such functionality in the near future. OTP Holders are able This is a non-substantive change as both the Exchange takes the best bid in the rules call for orders to be ranked Jan 20 calls coupled with the best offer to and do use the PNP Plus designation when submitting Electronic Complex according to price/time priority. The in the Jan 25 calls. The result is an .80 Exchange believes Rule 6.91(a)(1) is the bid (2.00¥1.20 = .80). To derive the Orders. Accordingly, the Exchange is proposing to amend the definition of the more appropriate rule to reference offer side of the Complex BBO for the because it is specific to Electronic same call spread the Exchange take the PNP Plus order type to make it applicable solely to Electronic Complex Complex Orders. For the purposes of best offer in the Jan 20 calls coupled ranking in the Consolidated Book, with the best bid in the Jan 25 calls. The Orders. In addition, the revised rule would Electronic Complex Orders designated result is an offer of 1.20 (2.20–1.00 = as PNP Plus shall initially be ranked explain that the net debit/credit price 7 1.20). In this example, the resulting based on their original time of entry and ¥ of an Electronic Complex Order Complex BBO is .80 1.20. assigned a new price/time priority as of designated as PNP Plus is re-priced To derive the bid side of the Complex the time of each re-posting. From there, based on the Complex BBO for the same NBBO for the Jan 20/25 call spread with the exception of the use of the complex order strategy. An Electronic using the markets as disseminated by Complex BBO rather than the NBBO, all Complex Order designated as PNP Plus OPRA, the Exchange takes the national other PNP Plus functionality remains would follow existing PNP Plus best bid in the Jan 20 calls coupled with unchanged. the national best offer in the Jan 25 processing in that the order will be calls. This results in an .85 bid automatically re-priced by the Exchange 2. Statutory Basis (2.05¥1.20 = .85). To derive the offer to a price that is one MPV lower (higher) The Exchange believes that its side of the Complex NBBO for the same than the displayed contra-side market proposal is consistent with Section call spread the Exchange take the for buy orders (sell orders) if it were to 6(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of national best offer in the Jan 20 calls lock or cross that market. However, 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’),10 which requires the coupled with the national best bid in because the leg prices of an Electronic rules of an exchange to promote just and the Jan 25 calls. This results in an offer Complex Order are bound by the best equitable principles of trade, to remove of 1.15 (2.20¥1.05=1.15). In this bid or offer on the Exchange and not the impediments to and perfect the 8 example, the resulting Complex NBBO national best bid or offer as is the case mechanism of a free and open market is .85¥1.15. with single-leg orders, when re-pricing and a national market system and, in an Electronic Complex Order designated general, to protect investors and the PNP Plus public interest. The Exchange believes As defined in Rule 6.62(y), an order 7 Bids and offers for Electronic Complex Orders are entered based on the net debit/credit of prices that the proposed rule change would designated as PNP Plus is a limit order of the individual component series comprising the that is automatically re-priced by the complex order strategy. 9 See Rule 6.91 Commentary .01. Exchange to a price that is one 8 See Rule 6.91(a)(2). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60225

remove impediments to and perfect the NBBO as defined terms is intended to Comments may be submitted by any of mechanism of a free and open market add clarity into Exchange rules the following methods: and a national market system because it regarding the methodology of how a Electronic Comments would provide transparency in Complex BBO and a Complex NBBO is Exchange rules that the PNP Plus is a derived and therefore does not raise any • Use the Commission’s Internet designation applicable to Electronic competitive concerns. comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Complex Orders. The Exchange further C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s rules/sro.shtml); or believes that revising the PNP Plus • Statement on Comments on the Send an email to rule-comments@ definition to describe how an Electronic sec.gov. Please include File Number SR– Complex Order designated as PNP Plus Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others NYSEArca–2014–108 on the subject is re-price [sic] based off the Complex line. BBO and not the NBBO would align the No written comments were solicited rule with existing functionality and or received with respect to the proposed Paper Comments rules governing Electronic Complex rule change. • Send paper comments in triplicate Orders. to Secretary, Securities and Exchange The Exchange also believes that [sic] III. Date of Effectiveness of the Commission, 100 F Street NE., proposed rule change would perfect the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Washington, DC 20549–1090. mechanism of a free and open market Commission Action because by revising the PNP Plus order The Exchange has filed the proposed All submissions should refer to File type to make the designation available rule change pursuant to Section Number SR–NYSEArca–2014–108. This solely for Electronic Complex Orders, 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 11 and Rule file number should be included on the and not for single leg orders, the rule 19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.12 Because the subject line if email is used. To help the would clearly describe the applicability proposed rule change does not: (i) Commission process and review your of the PNP Plus order type and Significantly affect the protection of comments more efficiently, please use eliminate any suggestion of an order investors or the public interest; (ii) only one method. The Commission will type for which there is no demonstrated impose any significant burden on post all comments on the Commission’s demand and is not supported by competition; and (iii) become operative Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Exchange systems. prior to 30 days from the date on which rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the The Exchange also believes that it was filed, or such shorter time as the submission, all subsequent defining the terms Complex BBO and Commission may designate, if amendments, all written statements Complex NBBO will help to remove consistent with the protection of with respect to the proposed rule impediments to and perfect the investors and the public interest, the change that are filed with the mechanism of a free and open market proposed rule change has become Commission, and all written and a national market system, in general effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) communications relating to the because it would provide all market of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) proposed rule change between the participants with additional clarity in thereunder.13 Commission and any person, other than how the Exchange calculates the At any time within 60 days of the those that may be withheld from the Complex BBO and Complex NBBO in filing of such proposed rule change, the public in accordance with the connection with the processing of Commission summarily may provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Complex Orders. temporarily suspend such rule change if available for Web site viewing and In addition, the Exchange believes it appears to the Commission that such printing in the Commission’s Public that the proposal would remove action is necessary or appropriate in the Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., impediments to and perfect the public interest, for the protection of Washington, DC 20549, on official mechanism of a free and open market by investors, or otherwise in furtherance of business days between the hours of ensuring that members, regulators and the purposes of the Act. If the 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the the public can more easily navigate the Commission takes such action, the filing also will be available for Exchange’s rulebook and better Commission shall institute proceedings inspection and copying at the NYSE’s understand the orders types available under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 14 of the Act to principal office and on its Internet Web for trading on the Exchange. determine whether the proposed rule site at www.nyse.com. All comments B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s change should be approved or received will be posted without change; Statement on Burden on Competition disapproved. the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from The Exchange does not believe that IV. Solicitation of Comments submissions. You should submit only the proposed rule change would impose Interested persons are invited to information that you wish to make any burden on competition that is not available publicly. All submissions necessary or appropriate in furtherance submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, should refer to File Number SR– of the purposes of the Act. The NYSEArca–2014–108 and should be proposed change is not designed to including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. submitted on or before October 27, address any competitive issue but rather 2014. revise an existing a [sic] rule, that can be seen as inaccurate or incomplete, by 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). For the Commission, by the Division of 12 accurately describing functionality 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 13 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). As required under Rule authority.15 applicable to the PNP Plus order type 19b–4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Kevin M. O’Neill, and describing the processing of an Commission with written notice of its intent to file Electronic Complex Order designated as the proposed rule change, along with a brief Deputy Secretary. PNP Plus, thereby reducing confusion description and the text of the proposed rule [FR Doc. 2014–23704 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] change, at least five business days prior to the date BILLING CODE 8011–01–P and making the Exchange’s rules easier of filing of the proposed rule change, or such to understand and navigate. Also, shorter time as designated by the Commission. adopting Complex BBO and Complex 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60226 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE and 717 (Limitations on Orders) information,7 should be able to consider COMMISSION governing information barriers. the outstanding quotes of their affiliated Specifically, the Exchange is proposing marker maker units for the purposes of [Release No. 34–73261; File No. SR–ISE– 2014–43] to amend the portion of the rules that calculating net positions and making address the limitation on the flow of routing decisions to increase the Self-Regulatory Organizations; information between a member’s member’s interaction rate between its International Securities Exchange, Electronic Access Member (‘‘EAM’’) EAM unit and affiliated market making LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule unit, which handles the customer/ unit(s). Further, the Exchange asserts Change Amending Its Information agency side of the business, and its that a member should be able to Barrier Rules affiliated Primary Market Maker integrate its market makers’ positions (‘‘PMM’’) and/or Competitive Market and quoting information with its EAM September 30, 2014. Maker (‘‘CMM’’) (jointly, ‘‘market unit(s) because this proposal, in tandem Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the makers’’) unit, which handles the with existing ISE conduct rules,8 ISE’s Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the proprietary side of the business. review and approval of the information ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 ISE adopted its Rule 810 (Limitations barrier procedures submitted by market notice is hereby given that on on Dealings) on February 24, 2000 3 and makers that will be conducting Other September 15, 2014, the International over the years, the Exchange has Business Activities,9 ISE’s ongoing Securities Exchange, LLC (the frequently been asked by its members to surveillances for manipulative conduct, ‘‘Exchange’’ or the ‘‘ISE’’) filed with the provide guidance as to what information and FINRA’s exam program that reviews Securities and Exchange Commission can be shared between an EAM and its such members compliance with such (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule affiliated market maker business under policies and procedures, should provide change, as described in Items I and II Rule 810.4 The Exchange’s position on a regulatory framework that guards below, which items have been prepared this issue has always been that the customer interests and protects against by the self-regulatory organization. The information barrier between the EAM the misuse of material nonpublic Commission is publishing this notice to unit and its affiliated market maker unit information, while increasing the solicit comments on the proposed rule must restrict the flow of information in operational flexibility of ISE members. change from interested persons. both directions. As so interpreted, (i) the ISE Rule 717(d) and (e) requires I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s EAM unit cannot know where and at members to expose certain orders Statement of the Terms of Substance of what price its affiliated market makers entered on the limit order book for at the Proposed Rule Change are quoting and, therefore, cannot use least one second before executing them that information to influence their as principal or against orders that were The International Securities solicited from other broker-dealers. This Exchange, LLC (the ‘‘Exchange’’ or the routing decisions, and (ii) the market makers cannot know what customer requirement applies when the EAM is ‘‘ISE’’) is proposing to amend its Rules handling both sides of a trade and not 810 (Limitations on Dealings) and 717 orders its affiliated EAMs are handling as agent and, therefore, cannot use that when an EAM is handling a marketable (Limitations on Orders). The text of the order as agent and is routing that order proposed rule change is available on the information to influence their quotations. to execute against a quote/order resting Exchange’s Web site (http:// on the order book. Accordingly, when www.ise.com), at the principal office of The Exchange is now proposing to amend its Rule 810 to allow EAMs to customer order(s) that an EAM is the Exchange, and at the Commission’s handling as agent executes against an know where and at what price its Public Reference Room. affiliated market maker’s quote or order, affiliated market makers are either it appears as though the EAM was in II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s quoting or have orders on the order fact handling both sides of the trade, Statement of the Purpose of, and book 5 and to use that information to and did not comply with the order Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule influence their routing decisions. As exposure requirements of ISE Rule Change such, an EAM may route an order that 717(d) and (e). However, because the it is handling on an agency basis to the In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange does not publicly identify the ISE where its affiliated market maker is self-regulatory organization included member that entered an order on the either quoting or has an order on the statements concerning the purpose of, limit order book, orders from the same and basis for, the proposed rule change order book so that the two orders and discussed any comments it received immediately interact. The Exchange 7 See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. 78o(g). Section 15(g) of the on the proposed rule change. The text posits that these such members, in the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’) of these statements may be examined at context of risk management 6 and requires every broker or dealer to ‘‘establish, the places specified in Item IV below. consistent with the protections against maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed, taking into The self-regulatory organization has the misuse of material nonpublic consideration the nature of such broker’s or dealer’s prepared summaries, set forth in business, to prevent the misuse . . . of material, sections A, B and C below, of the most 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34– nonpublic information by such broker or dealer or significant aspects of such statements. 4255 [sic]; File No. 10–127 (February 24, 2000). any person associated with such broker or dealer.’’ 4 Rule 810 currently permits market makers to 8 See, e.g., ISE Rules 400 (Just and Equitable A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s provide its affiliated EAM, upon request, the same Principles of Trade), 401 (Adherence to Law), 405 Statement of the Purpose of, and general quotation information that it would provide (Manipulation), 408 (Prevention of the Misuse of to an unaffiliated entity. The intent of that Material, Nonpublic Information) and 713 (Priority Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule provision was an attempt in 2000 to replicate a of Quotes and Orders). Change floor-based market, in which a broker could ask a 9 ISE Rule 810 defines ‘‘Other Business floor-based specialist general information on the Activities’’ as meaning, (1) conducting an 1. Purpose market. investment or banking or public securities business; The Exchange is proposing to amend 5 According to Rule 805(b)(1)(i) and (ii) market (2) making markets in the stocks underlying the its Rules 810 (Limitations on Dealings) makers may only have orders on the order book in options in which it makes markets; (3) handling option classes to which they are not appointed. listed options orders as agent on behalf of Public 6 See, e.g., 17 CFR Part 240.15c3–5 (Risk Customers or broker-dealers; or (4) conducting non- 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Management Controls for Brokers or Dealers with market making proprietary listed options trading 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. Market Access). activities.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60227

firm may inadvertently execute against information to flow from the market regulations and with Exchange rules. each other as a result of being entered maker to the EAM would not comprise Such written policies and procedures by disparate persons and/or systems at the integrity of our market, nor would will continue to be subject to oversight the same member firm. Therefore, when it introduce customer harm, as by the Exchange and therefore allowing enforcing Rule 717(d) and (e), the discussed in more detail above. information to flow from the market Exchange has never considered the Additionally, the Exchange believes that makers to their affiliated EAMs should inadvertent interaction of orders from market quality will not be eroded due to not reduce the effectiveness of the the same firm within one second to be these changes because the information Exchange rules to protect against the a violation of the exposure requirement. barrier preventing the flow of misuse of material nonpublic On September 20, 2011 the Exchange information from the EAM to its’ information. Rather the Exchange codified this longstanding policy in affiliated market maker remains believes that a member should be able Supplementary Material .06 to Rule unchanged, meaning, market makers to integrate its market makers’ positions 717,10 which currently specifies that will continue to be unable to adjust and quoting information with its EAM members can demonstrate that orders their quotes either to intercept or avoid unit(s) because this proposal, in tandem were entered without knowledge of a orders since that side of the barrier with existing ISE conduct rules,17 ISE’s pre-existing order on the book remains in force. review and approval of the information represented by the same firm by barrier procedures submitted by market 2. Statutory Basis providing evidence that effective makers that will be conducting Other information barriers between the The basis under the Act for this Business Activities, ISE’s ongoing persons, business units and/or systems proposed rule change is the requirement surveillances for manipulative conduct, entering the orders onto the Exchange under Section 6(b),13 in general, and and FINRA’s exam program that reviews were in existence at the time the orders Section 6(b)(5) 14 in particular, that an such members compliance with such were entered.11 This rule requires that exchange have rules that are designed to policies and procedures, should provide such information barriers be fully prevent fraudulent and manipulative a regulatory framework that guards documented and provided to the acts and practices, to promote just and customer interests and protects against Exchange upon request.12 equitable principles of trade, to remove the misuse of material nonpublic Given the proposed change to ISE impediments to and perfect the information. The proposed changes do Rule 810, the Exchange is also mechanism for a free and open market not alter a member’s best execution duty proposing to make a corresponding and a national market system, and, in to get the best price for its customer and, change to Supplementary Material .06 to general, to protect investors and the therefore, the Exchange does not believe Rule 717 to specify that orders from the public interest. In particular, the that the proposed changes provided any same member’s EAM unit and its Exchange believes that amending its advantage or disadvantage to customers affiliated PMM and/or CMM unit may rules to allow information to flow from or the markets in general. interact within one second without the market maker to the EAM would not B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s being a violation of the order exposure comprise the integrity of the market as Statement on Burden on Competition requirement of paragraph (d) and (e) of the information barrier preventing the Rule 717 when the firm can demonstrate flow of information from the EAM to its The Exchange does not believe that that the customer order that it routed affiliated market maker remains the proposed rule change will impose was marketable, the EAM was not unchanged. Meaning, a market maker any burden on competition that is not handling the affiliated market maker cannot be privy to nonpublic necessary or appropriate in furtherance quote/order and the affiliated market information about incoming customer of the purposes of the Act. However, the maker quote/order was in existence at orders and adjust their quotations in Exchange believes that Rule 810 the time the customer order(s) were response. The Exchange also believes currently imposes a burden on entered into the ISE’s system. that this rule change will not introduce competition for the Exchange because it The Exchange believes that adopting customer harm as this change does not requires market makers that engage in these rule changes will allow for the impact the order protection rules Other Business Activities to operate in Exchange to provide its membership applicable to an EAM handling an order a manner that the Exchange believes is with increased operational flexibility as agent,15 but rather allows the EAM to more restrictive than necessary for the while keeping intact the original route to a specific destination to interact protection of investors to the public purpose of the rule, which was intended with its affiliated market makers’ interest. The Exchange believes that the to prevent market makers from using quotations or orders in the same manner proposed rule change is pro-competitive customer order flow information to that the EAM would route orders to because it is consistent with how other influence their quotations. The access quotes and orders of market national securities exchanges are Exchange believes that allowing makers that it is not affiliated with. In currently interpreting their rules and addition, members will continue to be should provide greater flexibility to 10 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65361 allow member firms to make routing (September 20, 2011), 76 FR 59472 (September 26, subject to federal and Exchange 2011) (SR–ISE–2011–42). requirements for protecting material decisions based on the same 11 The Exchange conducts routine surveillance to nonpublic order information.16 information across multiple markets. identify instances when an order on the limit order Additionally, the Exchange notes that book is executed against an order entered by the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the rule will still require that member Statement on Comments on the same firm within one second. organizations maintain and enforce 12 The Exchange reviews information barrier Proposed Rule Change Received From documentation to evaluate whether a member has policies and procedures reasonably Members, Participants or Others implemented processes that are reasonably designed to ensure compliance with designed to prevent the flow of pre-trade order applicable federal securities laws and The Exchange has not solicited, and information given the particular structure of the does not intend to solicit, comments on member firm. Additionally, information barriers are 13 this proposed rule change. The reviewed as part of the Exchange’s examination 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). program, which is administered by the Financial 14 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Exchange has not received any Industry Regulatory Authority (‘‘FINRA’’) pursuant 15 See note 7. to a regulatory services agreement. 16 See 15 U.S.C. 78o(g) and ISE Rule 408. 17 See note 7.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60228 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

unsolicited written comments from Paper Comments Incident: Central Washington members or other interested parties. • Send paper comments in triplicate Firestorm. Incident Period: 07/09/2014 through to Secretary, Securities and Exchange III. Date of Effectiveness of the 08/05/2014. Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. EFFECTIVE DATE: 09/29/2014. Commission Action Physical Loan Application Deadline Within 45 days of the publication date All submissions should refer to File Date: 11/28/2014. of this notice in the Federal Register or Number SR–ISE–2014–43. This file Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan within such longer period up to 90 days number should be included on the Application Deadline Date: 06/29/2015. (i) as the Commission may designate if subject line if email is used. To help the ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan it finds such longer period to be Commission process and review your applications to: U.S. Small Business appropriate and publishes its reasons comments more efficiently, please use Administration, Processing and for so finding or (ii) as to which the self- only one method. The Commission will Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport regulatory organization consents, the post all comments on the Commissions Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Commission will: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the (a) By order approve or disapprove Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, submission, all subsequent such proposed rule change, or U.S. Small Business Administration, amendments, all written statements (b) institute proceedings to determine 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, with respect to the proposed rule whether the proposed rule change Washington, DC 20416. should be disapproved. change that are filed with the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Commission, and all written Notice is IV. Solicitation of Comments communications relating to the hereby given that as a result of the Interested persons are invited to proposed rule change between the Administrator’s disaster declaration, submit written data, views, and Commission and any person, other than applications for disaster loans may be arguments concerning the foregoing, those that may be withheld from the filed at the address listed above or other including whether the proposed rule public in accordance with the locally announced locations. The following areas have been change is consistent with the Act. The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be determined to be adversely affected by Commission requests comments, in available for Web site viewing and the disaster: particular, on the following: printing in the Commission’s Public 1. If the proposed rule change is Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Primary Counties: Okanogan. Contiguous Counties: approved, an EAM will be able to know Washington, DC 20549 on official Washington: Chelan, Douglas, Ferry, where and at what price its affiliated business days between the hours of Grant, Lincoln, Skagit, Whatcom. market makers are either quoting or 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such have orders on the order book and to filing also will be available for The Interest Rates are: use that information to influence its inspection and copying at the principal Percent routing decisions. Do commenters agree office of the ISE. All comments received with the Exchange’s assertion that the will be posted without change; the For Physical Damage: proposed rule change will not introduce Commission does not edit personal Homeowners With Credit Avail- customer harm, as this change does not identifying information from able Elsewhere ...... 4.375 impact the order protection rules submissions. You should submit only Homeowners Without Credit applicable to an EAM handling an order information that you wish to make Available Elsewhere ...... 2.188 as agent? Do commenters have a view available publicly. All submissions Businesses With Credit Avail- on whether permitting EAMs to make able Elsewhere ...... 6.000 should refer to File Number SR–ISE– Businesses Without Credit routing decisions, based on knowledge 2014–43 and should be submitted by Available Elsewhere ...... 4.000 of an affiliated market maker’s quotes, October 27, 2014. Non-Profit Organizations With would impact the execution quality and For the Commission, by the Division of Credit Available Elsewhere ... 2.625 handling of customer orders? Please Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Non-Profit Organizations With- explain. authority.18 out Credit Available Else- where ...... 2.625 2. Given that EAMs must maintain Kevin M. O’Neill, policies and procedures that are For Economic Injury: Deputy Secretary. reasonably designed to ensure against Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit the misuse of material, nonpublic [FR Doc. 2014–23701 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Available Elsewhere ...... 4.000 information pursuant to ISE Rule 408, Non-Profit Organizations With- do commenters have any views out Credit Available Else- regarding a proposed rule that would where ...... 2.625 permit an EAM to have non-public SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION information about where and at what The number assigned to this disaster [Disaster Declaration #14136 and #14137] price its affiliated market maker is either for physical damage is 14136 5 and for quoting or has orders on the order book? Washington Disaster #WA–00047 economic injury is 14137 0. Comments may be submitted by any The State which received an EIDL of the following methods: AGENCY: Small Business Administration. Declaration # is Washington. ACTION: Notice. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Electronic Comments Numbers 59002 and 59008) • Use the Commission’s Internet SUMMARY: This is a notice of an comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Administrative declaration of a disaster Dated: September 29, 2104. rules/sro.shtml); or for the State of Washington dated 09/29/ Maria Contreras-Sweet, • Send an Email to rule-comments@ 2014. Administrator. sec.gov. Please include File No. SR–ISE– [FR Doc. 2014–23808 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 2014–43 on the subject line. 18 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60229

DEPARTMENT OF STATE be fulfilled. If you would like to additional information. A member of the participate by telephone, please email public needing reasonable [Public Notice 8899] [email protected] to obtain the call-in accommodation should notify us at pil@ U.S. Department of State Advisory number and other information. state.gov not later than October 20th. Committee on Private International Data from the public is requested Requests made after that date will be Law (ACPIL): Public Meeting on pursuant to Pub.L. 99–399 (Omnibus considered, but might not be able to be Electronic Commerce Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism fulfilled. Act of 1986), as amended; Pub.L. 107– Dated: September 19, 2014. The Office of the Assistant Legal 56 (USA PATRIOT Act); and Executive John J. Kim, Adviser for Private International Law, Order 13356. The purpose of the Assistant Legal Adviser, Office of Private Department of State, gives notice of a collection is to validate the identity of public meeting to discuss a Working International Law, Office of the Legal Adviser, individuals who enter Department Department of State. Paper prepared by the Secretariat of the facilities. [FR Doc. 2014–23789 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] United Nations Commission on The data will be entered into the International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). Visitor Access Control System (VACS– BILLING CODE 4710–08–P The public meeting will take place on D) database. Please see the Security Monday, October 27, 2014 from 9:30 Records System of Records Notice a.m. until 12 p.m. EDT. This is not a (State-36) at http://www.state.gov/ OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES meeting of the full Advisory Committee. documents/organization/103419.pdf for TRADE REPRESENTATIVE The UNCITRAL Secretariat has additional information. revised draft provisions on electronic [Docket No. USTR–2014–0019] transferable records, which are Dated: September 23, 2014. Michael S. Coffee, 2014 Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review presented in the form of a model law to of Kuwait facilitate discussion during the next Attorney-Adviser, Office of Private meeting of UNCITRAL’s Working Group International Law, Office of the Legal Adviser, AGENCY: Office of the United States IV, which will meet November 10–14, U.S. Department of State. Trade Representative. [FR Doc. 2014–23790 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 2014. The Working Paper, which is ACTION: Request for written comments. numbered WP.130 and includes BILLING CODE 4710–08–P WP.130/Add.1, is available at http:// SUMMARY: In the 2014 Special 301 www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/ Report, the Office of the United States commission/working_groups/ DEPARTMENT OF STATE Trade Representative (USTR) _ 4Electronic Commerce.html. [Public Notice 8900] announced that, in order to monitor The purpose of the public meeting is progress on specific intellectual to obtain the views of concerned U.S. Department of State Advisory property rights (IPR) issues, an Out-of- stakeholders on the topics addressed in Committee on Private International Cycle Review (OCR) would be the Working Paper in advance of the Law: Notice of Annual Meeting conducted for Kuwait. USTR requests meeting of Working Group IV. Those written comments from the public who cannot attend but wish to comment The Department of State’s Advisory concerning any act, policy, or practice are welcome to do so by email to Committee on Private International Law that is relevant to the decision regarding Michael Coffee at [email protected]. (ACPIL) will hold its annual meeting on whether Kuwait should be identified Time and Place: The meeting will Monday, November 3, 2014 in under Section 182 of the Trade Act of take place from 9:30 a.m. until 12 p.m. Washington, DC The meeting will be 1974 (Trade Act) (19 U.S.C. 2242). The EDT in Room 356, South Building, State held at the Michael K. Young Faculty 2014 Special 301 Report is available at Department Annex 4, Washington, DC Conference Center, George Washington www.ustr.gov. 20037. Participants should plan to University Law School, 2000 H Street Deadlines: The deadline for the arrive at the Navy Hill gate on the west NW., Washington DC 20052. The public, except foreign governments, to side of 23rd Street NW., at the program is scheduled to run from 9:00 submit written comments is intersection of 23rd Street NW. and D a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, October 15, 2014. The Street NW. by 9:00 a.m. for visitor We expect that the discussion will deadline for foreign governments to screening. If you are unable to attend focus on certain ongoing projects as well submit written comments is Monday, the public meeting and would like to as the future of private international October 20, 2014. participate from a remote location, law. We encourage active participation ADDRESSES: All written comments teleconferencing will be available. by all those attending. Public Participation: This meeting is Please advise as early as possible if should be filed electronically via open to the public, subject to the you plan to attend. The meeting is open www.regulations.gov, Docket Number capacity of the meeting room. Access to to the public up to the capacity of the USTR–2014–0019, and be consistent the building is strictly controlled. For conference facility, and space will be with the requirements set forth below. pre-clearance purposes, those planning reserved on a first come, first served Please specify ‘‘2014 Special 301 Out-of- to attend should email [email protected] basis. Persons who wish to have their Cycle Review of Kuwait’’ in the ‘‘Type providing full name, address, date of views considered are encouraged, but Comment’’ field. birth, citizenship, driver’s license or not required, to submit written FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: passport number, and email address. comments in advance. Those who are Susan Wilson, Director for Intellectual This information will greatly facilitate unable to attend are also encouraged to Property and Innovation, Office of the entry into the building. A member of the submit written views. Comments should United States Trade Representative, at public needing reasonable be sent electronically to [email protected]. [email protected]. Please do not accommodation should email pil@ Those planning to attend should file comments at this address. state.gov not later than October 20, provide name, affiliation and contact Information on the Special 301 Review 2014. Requests made after that date will information to [email protected]. You may is available at www.ustr.gov. be considered, but might not be able to also use those contacts to obtain SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60230 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

1. Background particularly their consistency with be marked ‘‘BUSINESS Section 182 of the Trade Act requires international standards; and the change, CONFIDENTIAL’’ on the cover page and USTR to identify countries that deny if any, of the frequency of enforcement each succeeding page, and the adequate and effective protection of IPR actions against copyright and trademark submission should clearly indicate, via or deny fair and equitable market access infringement. USTR requests that brackets, highlighting, or other means, to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual interested parties provide specific the specific information that is business property protection. The provisions of references to laws, regulations, policy confidential. Additionally, the submitter Section 182 are commonly referred to as statements, executive, presidential or should type ‘‘Business Confidential the ‘‘Special 301’’ provisions of the other orders, administrative, court or 2014 Out-of-Cycle Review of Kuwait’’ in Trade Act. other determinations that should be the ‘‘Type Comment’’ field. Anyone Those countries that have the most factored in the review. submitting a comment containing onerous or egregious acts, policies, or b. Instructions for Submitting Comments business confidential information must practices and whose acts, policies, or also submit, as a separate submission, a practices have the greatest adverse Comments must be in English. To non-business confidential version of the impact (actual or potential) on relevant ensure the timely receipt and submission, indicating where the U.S. products are to be identified as consideration of comments, USTR business confidential information has Priority Foreign Countries. In addition, strongly encourages commenters to been redacted. The filenames of both USTR has created a ‘‘Priority Watch submit comments electronically, using documents should reflect their status— List’’ and a ‘‘Watch List’’ under Special the www.regulations.gov Web site. To ‘‘BC’’ for the business confidential 301 provisions. Placement of a trading submit comments via version and ‘‘P’’ for the public version. www.regulations.gov, enter Docket partner on the Priority Watch List or The non-business confidential version Number USTR–2014–0019 on the home Watch List indicates that particular will be placed in the docket at page and click ‘‘Search.’’ The site will problems exist in that country with www.regulations.gov and be available provide a search-results page listing all respect to IPR protection, enforcement, for public inspection. documents associated with this docket. or market access for persons relying on As noted, USTR strongly urges Find the reference to this notice and intellectual property. commenters to submit comments An OCR is a tool that USTR uses to click on the link entitled ‘‘Comment through www.regulations.gov. Any encourage progress on IPR issues of Now!’’ For further information on using alternative arrangements must be made the www.regulations.gov Web site, concern. It provides an opportunity for in advance of transmitting a comment please consult the resources provided heightened engagement with a trading and in advance of the relevant deadline on the site by clicking on ‘‘How to use partner to address and remedy such by contacting USTR at Special301@ Regulations.gov’’ at the bottom of the issues. Successful resolution of specific ustr.eop.gov. home page under ‘‘Help.’’ IPR issues of concern or lack of action The www.regulations.gov Web site 3. Inspection of Comments on that concern can lead to a change in allows users to provide comments by Comments received will be placed in a trading partner’s Special 301 status filling in a ‘‘Type Comment’’ field, or by outside of the time frame for the annual the docket and open to public attaching a document using an ‘‘Upload inspection pursuant to 15 CFR 2006.13, Special 301 Review. File’’ field. USTR prefers that comments In the 2014 Special 301 Report, USTR except business confidential be provided in an attached document. If information exempt from public noted that it would conduct an OCR of a document is attached, please type Kuwait focusing in particular on the inspection in accordance with 15 CFR ‘‘2014 Out-of-Cycle Review of Kuwait’’ 2006.15. Comments may be viewed free Government of Kuwait’s efforts to in the ‘‘Type Comment’’ field. USTR address deficiencies in both its of charge by visiting prefers submissions in Microsoft Word www.regulations.gov and entering copyright legislation and its intellectual (.doc) or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format. If property enforcement practices. The Docket Number USTR–2014–0019 in the the submission is in another file format, ‘‘Search’’ field on the home page. 2014 Special 301 Report included please indicate the name of the software specific steps that Kuwait would need application in the ‘‘Type Comment’’ Susan F. Wilson, to take by the conclusion of the OCR to field. File names should reflect the Director for Intellectual Property and avoid being moved to the Priority Watch name of the person or entity submitting Innovation. List: (1) Introduce amendments to the the comments. Please do not attach [FR Doc. 2014–23763 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] current copyright legislation that meet separate cover letters to electronic BILLING CODE 3290–F4–P international standards; and (2) resume submissions; rather, include any enforcement against both copyright information that might appear in a cover piracy and trademark infringement. letter in the comments themselves. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2. Written Comments Similarly, to the extent possible, please include any exhibits, annexes, or other Federal Aviation Administration a. Requirements for Written Comments attachments in the same file as the To facilitate the review, written comment itself, rather than submitting Agency Information Collection comments should be as detailed as them as separate files. Activities: Requests for Comments; possible and provide all necessary A person requesting that information Clearance of Renewed Approval of information for identifying and contained in a comment submitted by Information Collection: Notice of assessing the effect of the acts, policies, that person be treated as confidential Landing Area Proposal and practices of Kuwait relevant to the business information must certify that AGENCY: Federal Aviation issues being reviewed in the OCR. such information is business Administration (FAA), DOT. Comments should include: Information confidential and would not customarily ACTION: Notice and request for relating to the status of any amendments be released to the public by the comments. that have been introduced to the current submitter. In the document, confidential copyright legislation of Kuwait; the business information must clearly be SUMMARY: In accordance with the substance of the amendments, designated as such; the submission must Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60231

invites public comments about our Whether the proposed collection of Background: A pilot in command is intention to request the Office of information is necessary for FAA’s required to be apprised when a Management and Budget (OMB) performance; (b) the accuracy of the passenger brings a POC on board the approval for to renew an information estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to aircraft, and passengers who have a collection. The Federal Register Notice enhance the quality, utility and clarity medical need to use a POC during flight with a 60-day comment period soliciting of the information collection; and (d) are required to possess a signed comments on the following collection of ways that the burden could be physician statement describing the information was published on July 31, minimized without reducing the quality oxygen therapy needed, to determine 2014, vol. 79, no. 147, page 44485. FAA of the collected information. The agency whether an inflight diversion to an Form 7480–1 (Notice of Landing Area will summarize and/or include your airport may be needed in the event the Proposal) is used to collect information comments in the request for OMB’s passenger’s POC fails to operate or the about any construction, alteration, or clearance of this information collection. aircraft experiences cabin pressurization change to the status or use of an airport. Issued in Washington, DC on October 1, difficulties, and to verify the need for DATES: Written comments should be 2014. the device, the oxygen therapy needed submitted by November 5, 2014. Albert R. Spence, to be provided by use of the POC, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FAA Assistant Information Collection the oxygen needs of the passenger in Kathy DePaepe at (405) 954–9362, or by Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business case of emergency. email at: [email protected]. Services Division, ASP–110. Respondents: Approximately SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 2014–23813 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] 1,690,555 passengers. OMB Control Number: 2120–0036 BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Title: Notice of Landing Area Proposal Frequency: Information is collected as Form Numbers: FAA Form 7480–1. needed. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Type of Review: Renewal of an Estimated Average Burden per information collection. Response: 6 minutes. Background: FAR Part 157 requires Federal Aviation Administration that each person who intends to Estimated Total Annual Burden: Agency Information Collection construct, deactivate, or change the 169,046 hours. Activities: Requests for Comments; status of an airport, runway, or taxiway Clearance of Renewed Approval of ADDRESSES: Interested persons are must notify the FAA of such activity. Information Collection: Use of Certain invited to submit written comments on The information collected provides the Personal Oxygen Concentrator (POC) the proposed information collection to basis for determining the effect the Devices on Board Aircraft the Office of Information and Regulatory proposed action would have on existing Affairs, Office of Management and airports and on the safe and efficient use AGENCY: Federal Aviation Budget. Comments should be addressed of airspace by aircraft, the effects on Administration (FAA), DOT. to the attention of the Desk Officer, existing or contemplated traffic patterns ACTION: Notice and request for Department of Transportation/FAA, and of neighboring airports, the effects on comments. sent via electronic mail to oira_ the existing airspace structure and [email protected], or faxed to projected programs of the FAA, and the SUMMARY: In accordance with the effects that existing or proposed Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA (202) 395–6974, or mailed to the Office manmade objects (on file with the FAA) invites public comments about our of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and natural objects within the affected intention to request the Office of Office of Management and Budget, area would have on the airport proposal. Management and Budget (OMB) Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Respondents: Approximately 1500 approval to renew an information Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. applicants. collection. The Federal Register Notice Public Comments Invited: You are Frequency: Information is collected with a 60-day comment period soliciting asked to comment on any aspect of this on occasion. comments on the following collection of information collection, including (a) Estimated Average Burden per information was published on July 31, Whether the proposed collection of Response: 45 minutes. 2014, vol. 79, no. 147, page 44486. A information is necessary for FAA’s Estimated Total Annual Burden: Special Federal Aviation Regulation performance; (b) the accuracy of the 1,125 hours. requires passengers who intend to use estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to an approved POC to present a physician ADDRESSES: Interested persons are enhance the quality, utility and clarity statement before boarding. The flight invited to submit written comments on of the information collection; and (d) crew must then inform the pilot-in- the proposed information collection to ways that the burden could be the Office of Information and Regulatory command that a POC is on board. minimized without reducing the quality Affairs, Office of Management and DATES: Written comments should be of the collected information. The agency Budget. Comments should be addressed submitted by November 5, 2014. will summarize and/or include your to the attention of the Desk Officer, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments in the request for OMB’s Department of Transportation/FAA, and Kathy DePaepe at (405) 954–9362, or by clearance of this information collection. sent via electronic mail to oira_ email at: [email protected]. [email protected], or faxed to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Issued in Washington, DC, on October 1, (202) 395–6974, or mailed to the Office Control Number: 2120–0702. 2014. of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Title: Use of Certain Personal Oxygen Albert R. Spence, Office of Management and Budget, Concentrator (POC) Devices on Board FAA Assistant Information Collection Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Aircraft. Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. Form Numbers: There are no FAA Services Division, ASP–110. Public Comments Invited: You are forms associated with this collection. [FR Doc. 2014–23815 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] asked to comment on any aspect of this Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection, including (a) information collection. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60232 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION alternatives analyses over the past 10 Environmental Policy Act of 1969 years to evaluate feasible options for (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Federal Highway Administration development of passenger rail service Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing along the IH–35 corridor between the NEPA, and FHWA regulations. The EIS Environmental Impact Statement; Lone metropolitan areas of Austin and San will evaluate the reasonable alternatives Star Regional Rail Project, Williamson, Antonio. Through these efforts, the and the No Action (the no-build Travis, Bastrop, Hays, Caldwell, LSRD has worked closely with the alternative), Transportation System Comal, Guadalupe, and Bexar UPRR, as a major stakeholder, to Management (TSM)/Transportation Counties, TX evaluate operational scenarios for joint Demand Management (TDM), and other AGENCY: Federal Highway freight and passenger operations within transit, rail, and roadway alternatives Administration (FHWA), DOT. UPRR’s existing system. A potential incorporated by reference from other alternative to be evaluated in the EIS applicable studies. Federal Surface ACTION: Notice of intent. includes development and operation of Transportation Program-Metropolitan SUMMARY: Pursuant to 40 CFR 1508.22 passenger rail service within the Mobility (STP–MM) funds were used to and 43 TAC § 2.5(e)(2), the Federal abandoned MoKan railroad right-of-way conduct the previous studies and are Highway Administration (FHWA), between Georgetown and Round Rock, funding the current EIS. Texas Department of Transportation and along the existing UPRR corridor The EIS will analyze potential direct, (TxDOT), and the Lone Star Rail District between Round Rock and San Antonio. indirect, and cumulative impacts from (LSRD) are issuing this notice to advise A branch route providing passenger rail the proposed construction and the public that an Environmental Impact service between Round Rock and Taylor operation of the reasonable alternatives Statement (EIS) will be prepared for a along the existing UPRR corridor could considered including, but not limited to proposed transportation project to also be evaluated. the following: regional transportation construct and operate a regional A potential alternative could include system impacts (including all modes passenger rail service system along the development of a freight bypass to and effects on congestion); air quality IH–35 corridor connecting the greater accommodate some existing freight rail impacts; noise and vibration impacts (in Austin and San Antonio metropolitan traffic that could be displaced by the accordance with FRA/FTA guidelines); areas. A required letter of initiation proposed passenger rail operations. The impacts to water quality and water pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 139 was proposed freight rail bypass could resources including surface and completed as well. As the project extend from the UPRR Austin groundwater, wetlands, rivers, and proponent, the LSRD intends to apply Subdivision near Taylor and follow a streams, and floodplains; impacts to for Transportation Infrastructure greenfield alignment (new location) to historic, archaeological, and cultural Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Seguin. From Seguin, the proposed resources; impacts to threatened and program funding and seek to retain freight rail bypass could follow existing endangered species and protected federal funding eligibility for this UPRR right-of-way through the San habitats; impacts on farm and range proposed project. The proposed project Antonio area and terminate at Tower lands; socioeconomic impacts including would provide for implementation of 105 near downtown San Antonio. environmental justice communities; The need for the proposed project passenger rail service within the impacts on land use and potential stems from the rapid growth occurring existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) displacements; hazardous materials; and in Central and South Texas. Congestion corridor that extends from Williamson impacts to aesthetic and visual within the IH–35 corridor has resulted County to Bexar County, Texas. FHWA resources. in decreased mobility and travel time Public involvement is a critical as the lead federal agency will reliability for both travelers and freight component of the NEPA process and coordinate closely with the Federal transporters. The deficiencies of the will occur throughout this study. Railroad Administration (FRA) and the existing transportation network, Scoping letters describing the proposed Federal Transit Administration (FTA), including lack of modal transportation action and a request for comments will to perform the analyses required to options and limited roadway capacity, be sent to federal, state, and local evaluate reasonable alternatives for the contribute to decreased regional air agencies as well as stakeholders, proposed action. The EIS may include a quality, increased crash rates, and community groups, and citizens who potential alternative that would include diminished quality of life for residents previously expressed an interest in the development and operation of a new living in close proximity to IH–35. proposed project. Agency and public freight bypass to carry some of the The Lone Star Regional Rail Project scoping meetings are planned for the existing freight rail traffic between would provide regional passenger rail fall of 2014. The purpose of agency and Taylor and San Antonio to allow the service connecting communities along public scoping is to identify relevant addition of passenger service along the the IH–35 corridor between the and potentially significant issues related existing UPRR line. metropolitan areas of Austin and San to the Lone Star Regional Rail Project as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Antonio. As currently envisioned, the part of the NEPA process. Scoping Salvador Deocampo, District Engineer, project would span approximately 120 meetings, conducted pursuant to 23 Federal Highway Administration, Texas miles across Williamson, Travis, U.S.C. 139, will provide opportunities Division, 300 East 8th Street, Room 826, Bastrop, Hays, Caldwell, Comal, for cooperating agencies, participating Austin, Texas 78701, Telephone 512– Guadalupe, and Bexar counties. Based agencies, and the public to be involved 536–5950. upon previous studies, the purpose of in review and comment on the Draft SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The LSRD the proposed project is to improve Project Coordination Plan, defining the (formed in 2003 with authorization of mobility, accessibility, transportation need and purpose for the proposed the State of Texas) is an independent reliability, modal choice, safety, and action, determining the range of and accountable public agency focused facilitate economic development along reasonable alternatives to be considered on providing regional passenger rail the IH–35 corridor in Central and South in the EIS and the appropriate service. As the project proponent, the Texas. methodologies to be used, and the level LSRD has conducted numerous The EIS will be prepared in of detail required in the analysis of planning, environmental, and accordance with the National alternatives. Federal agencies with

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60233

jurisdiction by law or special expertise did not correctly reflect NHTSA’s first and second paragraph to cite the with respect to potential environmental intentions for the effective date. Also, following provision: ‘‘23 U.S.C. 405(f).’’ issues (such as FRA and FTA) will be the Notice did not accurately cite the Issued in Washington, DC, on September requested to act as Cooperating appropriate section of the United States 30, 2014, under authority delegated in 49 Agencies in accordance with 40 CFR Code for motorcyclist safety grant funds, CFR part 1.95. 1501.16. Agencies and the public will 23 U.S.C. 405(f). This document corrects O. Kevin Vincent, be notified of the dates, times, and those errors. Chief Counsel. locations of the scoping meetings at a DATES: The effective date of this [FR Doc. 2014–23822 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] later date. Additional public meetings correction is the date of publication BILLING CODE 4910–59–P will also be held on dates to be October 6, 2014. determined at a later time. In addition FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For to public meetings, public hearings will program issues, contact Barbara Sauers, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION also be held. Public notice will be given Office of Regional Operations and of the times and places for the public Program Delivery, NHTSA (phone: 202– Surface Transportation Board meetings and public hearings. Because 366–0144). For legal issues, contact [Docket No. AB 55 (Sub-No. 736X; Docket of the geographic scope of the project, Andrew DiMarsico, Office of Chief No. AB 290 (Sub-No. 368X] public meetings and public hearings Counsel, NHTSA (phone: 202–366– may be conducted at multiple locations. 5263). You may send mail to these CSX Transportation, Inc.— Opportunities for public participation officials at National Highway Traffic Abandonment Exemption—in will also be announced through Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Knoxville, Knox County, Tenn.; Norfolk mailings, notices, advertisements, and Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Southern Railway Company— on the EIS Web page http:// SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Discontinuance of Service www.LoneStarRail.com. September 16, 2014, NHTSA published Exemption—in Knoxville, Knox To ensure that the full range of issues a Notice of Buy America Waiver that County, Tenn. related to this proposed action is provided findings in regards to five CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) and addressed and all significant issues are requests from the Michigan Office of Norfolk Southern Railway Company identified, comments and suggestions Highway Safety Planning (OHSP) to (NSR) (collectively, applicants) have are invited from all interested parties. waive the requirements of Buy America. jointly filed a verified notice of Such comments or questions concerning In summary, NHTSA found the exemption under 49 CFR part 1152 this proposed action should be directed following: subpart F–Exempt Abandonments and to the FHWA at the address provided • A waiver of the Buy America Discontinuances of Service for CSXT to above. requirements, 23 U.S.C. 313, was abandon, and for NSR to discontinue (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance appropriate for OHSP to purchase a service over, approximately 1.18 miles Program Number 20.205, Highway, Planning, portable data projector, wireless remote of rail line on CSXT’s Second Creek and Construction. The regulations control presenter, DVDs, high-visibility Spur on CSXT’s Central Region, implementing Executive Order 12372 motorcycle vests and twenty training Huntington Division, KD Subdivision regarding intergovernmental consultation on motorcycles. between milepost 0KS 275.09 Federal programs and activities apply to this • A non-availability waiver of the (Valuation Station 15304+87) at the end program.) Buy America requirements was of the track and milepost 0KS 276.27 inappropriate for OHSP to lease a (Valuation Station 15368+89 near West Issued on: September 29, 2014. copy/printer/fax machine. Salvador Deocampo, Baxter Avenue in Knoxville, Knox District Engineer. Need for Correction County, Tenn. (the Line). The Line [FR Doc. 2014–23711 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] The Notice of Buy America Waiver traverses United States Postal Service Zip Code 37921 and includes no BILLING CODE 4910–22–P stated the waiver was effective on October 16, 2014. This date did not stations. correctly state NHTSA’s intentions. On Applicants have certified that: (1) No DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION September 16, 2014, at 79 FR 55529, local traffic has moved over the Line for NHTSA intended the waiver to be at least two years; (2) any overhead National Highway Traffic Safety effective on an earlier date in order to traffic on the Line can be rerouted over Administration allow the grantee an opportunity to other lines; (3) no formal complaint has been filed by a user of rail service on the [Docket No. NHTSA–2014–0090] purchase the items requested. Also, the Notice did not accurately cite the Line (or by a state or local government Notice of Buy America Waiver appropriate section of the United States entity acting on behalf of such user) Code for motorcyclist safety grant funds. regarding cessation of service over the AGENCY: National Highway Traffic The Notice cited to 23 U.S.C. 405(g), but Line, and no such complaint is either Safety Administration (NHTSA), NHTSA intended to cite 23 U.S.C. 405(f) pending with the Surface Department of Transportation (DOT). for motorcyclist safety grant funds. Transportation Board (Board) or with ACTION: Correction to Notice of Buy In FR Doc. 2014–0090 appearing on any U.S. District Court or has been America Waiver page 55529 of the Federal Register of decided in favor of a complainant Tuesday, September 16, 2014, the within the two-year period; and (4) the SUMMARY: On September 16, 2014, following corrections are made: requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7(c) NHTSA published a Notice of Buy In the DATES section in the left (environmental report), 49 CFR 1105.11 America Waiver that provided findings column, revise the paragraph to read as (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 to requests from the Michigan Office of follows: (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR Highway Safety Planning (OHSP) to ‘‘The effective date of this waiver is 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental waive the requirements of Buy America. the date of publication.’’ agencies) have been met. The Notice stated an effective date of In the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION As a condition to these exemptions, October 16, 2014. However, that date section in the middle column, revise the any employee adversely affected by the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60234 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices

abandonment or discontinuance shall be after the EA becomes available to the Administration (20M35), Department of protected under Oregon Short Line public. Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue Railroad—Abandonment Portion Environmental, historic preservation, NW., Washington, DC 20420 or email to Goshen Branch Between Firth & public use, or trail use/rail banking [email protected]. Please refer to Ammon, in Bingham & Bonneville conditions will be imposed, where ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900-(VA Form 20– Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). To appropriate, in a subsequent decision. 0968)’’ in any correspondence. During address whether this condition Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR the comment period, comments may be adequately protects affected employees, 1152.29(e)(2), CSXT shall file a notice of viewed online through FDMS. a petition for partial revocation under consummation with the Board to signify FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) must be filed. that it has exercised the authority Nancy J. Kessinger at (202) 632–8924 or Provided no formal expression of granted and fully abandoned the Line. If FAX (202) 632–8925. intent to file an offer of financial consummation has not been effected by assistance (OFA) has been received, CSXT’s filing of a notice of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the these exemptions will be effective on consummation by October 6, 2015, and PRA of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13; 44 U.S.C. November 5, 2014, unless stayed there are no legal or regulatory barriers 3501–3521), Federal agencies must pending reconsideration. Petitions to to consummation, the authority to obtain approval from OMB for each stay that do not involve environmental abandon will automatically expire. collection of information they conduct issues,1 formal expressions of intent to Board decisions and notices are or sponsor. This request for comment is file an OFA under 49 CFR available on our Web site at being made pursuant to Section 1152.27(c)(2),2 and trail use/rail banking ‘‘WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.’’ 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be Decided: September 26, 2014. With respect to the following filed by October 16, 2014. Petitions to collection of information, VBA invites reopen or requests for public use By the Board, Joseph H. Dettmar, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings. comments on: (1) Whether the proposed conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 must collection of information is necessary be filed by October 27, 2014, with the Raina S. White, for the proper performance of VBA’s Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Clearance Clerk. functions, including whether the Street SW., Washington, DC 20423– [FR Doc. 2014–23791 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] information will have practical utility; 0001. BILLING CODE 4915–01–P A copy of any petition filed with the (2) the accuracy of VBA’s estimate of the Board should be sent to applicants’ burden of the proposed collection of representatives: For CSXT, Louis E. information; (3) ways to enhance the DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS quality, utility, and clarity of the Gitomer, Law Offices of Louis E. AFFAIRS Gitomer, LLC, 600 Baltimore Avenue, information to be collected; and (4) Suite 301, Towson, MD 21204, and for [OMB Control No. 2900-(VA Form 20–0968)] ways to minimize the burden of the NSR, William A. Mullins, 2401 collection of information on Claim for Reimburse of Travel Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 300, respondents, including through the use Expenses Activity: Comment Request Washington, DC 20037. of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information If the verified notice contains false or AGENCY: Veterans Benefits technology. misleading information, the exemptions Administration, Department of Veterans are void ab initio. Affairs. Title: Quarterly Report of State Applicants have filed environmental Approving Agency Activities. ACTION: Notice. and historic reports that address the OMB Control Number: 2900-(VA Form effects, if any, of the abandonment and SUMMARY: The Veterans Benefits 20–0968). discontinuance on the environment and Administration (VBA), Department of Type of Review: New collection. historic resources. OEA will issue an Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an environmental assessment (EA) by opportunity for public comment on the Abstract: The purpose of the October 10, 2014. Interested persons proposed collection of certain information collection is for claimants may obtain a copy of the EA by writing information by the agency. Under the to apply for the mileage reimbursement to OEA (Room 1100, Surface Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of benefit in an efficient, convenient and Transportation Board, Washington, DC 1995, Federal agencies are required to accurate manner. VBA must determine 20423–0001) or by calling OEA at (202) publish notice in the Federal Register the identity of the claimant; the dates 245–0305. Assistance for the hearing concerning each proposed collection of and length of the trip being claimed, impaired is available through the information, including each new based on the claimant’s residence and Federal Information Relay Service collection and allow 60 days for public the place of evaluation and counseling, (FIRS) at (800) 877–8339. Comments on comment in response to the notice. This or other place in connection with environmental and historic preservation notice solicits comments on the vocational rehabilitation; and whether matters must be filed within 15 days information needed to provide expenses other than mileage are being beneficiary travel benefits under 38 CFR claimed. 1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed 21.370 through 21.376. Affected Public: Federal government. decision on environmental issues (whether raised by a party or by the Board’s Office of Environmental DATES: Written comments and Estimated Annual Burden: 10,750 Analysis (OEA) in its independent investigation) recommendations on the proposed hours. cannot be made before the exemption’s effective collection of information should be date. See Exemption of Out-of-Serv. Rail Lines, 5 Estimated Average Burden per I.C.C. 2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should received on or before December 5, 2014. Respondent: 5 minutes. be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may ADDRESSES: Submit written comments Frequency of Response: Once. take appropriate action before the exemption’s on the collection of information through effective date. the Federal Docket Management System Estimated Number of Responses: 2 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing 129,000. fee, which is currently set at $1,600. See 49 CFR (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov; or to 1002.2(f)(25). Nancy J. Kessinger, Veterans Benefits Dated: October 1, 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Notices 60235

By direction of the Secretary. Administration, Department of Veterans service. Committee members will Crystal Rennie, Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW (10P), receive travel expenses and a per diem Department Clearance Officer, Department of Washington, DC 20420, telephone (202) allowance for any travel made in Veterans Affairs. 443–5600. (This is not a toll free connection with duties as members of [FR Doc. 2014–23738 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] number.) A copy of the Committee the Committee and within federal travel BILLING CODE 8320–01–P charter and list of the current guidelines. membership can be obtained by Requirements for Nomination contacting Dr. Kalasinsky or by Submission: Nominations should be DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS accessing the Web site: http:// typed (one nomination per nominator). AFFAIRS www.va.gov/rac-gwvi/. Nomination package should include: (1) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Solicitation of Nominations for A letter of nomination that clearly states Research Advisory Committee on Gulf Appointment to the Research Advisory the name and affiliation of the nominee, War Veterans’ Illnesses was established Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ the basis for the nomination (i.e., pursuant to Public Law 105–368, Illnesses specific attributes which qualify the Section 104, to advise the Secretary of nominee for service in this capacity), AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. VA (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the and a statement from the nominee ACTION: Notice. Secretary’’) with respect to proposed indicating the willingness to serve as a research studies, plans, and strategies member of the Committee; (2) the SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans related to understanding and treating nominee’s contact information, Affairs (VA), Veterans Health the health consequences of military including name, mailing address, Administration (VHA), is seeking service in the Southwest Asia theatre of nominations of qualified candidates to telephone numbers, and email address; operations during the 1990–1991 Gulf (3) the nominee’s curriculum vitae; (4) be considered for appointment as a War. member of the Research Advisory a summary of the nominee’s experience VHA is requesting nominations for and qualifications relative to the Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ upcoming vacancies on the Committee. Illnesses (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the membership considerations described The Committee is currently composed above; and (5) a statement confirming Committee’’). The Committee was of 12 members. The members of the established pursuant to Public Law 105– that he/she is not a federally-registered Committee are appointed by the lobbyist. 368, Section 104, to advise the Secretary Secretary from the general public, of VA with respect to proposed research including but not limited to: VA makes every effort to ensure that studies, plans, and strategies related to (1) Gulf War Veterans; the membership of VA Federal advisory understanding and treating the health (2) Representatives of such Veterans; committees is fairly balanced in terms of consequences of military service in the (3) Members of the medical and points of view represented and the Southwest Asia theatre of operations scientific communities representing committee’s function. Appointments to during the 1990–1991 Gulf War. disciplines such as, but not limited to, this Committee shall be made without Nominations of qualified candidates are epidemiology, immunology, discrimination based on a person’s race, being sought to fill upcoming vacancies environmental health, neurology, and color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, on the Committee. toxicology. gender identity, national origin, age, DATES: Nominations for membership on To the extent possible, the Secretary disability, or genetic information. the Committee must be received no later seeks members who have diverse Nominations must state that the than 5:00 p.m. EDT on October 24, 2014. professional and personal qualifications. nominee appears to have no conflict of ADDRESSES: All nominations should be We ask that nominations include interest that would preclude mailed to Veterans Health information of this type so that VA can membership. An ethics review is Administration, Department of Veterans ensure a balanced Committee conducted for each selected nominee. Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave. NW., (10P), membership. Dated: September 30, 2014. Washington, DC 20420, emailed to Individuals appointed to the [email protected], or faxed to Committee by the Secretary shall be Rebecca Schiller, (202) 495–6155. invited to serve a two- or three-year Advisory Committee Management Officer. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. term. The Secretary may reappoint a [FR Doc. 2014–23661 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] Victor Kalasinsky, Veterans Health member for an additional term of BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCN1.SGM 06OCN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Vol. 79 Monday, No. 193 October 6, 2014

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

40 CFR Part 63 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ferroalloys Production; Proposed Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60238 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION http://www.regulations.gov. Follow you for clarification, the EPA may not AGENCY the online instructions for submitting be able to consider your comment. comments. Electronic files should not include 40 CFR Part 63 • Email: [email protected]. special characters or any form of Include ‘‘Attention Docket ID No. EPA– encryption and be free of any defects or [EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0895; FRL–9909–26– HQ–OAR–2010–0895’’ in the subject viruses. For additional information OAR] line of the message. about the EPA’s public docket, visit the • Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention EPA Docket Center homepage at: Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR– RIN 2060–AQ11 http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 2010–0895. Docket. The EPA has established a • National Emission Standards for Mail: Environmental Protection docket for this rulemaking under Docket Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ferroalloys Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0895. Production Mail Code 28221T, Attention Docket ID All documents in the docket are listed No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0895, 1200 in the regulations.gov index. Although AGENCY: Environmental Protection Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, listed in the index, some information is Agency (EPA). DC 20460. Please include a total of two not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other ACTION: Supplemental notice of copies. In addition, please mail a copy information whose disclosure is proposed rulemaking. of your comments on the information restricted by statute. Certain other collection provisions to the Office of material, such as copyrighted material, SUMMARY: This action supplements our Information and Regulatory Affairs, is not placed on the Internet and will be proposed amendments to the national Office of Management and Budget publicly available only in hard copy. emission standards for hazardous air (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 Publicly available docket materials are pollutants (NESHAP) for the Ferroalloys 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. available either electronically in Production source category published in • Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket regulations.gov or in hard copy at the the Federal Register on November 23, Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West EPA Docket Center, EPA WJC West 2011. In that action, the Environmental Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Protection Agency (EPA) proposed NW., Washington, DC 20004, Attention Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public amendments based on the initial Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to technology and residual risk reviews for 0895. Such deliveries are only accepted 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, this source category. Today’s action during the Docket’s normal hours of excluding legal holidays. The telephone presents a revised technology review operation, and special arrangements number for the Public Reading Room is and a revised residual risk review for should be made for deliveries of boxed (202) 566–1744, and the telephone the Ferroalloys Production source information. number for the EPA Docket Center is category and proposes revisions to the Instructions. Direct your comments to (202) 566–1742. standards based on those reviews. This Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– Public Hearing. If requested, we will action also proposes new compliance 0895. The EPA’s policy is that all hold a public hearing on October 21, requirements to meet the revised comments received will be included in 2014, from 1:00 p.m. [Eastern Standard standards. This action would result in the public docket without change and Time] to 8:00 p.m. [Eastern Standard significant environmental may be made available online at Time] in Marietta, Ohio. There will be improvements through the reduction of http://www.regulations.gov, including a dinner break from 5:00 p.m. [Eastern fugitive manganese emissions and any personal information provided, Standard Time] until 6:00 p.m. [Eastern through more stringent emission limits unless the comment includes Standard Time]. Please contact Ms. for several processes. information claimed to be confidential Virginia Hunt of the Sector Policies and business information (CBI) or other Programs Division (E143–01), Office of DATES: Comments. Comments must be information whose disclosure is received on or before November 20, Air Quality Planning and Standards, restricted by statute. Do not submit Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. A copy of comments on the information that you consider to be CBI information collection provisions Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; or otherwise protected through telephone number: 919–541–0832; should be submitted to the Office of www.regulations.gov or email. The Management and Budget (OMB) on or email address: [email protected]; to http://www.regulations.gov Web site is register to speak at the hearing or to before November 5, 2014. an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the inquire as to whether or not a hearing means the EPA will not know your will be held. The last day to pre-register EPA requesting a public hearing by identity or contact information unless in advance to speak at the hearing will October 14, 2014 the EPA will hold a you provide it in the body of your be October 20, 2014. Additionally, public hearing on October 21, 2014 from comment. If you send an email requests to speak will be taken the day 1:00 p.m. [Eastern Standard Time] to comment directly to the EPA without of the hearing at the hearing registration 8:00 p.m. [Eastern Standard Time] in going through http:// desk, although preferences on speaking Marietta, Ohio. If the EPA holds a www.regulations.gov, your email times may not be able to be fulfilled. If public hearing, the EPA will keep the address will be automatically captured you require the service of a translator or record of the hearing open for 30 days and included as part of the comment special accommodations such as audio after completion of the hearing to that is placed in the public docket and description, please let us know at the provide an opportunity for submission made available on the Internet. If you time of registration. If you require an of rebuttal and supplementary submit an electronic comment, the EPA accommodation we ask that you pre- information. recommends that you include your register for the hearing, as we may not ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your name and other contact information in be able to arrange such accommodations comments, identified by Docket ID No. the body of your comment and with any without advance notice. The hearing EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0895, by one of disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA will provide interested parties the the following methods: cannot read your comment due to opportunity to present data, views or • Federal eRulemaking Portal: technical difficulties and cannot contact arguments concerning the proposed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60239

action. The EPA will make every effort MACT Code—Code within the National D. What data collection activities were to accommodate all speakers who arrive Emissions Inventory used to identify conducted to support this action? and register. processes included in a source category III. Analytical Procedures mg/dscm—milligrams per dry standard cubic A. For purposes of this supplemental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For meter proposal, how did we estimate the post- questions about this proposed action, mg/kg-day—milligrams per kilogram-day MACT risks posed by the Ferroalloys contact Mr. Phil Mulrine, Sector mg/m3—milligrams per cubic meter Production Source Category? Policies and Programs Division (D243– MIR—maximum individual risk B. How did we consider the risk results in making decisions for this supplemental 02), Office of Air Quality Planning and MRL—Minimal Risk Level NAAQS—National Ambient Air Quality proposal? Standards, Environmental Protection Standards C. How did we perform the technology Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC NAICS—North American Industry review? 27711; telephone (919) 541–5289; fax Classification System IV. Revised Analytical Results and Proposed number: (919) 541–3207; and email NAS—National Academy of Sciences Decisions for the Ferroalloys Production address: [email protected]. For NATA—National Air Toxics Assessment Source Category specific information regarding the risk NESHAP—National Emissions Standards for A. What actions are we taking pursuant to modeling methodology, contact Ms. Hazardous Air Pollutants CAA sections 112(d)(2) and 112(d)(3)? NOAEL—no-observed-adverse-effect level B. What are the results of the risk Darcie Smith, Health and assessment and analyses? Environmental Impacts Division (C539– NRC—National Research Council NTTAA—National Technology Transfer and C. What are our proposed decisions 02), Office of Air Quality Planning and Advancement Act regarding risk acceptability, ample Standards, U.S. Environmental OAQPS—Office of Air Quality Planning and margin of safety and adverse Protection Agency, Research Triangle Standards environmental effects based on our Park, NC 27711; telephone number: OECA—Office of Enforcement and revised analyses? (919) 541–2076; fax number: (919) 541– Compliance Assurance D. What are the results and proposed 2076; and email address: smith.darcie@ OMB—Office of Management and Budget decisions based on our technology review? epa.gov. For information about the PAH—polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons PB–HAP—hazardous air pollutants known to E. What other actions are we proposing? applicability of the National Emissions F. What compliance dates are we Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants be persistent and bio-accumulative in the environment proposing? (NESHAP) to a particular entity, contact PEL—probable effect level V. Summary of the Revised Cost, Cary Secrest, Office of Enforcement and PM—particulate matter Environmental and Economic Impacts A. What are the affected sources? Compliance Assurance (OECA), POM—polycyclic organic matter B. What are the air quality impacts? telephone number: (202) 564–8661 and ppm—parts per million C. What are the cost impacts? email address: [email protected]. RDL—representative method detection level D. What are the economic impacts? REL—reference exposure level E. What are the benefits? SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act VI. Request for Comments RfC—reference concentration Preamble Acronyms and Abbreviations VII. Submitting Data Corrections RfD—reference dose VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews RTR—residual risk and technology review We use multiple acronyms and terms A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory SAB—Science Advisory Board in this preamble. While this list may not Planning and Review and Executive SBA—Small Business Administration Order 13563: Improving Regulation and be exhaustive, to ease the reading of this SSM—startup, shutdown and malfunction preamble and for reference purposes, Regulatory Review TOSHI—target organ-specific hazard index B. Paperwork Reduction Act the EPA defines the following terms and TPY—tons per year acronyms here: C. Regulatory Flexibility Act TRIM.FaTE—Total Risk Integrated D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act AEGL—acute exposure guideline levels Methodology.Fate, Transport, and E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism AERMOD—air dispersion model used by the Ecological Exposure model F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation HEM–3 model TTN—Technology Transfer Network and Coordination With Indian Tribal ATSDR—Agency for Toxic Substances and UF—uncertainty factor Governments Disease Registry mg/dscm—micrograms per dry standard cubic G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of BLDS—bag leak detection system meter Children From Environmental Health mg/m3—micrograms per cubic meter BTF—Beyond the Floor Risks and Safety Risks UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act CAA—Clean Air Act H. Executive Order 13211: Actions UPL—Upper Prediction Limit CalEPA—California EPA Concerning Regulations That URE—unit risk estimate CBI—Confidential Business Information Significantly Affect Energy Supply, VCS—voluntary consensus standards CFR—Code of Federal Regulations Distribution, or Use EJ—environmental justice Organization of this Document. The I. National Technology Transfer and EPA—Environmental Protection Agency information in this preamble is Advancement Act ERPG—Emergency Response Planning organized as follows: J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Guidelines I. General Information ERT—Electronic Reporting Tool Minority Populations and Low-Income A. Does this action apply to me? Populations FR—Federal Register B. Where can I get a copy of this document HAP—hazardous air pollutants and other related information? I. General Information HCl—hydrochloric acid C. What should I consider as I prepare my HEM–3—Human Exposure Model, Version comments for the EPA? A. Does this action apply to me? 1.1.0 II. Background Information Table 1 of this preamble lists the HI—Hazard Index A. What is the statutory authority for this industrial source category that is the HQ—Hazard Quotient action? subject of this supplemental proposal. ICR—Information Collection Request B. What is this source category and how IRIS—Integrated Risk Information System does the current NESHAP regulate its Table 1 is not intended to be exhaustive km—kilometer HAP emissions? but rather to provide a guide for readers LOAEL—lowest-observed-adverse-effect level C. What is the history of the Ferroalloys regarding the entities that this proposed MACT—maximum achievable control Production Risk and Technology action is likely to affect. The proposed technology Review? standards, once finalized, will be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60240 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

directly applicable to the affected 31576, July 16, 1992), the ‘‘Ferroalloys Ferroalloys Production standard so that sources. Federal, state, local and tribal Production’’ source category is any it now includes only major sources that government agencies are not affected by facility engaged in producing ferroalloys produce products containing manganese this proposed action. As defined in the such as ferrosilicon, ferromanganese (Mn). (64 FR 27450, May 20, 1999.) The ‘‘Initial List of Categories of Sources and ferrochrome.1 The EPA redefined 1999 standard applies specifically to Under Section 112(c)(1) of the Clean Air the Ferroalloys Production source two ferroalloy product types: Act Amendments of 1990’’ (see 57 FR category when it promulgated the 1999 Ferromanganese and silicomanganese.

TABLE 1—NESHAP AND INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CATEGORIES AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSED ACTION

Source category NESHAP NAICS code a

Ferroalloys Production ...... Ferroalloys Production ...... 331110 a 2012 North American Industry Classification System

B. Where can I get a copy of this marked as CBI will not be disclosed enclose systems or processes to document and other related except in accordance with procedures eliminate emissions; (3) capture or treat information? set forth in 40 Code of Federal pollutants when released from a In addition to being available in the Regulations (CFR) part 2. Send or process, stack, storage or fugitive docket, an electronic copy of this action deliver information identified as CBI emissions point; (4) are design, is available on the Internet through the only to the following address: Roberto equipment, work practice or operational EPA’s Technology Transfer Network Morales, OAQPS Document Control standards (including requirements for (TTN) Web site, a forum for information Officer (C404–02), OAQPS, U.S. operator training or certification); or (5) and technology exchange in various Environmental Protection Agency, are a combination of the above. CAA areas of air pollution control. Following Research Triangle Park, North Carolina section 112(d)(2)(A)–(E). The MACT signature by the EPA Administrator, the 27711, Attention Docket ID Number standards may take the form of design, EPA will post a copy of this proposed EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0895. equipment, work practice or operational action at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/ II. Background Information standards where the EPA first ferropg.html. Following publication in determines either that (1) a pollutant the Federal Register, the EPA will post A. What is the statutory authority for cannot be emitted through a conveyance the Federal Register version of the this action? designed and constructed to emit or proposal and key technical documents Section 112 of the Clean Air Act capture the pollutant, or that any at this same Web site. Information on (CAA) establishes a two-stage regulatory requirement for, or use of, such a the overall residual risk and technology process to address emissions of conveyance would be inconsistent with review program is available at the hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from law; or (2) the application of following Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ stationary sources. In the first stage, measurement methodology to a ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. after the EPA has identified categories of particular class of sources is not sources emitting one or more of the HAP practicable due to technological and C. What should I consider as I prepare listed in CAA section 112(b), CAA economic limitations. CAA section my comments for the EPA? section 112(d) requires us to promulgate 112(h)(1)–(2). Submitting CBI. Do not submit technology-based NESHAP for those The MACT ‘‘floor’’ is the minimum information containing CBI to the EPA sources. ‘‘Major sources’’ are those that control level allowed for MACT through http://www.regulations.gov or emit or have the potential to emit 10 standards promulgated under CAA email. Clearly mark the part or all of the tons per year (tpy) or more of a single section 112(d)(3) and may not be based information that you claim to be CBI. HAP or 25 tpy or more of any on cost considerations. For new sources, For CBI information on a disk or CD– combination of HAP. For major sources, the MACT floor cannot be less stringent ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the the technology-based NESHAP must than the emissions control that is outside of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI reflect the maximum degree of emission achieved in practice by the best- and then identify electronically within reductions of HAPs achievable (after controlled similar source. The MACT the disk or CD–ROM the specific considering cost, energy requirements floor for existing sources can be less information that is claimed as CBI. In and non-air quality health and stringent than floors for new sources, addition to one complete version of the environmental impacts) and are but not less stringent than the average comments that includes information commonly referred to as maximum emissions limitation achieved by the claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy achievable control technology (MACT) best-performing 12 percent of existing of the comments that does not contain standards. sources in the category or subcategory the information claimed as CBI for MACT standards must reflect the (or the best-performing five sources for inclusion in the public docket. If you maximum degree of emissions reduction categories or subcategories with fewer submit a CD–ROM or disk that does not achievable through the application of than 30 sources). In developing MACT contain CBI, mark the outside of the measures, processes, methods, systems standards, the EPA must also consider disk or CD–ROM clearly that it does not or techniques, including, but not limited control options that are more stringent contain CBI. Information not marked as to, measures that (1) reduce the volume than the floor. We may establish CBI will be included in the public of or eliminate pollutants through standards more stringent than the floor docket and the EPA’s electronic public process changes, substitution of based on considerations of the cost of docket without prior notice. Information materials or other modifications; (2) achieving the emission reductions, any

1 U.S. EPA. Documentation for Developing the Initial Source Category List—Final Report, EPA/ OAQPS, EPA–450/3–91–030, July, 1992.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60241

non-air quality health and Organic Chemical Manufacturing source an estimate of the upper bound of risk environmental impacts and energy category, the United States Court of based on conservative assumptions, requirements. Appeals for the District of Columbia such as continuous exposure for 24 The EPA is then required to review Circuit upheld as reasonable the EPA’s hours per day for 70 years.’’ Id. We these technology-based standards and interpretation that subsection 112(f)(2) acknowledged that maximum revise them ‘‘as necessary (taking into incorporates the approach established in individual lifetime cancer risk ‘‘does not account developments in practices, the Benzene NESHAP. See NRDC v. necessarily reflect the true risk, but processes, and control technologies)’’ no EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, 1083 (D.C. Cir. displays a conservative risk level which less frequently than every eight years. 2008) (‘‘[S]ubsection 112(f)(2)(B) is an upper-bound that is unlikely to be CAA section 112(d)(6). In conducting expressly incorporates the EPA’s exceeded.’’ Id. this review, the EPA is not required to interpretation of the Clean Air Act from Understanding that there are both recalculate the MACT floor. Natural the Benzene standard, complete with a benefits and limitations to using the Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. citation to the Federal Register.’’); see MIR as a metric for determining EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, 1084 (D.C. Cir. also A Legislative History of the Clean acceptability, we acknowledged in the 2008). Association of Battery Recyclers, Air Act Amendments of 1990, vol. 1, Benzene NESHAP that ‘‘consideration of Inc. v. EPA, 716 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. p. 877 (Senate debate on Conference maximum individual risk * * * must 2013). Report). take into account the strengths and The second stage in standard-setting The first step in the process of weaknesses of this measure of risk.’’ Id. focuses on reducing any remaining (i.e., evaluating residual risk is the Consequently, the presumptive risk ‘‘residual’’) risk according to CAA determination of acceptable risk. If risks level of 100-in-1 million (1-in-10 section 112(f). Section 112(f)(1) required are unacceptable, the EPA cannot thousand) provides a benchmark for that the EPA prepare a report to consider cost in identifying the judging the acceptability of maximum Congress discussing (among other emissions standards necessary to bring individual lifetime cancer risk, but does things) methods of calculating the risks risks to an acceptable level. The second not constitute a rigid line for making posed (or potentially posed) by sources step is the determination of whether that determination. Further, in the after implementation of the MACT standards must be further revised in Benzene NESHAP, we noted that: standards, the public health significance order to provide an ample margin of of those risks and the EPA’s safety to protect public health. The [p]articular attention will also be accorded to recommendations as to legislation the weight of evidence presented in the risk ample margin of safety is the level at assessment of potential carcinogenicity or regarding such remaining risk. The EPA which the standards must be set, unless other health effects of a pollutant. While the prepared and submitted the Residual an even more stringent standard is same numerical risk may be estimated for an Risk Report to Congress, EPA–453/R– necessary to prevent, taking into exposure to a pollutant judged to be a known 99–001 (Risk Report) in March 1999. consideration costs, energy, safety and human carcinogen, and to a pollutant CAA section 112(f)(2) then provides that other relevant factors, an adverse considered a possible human carcinogen if Congress does not act on any environmental effect. based on limited animal test data, the same recommendation in the Risk Report, the weight cannot be accorded to both estimates. EPA must analyze and address residual 1. Step 1—Determination of In considering the potential public health risk for each category or subcategory of Acceptability effects of the two pollutants, the Agency’s sources 8 years after promulgation of The agency in the Benzene NESHAP judgment on acceptability, including the concluded that ‘‘the acceptability of risk MIR, will be influenced by the greater weight such standards pursuant to CAA section of evidence for the known human 112(d). under section 112 is best judged on the carcinogen. Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA requires basis of a broad set of health risk the EPA to determine for source measures and information’’ and that the Id. at 38046. The agency also explained categories subject to MACT standards ‘‘judgment on acceptability cannot be in the Benzene NESHAP that: whether the emission standards provide reduced to any single factor.’’ Benzene [i]n establishing a presumption for MIR, an ample margin of safety to protect NESHAP at 38046. The determination of rather than a rigid line for acceptability, the public health. Section 112(f)(2)(B) of the what represents an ‘‘acceptable’’ risk is Agency intends to weigh it with a series of CAA expressly preserves the EPA’s use based on a judgment of ‘‘what risks are other health measures and factors. These of the two-step process for developing acceptable in the world in which we include the overall incidence of cancer or standards to address any residual risk live’’ (Risk Report at 178, quoting NRDC other serious health effects within the and the agency’s interpretation of v. EPA, 824 F. 2d 1146, 1165 (D.C. Cir. exposed population, the numbers of persons exposed within each individual lifetime risk ‘‘ample margin of safety’’ developed in 1987) (en banc) (‘‘Vinyl Chloride’’), range and associated incidence within, the National Emissions Standards for recognizing that our world is not risk- typically, a 50 km exposure radius around Hazardous Air Pollutants: Benzene free. facilities, the science policy assumptions and Emissions From Maleic Anhydride In the Benzene NESHAP, we stated estimation uncertainties associated with the Plants, Ethylbenzene/Styrene Plants, that ‘‘EPA will generally presume that if risk measures, weight of the scientific Benzene Storage Vessels, Benzene the risk to [the maximum exposed] evidence for human health effects, other Equipment Leaks, and Coke By-Product individual is no higher than quantified or unquantified health effects, Recovery Plants (Benzene NESHAP) (54 approximately one in 10 thousand, that effects due to co-location of facilities, and co- FR 38044, September 14, 1989). The risk level is considered acceptable.’’ 54 emission of pollutants. EPA notified Congress in the Risk FR at 38045, September 14, 1989. We Id. at 38045. In some cases, these health Report that the agency intended to use discussed the maximum individual measures and factors taken together may the Benzene NESHAP approach in lifetime cancer risk (or maximum provide a more realistic description of making CAA section 112(f) residual risk individual risk (MIR)) as being ‘‘the the magnitude of risk in the exposed determinations (EPA–453/R–99–001, estimated risk that a person living near population than that provided by p. ES–11). The EPA subsequently a plant would have if he or she were maximum individual lifetime cancer adopted this approach in its residual exposed to the maximum pollutant risk alone. risk determinations and in a challenge concentrations for 70 years.’’ Id. We As noted earlier, in NRDC v. EPA, the to the risk review for the Synthetic explained that this measure of risk ‘‘is court held that section 112(f)(2)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60242 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

‘‘incorporates the EPA’s interpretation safety and other relevant factors in and cast iron products with enhanced or of the Clean Air Act from the Benzene doing so. special properties. The ferroalloys Standard.’’ The court further held that The CAA does not specifically define products that are the focus of the Congress’ incorporation of the Benzene the terms ‘‘individual most exposed,’’ NESHAP are ferromanganese (FeMn) standard applies equally to carcinogens ‘‘acceptable level’’ and ‘‘ample margin and silicomanganese (SiMn), which are and non-carcinogens. 529 F.3d at 1081– of safety.’’ In the Benzene NESHAP, 54 produced by two facilities in the United 82. Accordingly, we also consider non- FR at 38044–38045, September 14, 1989, States. One facility (Eramet) is located cancer risk metrics in our determination we stated as an overall objective: in Marietta, Ohio and produces both of risk acceptability and ample margin In protecting public health with an ample FeMn and SiMn. The other plant of safety. margin of safety under section 112, EPA (Felman) is located in Letart, West strives to provide maximum feasible Virginia and produces only SiMn. 2. Step 2—Determination of Ample protection against risks to health from Ferroalloys within the scope of this Margin of Safety hazardous air pollutants by (1) protecting the source category are produced using CAA section 112(f)(2) requires the greatest number of persons possible to an submerged electric arc furnaces, which EPA to determine, for source categories individual lifetime risk level no higher than are furnaces in which the electrodes are approximately 1-in-1 million and (2) limiting submerged into the charge. The subject to MACT standards, whether to no higher than approximately 1-in-10 those standards provide an ample thousand [i.e., 100-in-1 million] the submerged arc process is a reduction margin of safety to protect public health. estimated risk that a person living near a smelting operation. The reactants As explained in the Benzene NESHAP, plant would have if he or she were exposed consist of metallic ores (ferrous oxides, ‘‘the second step of the inquiry, to the maximum pollutant concentrations for silicon oxides, manganese oxides, etc.) determining an ‘ample margin of safety,’ 70 years. and a carbon-source reducing agent, again includes consideration of all of The agency further stated that ‘‘[t]he usually in the form of coke, charcoal, the health factors, and whether to EPA also considers incidence (the high- and low-volatility coal, or wood reduce the risks even further. . . . number of persons estimated to suffer chips. Raw materials are crushed and Beyond that information, additional cancer or other serious health effects as sized and then conveyed to a mix house factors relating to the appropriate level a result of exposure to a pollutant) to be for weighing and blending. Conveyors, of control will also be considered, an important measure of the health risk buckets, skip hoists or cars transport the including costs and economic impacts to the exposed population. Incidence processed material to hoppers above the of controls, technological feasibility, measures the extent of health risks to furnace. The mix is gravity-fed through uncertainties and any other relevant the exposed population as a whole, by a feed chute either continuously or factors. Considering all of these factors, providing an estimate of the occurrence intermittently, as needed. At high the agency will establish the standard at of cancer or other serious health effects temperatures in the reaction zone, the a level that provides an ample margin of in the exposed population.’’ Id. at carbon source reacts with metal oxides safety to protect the public health, as 38045. to form carbon monoxide and to reduce 3 required by section 112.’’ 54 FR at In the ample margin of safety decision the ores to base metal. The molten 38046, September 14, 1989. process, the agency again considers all material (product and slag) is tapped According to CAA section of the health risks and other health from the furnace, sometimes subject to 112(f)(2)(A), if the MACT standards for information considered in the first step, post-furnace refining and poured into HAP ‘‘classified as a known, probable, including the incremental risk reduction casting beds on the furnace room floor. or possible human carcinogen do not associated with standards more Once the material hardens, it is reduce lifetime excess cancer risks to stringent than the MACT standard or a transported to product crushing and the individual most exposed to more stringent standard that EPA has sizing systems and packaged for emissions from a source in the category determined is necessary to ensure risk is transport to the customer. The NESHAP for Ferroalloys or subcategory to less than one in one acceptable. In the ample margin of Production: Ferromanganese and million,’’ the EPA must promulgate safety analysis, the agency considers Silicomanganese were promulgated on residual risk standards for the source additional factors, including costs and May 20, 1999 (64 FR 27450) and category (or subcategory), as necessary economic impacts of controls, codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart to provide an ample margin of safety to technological feasibility, uncertainties XXX.4 The 1999 NESHAP applies to all protect public health. In doing so, the and any other relevant factors. new and existing ferroalloys production EPA may adopt standards equal to Considering all of these factors, the facilities that manufacture existing MACT standards if the EPA agency will establish the standard at a ferromanganese or silicomanganese and determines that the existing standards level that provides an ample margin of are major sources or are co-located at (i.e., the MACT standards) are safety to protect the public health, as major sources of HAP emissions. sufficiently protective. NRDC v. EPA, required by CAA section 112(f). 54 FR The existing Ferroalloys Production 529 F.3d 1077, 1083 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (‘‘If 38046, September 14, 1989. NESHAP rule applies to process EPA determines that the existing B. What is this source category and how emissions from the submerged arc technology-based standards provide an does the current NESHAP regulate its furnaces, the metal oxygen refining ‘ample margin of safety,’ then the HAP emissions? process and the product crushing Agency is free to readopt those equipment; process fugitive emissions standards during the residual risk Ferroalloys are alloys of iron in which from the furnace; and outdoor fugitive rulemaking.’’) The EPA must also adopt one or more chemical elements (such as dust emissions sources such as more stringent standards, if necessary, chromium, manganese and silicon) are added into molten metal. Ferroalloys are to prevent an adverse environmental 3 EPA. AP–42, 12.4. Ferroalloy Production. 10/86. 2 consumed primarily in iron and steel effect, but must consider cost, energy, 4 The emission limits were revised on March 22, making and are used to produce steel 2001 (66 FR 16024) in response to a petition for 2 ‘‘Adverse environmental effect’’ is defined as reconsideration submitted to the EPA following any significant and widespread adverse effect, impacts on populations of endangered or threatened promulgation of the final rule and a petition for which may be reasonably anticipated to wildlife, species or significant degradation of environmental review filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the aquatic life or natural resources, including adverse qualities over broad areas. CAA section 112(a)(7). District of Columbia Circuit.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60243

roadways, yard areas and outdoor non-mercury (or particulate) metal product crushing and screening material storage and transfer operations. HAP). The NESHAP also includes equipment. Table 2 is a summary of the For the electric (submerged) arc furnace emissions limits for particulate matter applicable limits in the existing Subpart process, the NESHAP specifies (again as a surrogate for particulate XXX. numerical emissions limits for metal HAP) for process emissions from particulate matter (as a surrogate for the metal oxygen refining process and

TABLE 2—EMISSION LIMITS IN SUBPART XXX

New or reconstructed or Applicable PM Subpart XXX existing source Affected source emission standards reference

New or reconstructed ...... Submerged arc furnace ...... 0.23 kilograms per hour per 40 CFR 63.1652(a)(1) and megawatt (kg/hr/MW) (0.51 (a)(2) pounds per hour per mega- watt (lb/hr/MW) or 35 milli- grams per dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) (0.015 grains per dry stand- ard cubic foot (gr/dscf). Existing ...... Open submerged arc furnace producing 9.8 kg/hr (21.7 lb/hr) ...... 40 CFR 63.1652(b)(1) ferromanganese and operating at a furnace power input of 22 megawatts (MW) or less. Existing ...... Open submerged arc furnace producing 13.5 kg/hr (29.8 lb/hr) ...... 40 CFR 63.1652(b)(2) ferromanganese and operating at a furnace power input greater than 22 MW. Existing ...... Open submerged arc furnace producing 16.3 kg/hr (35.9 lb/hr) ...... 40 CFR 63.1652(b)(3) silicomanganese and operating at a fur- nace power input greater than 25 MW. Existing ...... Open submerged arc furnace producing 12.3 kg/hr (27.2 lb/hr) ...... 40 CFR 63.1652(b)(4) silicomanganese and operating at a fur- nace power input of 25 MW or less. Existing ...... Semi-sealed submerged arc furnace (pri- 11.2 kg/hr (24.7 lb/hr) ...... 40 CFR 63.1652(c) mary, tapping and vent stacks) producing ferromanganese. New, reconstructed, or existing Metal oxygen refining process ...... 69 mg/dscm (0.03 gr/dscf) ..... 40 CFR 63.1652(d) New or reconstructed...... Individual equipment associated with the 50 mg/dscm (0.022 gr/dscf) ... 40 CFR 63.1652(e)(1) product crushing and screening operation. Existing ...... Individual equipment associated with the 69 mg/dscm (0.03 gr/dscf) ..... 40 CFR 63.1652(e)(2) product crushing and screening operation.

The 1999 NESHAP established a designated permitting authority on or • emission limits for mercury, building opacity limit of 20 percent that before the applicable compliance date. polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons is measured during the required furnace (PAHs), and hydrochloric acid (HCl); C. What is the history of the Ferroalloys control device performance test. The • proposed requirements to control Production Risk and Technology rule provides an excursion limit of 60 process fugitive emissions based on full- Review? percent opacity for one 6-minute period building enclosure with negative during the performance test. The Pursuant to section 112(f)(2) of the pressure, or fenceline monitoring as an opacity observation is focused only on CAA, we first evaluated the residual risk alternative; • a provision for emissions averaging; emissions exiting the shop due solely to associated with the Ferroalloys • operations of any affected submerged Production NESHAP in 2011. We also amendments to the monitoring, notification, recordkeeping and testing arc furnace. In addition, blowing taps, conducted a technology review, as requirements; and poling and oxygen lancing of the tap required by section 112(d)(6) of the • proposed provisions establishing an hole, burndowns associated with CAA. Finally, we also reviewed the affirmative defense to civil penalties for electrode measurements and 1999 MACT rule to determine if other violations caused by malfunctions. maintenance activities associated with amendments were appropriate. Based The comment period for the 2011 submerged arc furnaces and casting on the results of that previous residual proposal opened on November 23, 2011, operations are exempt from the opacity risk and technology review (RTR) and and ended on January 31, 2012. We standards specified in § 63.1653. the MACT rule review, we proposed received significant comments from For outdoor fugitive dust sources, as amendments to subpart XXX on industry representatives, environmental defined in § 63.1652, the 1999 NESHAP November 23, 2011 (76 FR 72508) organizations local community groups. requires that plants prepare and operate (referred to from here on as the 2011 We also met with stakeholders (from according to an outdoor fugitive dust proposal in the remainder of this FR industry, community groups and control plan that describes in detail the notice). The proposed amendments in environmental organizations) after measures that will be put in place to the 2011 proposal which we are proposal to further discuss their control outdoor fugitive dust emissions revisiting in today’s supplemental comments, concerns and related issues. from the individual outdoor fugitive proposal include the following: After reviewing the comments and after dust sources at the facility. The owner • Revisions to particulate matter (PM) consideration of additional data and or operator must submit a copy of the standards for electric arc furnaces and information received since the 2011 outdoor fugitive dust control plan to the local ventilation control devices; proposal, we determined it is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60244 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

appropriate to revise some of our comments, we worked with the facilities we were not able to incorporate these analyses and publish a supplemental to address these concerns and we new data (on PAHs, PM, or Hg) into our proposal. Therefore, in today’s Notice of obtained a significant amount of new RTR or MACT analyses in time for the Supplemental Proposed Rulemaking we data in order to establish a more robust publication of today’s Notice.56 These present revised analyses, and based on dataset than the dataset we had for the test reports (which we received on those analyses we are proposing revised 2011 proposal. Specifically, the plants August 19, 2014) are available in the amendments for the items listed above provided data collected during their docket for today’s action. We have not to allow the public an opportunity to 2011 and 2012 compliance tests and, in yet determined the technical viability of review and comment on these revised response to an Information Collection these data or how these data would analyses and revised proposed Request (ICR) from the EPA in affect the RTR and MACT analyses. amendments. In addition, we have December 2012, they conducted more Nevertheless, we seek comment on reevaluated the proposed affirmative tests in the spring of 2013. This these new data and how these data defense provisions in light of a recent combined testing effort provided the would impact our analyses and results court decision vacating an affirmative following data: presented in today’s Notice. Based on defense in one of the EPA’s Section • Additional stack test data for comments and information that we 112(d) regulations. NRDC v. EPA, 749 arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, receive in response to this supplemental F.3d 1055 (D.C. Cir., 2014) (vacating manganese, mercury, nickel, HCl, proposal, and after we complete our affirmative defense provisions in formaldehyde, PAH, polychlorinated review of these data, we will consider Section 112(d) rule establishing biphenyls (PCB) and dioxins/furans; these data as appropriate as we develop • emission standards for Portland cement Test data collected using updated, the final rule. kilns). In this supplemental proposal, state-of-the-art test methods and Commenters also expressed concern procedures; that the estimated cost and operational we are withdrawing our 2011 proposal • to include an affirmative defense Hazardous air pollutant (HAP) test impacts of the 2011 proposed process data for all operational furnaces; fugitive standards based on use of a total provision in this regulation. • However, we also proposed other Test data obtained during different building enclosure requirement were requirements in the 2011 proposal seasonal conditions (i.e., spring and significantly underestimated. In their (listed below) for which we have made fall); comments both companies submitted • Test data for both products no revisions to the analyses, we are not substantial additional information and (ferromanganese and silicomanganese) proposing any changes and are not estimates regarding the elements, costs for both furnaces at Eramet (Felman reopening for public comment. The and impacts involved with constructing only produces silicomanganese). other requirements that we proposed in and operating a full building enclosure With the new data, we no longer have for their facilities. We also received the 2011 proposal, for which we are not to extrapolate HAP emissions from a re-opening for comment, are the comments saying that full-enclosure ratio of PM to HAP emissions from just with negative pressure can lead to following: one or two tested furnaces. We are also • PM standards for metal oxygen worker safety and health issues related using test data collected using state-of- refining processes and crushing and to indoor air quality if the systems are the-art test methods that provide better screening operations; not designed and operated appropriately • emissions limits for formaldehyde; QA/QC of the test results. For mercury, to provide sufficient air exchanges and • elimination of SSM exemptions; test data were collected for the air conditioning in the work space. and supplemental proposal using EPA Furthermore, in their comments and in • electronic reporting. Method 30B, which requires paired subsequent meetings and other We will address the comments we samples collected for each test run, in communications, the companies also received on these other proposed addition to a spiked sample during the provided design and cost information requirements during the public 3-run test. Test data for PAH were for an alternative approach to comment period for the 2011 proposal collected using CARB 429, which substantially reduce fugitive emissions at the time we take final action. provides greater sensitivity, precision based on enhanced local capture and In the 2011 proposal, we also and identification of individual PAH control of these emissions at each plant. included information about several compounds as compared to Method In the summer of 2012 and fall of 2013, ATSDR health consultations and a study 0010 which was used for previous tests. both plants submitted updated (Kim et al.) that had been conducted in We also received PCB and dioxin/furan enhanced capture plans and cost the Marietta area. We note that the Kim test data that were collected using CARB estimates to implement those plans. We et al. study was included in the 2012 428, which uses high resolution also consulted with outside ventilation ATSDR review of manganese. Since the instruments and provides a specific experts and control equipment vendors 2011 proposal, additional studies on the procedure for measuring PCBs in to re-evaluate the costs of process potential toxicity of manganese have addition to dioxin/furans. fugitive capture as well as costs of other been published. These studies add to The data described above, which we control measures such as activated the literature regarding potential health received prior to summer 2014, were carbon injection. We also gathered a effects from exposure to manganese and incorporated into our risk assessment, will be included, along with the technology review and other MACT 5 Emission Measurement Summary Report. complete body of scientific evidence, in analyses presented in this Notice. Furnace No. 12 Scrubber. PAHs and Mercury. future reviews of manganese toxicity. However, we recently received Eramet Marietta, Inc. Marietta, OH. Prepared for: additional test reports and data for PAH, Eramet Marietta, Inc. Marietta, Ohio. Prepared by D. What data collection activities were mercury and PM emissions from one of Environmental Quality Management, Inc. 1800 conducted to support this action? Carillon Boulevard, Cincinnati, Ohio 45240. the furnaces at Eramet (Furnace #12). January 2013. Commenters on the 2011 proposal We also received additional data on PM 6 Emission Measurement Summary Report. expressed concern that the data set used emissions for Furnaces #1 and #12 at Filterable Particulate Matter Furnaces 1 and 12. Eramet and for the tapping baghouse at Eramet Marietta, Inc. Marietta, OH. Prepared for: in the risk assessment did not Eramet Marietta, Inc. Marietta, Ohio 45750–0299 adequately reflect current operations at Eramet. We have not yet completed our Prepared by: Environmental Quality Management, the plants. In response to these technical review of these new data and Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio 45240. April 2014.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60245

substantial amount of opacity data from assessment. We estimated the the 1999 MACT standards. We also both facilities and collected additional magnitude of emissions using emissions evaluated the level of reported actual information regarding the processes, test data collected through ICRs along emissions and available information on control technologies and modeling with additional data submitted the level of control achieved by the input parameters (such as stack release voluntarily by the companies. We also emissions controls in use. Further heights and fugitive emissions release collected information regarding explanation is provided in the technical characteristics). We reviewed and emissions release characteristics such as document: Revised Development of the evaluated these data and information stack heights, stack gas exit velocities, RTR Emissions Dataset for the provided by the facilities, the stack temperatures and source locations. Ferroalloys Production Source Category ventilation experts and vendors, and In addition to the quality assurance for the 2014 Supplemental Proposal, revised our analyses accordingly. (QA) of the source data for the facilities which is available in the docket. contained in the data set, we also 3. How did we conduct dispersion III. Analytical Procedures checked the coordinates of every modeling, determine inhalation A. For purposes of this supplemental emission source in the data set through exposures and estimate individual and proposal, how did we estimate the post- visual observations using tools such as population inhalation risks? MACT risks posed by the Ferroalloys GoogleEarth and ArcView. Where Production Source Category? coordinates were found to be incorrect, Both long-term and short-term inhalation exposure concentrations and The EPA conducted a risk assessment we identified and corrected them to the health risks from the source category that provides estimates of the MIR extent possible. We also performed a addressed in this proposal were posed by the HAP emissions from each QA assessment of the emissions data estimated using the Human Exposure source in the source category, the and release characteristics to ensure the data were reliable and that there were Model (Community and Sector HEM–3 hazard index (HI) for chronic exposures no outliers. The emissions data and the version 1.1.0). The HEM–3 performs to HAP with the potential to cause methods used to estimate emissions three primary risk assessment activities: noncancer health effects and the hazard from all the various emissions sources (1) Conducting dispersion modeling to quotient (HQ) for acute exposures to are described in more detail in the estimate the concentrations of HAP in HAP with the potential to cause technical document: Revised ambient air, (2) estimating long-term noncancer health effects. The Development of the RTR Emissions and short-term inhalation exposures to assessment also provides estimates of Dataset for the Ferroalloys Production individuals residing within 50 the distribution of cancer risks within Source Category for the 2014 kilometers (km) of the modeled the exposed populations, cancer Supplemental Proposal, which is sources 8, and (3) estimating individual incidence and an evaluation of the available in the docket for this action. and population-level inhalation risks potential for adverse environmental using the exposure estimates and effects. The risk assessment consisted of 2. How did we estimate MACT- allowable emissions? quantitative dose-response information. eight primary steps, as discussed in The air dispersion model used by the detail in the 2011 proposal. The docket The available emissions data in the HEM–3 model (AERMOD) is one of the for this rulemaking contains the RTR emissions dataset include estimates EPA’s preferred models for assessing following document which provides of the mass of HAP emitted during the pollutant concentrations from industrial more information on the risk assessment specified annual time period. In some facilities.9 To perform the dispersion inputs and models: Residual Risk cases, these ‘‘actual’’ emission levels are modeling and to develop the Assessment for the Ferroalloys lower than the emission levels required preliminary risk estimates, HEM–3 Production Source Category in Support to comply with the MACT standards. draws on three data libraries. The first of the September 2014 Supplemental The emissions level allowed to be is a library of meteorological data, Proposal (risk assessment document). emitted by the MACT standards is which is used for dispersion The methods used to assess risks (as referred to as the ‘‘MACT-allowable’’ calculations. This library includes 1 described in the eight primary steps emissions level. We discussed the use of year (2011) of hourly surface and upper below) are consistent with those peer- both MACT-allowable and actual air observations for more than 800 reviewed by a panel of the EPA’s emissions in the final Coke Oven meteorological stations, selected to Science Advisory Board (SAB) in 2009 Batteries residual risk rule (70 FR provide coverage of the United States and described in their peer review 19998–19999, April 15, 2005) and in the 7 and Puerto Rico. A second library of report issued in 2010; they are also proposed and final Hazardous Organic United States Census Bureau census consistent with the key NESHAP residual risk rules (71 FR block 10 internal point locations and recommendations contained in that 34428, June 14, 2006, and 71 FR 76609, populations provides the basis of report. December 21, 2006, respectively). In human exposure calculations (U.S. 1. How did we estimate actual those previous actions, we noted that Census, 2010). In addition, for each emissions and identify the emissions assessing the risks at the MACT- census block, the census library release characteristics? allowable level is inherently reasonable includes the elevation and controlling since these risks reflect the maximum hill height, which are also used in As explained previously, the revised level facilities could emit and still data set for the ferroalloys production dispersion calculations. A third library comply with national emission of pollutant unit risk factors and other source category, derived from the two standards. We also explained that it is existing ferromanganese and reasonable to consider actual emissions, 8 This metric comes from the Benzene NESHAP. silicomanganese production facilities, where such data are available, in both See 54 FR 38046. constitutes the basis for the revised risk steps of the risk analysis, in accordance 9 U.S. EPA. Revision to the Guideline on Air with the Benzene NESHAP approach. Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General 7 U.S. EPA SAB. Risk and Technology Review (54 FR 38044, September 14, 1989.) Purpose (Flat and Complex Terrain) Dispersion (RTR) Risk Assessment Methodologies: For Review Model and Other Revisions (70 FR 68218, by the EPA’s Science Advisory Board with Case For this supplemental proposal, we November 9, 2005). Studies—MACT I Petroleum Refining Sources and evaluated allowable stack emissions 10 A census block is the smallest geographic area Portland Cement Manufacturing, May 2010. based on the level of control required by for which census statistics are tabulated.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60246 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

health benchmarks is used to estimate nickel-emitting sources (including oil nickel subsulfide to estimate risks due health risks. These risk factors and combustion, coal combustion and to all nickel emissions from the source health benchmarks are the latest values others) suggested that at least 35 percent category. However, given that there are recommended by the EPA for HAP and of total nickel emissions may be soluble two additional URE values 15 derived for other toxic air pollutants. These values compounds and that the cancer risk for exposure to mixtures of nickel are available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ the mixture of inhaled nickel compounds, as a group, that are 2–3 fold atw/toxsource/summary.html and are compounds (based on nickel subsulfide lower than the IRIS URE for nickel discussed in more detail later in this and representative of pure insoluble subsulfide, the EPA also considers it section. crystalline nickel) was derived to reflect reasonable to use a value that is 50 In developing the risk assessment for the assumption that 65 percent of the percent of the IRIS URE for nickel chronic exposures, we used the total mass of nickel may be subsulfide for providing an estimate of estimated annual average ambient air carcinogenic. the lower end of the plausible range of concentrations of each HAP emitted by Based on consistent views of major cancer potency values for different each source for which we have scientific bodies (i.e., National mixtures of nickel compounds. In the emissions data in the source category. Toxicology Program (NTP) in their 12th public comments provided in response The air concentrations at each nearby Report of the Carcinogens (ROC) 11, to the proposal and available in the census block centroid were used as a International Agency for Research on docket, one facility provided additional surrogate for the chronic inhalation Cancer (IARC) 12 and other international data in the form of a laboratory test exposure concentration for all the agencies) 13 that consider all nickel report that indicated it would be people who reside in that census block. compounds to be carcinogenic, we unlikely that 100 percent of the nickel We calculated the MIR for each facility currently consider all nickel compounds from the furnace would be in the form as the cancer risk associated with a to have the potential of being of nickel subsulfide. Given our current continuous lifetime (24 hours per day, carcinogenic to humans. The 12th knowledge of the carcinogenic potential 7 days per week, and 52 weeks per year Report of the Carcinogens states that the of all nickel compounds, and the for a 70-year period) exposure to the ‘‘combined results of epidemiological potential differences in carcinogenic maximum concentration at the centroid studies, mechanistic studies, and potential across nickel compounds, we of inhabited census blocks. Individual carcinogenic studies in rodents support consider it reasonable to use a value that cancer risks were calculated by the concept that nickel compounds is 50 percent of the IRIS URE for nickel multiplying the estimated lifetime generate nickel ions in target cells at subsulfide for providing an estimate of exposure to the ambient concentration sites critical for carcinogenesis, thus the cancer potency values for different of each of the HAP (in micrograms per allowing consideration and evaluation mixtures of nickel compounds in the cubic meter (mg/m3)) by its unit risk of these compounds as a single group.’’ revised data set for the current estimate (URE). The URE is an upper Although the precise nickel compound supplemental proposal. bound estimate of an individual’s (or compounds) responsible for The EPA estimated incremental probability of contracting cancer over a carcinogenic effects in humans is not individual lifetime cancer risks lifetime of exposure to a concentration always clear, studies indicate that nickel associated with emissions from the of 1 microgram of the pollutant per sulfate and the combinations of nickel facilities in the source category as the cubic meter of air. For residual risk sulfides and oxides encountered in the sum of the risks for each of the assessments, we generally use URE nickel refining industries cause cancer carcinogenic HAP (including those values from the EPA’s Integrated Risk in humans (these studies are classified as carcinogenic to humans, Information System (IRIS). For summarized in a review by Grimsrud et likely to be carcinogenic to humans, and carcinogenic pollutants without EPA al., 2010 14). The major scientific bodies suggestive evidence of carcinogenic IRIS values, we look to other reputable mentioned above have also recognized potential 16) emitted by the modeled sources of cancer dose-response values, that there are differences in toxicity sources. Cancer incidence and the often using California EPA (CalEPA) and/or carcinogenic potential across the distribution of individual cancer risks URE values, where available. In cases different nickel compounds. for the population within 50 km of the where new, scientifically credible dose In the inhalation risk assessment for sources were also estimated for the response values have been developed in the 2011 proposed rule, to take a source category as part of this a manner consistent with the EPA conservative approach, we considered guidelines and have undergone a peer all nickel compounds to have the same 15 Two UREs (other than the current IRIS values) review process similar to that used by carcinogenic potential as nickel have been derived for nickel compounds as a group: the EPA, we may use such dose- subsulfide and used the IRIS URE for One developed by the California Department of response values in place of, or in Health Services (http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/id/ summary/nickel_tech_b.pdf) and the other by the addition to, other values, if appropriate. 11 National Toxicology Program (NTP), 2011. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality In the case of nickel compounds, to Report on carcinogens. 12th ed. Research Triangle (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/99pdfs/ provide a conservative estimate of Park, NC: US Department of Health and Human healtheffectsinfo.pdf). Services (DHHS), Public Health Service. Available 16 These classifications also coincide with the potential cancer risks, we used the IRIS online at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/ URE value for nickel subsulfide (which terms ‘‘known carcinogen, probable carcinogen, and roc12.pdf. possible carcinogen,’’ respectively, which are the is considered the most potent 12 International Agency for Research on Cancer terms advocated in the EPA’s previous Guidelines carcinogen among all nickel (IARC), 1990. IARC monographs on the evaluation for Carcinogen Risk Assessment, published in 1986 compounds) in the assessment for the of carcinogenic risks to humans. Chromium, nickel, (51 FR 33992, September 24, 1986). Summing the 2011 proposed rule for ferroalloys and welding. Vol. 49. Lyons, France: International risks of these individual compounds to obtain the Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health cumulative cancer risks is an approach that was production. In the 2011 proposed rule, Organization Vol. 49:256. recommended by the EPA’s Science Advisory Board the determination of the percent of 13 World Health Organization (WHO, 1991) and (SAB) in their 2002 peer review of EPA’s National nickel subsulfide was considered a the European Union’s Scientific Committee on Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) entitled, NATA— major factor for estimating the risks of Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER, 2006). Evaluating the National-scale Air Toxics 14 Grimsrud TK and Andersen A. Evidence of Assessment 1996 Data—an SAB Advisory, available cancer due to nickel-containing carcinogenicity in humans of water-soluble nickel at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ emissions. Nickel speciation salts. J Occup Med Toxicol 2010, 5:1–7. Available 214C6E915BB04E14852570CA007A682C/$File/ information for some of the largest online at http://www.ossup-med.com/content/5/1/7. ecadv02001.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60247

assessment by summing individual manganese (Mn) published in 1993.17 Determination of Acute Reference risks. A distance of 50 km is consistent This value was used in the RTR risk Exposure Levels for Airborne Toxicants, with both the analysis supporting the assessment supporting the Ferroalloys an acute REL value (http:// 1989 Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38044, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.18 www.oehha.ca.gov/air/pdf/acuterel.pdf) September 14, 1989) and the limitations However, since the 2011 proposal, is defined as ‘‘the concentration level at of Gaussian dispersion models, ATSDR has published an assessment of or below which no adverse health including AERMOD. Mn toxicity (2012) which includes a effects are anticipated for a specified To assess the risk of non-cancer chronic inhalation value (i.e., an ATSDR exposure duration.’’ Id. at page 2. Acute health effects from chronic exposures, Minimal Risk Level or MRL).19 Both the REL values are based on the most we summed the HQ for each of the HAP 1993 IRIS RfC and the 2012 ATSDR sensitive, relevant, adverse health effect that affects a common target organ MRL were based on the same study reported in the peer-reviewed medical system to obtain the HI for that target (Roels et al., 1993). In developing their and toxicological literature. Acute REL organ system (or target organ-specific assessment, ATSDR used updated dose- values are designed to protect the most HI, TOSHI). The HQ is the estimated response modeling methodology sensitive individuals in the population exposure divided by the chronic (benchmark dose approach) and through the inclusion of margins of reference value, which is a value considered recent pharmacokinetic safety. Because margins of safety are selected from one of several sources. findings to support their MRL incorporated to address data gaps and First, the chronic reference level can be derivation. Consistent with Agency uncertainties, exceeding the REL does the EPA reference concentration (RfC) policy, which was supported by SAB,20 not automatically indicate an adverse (http://www.epa.gov/riskassessment/ the EPA has chosen in this instance to health impact. glossary.htm), defined as ‘‘an estimate rely on the ATSDR MRL for Mn in the As we state above, in assessing the (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an current ferroalloys supplemental potential risks associated with acute order of magnitude) of a continuous proposal. exposures to HAP, we do not follow a inhalation exposure to the human The EPA also evaluated screening prioritization scheme and therefore we population (including sensitive estimates of acute exposures and risks consider available dose-response values for each of the HAP at the point of subgroups) that is likely to be without from multiple authoritative sources. In highest potential off-site exposure for an appreciable risk of deleterious effects the RTR program, EPA assesses acute each facility. To do this, the EPA during a lifetime.’’ Alternatively, in risk using toxicity values derived from estimated the risks when both the peak cases where an RfC from the EPA’s IRIS one hour exposures. Based on an in- hourly emissions rate and worst-case database is not available or where the depth examination of the available acute dispersion conditions occur. We also EPA determines that using a value other value for nickel [California EPA’s acute assume that a person is located at the than the RfC is appropriate, the chronic (1-hour) REL], we have concluded that point of highest impact during that same reference level can be a value from the this value is not appropriate to use to time. In accordance with our mandate in following prioritized sources: (1) The support EPA’s risk and technology section 112 of the Clean Air Act, we use Agency for Toxic Substances and review rules. This conclusion takes into the point of highest off-site exposure to Disease Registry Minimum Risk Level account: The effect on which the acute assess the potential risk to the (MRL) (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/ REL is based; aspects of the maximally exposed individual. The index.asp), which is defined as ‘‘an methodology used in its derivation; and acute HQ is the estimated acute estimate of daily human exposure to a how this assessment stands in exposure divided by the acute dose- hazardous substance that is likely to be comparison to the ATSDR toxicological response value. In each case, the EPA without an appreciable risk of adverse assessment, which considered the calculated acute HQ values using best non-cancer health effects (other than broader nickel health effects database. available, short-term dose-response cancer) over a specified duration of The broad nickel noncancer health exposure’’; (2) the CalEPA Chronic values. These acute dose-response values, which are described below, effects database strongly suggests that Reference Exposure Level (REL) the respiratory tract is the primary target (http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_ include the acute REL, acute exposure guideline levels (AEGL) and emergency of nickel toxicity following inhalation spots/pdf/HRAguidefinal.pdf), which is exposure. The available database on defined as ‘‘the concentration level (that response planning guidelines (ERPG) for 1-hour exposure durations. As acute noncancer respiratory effects is is expressed in units of micrograms per limited and was considered unsuitable cubic meter (mg/m3) for inhalation discussed below, we used conservative assumptions for emissions rates, for quantitative analysis of nickel exposure and in a dose expressed in 21 meteorology and exposure location for toxicity by both California EPA and units of milligram per kilogram-day ATSDR.22 The California EPA’s acute (1- (mg/kg-day) for oral exposures), at or our acute analysis. As described in the CalEPA’s Air hour) REL is based on an alternative below which no adverse health effects Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk endpoint, immunotoxicity in mice, are anticipated for a specified exposure Assessment Guidelines, Part I, The specifically depressed antibody duration’’; or (3), as noted above, a response measured in an antibody scientifically credible dose-response 17 US EPA Integrated Risk Information System plaque assay. value that has been developed in a Review of Manganese (1993) available at http:// In addition, the current California manner consistent with the EPA www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0373.htm. acute (1-hour) REL for Ni includes the 18 guidelines and has undergone a peer 2011 Notice of proposed Rulemaking reference application of methods that are different review process similar to that used by (76 FR 72508). 19 from those described in EPA guidelines. the EPA, in place of or in concert with Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry Toxicological Profile for Manganese (2012) Specifically, the (1-hour) REL applies other values. available at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/ uncertainty factors that depart from the For the ferroalloys source category, tp.asp?id=102&tid=23. defaults in EPA guidelines and does not we applied this policy in our estimate 20 The SAB peer review of RTR Risk Assessment of noncancer inhalation hazards and Methodologies is available at: http:// yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ 21 http://oehha.ca.gov/air/allrels.html. note the following related to manganese. 4AB3966E263D943A8525771F00668381/$File/EPA- 22 http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/ There is an existing IRIS RfC for SAB-10-007-unsigned.pdf. toxsubstance.asp?toxid=44.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60248 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

apply an inhalation dosimetric program and the National Advisory for single exposures to chemicals.’’ 26 Id. adjustment factor. Committee for Acute Exposure at 1. The ERPG–1 value is defined as Further, the ATSDR’s intermediate Guideline Levels for Hazardous ‘‘the maximum airborne concentration MRL (relevant to Ni exposures for a time Substances is to develop guideline below which it is believed that nearly frame between 14 and 364 days), was levels for once-in-a-lifetime, short-term all individuals could be exposed for up established at the same concentration as exposures to airborne concentrations of to 1 hour without experiencing other the California EPA (1- hour) REL, acutely toxic, high-priority chemicals.’’ than mild transient adverse health indicating that exposure to this Id. at 21. In detailing the intended effects or without perceiving a clearly concentration ‘‘is likely to be without application of AEGL values, the defined, objectionable odor.’’ Id. at 2. appreciable risk of adverse noncancer document states that ‘‘[i]t is anticipated Similarly, the ERPG–2 value is defined effects’’ (MRL definition) 23 for up to 364 that the AEGL values will be used for as ‘‘the maximum airborne days. regulatory and nonregulatory purposes concentration below which it is We have high confidence in the nickel by U.S. Federal and state agencies and believed that nearly all individuals ATSDR intermediate MRL. Our analysis possibly the international community in could be exposed for up to one hour of the broad toxicity database for nickel conjunction with chemical emergency without experiencing or developing indicates that this value is based on the response, planning, and prevention irreversible or other serious health most biologically-relevant endpoint. programs. More specifically, the AEGL effects or symptoms which could impair That is, the intermediate MRL is based values will be used for conducting an individual’s ability to take protective on a scientifically sound study of acute various risk assessments to aid in the action.’’ Id. at 1. respiratory toxicity. Furthermore, this development of emergency As can be seen from the definitions value is supported by a robust preparedness and prevention plans, as above, the AEGL and ERPG values subchronic nickel toxicity database and include the similarly-defined severity was derived following guidelines that well as real-time emergency response actions, for accidental chemical releases levels 1 and 2. For many chemicals, a are consistent with EPA guidelines.24 severity level 1 value AEGL or ERPG has Finally, there are no AEGL–1/ERPG–1 at fixed facilities and from transport carriers.’’ Id. at 31. not been developed because the types of or AEGL–2/ERPG–2 values available for effects for these chemicals are not nickel. Thus, for all the above The AEGL–1 value is then specifically consistent with the AEGL–1/ERPG–1 mentioned reasons, we will not include defined as ‘‘the airborne concentration definitions; in these instances, we Ni in our acute analysis for this source (expressed as ppm (parts per million) or compare higher severity level AEGL–2 category or in future assessments unless mg/m3 (milligrams per cubic meter)) of or ERPG–2 values to our modeled and until an appropriate value becomes a substance above which it is predicted exposure levels to screen for potential available. that the general population, including acute concerns. When AEGL–1/ERPG–1 AEGL values were derived in susceptible individuals, could values are available, they are used in response to recommendations from the experience notable discomfort, our acute risk assessments. National Research Council (NRC). As irritation, or certain asymptomatic Acute REL values for 1-hour exposure described in Standing Operating nonsensory effects. However, the effects durations are typically lower than their Procedures (SOP) of the National are not disabling and are transient and corresponding AEGL–1 and ERPG–1 Advisory Committee on Acute Exposure reversible upon cessation of exposure.’’ values. Even though their definitions are Guideline Levels for Hazardous Id. at 3. The document also notes that, slightly different, AEGL–1 values are Substances (http://www.epa.gov/oppt/ ‘‘Airborne concentrations below AEGL– often the same as the corresponding 25 aegl/pubs/sop.pdf), ‘‘the NRC’s 1 represent exposure levels that can ERPG–1 values, and AEGL–2 values are previous name for acute exposure produce mild and progressively often equal to ERPG–2 values. levels—community emergency exposure increasing but transient and Maximum HQ values from our acute levels—was replaced by the term AEGL nondisabling odor, taste, and sensory screening risk assessments typically to reflect the broad application of these irritation or certain asymptomatic, result when basing them on the acute values to planning, response and nonsensory effects.’’ Id. Similarly, the REL value for a particular pollutant. In prevention in the community, the document defines AEGL–2 values as cases where our maximum acute HQ workplace, transportation, the military ‘‘the airborne concentration (expressed value exceeds 1, we also report the HQ and the remediation of Superfund as parts per million or milligrams per value based on the next highest acute sites.’’ Id. at 2. This document also cubic meter) of a substance above which dose-response value (usually the AEGL– states that AEGL values ‘‘represent it is predicted that the general 1 and/or the ERPG–1 value). threshold exposure limits for the general population, including susceptible To develop screening estimates of public and are applicable to emergency individuals, could experience acute exposures in the absence of hourly exposures ranging from 10 minutes to irreversible or other serious, long-lasting emissions data, generally we first eight hours.’’ Id. at 2. adverse health effects or an impaired develop estimates of maximum hourly The document lays out the purpose ability to escape.’’ Id. emissions rates by multiplying the and objectives of AEGL by stating that average actual annual hourly emissions ‘‘the primary purpose of the AEGL ERPG values are derived for use in emergency response, as described in the rates by a default factor to cover routinely variable emissions. We choose 23 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease American Industrial Hygiene Registry (ATSDR), Toxic Substances Portal. Association’s ERP Committee document the factor to use partially based on Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) http:// entitled, ERPGS Procedures and process knowledge and engineering www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/index.asp. Responsibilities (http://sp4m.aiha.org/ judgment. The factor chosen also 24 US EPA 2002. Review of the reference dose and insideaiha/GuidelineDevelopment/ reflects a Texas study of short-term reference concentration processes (EPA/630/P–02/ emissions variability, which showed 002F), December 2002, http://www.epa.gov/raf/ ERPG/Documents/ERP–SOPs2006.pdf), publications/pdfs/rfd-final.pdf which states that, ‘‘Emergency Response that most peak emission events in a 25 National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 2001. Planning Guidelines were developed for Standing Operating Procedures for Developing 26 ERP Committee Procedures and Acute Exposure Levels for Hazardous Chemicals, emergency planning and are intended as Responsibilities. November 1, 2006. American page 2. health based guideline concentrations Industrial Hygiene Association.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60249

heavily-industrialized four-county area determining that the receptor with the environment (PB–HAP). The PB–HAP (Harris, Galveston, Chambers and maximum concentration was off of plant compounds or compound classes are Brazoria Counties, Texas) were less than property. These refinements are identified for the screening from the twice the annual average hourly discussed more fully in the Residual EPA’s Air Toxics Risk Assessment emissions rate. The highest peak Risk Assessment for the Ferroalloys Library (available at http:// emissions event was 74 times the Production Source Category in Support www2.epa.gov/fera/risk-assessment- annual average hourly emissions rate, of the September 2014 Supplemental and-modeling-air-toxics-risk- and the 99th percentile ratio of peak Proposal, which is available in the assessment-reference-library). hourly emissions rate to the annual docket for this source category. Ideally, For the Ferroalloys Production source average hourly emissions rate was 9.27 we would prefer to have continuous category, we identified emissions of Considering this analysis, to account for measurements over time to see how the cadmium compounds, chlorinated more than 99 percent of the peak hourly emissions vary by each hour over an dibenzodioxins and furans, lead emissions, we apply a conservative entire year. Having a frequency compounds, mercury compounds and screening multiplication factor of 10 to distribution of hourly emissions rates polycyclic organic matter. Because one the average annual hourly emissions over a year would allow us to perform or more of these PB–HAP are emitted by rate in our acute exposure screening a probabilistic analysis to estimate at least one facility in the Ferroalloys assessments as our default approach. potential threshold exceedances and Production source category, we However, we use a factor other than 10 their frequency of occurrence. Such an proceeded to the second step of the if we have information that indicates evaluation could include a more evaluation. In this step, we determined that a different factor is appropriate for complete statistical treatment of the key whether the facility-specific emissions a particular source category. parameters and elements adopted in this rates of each of the emitted PB–HAP For this source category, data were screening analysis. Recognizing that this were large enough to create the potential available to determine process-specific level of data is rarely available, we for significant non-inhalation human factors. Some processes, for example the instead rely on the multiplier approach. health risks under reasonable worst-case electric arc furnaces, operate To better characterize the potential conditions. To facilitate this step, we continuously so there are no peak health risks associated with estimated developed emissions rate screening emissions. These processes received a acute exposures to HAP, and in levels for several PB–HAP using a factor of 1 in the acute assessment. response to a key recommendation from hypothetical upper-end screening Other processes, for example tapping the SAB’s peer review of the EPA’s RTR exposure scenario developed for use in and casting, have specific cycles, with risk assessment methodologies,28 we conjunction with the EPA’s Total Risk peak emissions occurring for a part of generally examine a wider range of Integrated Methodology.Fate, Transport, that cycle (e.g., 30 minutes during a 2- available acute health metrics (e.g., and Ecological Exposure (TRIM.FaTE) hour period). For these processes, we RELs, AEGLs) than we do for our model. The PB–HAP with emissions used a factor of 4 in the acute chronic risk assessments. This is in rate screening level values are: Lead, assessment. Even with data available to response to the SAB’s acknowledgement cadmium, chlorinated dibenzodioxins develop process-specific factors, our that there are generally more data gaps and furans, mercury compounds, and acute assessment is still conservative in and inconsistencies in acute reference polycyclic organic matter (POM). We that it assumes that every process values than there are in chronic conducted a sensitivity analysis on the releases its peak emissions at the same reference values. In some cases, when screening scenario to ensure that its key hour and that this is the same hour as Reference Value Arrays 29 for HAP have design parameters would represent the the worst-case dispersion conditions. been developed, we consider additional upper end of the range of possible This results in a highly conservative acute values (i.e., occupational and values, such that it would represent a exposure scenario. A further discussion international values) to provide a more conservative but not impossible of why this factor of 4 was chosen can complete risk characterization. scenario. The facility-specific emissions be found in the memorandum, Revised rates of these PB–HAP were compared 4. How did we conduct the Development of the RTR Emissions to the emission rate screening levels for multipathway exposure and risk Dataset for the Ferroalloys Production these PB–HAP to assess the potential for screening? Source Category for the 2014 significant human health risks via non- Supplemental Proposal, available in the The EPA conducted a screening inhalation pathways. We call this docket for this rulemaking. analysis examining the potential for application of the TRIM.FaTE model the As part of our acute risk assessment significant human health risks due to Tier I TRIM-screen or Tier I screen. process, for cases where acute HQ exposures via routes other than For the purpose of developing values from the screening step were less inhalation (i.e., ingestion). We first emissions rates for our Tier I TRIM- than or equal to 1 (even under the determined whether any sources in the screen, we derived emission levels for conservative assumptions of the source category emitted any hazardous these PB–HAP (other than lead screening analysis), acute impacts were air pollutants known to be persistent compounds) at which the maximum deemed negligible and no further and bioaccumulative in the excess lifetime cancer risk would be 1- analysis was performed. In cases where in-1 million (i.e., for polychlorinated an acute HQ from the screening step 28 The SAB peer review of RTR Risk Assessment dibenzodioxins and furans and POM) was greater than 1, additional site- Methodologies is available at: http:// or, for HAP that cause non-cancer health yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ specific data were considered to effects (i.e., cadmium compounds and 4AB3966E263D943A8525771F00668381/$File/EPA- mercury compounds), the maximum develop a more refined estimate of the SAB-10-007-unsigned.pdf. hazard quotient would be 1. If the potential for acute impacts of concern. 29 U.S. EPA. (2009) Chapter 2.9 Chemical Specific For this source category, the data Reference Values for Formaldehyde in Graphical emissions rate of any PB–HAP included refinements employed consisted of Arrays of Chemical-Specific Health Effect Reference in the Tier I screen exceeds the Tier I Values for Inhalation Exposures (Final Report). U.S. screening emissions rate for any facility, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 27 See http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/compliance/ EPA/600/R–09/061 and available online at http:// we conduct a second screen, which we field_ops/eer/index.html or docket to access the cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/ call the Tier II TRIM-screen or Tier II source of these data. recordisplay.cfm?deid=211003. screen.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60250 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

In the Tier II screen, the location of considered to have a low potential for or animals (e.g., small fish) at the each facility that exceeded the Tier I multi-pathway risk. bottom of the food chain. As larger and emission rate is used to refine the For further information on the larger predators consume these assumptions associated with the multipathway analysis approach, see organisms, concentrations of the PB– environmental scenario while the Residual Risk Assessment for the HAP in the animal tissues increase as maintaining the exposure scenario Ferroalloys Production Source Category does the potential for adverse effects. assumptions. We then adjust the risk- in Support of the September 2014 The five PB–HAP we evaluate as part of based Tier I screening level for each PB– Supplemental Proposal, which is our screening analysis account for 99.8 HAP for each facility based on an available in the docket for this action. percent of all PB–HAP emissions understanding of how exposure 5. How did we assess risks considering nationally from stationary sources (on a concentrations estimated for the the revised emissions control options? mass basis from the 2005 NEI). screening scenario change with In addition to accounting for almost meteorology and environmental In addition to assessing baseline all of the mass of PB–HAP emitted, we assumptions. PB–HAP emissions that do inhalation risks and potential note that the TRIM.FaTE model that we not exceed these new Tier II screening multipathway risks, we also estimated use to evaluate multipathway risk levels are considered to pose no risks considering the emissions allows us to estimate concentrations of unacceptable risks. When facilities reductions that would be achieved by cadmium compounds, dioxins/furans, exceed the Tier II screening levels, it the control options under consideration POM and mercury in soil, sediment and does not mean that multipathway in this supplemental proposal. In these water. For lead compounds, we impacts are significant, only that we cases, the expected emissions currently do not have the ability to cannot rule out that possibility based on reductions were applied to the specific calculate these concentrations using the the results of the screen. HAP and emissions points in the RTR TRIM.FaTE model. Therefore, to If the PB–HAP emissions for a facility emissions dataset to develop evaluate the potential for adverse exceed the Tier II screening emissions corresponding estimates of risk that environmental effects from lead rate and data are available, we may would exist after implementation of the compounds, we compare the estimated decide to conduct a more refined proposed amendments in today’s action. HEM-modeled exposures from the multipathway assessment. A refined 6. How did we conduct the source category emissions of lead with assessment replaces some of the environmental risk screening the level of the secondary National assumptions made in the Tier II screen, assessment? Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) with site-specific data. The refined 31 a. Adverse Environmental Effect for lead. We consider values below the assessment also uses the TRIM.FaTE level of the secondary lead NAAQS as model and facility-specific emission rate The EPA has developed a screening unlikely to cause adverse environmental screening levels that are created for each approach to examine the potential for effects. PB–HAP. For the ferroalloys production adverse environmental effects as Due to their well-documented source category, we did conduct a required under section 112(f)(2)(A) of potential to cause direct damage to refined multipathway assessment for the CAA. Section 112(a)(7) of the CAA terrestrial plants, we include two acid one facility in the category. A detailed defines ‘‘adverse environmental effect’’ gases, HCl and HF, in the environmental discussion of the approach for this as ‘‘any significant and widespread screening analysis. According to the assessment can be found in Appendix adverse effect, which may reasonably be 2005 NEI, HCl and HF account for about 10 (Technical Support Document: anticipated, to wildlife, aquatic life, or 99 percent (on a mass basis) of the total Human Health Multipathway Residual other natural resources, including acid gas HAP emitted by stationary Risk Assessment for the Ferroalloys adverse impacts on populations of sources in the U.S. In addition to the Production Source Category) of the risk endangered or threatened species or potential to cause direct damage to assessment document. significant degradation of plants, high concentrations of HF in the In evaluating the potential multi- environmental quality over broad air have been linked to fluorosis in pathway risk from emissions of lead areas.’’ livestock. Air concentrations of these compounds, rather than developing a HAP are already calculated as part of screening emissions rate for them, we b. Environmental HAP The EPA focuses on seven HAP, the human multipathway exposure and compared maximum estimated chronic risk screening analysis using the HEM3– inhalation exposures with the level of which we refer to as ‘‘environmental HAP,’’ in its screening analysis: Five AERMOD air dispersion model, and we the current National Ambient Air are able to use the air dispersion Quality Standard (NAAQS) for lead.30 persistent bioaccumulative HAP (PB– HAP) and two acid gases. The five PB– modeling results to estimate the Values below the level of the primary potential for an adverse environmental (health-based) lead NAAQS were HAP are cadmium, dioxins/furans, polycyclic organic matter (POM), effect. The EPA acknowledges that other 30 mercury (both inorganic mercury and In doing so, EPA notes that the legal standard HAP beyond the seven HAP discussed for a primary NAAQS—that a standard is requisite methyl mercury) and lead compounds. to protect public health and provide an adequate The two acid gases are hydrogen above may have the potential to cause margin of safety (CAA section 109(b))—differs from adverse environmental effects. the section 112(f) standard (requiring among other chloride (HCl) and hydrogen fluoride (HF). The rationale for including these Therefore, the EPA may include other things that the standard provide an ‘‘ample margin relevant HAP in its environmental risk of safety’’). However, the lead NAAQS is a seven HAP in the environmental risk reasonable measure of determining risk screening analysis is presented below. acceptability (i.e. the first step of the Benzene 31 The secondary lead NAAQS is a reasonable NESHAP analysis) since it is designed to protect the The HAP that persist and measure of determining whether there is an adverse most susceptible group in the human population— bioaccumulate are of particular environmental effect since it was established children, including children living near major lead environmental concern because they considering ‘‘effects on soils, water, crops, emitting sources. 73 FR 67002/3; 73 FR 67000/3; 73 accumulate in the soil, sediment and vegetation, man-made materials, animals, wildlife, FR 67005/1. In addition, applying the level of the weather, visibility and climate, damage to and primary lead NAAQS at the risk acceptability step water. The PB–HAP are taken up, deterioration of property, and hazards to is conservative, since that primary lead NAAQS through sediment, soil, water, and/or transportation, as well as effects on economic reflects an adequate margin of safety. ingestion of other organisms, by plants values and on personal comfort and well-being.’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60251

screening in the future, as modeling HAP per liter of water) that has been concentration for chronic inhalation science and resources allow. The EPA linked to a particular environmental exposure for human health. This means invites comment on the extent to which effect level (e.g., a no-observed-adverse- that where the EPA includes regulatory other HAP emitted by the source effect level (NOAEL)) through scientific requirements to prevent an exceedance category may cause adverse study. For PB–HAP we identified, of the reference concentration for environmental effects. Such information where possible, ecological benchmarks human health, additional analyses for should include references to peer- at the following effect levels: adverse environmental effects of HCl reviewed ecological effects benchmarks Probable effect levels (PEL): Level would not be necessary. that are of sufficient quality for making above which adverse effects are For HF, the EPA identified chronic regulatory decisions, as well as expected to occur frequently. benchmark concentrations for plants information on the presence of Lowest-observed-adverse-effect level and evaluated chronic exposures to organisms located near facilities within (LOAEL): The lowest exposure level plants in the screening analysis. High the source category that such tested at which there are biologically concentrations of HF in the air have also benchmarks indicate could be adversely significant increases in frequency or been linked to fluorosis in livestock. affected. severity of adverse effects. However, the HF concentrations at No-observed-adverse-effect levels which fluorosis in livestock occur are c. Ecological Assessment Endpoints and (NOAEL): The highest exposure level higher than those at which plant Benchmarks for PB–HAP tested at which there are no biologically damage begins. Therefore, the An important consideration in the significant increases in the frequency or benchmarks for plants are protective of development of the EPA’s screening severity of adverse effect. both plants and livestock. methodology is the selection of We established a hierarchy of e. Screening Methodology ecological assessment endpoints and preferred benchmark sources to allow benchmarks. Ecological assessment selection of benchmarks for each For the environmental risk screening endpoints are defined by the ecological environmental HAP at each ecological analysis, the EPA first determined entity (e.g., aquatic communities assessment endpoint. In general, the whether any facilities in the ferroalloys including fish and plankton) and its EPA sources that are used at a production source category sources attributes (e.g., frequency of mortality). programmatic level (e.g., Office of emitted any of the seven environmental Ecological assessment endpoints can be Water, Superfund Program) were used, HAP. For the ferroalloys production established for organisms, populations, if available. If not, the EPA benchmarks source category, we identified emissions communities or assemblages, and used in regional programs (e.g., of five of the PB HAP (cadmium, ecosystems. Superfund) were used. If benchmarks mercury, lead compounds, dioxins and For PB–HAP (other than lead were not available at a programmatic or polycyclic organic matter) and one acid compounds), we evaluated the regional level, we used benchmarks gas (HCl). following community-level ecological developed by other federal agencies Because one or more of the seven assessment endpoints to screen for (e.g., National Oceanic and Atmospheric environmental HAP evaluated are organisms directly exposed to HAP in Administration (NOAA)) or state emitted by the facilities in the source soils, sediment and water: agencies. category, we proceeded to the second • Local terrestrial communities (i.e., Benchmarks for all effect levels are step of the evaluation. soil invertebrates, plants) and not available for all PB–HAP and f. PB–HAP Methodology populations of small birds and assessment endpoints. In cases where mammals that consume soil multiple effect levels were available for For cadmium, mercury, POM and invertebrates exposed to PB–HAP in the a particular PB–HAP and assessment dioxins/furans, the environmental surface soil. endpoint, we use all of the available screening analysis consists of two tiers, • Local benthic (i.e., bottom sediment effect levels to help us to determine while lead compounds are analyzed dwelling insects, amphipods, isopods whether ecological risks exist and, if so, differently as discussed earlier. In the and crayfish) communities exposed to whether the risks could be considered first tier, we determined whether the PB–HAP in sediment in nearby water significant and widespread. maximum facility-specific emission bodies. rates of each of the emitted • Local aquatic (water-column) d. Ecological Assessment Endpoints and environmental HAP were large enough communities (including fish and Benchmarks for Acid Gases to create the potential for adverse plankton) exposed to PB–HAP in nearby The environmental screening analysis environmental effects under reasonable surface waters. also evaluated potential damage and worst-case environmental conditions. For PB–HAP (other than lead reduced productivity of plants due to These are the same environmental compounds), we also evaluated the direct exposure to acid gases in the air. conditions used in the human following population-level ecological For acid gases, we evaluated the multipathway exposure and risk assessment endpoint to screen for following ecological assessment screening analysis. indirect HAP exposures of top endpoint: To facilitate this step, TRIM.FaTE was consumers via the bioaccumulation of • Local terrestrial plant communities run for each PB–HAP under HAP in food chains. with foliage exposed to acidic gaseous hypothetical environmental conditions • Piscivorous (i.e., fish-eating) HAP in the air. designed to provide conservatively high wildlife consuming PB–HAP- The selection of ecological HAP concentrations. The model was set contaminated fish from nearby water benchmarks for the effects of acid gases to maximize runoff from terrestrial bodies. on plants followed the same approach parcels into the modeled lake, which in For cadmium compounds, dioxins/ as for PB–HAP (i.e., we examine all of turn, maximized the chemical furans, POM and mercury, we identified the available benchmarks). For HCl, the concentrations in the water, the the available ecological benchmarks for EPA identified chronic benchmark sediments and the fish. The resulting each assessment endpoint. An concentrations. We note that the media concentrations were then used to ecological benchmark represents a benchmark for chronic HCl exposure to back-calculate a screening level concentration of HAP (e.g., 0.77 ug of plants is greater than the reference emission rate that corresponded to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60252 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

relevant exposure benchmark For purposes of ecological risk Production Source Category in Support concentration value for each assessment screening, the EPA identifies a potential of the September 2014 Supplemental endpoint. To assess emissions from a for adverse environmental effects to Proposal, which is available in the facility, the reported emission rate for plant communities from exposure to docket for this action. each PB–HAP was compared to the acid gases when the average screening level emission rate for that concentration of the HAP around a a. Uncertainties in the RTR Emissions PB–HAP for each assessment endpoint. facility exceeds the LOAEL ecological Dataset benchmark. In such cases, we further If emissions from a facility do not Although the development of the RTR investigate factors such as the exceed the Tier I screening level, the emissions dataset involved quality facility ‘‘passes’’ the screen, and magnitude and characteristics of the assurance/quality control processes, the therefore, is not evaluated further under area of exceedance (e.g., land use of accuracy of emissions values will vary the screening approach. If emissions exceedance area, size of exceedance depending on the source of the data, the from a facility exceed the Tier I area) to determine if there is an adverse screening level, we evaluate the facility environmental effect. For further degree to which data are incomplete or further in Tier II. information on the environmental missing, the degree to which assumptions made to complete the In Tier II of the environmental screening analysis approach, see the datasets are accurate, errors in emission screening analysis, the emission rate Residual Risk Assessment for the estimates and other factors. The screening levels are adjusted to account Ferroalloys Production Source Category for local meteorology and the actual in Support of the September 2014 emission estimates considered in this location of lakes in the vicinity of Supplemental Proposal, which is analysis generally are annual totals for facilities that did not pass the Tier I available in the docket for this action. certain years, and they do not reflect short-term fluctuations during the screen. The modeling domain for each 7. How did we conduct facility-wide facility in the tier II analysis consists of assessments? course of a year or variations from year to year. The estimates of peak hourly eight octants. Each octant contains 5 To put the source category risks in modeled soil concentrations at various emission rates for the acute effects context, we typically examine the risks screening assessment were based on an distances from the facility (5 soil from the entire ‘‘facility,’’ where the concentrations × 8 octants = total of 40 emission adjustment factor applied to facility includes all HAP-emitting the average annual hourly emission soil concentrations per facility) and 1 operations within a contiguous area and rates, which are intended to account for lake with modeled concentrations for under common control. In other words, emission fluctuations due to normal water, sediment and fish tissue. In the we examine the HAP emissions not only facility operations. tier II environmental risk screening from the source category of interest, but analysis, the 40 soil concentration also emissions of HAP from all other As described above and in the points are averaged to obtain an average emissions sources at the facility for emissions technical document, we soil concentration for each facility for which we have data. However, for the gathered a substantial amount of each PB–HAP. For the water, sediment Ferroalloys Production source category, emissions test data for the stack and fish tissue concentrations, the we did not identify other HAP emissions from both facilities. highest value for each facility for each emissions sources located at these Therefore, the level of uncertainty in the pollutant is used. If emission facilities. Thus, we did not perform a estimates of HAP emissions from the concentrations from a facility do not separate facility wide risk assessment. stacks is relatively low. Regarding exceed the Tier II screening levels, the fugitive emissions, we lack direct facility passes the screen and typically 8. How did we consider uncertainties in quantitative measurements of these is not evaluated further. If emissions risk assessment? emissions, therefore, we had to rely on from a facility exceed the Tier II In the Benzene NESHAP, we available emissions factors and other screening level, the facility does not concluded that risk estimation technical information to derive the best pass the screen and, therefore, may have uncertainty should be considered in our estimates of emissions for these the potential to cause adverse decision-making under the ample environmental effects. Such facilities margin of safety framework. Uncertainty emissions. To estimate these fugitive are evaluated further to investigate and the potential for bias are inherent in emissions, we relied on information and factors such as the magnitude and all risk assessments, including those observations gathered through several characteristics of the area of exceedance. performed for this proposal. Although site visits by the EPA technical experts, uncertainty exists, we believe that our reviewed and evaluated all available g. Acid Gas Methodology approach, which used conservative emissions factors and analyzed other The environmental screening analysis tools and assumptions, ensures that our relevant information such as the evaluates the potential phytotoxicity decisions are health protective and measured ratios of HAP metals to and reduced productivity of plants due environmentally protective. A brief particulate matter, estimated capture to chronic exposure to acid gases. The discussion of the uncertainties in the efficiencies of the various ventilation environmental risk screening RTR emissions dataset, dispersion hoods currently used to capture and methodology for acid gases is a single- modeling, inhalation exposure estimates control some of the fugitive emissions tier screen that compares the average and dose-response relationships follows and the production rates for various off-site ambient air concentration over below. A more thorough discussion of products. Based on this information, we the modeling domain to ecological these uncertainties is included in the have derived the best estimates of benchmarks for each of the acid gases. Revised Development of the RTR fugitive emissions from these sources. Because air concentrations are Emissions Dataset for the Ferroalloys Details are described in the Emissions compared directly to the ecological Production Source Category for the 2014 Memo, which is available in the docket benchmarks, emission-based screening Supplemental Proposal (Emissions for this action. Nevertheless, there are levels are not calculated for acid gases Memo) and the other uncertainties are still some uncertainties regarding the as they are in the ecological risk described in more detail in the Residual precise quantities of fugitive HAP being screening methodology for PB–HAPs. Risk Assessment for the Ferroalloys emitted from these plants.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60253

b. Uncertainties in Dispersion Modeling census block who live closer to the assessment that the EPA conducts as We recognize there is uncertainty in facility. Thus, using the census block part of the risk review under section 112 ambient concentration estimates centroid to predict chronic exposures of the CAA that should be highlighted. associated with any model, including may lead to a potential understatement The accuracy of an acute inhalation the EPA’s recommended regulatory or overstatement of the true maximum exposure assessment depends on the dispersion model, AERMOD. In using a impact, but is an unbiased estimate of simultaneous occurrence of model to estimate ambient pollutant average risk and incidence. We reduce independent factors that may vary concentrations, the user chooses certain this uncertainty by analyzing large greatly, such as hourly emissions rates, options to apply. For RTR assessments, census blocks near facilities using aerial meteorology and the presence of we select some model options that have imagery and adjusting the location of humans at the location of the maximum the potential to overestimate ambient air the block centroid to better represent the concentration. In the acute screening concentrations (e.g., not including population in the block, as well as assessment that we conduct under the plume depletion or pollutant adding additional receptor locations RTR program, we assume that peak transformation). We select other model where the block population is not well emissions from the source category and worst-case meteorological conditions options that have the potential to represented by a single location. The assessment evaluates the cancer co-occur, thus resulting in maximum underestimate ambient impacts (e.g., not inhalation risks associated with ambient concentrations. These two including building downwash). Other pollutant exposures over a 70-year events are unlikely to occur at the same options that we select have the potential period, which is the assumed lifetime of time, making these assumptions to either under- or overestimate ambient an individual. In reality, both the length conservative. We then include the levels (e.g., meteorology and receptor of time that modeled emission sources additional assumption that a person is locations). On balance, considering the at facilities actually operate (i.e., more located at this point during this same directional nature of the uncertainties or less than 70 years) and the domestic time period. For this source category, commonly present in ambient growth or decline of the modeled these assumptions would tend to be concentrations estimated by dispersion industry (i.e., the increase or decrease in worst-case actual exposures as it is models, the approach we apply in the the number or size of domestic unlikely that a person would be located RTR assessments should yield unbiased facilities) will influence the future risks at the point of maximum exposure estimates of ambient HAP posed by a given source or source during the time when peak emissions concentrations. category. Depending on the and worst-case meteorological c. Uncertainties in Inhalation Exposure characteristics of the industry, these conditions occur simultaneously. The EPA did not include the effects factors will, in most cases, result in an d. Uncertainties in Dose-Response of human mobility on exposures in the overestimate both in individual risk Relationships levels and in the total estimated number assessment. Specifically, short-term There are uncertainties inherent in mobility and long-term mobility of cancer cases. However, in the unlikely scenario where a facility the development of the dose-response between census blocks in the modeling values used in our risk assessments for domain were not considered.32 The maintains, or even increases, its emissions levels over a period of more cancer effects from chronic exposures approach of not considering short or and non-cancer effects from both long-term population mobility does not than 70 years, residents live beyond 70 years at the same location, and the chronic and acute exposures. Some bias the estimate of the theoretical MIR uncertainties may be considered (by definition), nor does it affect the residents spend most of their days at that location, then the cancer inhalation quantitatively, and others generally are estimate of cancer incidence because the expressed in qualitative terms. We note total population number remains the risks could potentially be underestimated. However, annual as a preface to this discussion a point on same. It does, however, affect the shape dose-response uncertainty that is of the distribution of individual risks cancer incidence estimates from exposures to emissions from these brought out in the EPA’s 2005 Cancer across the affected population, shifting Guidelines; namely, that ‘‘the primary it toward higher estimated individual sources would not be affected by the length of time an emissions source goal of EPA actions is protection of risks at the upper end and reducing the human health; accordingly, as an number of people estimated to be at operates. The exposure estimates used in these Agency policy, risk assessment lower risks, thereby increasing the procedures, including default options estimated number of people at specific analyses assume chronic exposures to ambient (outdoor) levels of pollutants. that are used in the absence of scientific high risk levels (e.g., 1-in-10 thousand data to the contrary, should be health or 1-in-1 million). Because most people spend the majority of their time indoors, actual exposures protective’’ (EPA 2005 Cancer In addition, the assessment predicted Guidelines, pages 1–7). This is the the chronic exposures at the centroid of may not be as high, depending on the characteristics of the pollutants approach followed here as summarized each populated census block as in the next several paragraphs. A surrogates for the exposure modeled. For many of the HAP, indoor levels are roughly equivalent to ambient complete detailed discussion of concentrations for all people living in uncertainties and variability in dose- that block. Using the census block levels, but for very reactive pollutants or larger particles, indoor levels are response relationships is given in the centroid to predict chronic exposures Residual Risk Assessment for the tends to over-predict exposures for typically lower. This factor has the potential to result in an overestimate of Ferroalloys Production Source Category people in the census block who live in Support of the September 2014 25 to 30 percent of exposures.33 farther from the facility and under- Supplemental Proposal, which is predict exposures for people in the In addition to the uncertainties highlighted above, there are several available in the docket for this action. Cancer URE values used in our risk factors specific to the acute exposure 32 Short-term mobility is movement from one assessments are those that have been micro-environment to another over the course of hours or days. Long-term mobility is movement 33 U.S. EPA. National-Scale Air Toxics developed to generally provide an upper from one residence to another over the course of a Assessment for 1996. (EPA 453/R–01–003; January bound estimate of risk. That is, they lifetime. 2001; page 85.) represent a ‘‘plausible upper limit to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60254 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

true value of a quantity’’ (although this compound-specific data; where data are care must be taken when interpreting is usually not a true statistical available, UF may also be developed the results of an acute assessment of confidence limit).34 In some using compound-specific information. human health effects relative to the circumstances, the true risk could be as When data are limited, more reference value or values being low as zero; however, in other assumptions are needed and more UF exceeded. Where relevant to the circumstances the risk could be are used. Thus, there may be a greater estimated exposures, the lack of short- greater.35 When developing an upper tendency to overestimate risk in the term dose-response values at different bound estimate of risk and to provide sense that further study might support levels of severity should be factored into risk values that do not underestimate development of reference values that are the risk characterization as potential risk, health-protective default higher (i.e., less potent) because fewer uncertainties. approaches are generally used. To err on default assumptions are needed. Although every effort is made to the side of ensuring adequate health However, for some pollutants, it is identify appropriate human health effect protection, the EPA typically uses the possible that risks may be dose-response assessment values for all upper bound estimates rather than underestimated. pollutants emitted by the sources in this lower bound or central tendency While collectively termed ‘‘UF,’’ these risk assessment, some HAP emitted by estimates in our risk assessments, an factors account for a number of different this source category are lacking dose- approach that may have limitations for quantitative considerations when using response assessments. Accordingly, other uses (e.g., priority-setting or observed animal (usually rodent) or these pollutants cannot be included in expected benefits analysis). human toxicity data in the development the quantitative risk assessment, which Chronic non-cancer RfC and reference of the RfC. The UF are intended to could result in quantitative estimates dose (RfD) values represent chronic account for: (1) Variation in understating HAP risk. As we state exposure levels that are intended to be susceptibility among the members of the above in section III.A.3, based on a health-protective levels. Specifically, human population (i.e., inter-individual recent in-depth examination of the these values provide an estimate (with variability); (2) uncertainty in available acute value for nickel uncertainty spanning perhaps an order extrapolating from experimental animal (California EPA’s acute (1-hour) REL), of magnitude) of a continuous data to humans (i.e., interspecies we have concluded that this value is not inhalation exposure (RfC) or a daily oral differences); (3) uncertainty in appropriate for our regulatory needs in exposure (RfD) to the human population extrapolating from data obtained in a characterizing the potential for acute (including sensitive subgroups) that is study with less-than-lifetime exposure health risks. This conclusion takes into likely to be without an appreciable risk (i.e., extrapolating from sub-chronic to account the effect on which the acute of deleterious effects during a lifetime. chronic exposure); (4) uncertainty in REL is based, aspects of the To derive values that are intended to be extrapolating the observed data to methodology used in its derivation, and ‘‘without appreciable risk,’’ the obtain an estimate of the exposure how this assessment stands in methodology relies upon an uncertainty associated with no adverse effects; and comparison to other comprehensive factor (UF) approach (U.S. EPA, 1993, (5) uncertainty when the database is toxicological assessments which 1994) which considers uncertainty, incomplete or there are problems with considered the broader nickel health variability and gaps in the available the applicability of available studies. effects database. Also, there are no data. The UF are applied to derive Many of the UF used to account for AEGL–1 or -2 or ERPG–1 or -2 values reference values that are intended to variability and uncertainty in the protect against appreciable risk of development of acute reference values available to use in this acute risk deleterious effects. The UF are are quite similar to those developed for assessment. Therefore, we will not commonly default values,36 e.g., factors chronic durations, but they more often include nickel in our acute analysis for of 10 or 3, used in the absence of use individual UF values that may be this source category or in future less than 10. The UF are applied based assessments unless and until an 34 IRIS glossary (http://www.epa.gov/NCEA/iris/ on chemical-specific or health effect- appropriate value becomes available. help_gloss.htm). specific information (e.g., simple To help to alleviate this potential 35 An exception to this is the URE for benzene, irritation effects do not vary appreciably underestimate, where we conclude which is considered to cover a range of values, each similarity with a HAP for which a dose- end of which is considered to be equally plausible between human individuals, hence a and which is based on maximum likelihood value of 3 is typically used), or based on response assessment value is available, estimates. the purpose for the reference value (see we use that value as a surrogate for the 36 According to the NRC report, Science and the following paragraph). The UF assessment of the HAP for which no Judgment in Risk Assessment (NRC, 1994) value is available. To the extent use of ‘‘[Default] options are generic approaches, based on applied in acute reference value general scientific knowledge and policy judgment, derivation include: (1) Heterogeneity surrogates indicates appreciable risk, we that are applied to various elements of the risk among humans; (2) uncertainty in may identify a need to increase priority assessment process when the correct scientific extrapolating from animals to humans; for new IRIS assessment of that model is unknown or uncertain.’’ The 1983 NRC report, Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: (3) uncertainty in lowest observed substance. We additionally note that, Managing the Process, defined default option as adverse effect (exposure) level to no generally speaking, HAP of greatest ‘‘the option chosen on the basis of risk assessment observed adverse effect (exposure) level concern due to environmental policy that appears to be the best choice in the adjustments; and (4) uncertainty in exposures and hazard are those for absence of data to the contrary’’ (NRC, 1983a, p. 63). Therefore, default options are not rules that bind accounting for an incomplete database which dose-response assessments have the Agency; rather, the Agency may depart from on toxic effects of potential concern. been performed, reducing the likelihood them in evaluating the risks posed by a specific Additional adjustments are often of understating risk. Further, HAP not substance when it believes this to be appropriate. included in the quantitative assessment In keeping with EPA’s goal of protecting public applied to account for uncertainty in health and the environment, default assumptions extrapolation from observations at one are assessed qualitatively and are used to ensure that risk to chemicals is not exposure duration (e.g., 4 hours) to considered in the risk characterization underestimated (although defaults are not intended derive an acute reference value at that informs the risk management to overtly overestimate risk). See EPA, 2004, An decisions, including with regard to Examination of EPA Risk Assessment Principles another exposure duration (e.g., 1 hour). and Practices, EPA/100/B–04/001 available at: Not all acute reference values are consideration of HAP reductions http://www.epa.gov/osa/pdfs/ratf-final.pdf. developed for the same purpose and achieved by various control options.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60255

For a group of compounds that are configuration of the area of interest, lake described in detail in the risk document unspeciated (e.g., glycol ethers), we location and size, meteorology, surface Appendix 10, Residual Risk Assessment conservatively use the most protective water and soil characteristics and for the Ferroalloys Production Source reference value of an individual structure of the aquatic food web. We Category in Support of the September compound in that group to estimate also assume an ingestion exposure 2014 Supplemental Proposal, which is risk. Similarly, for an individual scenario and values for human exposure available in the docket for this action. compound in a group (e.g., ethylene factors that represent reasonable f. Uncertainties in the Environmental glycol diethyl ether) that does not have maximum exposures. Risk Screening Assessment a specified reference value, we also In Tier II of the multipathway apply the most protective reference assessment, we refine the model inputs For each source category, we value from the other compounds in the to account for meteorological patterns in generally rely on site-specific levels of group to estimate risk. the vicinity of the facility versus using environmental HAP emissions to upper-end national values and we perform an environmental screening e. Uncertainties in the Multipathway identify the actual location of lakes near assessment. The environmental Assessment the facility rather than the default lake screening assessment is based on the For each source category, we location that we apply in Tier I. By outputs from models that estimate generally rely on site-specific levels of refining the screening approach in Tier environmental HAP concentrations. The PB–HAP emissions to determine II to account for local geographical and same models, specifically the whether a refined assessment of the meteorological data, we decrease the TRIM.FaTE multipathway model and impacts from multipathway exposures likelihood that concentrations in the AERMOD air dispersion model, are is necessary. This determination is environmental media are overestimated, used to estimate environmental HAP based on the results of a two-tiered thereby increasing the usefulness of the concentrations for both the human screening analysis that relies on the screen. The assumptions and the multipathway screening analysis and for outputs from models that estimate associated uncertainties regarding the the environmental screening analysis. environmental pollutant concentrations selected ingestion exposure scenario are Therefore, both screening assessments and human exposures for four PB–HAP. the same for Tier I and Tier II. have similar modeling uncertainties. Two important types of uncertainty For both Tiers I and II of the Two important types of uncertainty associated with the use of these models multipathway assessment, our approach associated with the use of these models in RTR risk assessments and inherent to to addressing model input uncertainty is in RTR environmental screening any assessment that relies on generally cautious. We choose model assessments—and inherent to any environmental modeling are model inputs from the upper end of the range assessment that relies on environmental uncertainty and input uncertainty.37 of possible values for the influential modeling—are model uncertainty and Model uncertainty concerns whether the parameters used in the models, and we input uncertainty.38 selected models are appropriate for the assume that the exposed individual Model uncertainty concerns whether assessment being conducted and exhibits ingestion behavior that would the selected models are appropriate for whether they adequately represent the lead to a high total exposure. This the assessment being conducted and actual processes that might occur for approach reduces the likelihood of not whether they adequately represent the that situation. An example of model identifying high risks for adverse movement and accumulation of uncertainty is the question of whether impacts. environmental HAP emissions in the the model adequately describes the Despite the uncertainties, when environment. For example, does the movement of a pollutant through the individual pollutants or facilities do model adequately describe the soil. This type of uncertainty is difficult screen out, we are confident that the movement of a pollutant through the to quantify. However, based on feedback potential for adverse multipathway soil? This type of uncertainty is difficult received from previous EPA Science impacts on human health is very low. to quantify. However, based on feedback Advisory Board reviews and other On the other hand, when individual received from previous EPA Science reviews, we are confident that the pollutants or facilities do not screen out, Advisory Board reviews and other models used in the screen are it does not mean that multipathway reviews, we are confident that the appropriate and state-of-the-art for the impacts are significant, only that we models used in the screen are multipathway risk assessments cannot rule out that possibility and that appropriate and state-of-the-art for the conducted in support of RTR. a refined multipathway analysis for the environmental risk assessments Input uncertainty is concerned with site might be necessary to obtain a more conducted in support of our RTR how accurately the models have been accurate risk characterization for the analyses. configured and parameterized for the source category. Input uncertainty is concerned with assessment at hand. For Tier I of the For further information on how accurately the models have been multipathway screen, we configured the uncertainties and the Tier I and II configured and parameterized for the models to avoid underestimating screening methods, refer to the risk assessment at hand. For Tier I of the exposure and risk. This was document Appendix 4, Technical environmental screen for PB–HAP, we accomplished by selecting upper-end Support Document for TRIM-Based configured the models to avoid values from nationally-representative Multipathway Tiered Screening underestimating exposure and risk to data sets for the more influential Methodology for RTR. reduce the likelihood that the results parameters in the environmental model, We also completed a refined multi- indicate the risks are lower than they including selection and spatial pathway assessment for this actually are. This was accomplished by supplemental proposal. The refined 37 In the context of this discussion, the term assessment contains considerably less 38 In the context of this discussion, the term ‘‘uncertainty’’ as it pertains to exposure and risk uncertainty compared to the Tier I and ‘‘uncertainty,’’ as it pertains to exposure and risk encompasses both variability in the range of Tier II screens. Nevertheless, some assessment, encompasses both variability in the expected inputs and screening results due to range of expected inputs and screening results due existing spatial, temporal, and other factors, as well uncertainties also exist with the refined to existing spatial, temporal and other factors, as as uncertainty in being able to accurately estimate assessments. The refined multi-pathway well as uncertainty in being able to accurately the true result. assessment and related uncertainties are estimate the true result.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60256 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

selecting upper-end values from used at a programmatic level (e.g., Further information on uncertainties nationally-representative data sets for Office of Water, Superfund Program) and the Tier I and II screening methods the more influential parameters in the were used if available. If not, we used is provided in Appendix 4 of the environmental model, including EPA benchmarks used in regional document ‘‘Technical Support selection and spatial configuration of programs (e.g., Superfund Program). If Document for TRIM-Based the area of interest, the location and size benchmarks were not available at a Multipathway Tiered Screening of any bodies of water, meteorology, programmatic or regional level, we used Methodology for RTR: Summary of surface water and soil characteristics benchmarks developed by other Approach and Evaluation.’’ Also, see and structure of the aquatic food web. agencies (e.g., NOAA) or by state the Residual Risk Assessment for the In Tier I, we used the maximum facility- agencies. Ferroalloys Production Source Category specific emissions for the PB–HAP In all cases (except for lead in Support of the September 2014 (other than lead compounds, which compounds, which were evaluated Supplemental Proposal, available in the were evaluated by comparison to the through a comparison to the NAAQS), docket for this action. secondary lead NAAQS) that were we searched for benchmarks at the B. How did we consider the risk results included in the environmental following three effect levels, as in making decisions for this screening assessment and each of the described in section III.A.6. of this supplemental proposal? media when comparing to ecological notice: benchmarks. This is consistent with the As discussed in section II.A of this 1. A no-effect level (i.e., NOAEL). preamble, in evaluating and developing conservative design of Tier I of the 2. Threshold-effect level (i.e., LOAEL). screen. In Tier II of the environmental 3. Probable effect level (i.e., PEL). standards under section 112(f)(2), we screening analysis for PB–HAP, we apply a two-step process to address For some ecological assessment refine the model inputs to account for residual risk. In the first step, the EPA endpoint/environmental HAP meteorological patterns in the vicinity determines whether risks are acceptable. combinations, we could identify of the facility versus using upper-end This determination ‘‘considers all health benchmarks for all three effect levels, national values, and we identify the information, including risk estimation but for most, we could not. In one case, locations of water bodies near the uncertainty, and includes a presumptive where different agencies derived facility location. By refining the limit on maximum individual lifetime significantly different numbers to 39 screening approach in Tier II to account [cancer] risk (MIR) of approximately for local geographical and represent a threshold for effect, we [1-in-10 thousand] [i.e., 100-in-1 meteorological data, we decrease the included both. In several cases, only a million].’’ 54 FR 38045, September 14, likelihood that concentrations in single benchmark was available. In 1989. If risks are unacceptable, the EPA environmental media are overestimated, cases where multiple effect levels were must determine the emissions standards thereby increasing the usefulness of the available for a particular PB–HAP and necessary to bring risks to an acceptable screen. To better represent widespread assessment endpoint, we used all of the level without considering costs. In the impacts, the modeled soil available effect levels to help us to second step of the process, the EPA concentrations are averaged in Tier II to determine whether risk exists and if the considers whether the emissions obtain one average soil concentration risks could be considered significant standards provide an ample margin of value for each facility and for each PB– and widespread. safety ‘‘in consideration of all health HAP. For PB–HAP concentrations in The EPA evaluates the following information, including the number of water, sediment and fish tissue, the seven HAP in the environmental risk persons at risk levels higher than highest value for each facility for each screening assessment: Cadmium, approximately 1-in-1 million, as well as pollutant is used. dioxins/furans, POM, mercury (both other relevant factors, including costs For the environmental screening inorganic mercury and methyl mercury), and economic impacts, technological assessment for acid gases, we employ a lead compounds, HCl and HF, where feasibility, and other factors relevant to single-tiered approach. We use the applicable. These seven HAP represent each particular decision.’’ Id. The EPA modeled air concentrations and pollutants that can cause adverse must promulgate emission standards compare those with ecological impacts for plants and animals either necessary to provide an ample margin of benchmarks. through direct exposure to HAP in the safety. For both Tiers I and II of the air or through exposure to HAP that is In past residual risk actions, the EPA environmental screening assessment, deposited from the air onto soils and considered a number of human health our approach to addressing model input surface waters. These seven HAP also risk metrics associated with emissions uncertainty is generally cautious. We represent those HAP for which we can from the categories under review, choose model inputs from the upper conduct a meaningful environmental including the MIR, the number of end of the range of possible values for risk screening assessment. For other persons in various risk ranges, cancer the influential parameters used in the HAP not included in our screening incidence, the maximum non-cancer HI models, and we assume that the assessment, the model has not been and the maximum acute non-cancer exposed individual exhibits ingestion parameterized such that it can be used hazard. See, e.g., 72 FR 25138, May 3, behavior that would lead to a high total for that purpose. In some cases, 2007; 71 FR 42724, July 27, 2006. The exposure. This approach reduces the depending on the HAP, we may not EPA considered this health information likelihood of not identifying potential have appropriate multipathway models for both actual and allowable emissions. risks for adverse environmental impacts. that allow us to predict the See, e.g., 75 FR 65068, October 21, 2010; Uncertainty also exists in the concentration of that pollutant. The EPA 75 FR 80220, December 21, 2010; 76 FR ecological benchmarks for the acknowledges that other HAP beyond 29032, May 19, 2011. The EPA also environmental risk screening analysis. the seven HAP that we are evaluating discussed risk estimation uncertainties We established a hierarchy of preferred may have the potential to cause adverse benchmark sources to allow selection of environmental effects and, therefore, the 39 Although defined as ‘‘maximum individual benchmarks for each environmental EPA may evaluate other relevant HAP in risk,’’ MIR refers only to cancer risk. MIR, one metric for assessing cancer risk, is the estimated HAP at each ecological assessment the future, as modeling science and risk were an individual exposed to the maximum endpoint. In general, EPA benchmarks resources allow. level of a pollutant for a lifetime.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60257

and considered the uncertainties in the should ordinarily be the upper end of ‘‘that RTR assessments will be most determination of acceptable risk and the range of acceptability. As risks useful to decision makers and ample margin of safety in these past increase above this benchmark, they communities if results are presented in actions. The EPA considered this same become presumptively less acceptable the broader context of aggregate and type of information in support of this under CAA section 112, and would be cumulative risks, including background action. weighed with the other health risk concentrations and contributions from The agency is considering these measures and information in making an other sources in the area.’’ 40 various measures of health information overall judgment on acceptability. Or, In response to the SAB to inform our determinations of risk the Agency may find, in a particular recommendations, the EPA is acceptability and ample margin of safety case, that a risk that includes MIR less incorporating cumulative risk analyses under CAA section 112(f). As explained than the presumptively acceptable level into its RTR risk assessments, including in the Benzene NESHAP, ‘‘the first step is unacceptable in the light of other those reflected in this proposal. The judgment on acceptability cannot be health risk factors.’’ Id. at 38045. agency is: (1) Conducting facility-wide reduced to any single factor’’ and thus Similarly, with regard to the ample assessments, which include source ‘‘[t]he Administrator believes that the margin of safety analysis, the EPA stated category emission points as well as acceptability of risk under [previous] in the Benzene NESHAP that: ‘‘EPA other emission points within the section 112 is best judged on the basis believes the relative weight of the many facilities; (2) considering sources in the of a broad set of health risk measures factors that can be considered in same category whose emissions result in and information.’’ 54 FR 38046, selecting an ample margin of safety can exposures to the same individuals; and September 14, 1989. Similarly, with only be determined for each specific (3) for some persistent and regard to the ample margin of safety source category. This occurs mainly bioaccumulative pollutants, analyzing determination, ‘‘the Agency again because technological and economic the ingestion route of exposure. In considers all of the health risk and other factors (along with the health-related addition, the RTR risk assessments have health information considered in the factors) vary from source category to always considered aggregate cancer risk first step. Beyond that information, source category.’’ Id. at 38061. We also from all carcinogens and aggregate non- additional factors relating to the consider the uncertainties associated cancer hazard indices from all non- appropriate level of control will also be with the various risk analyses, as carcinogens affecting the same target considered, including cost and discussed earlier in this preamble, in organ system. economic impacts of controls, our determinations of acceptability and Although we are interested in placing technological feasibility, uncertainties, ample margin of safety. source category and facility-wide HAP and any other relevant factors.’’ Id. The EPA notes that it has not risks in the context of total HAP risks The Benzene NESHAP approach considered certain health information to from all sources combined in the provides flexibility regarding factors the date in making residual risk vicinity of each source, we are EPA may consider in making determinations. At this time, we do not concerned about the uncertainties of determinations and how the EPA may attempt to quantify those HAP risks that doing so. Because of the contribution to weigh those factors for each source may be associated with emissions from total HAP risk from emission sources category. In responding to comment on other facilities that do not include the other than those that we have studied in our policy under the Benzene NESHAP, source categories in question, mobile depth during this RTR review, such the EPA explained that: source emissions, natural source estimates of total HAP risks would have emissions, persistent environmental significantly greater associated ‘‘[t]he policy chosen by the Administrator pollution or atmospheric transformation uncertainties than the source category or permits consideration of multiple measures in the vicinity of the sources in these facility-wide estimates. Such aggregate of health risk. Not only can the MIR figure or cumulative assessments would be considered, but also incidence, the categories. presence of non-cancer health effects, and the The agency understands the potential compound those uncertainties, making uncertainties of the risk estimates. In this importance of considering an the assessments too unreliable. individual’s total exposure to HAP in way, the effect on the most exposed C. How did we perform the technology addition to considering exposure to individuals can be reviewed as well as the review? impact on the general public. These factors HAP emissions from the source category can then be weighed in each individual case. and facility. We recognize that such Our technology review focused on the This approach complies with the Vinyl consideration may be particularly identification and evaluation of Chloride mandate that the Administrator important when assessing non-cancer developments in practices, processes ascertain an acceptable level of risk to the risks, where pollutant-specific exposure and control technologies that have public by employing [her] expertise to assess health reference levels (e.g., RfCs) are occurred since the MACT standards available data. It also complies with the based on the assumption that thresholds were promulgated. Where we identified Congressional intent behind the CAA, which such developments, in order to inform did not exclude the use of any particular exist for adverse health effects. For measure of public health risk from the EPA’s example, the agency recognizes that, our decision of whether it is consideration with respect to CAA section although exposures attributable to ‘‘necessary’’ to revise the emissions 112 regulations, and thereby implicitly emissions from a source category or standards, we analyzed the technical permits consideration of any and all facility alone may not indicate the feasibility of applying these measures of health risk which the potential for increased risk of adverse developments and the estimated costs, Administrator, in [her] judgment, believes are non-cancer health effects in a appropriate to determining what will ‘protect population, the exposures resulting 40 EPA’s responses to this and all other key the public health’.’’ recommendations of the SAB’s advisory on RTR from emissions from the facility in risk assessment methodologies (which is available See 54 FR at 38057, September 14, 1989. combination with emissions from all of at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ Thus, the level of the MIR is only one the other sources (e.g., other facilities) to 4AB3966E263D943A8525771F00668381/$File/EPA- factor to be weighed in determining which an individual is exposed may be SAB-10-007-unsigned.pdf) are outlined in a memo to this rulemaking docket from David Guinnup acceptability of risks. The Benzene sufficient to result in increased risk of entitled, EPA’s Actions in Response to the Key NESHAP explained that ‘‘an MIR of adverse non-cancer health effects. In Recommendations of the SAB Review of RTR Risk approximately one in 10 thousand May 2010, the SAB advised the EPA Assessment Methodologies.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60258 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

energy implications, non-air technology review identified such estimated for the 2011 proposal. environmental impacts, as well as developments, we conducted an Therefore we evaluated other potential considering the emission reductions. analysis of the technical feasibility of approaches to reduce fugitive process We also considered the appropriateness applying these developments, along emissions based on enhanced local of applying controls to new sources with the estimated impacts (costs, capture and control of the fugitive versus retrofitting existing sources. emissions reductions, risk reductions, emissions and secondary capture and Based on our analyses of the available etc.) of applying these developments. control, which are described in more data and information, we identified We then made decisions on whether it detail below. potential developments in practices, is necessary to propose amendments to We also gathered additional emissions processes and control technologies. For the 1999 NESHAP to require any of the data for the process vents. Therefore, we this exercise, we considered any of the identified developments. Based on our have updated and revised our following to be a ‘‘development’’: analyses of the data and information technology review for the process vent • Any add-on control technology or collected by the 2010 ICR and our emissions and fugitive emissions other equipment that was not identified general understanding of the industry control options. The following and considered during development of and other available information on paragraphs describe the up-dated and the original MACT standards. revised technology review and • potential controls for this industry, we Any improvements in add-on identified several potential additional analyses that were performed control technology or other equipment developments in practices, processes for today’s supplemental proposal. (that were identified and considered and control technologies. during development of the original 1. Process Vent Emission Limits MACT standards) that could result in Based on our technology review for The ferroalloy production facilities additional emissions reduction. the 2011 proposed rule, we determined have add-on control devices such as • Any work practice or operational that there had been advances in venturi scrubbers or fabric filters to procedure that was not identified or emissions control measures since the control emissions of metal HAP from considered during development of the Ferroalloys Production NESHAP was the furnace operations. The furnace original MACT standards. originally promulgated in 1999. Based operations include charging, smelting • Any process change or pollution on that review, we proposed lower PM and tapping. Other operations that take prevention alternative that could be emissions limits for the process vents place inside the furnace buildings broadly applied to the industry and that because we determined that the existing include casting and ladle treatment. The was not identified or considered during add-on control devices (baghouses and vast majority of emissions from the development of the original MACT wet venture scrubbers) were achieving charging and smelting processes are standards. better control than that reflected by the currently vented to the add-on control • Any significant changes in the cost emissions limits in the 1999 MACT rule. devices. However, the percent of (including cost effectiveness) of Furthermore, based on that previous emissions currently captured and applying controls (including controls technology review, to reduce fugitive controlled from tapping, ladle treatment the EPA considered during the process emissions, in 2011 we proposed and casting are considerably lower and development of the original MACT a requirement for sources to enclose the varies across furnaces. The ferroalloy standards). furnace building, prevent the fugitive production facilities also use add-on We reviewed a variety of data sources emissions from being released to the control devices to reduce emissions in our investigation of potential atmosphere by maintaining the furnace from the metal oxygen refining (MOR) practices, processes or controls to building under negative pressure and process, local ventilation sources (e.g., consider. Among the sources we collect and duct those fugitive tapping fugitive control device) and the reviewed were the NESHAP for various emissions to a control device. We product crushing operations. industries that were promulgated since proposed that approach in 2011, To evaluate the effectiveness of these the MACT standards being reviewed in because at that time, we believed it emission control technologies currently this action. We reviewed the regulatory represented a technically-feasible cost- used to reduce emissions and meet the requirements and/or technical analyses effective advance in emissions control emission limits in the 1999 MACT rule, associated with these regulatory actions since the Ferroalloys Production an ICR under section 114 of the Clean to identify any practices, processes and NESHAP was originally promulgated in Air Act was sent to each of the control technologies considered in these 1999. Additional details regarding the ferroalloy production facilities on April efforts that could be applied to emission previously-conducted technology 28, 2010 and December 21, 2012 to sources in the Ferroalloys Production review can be found in the Technology gather source emissions test data and source category, as well as the costs, Review for Ferroalloys Production other information for the furnaces, the non-air impacts and energy implications Source Category (Docket No. EPA–HQ– MOR process and the product crushing associated with the use of these OAR–2010–0895–0044), which is operations. The HAP source test data technologies. Additionally, we available in the docket and are that were collected from the control requested information from facilities discussed in the preamble to the 2011 device outlet for each furnace include: regarding developments in practices, proposal (76 FR 72508). However, we metal HAP (arsenic, cadmium, processes or control technology. Finally, received significant adverse public chromium (total and Cr+6), lead we reviewed information from other comments regarding the proposed compounds, manganese, mercury and sources, such as state and/or local requirement for full-enclosure with nickel) 41, HCl, formaldehyde, PAH, permitting agency databases and negative pressure. After reviewing and industry-supported databases. considering the comments and other 41 Total phosphorus was also measured for the ICR using EPA Method 29; however this method For the 2011 proposal, our technology information regarding the costs and does not distinguish between white phosphorus review focused on the identification and feasibility of full-enclosure, we (which is a non-HAP) and red phosphorus (which evaluation of developments in practices, determined that full-enclosure with is a HAP). Due to the uncertainty of the percentage processes and control technologies that negative pressure may not be feasible for of red phosphorus in the total phosphorus test results, it was concluded that phosphorus would have occurred since the 1999 NESHAP these facilities and, if feasible, would be not be incorporated in the emissions used for was promulgated. In cases where the much more costly than what we had modeling.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60259

PCB and chlorodibenzodioxins and devices and the emission concentrations Arc Furnaces and Argon-Oxygen chlorodibenzofurans (CDD/CDF). In that could be achieved by the use of the Decarburization Vessels Constructed addition, emissions were measured from control devices. The results of this After August 17, 1983 establishes a shop the furnace control device outlet for two analysis and the proposed decisions are building opacity limit of 6 percent, due non-HAP air pollutants (carbon described in Section IV below. solely to the operations of affected monoxide and particulate matter). The 2. Process Fugitive Control Standards electric arc furnace (EAF)(s) or argon- pollutants measured from the MOR and oxygen decarburization vessel (AOD crushing and sizing operations in 2010 We re-evaluated the costs and vessel)(s). Building opacity limits in include particulate matter (PM) and operational feasibility associated with these rules serve as an emissions metal HAP (arsenic, total chromium, the option of requiring full building standard for the control of process lead compounds, manganese, mercury enclosure with negative pressure at all fugitive emissions. Opacity limits can and nickel).42 In addition, the facilities openings. We also consulted with ensure effective capture and control of provided compliance test reports from ventilation experts working with hot these fugitive emissions if they are 2011 and 2012 and additional emissions process fugitives like those found in the established at the appropriate levels and data they collected voluntarily, which ferroalloys industry (e.g., electric arc have appropriate compliance included test data for PM, metal HAP furnace steel mini-mills and secondary monitoring requirements to ensure the (arsenic, cadmium, total chromium, lead lead smelters). Furthermore, we fugitive emissions are minimized compounds, manganese, mercury and received detailed information from each continuously over time. nickel) and organic HAP (PAH, PCB, of the Ferroalloys facilities that provides After reviewing and evaluating CDD/CDF) from the furnace control an alternative approach to achieve available information regarding device outlets. significant reductions of process fugitive approaches to reduce process fugitive The test data collected from the ICR emissions using enhanced local capture, emissions, we revised our analysis of responses, the compliance reports and including primary and secondary hoods, options to control these fugitive other testing indicate that the PM which would effectively capture most of emissions. The results of the revised emissions from the furnace process the fugitive process emissions and route analyses of control options for process vents (also known as process stacks) are these emissions to a PM control device fugitive emissions are summarized in well below the level of emissions (e.g., baghouse or wet scrubber). The Section IV and also presented in the allowed by the current emission plans provided by the facilities are Cost Impacts of Control Options to standards in subpart XXX. In the 2011 designed to achieve a high overall level Address Fugitive HAP Emissions for the proposal, we proposed lower PM limits of control. These plans are available in Ferroalloys Production NESHAP to reflect the better performance of these the docket for this action (identified by Supplemental Proposal document and sources. We also proposed lower limits document numbers: EPA–HQ–OAR– the Revised Technology Review for the for the MOR process and the crushing 2010–0895–0106 and EPA–HQ–OAR– Ferroalloys Production Source Category and screening process vents in the 2011 2010–0895–0073). for the Supplemental Proposal We also reviewed other options to proposal. We did not receive any document (Revised Technology Review control process fugitive emissions. additional test data for the MOR process document), which are available in the When we consider the evolution of the or the crushing and screening process docket. since the 2011 proposal and have EPA rules on process fugitives in the received no other information indicating metallurgical industry, we observe that IV. Revised Analytical Results and that changes to the limits we proposed the primary emphasis on quantifiable Proposed Decisions for the Ferroalloys emission standards is based on in 2011 for these sources are necessary, Production Source Category controlling stack emissions with a high therefore we plan no changes to the degree of efficiency. Standards related A. What actions are we taking pursuant proposed emission standards in this to emissions capture are generally to CAA sections 112(d)(2) and supplemental proposal for the MOR related to parameter monitoring of flow 112(d)(3)? process and the crushing and screening rates and damper positions of capture As described previously, CAA section processes. 112(d) requires the EPA to promulgate However, for the furnace process equipment when the stack emission test national technology-based emission vents, we did receive additional data is occurring. There typically has not been an independent evaluation of the standards for hazardous air pollutants and based on that data combined with effectiveness of process fugitive control (NESHAP) for listed source categories, the data we already had, we evaluated through local ventilation in a including this source category. In the whether it is appropriate to propose quantitative, rigorous manner. 2011 proposal, we proposed emissions revised emissions limits for PM from the However, there is a history of limits for mercury, PAHs and HCl, furnace process vents. We also re- addressing fugitive emissions by which were previously unregulated evaluated the proposed emission limits requiring a building opacity limit, HAP, pursuant to section 112(d)(2) and for the local ventilation system based on including a 20 percent limit in the 112(d)(3). After proposal, we received a the new test data received. Further current subpart XXX (although this limit substantial amount of additional data discussions of the re-evaluations and also contains a 60-percent short-term for these HAP and re-analyzed the the proposed revised limits are excursion and it excludes some key proposed limits for these HAP presented in Section IV below. process fugitives events such as casting). For purposes of addressing new considering the additional data. Subpart FFFFF of Part 63, National Based on those analyses we ferroalloy production facilities, we Emission Standards for Hazardous Air determined it is appropriate to propose considered the feasibility of more Pollutants for Integrated Iron and Steel revised limits for these three HAP. stringent emission limits. Specifically, Manufacturing Facilities, contains Therefore, in today’s supplemental we examined what emission level could various building opacity limits ranging notice, we are proposing revised be met using available add-on control from 20 percent for existing sources to emissions limits pursuant to section 112(d)(2) and 112(d)(3) for mercury, 42 Total phosphorus was also measured using 10 percent for new sources. Section Method 29, but was not used in the technology 60.272a in the Subpart AAa—Standards PAHs and HCl. In this section, we review. of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric describe how we developed the revised

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60260 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

proposed standards for these HAP, number of samples that will be collected 3. How did we apply the approach for including how we calculated MACT to assess compliance with the emission limited datasets to limited datasets in floor limits, how we account for limit. The UPL approach has been used the ferroalloys source category? variability in those floor calculations in many environmental science For the ferroalloys source category, and how we considered beyond the applications.43 44 45 46 47 48 As explained we have limited datasets for the floor (BTF) options. The revised MACT in more detail in the UPL Memo, the following pollutants and subcategories: analyses for these previously EPA uses the UPL approach to PAHs for existing and new furnaces unregulated pollutants (i.e., mercury, reasonably estimate the emissions producing ferromanganese (FeMn); PAH and HCl) are presented in the performance of the best performing PAHs for new furnaces producing following paragraphs. For more source or sources to establish MACT silicon manganese (SiMn); mercury for information on these analyses, see the floor standards. new furnaces producing SiMn; mercury Revised MACT Floor Analysis for the for existing and new furnaces producing With regard to the derivation of Ferroalloys Production Source Category FeMn; and HCl for new furnaces and the Mercury Control Options and MACT limits using limited datasets, in producing FeMn or SiMn. Therefore, we Impacts for the Ferroalloys Production a recent D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals evaluated these specific datasets to Industry documents which are available decision in National Association of determine whether it is appropriate to in the docket for this action. Clean Water Agencies v. EPA (NACWA), make any modifications to the approach 1. How do we develop MACT floor which involved challenges to EPA’s used to calculate MACT floors for each limits? MACT standards for sewage sludge of these datasets. incinerators, questions were raised For each dataset, we performed the As discussed in the 2011 proposal (76 regarding the application of the UPL to steps outlined in the Limited Dataset FR 72508), the MACT floor limit for limited datasets. We have since Memo, including: Ensuring that we existing sources is calculated based on addressed these questions, as explained selected the data distribution that best the average performance of the best represents each dataset; ensuring that performing units in each category or in detail in the memorandum titled: the correct equation for the distribution subcategory, and also on a consideration Approach for Applying the Upper was then applied to the data; and of these units’ variability, and the Prediction Limit to Limited Datasets comparing individual components of MACT floor for new sources is based on (i.e., Limited Dataset Memo), which is the single best performing source, with available in the docket for this action. each small dataset to determine if the a similar consideration of that source’s We seek comments on the approach standards based on small datasets variability. The MACT floor for new described in the Limited Dataset Memo reasonably represent the performance of sources cannot be less stringent than the and whether there are other approaches the units included in the dataset. The emissions performance that is achieved we should consider for such datasets. results of each analysis are described in practice by the best-controlled similar We also seek comments on the and presented below in the applicable sections for each of the three HAP (i.e., source. To account for variability in the application of this approach for the mercury, PAHs and HCl). We seek operation and emissions, the stack test derivation of MACT limits based on comments regarding the specific data were used to calculate the average limited datasets in this supplemental application of the limited dataset emissions and the 99 percent upper proposal, which are described in the predictive limit (UPL) to derive the approach used to derive the proposed following sections of today’s notice and emissions limits for Hg, PAHs and HCl MACT floor limits. For more in the Limited Dataset Memo. information regarding the general use of described in the sections below. the UPL and why it is appropriate for 43 Gibbons, R. D. (1987), Statistical Prediction 4. How did we develop proposed limits calculating MACT floors, see the Intervals for the Evaluation of Ground-Water for mercury emissions? memorandum titled Use of the Upper Quality. Groundwater, 25: 455–465 and Hart, a. Background on Mercury Prediction Limit for Calculating MACT Barbara F. and Janet Chaseling, Optimizing Landfill Floors (UPL Memo), which is available Ground Water Analytes—New South Wales, As described above, we obtained in the docket for this action. Australia, Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation, significant additional data on mercury 2003, 23, 2. Furthermore, with regard to calculation emissions from the two ferroalloys 44 Wan, Can; Xu, Zhao; Pinson, Pierre; Dong, of MACT Floor limits based on limited Zhao Yang; Wong, Kit Po. Optimal Prediction production facilities since the 2011 datasets, we considered additional Intervals of Wind Power Generation. 2014. IEEE proposal. In particular, we obtained data factors as summarized below and Transactions on Power Systems, ISSN 0885–8950, from each furnace and for each product described in more details in the 29(3): pp. 1166–1174. type (ferromanganese and memorandum titled: Approach for 45 Khosravi, Abbas; Mazloumi, Ehsan; Nahavandi, silicomanganese). While the mercury Saeid; Creighton, Doug; van Lint, J. W. C. Prediction test data from the 2010 ICR were Applying the Upper Prediction Limit to Intervals to Account for Uncertainties in Travel Limited Datasets, which is available in Time Prediction. 2011. IEEE Transactions on collected using EPA Method 29 and the the docket for this action. Intelligent Transportation Systems, ISSN 1524– mercury test data from the 2012 ICR and 9050, 12(2):537–547. other submitted test reports were 2. What is our approach for applying the 46 Ashkan Zarnani; Petr Musilek; Jana collected using EPA Method 30B, the upper prediction limit to limited Heckenbergerova. 2014. Clustering numerical mercury test results from the two test datasets? weather forecasts to obtain statistical prediction methods were considered to be intervals. Meteorological Applications, ISSN 1350– The UPL approach addresses 4827. 21(3): 605. comparable and were used in the MACT variability of emissions data from the 47 Rayer, Stefan; Smith, Stanley K; Tayman, Jeff. Floor analysis. All of the test reports best performing source or sources in 2009. Empirical Prediction Intervals for County provided analytical results for mercury setting MACT standards. The UPL also Population Forecasts. Population Research and that were above the detection limit. accounts for uncertainty associated with Policy Review, 28(6): 773–793. The raw materials used to produce emission values in a dataset, which can 48 Nicholas A Som; Nicolas P Zegre; Lisa M ferroalloys contain various amounts of Ganio; Arne E Skaugset. 2012. Corrected prediction be influenced by components such as intervals for change detection in paired watershed mercury, which is emitted during the the number of samples available for studies. Hydrological Sciences Journal, ISSN 0262– smelting process. These mercury developing MACT standards and the 6667, 57(1): 134–143 emissions are derived primarily from

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60261

the manganese ore although there may steps described in the Limited Dataset is 4.0 mg/dscm for Hg from new furnaces be trace amounts in the coke or coal Memo to determine the appropriate producing SiMn. used in the smelting process. Some of MACT floor limits for mercury for With regard to mercury emissions the mercury that is in oxidized form is furnaces producing FeMn. We first from existing furnaces producing SiMn, captured on the particulate matter (PM) determined that the dataset is best we have 12 test runs in our dataset. This and then collected in the particle represented by a normal distribution data set was not determined to be a control device (e.g., fabric filter or wet and ensured that we used the correct limited data set. Using the 99 percent scrubber). In contrast, most of the equation for the distribution. Because UPL method described above, we gaseous elemental mercury is not the floor for both existing and new calculated the MACT floor limit (or 99 captured by these particulate control furnaces is based on the performance of percent UPL) for exhaust mercury devices and is largely emitted to the a single unit, our evaluation of the data concentrations from existing furnaces atmosphere. Based on the available was limited to ensuring that the producing SiMn to be 12 mg/dscm. The MACT floor limits for mercury emissions test data, we estimate Eramet emission limit is a reasonable estimate for existing furnaces are higher than the (which, as noted above, produces FeMn of the performance of the unit based on and SiMn) emits about 342 pounds per actual emissions measured during the our knowledge about the process and ICR performance tests at each plant due year of mercury from their furnaces and controls. Accordingly, we compared the that Felman, which produces only to an allowance for variability reflected calculated emission limit to the highest SiMn, emits about 35 lb/yr of mercury in the UPL. We anticipate that both of measured value and the average short- from their furnaces. Pursuant to CAA the existing sources would be able to term emissions from the unit, and found section 112(d)(2) and 112(d)(3), we are meet these product-specific MACT proposing to revise the 1999 NESHAP to that the calculated emission limit is Floor limits for existing sources without include emission limits for mercury. about 2.5 times the short-term average installing additional controls. Therefore, from the unit, which is within the range the costs and reductions for the MACT b. Calculation of MACT Floor Limits for that we see when we evaluate larger floor option were estimated to be zero Mercury data sets using our MACT floor because we conclude that the facilities With regard to determining calculation procedures. The fairly wide would be able to meet the mercury appropriate MACT limits for mercury, range in mercury emissions shown by limits with their current furnace importantly, the new test data confirm the available data for this best controls. that ferromanganese (FeMn) production performing unit indicate that variability The next step in establishing MACT has substantially higher mercury is significant, and we determined that standards is the BTF analysis. In this emissions compared to silicomanganese the emission limit is representative of step, we investigate other mechanisms (SiMn) production and that emissions the actual performance of the unit upon for further reducing HAP emissions that are considerably higher at Eramet as which the limit is based, considering are more stringent than the MACT floor compared to Felman. This finding is variability. Therefore, we determined level of control in order to ‘‘require the based on an analysis of the product- that no changes to our standard floor maximum degree of reduction in specific data sets. Furthermore, we calculation procedure were warranted emissions’’ of HAP. In setting such evaluated differences in the processes for this pollutant and subcategory, and standards, section 112(d)(2) requires the and input materials to try to determine we are proposing that the MACT floor Agency to consider the cost of achieving the reasons for the significant difference is 170 mg/dscm for Hg from existing the additional emission reductions, any in mercury emissions. Based on this furnaces producing FeMn. We also note non-air quality health and evaluation, we have determined the that while we calculated the same environmental impacts and energy input material recipes for producing the MACT floor value for new sources, we requirements. Historically, these factors different products are quite different. In are proposing a beyond-the-floor have included factors such as solid the case of FeMn production, much standard for new sources, which is waste impacts of a control, effects of more of the Mn ore and high carbon discussed later in this section of this emissions on bodies of water, as well as coke are used to reduce the MnO2 in the preamble. the energy impacts. ore to Mn to produce FeMn. We conclude the difference in emissions of The MACT floor dataset for mercury c. Beyond the Floor Analysis for mercury is due to the significant from new furnaces producing SiMn Mercury for Existing Furnaces differences in the input materials and includes 3 test runs from a single As described below, we considered recipe for FeMn as compared to SiMn furnace (furnace #7 at Felman) that we BTF control options to further reduce production. identified as the best performing unit emissions of mercury. The BTF mercury Because of the significant differences based on average emissions. After control options were developed in the input material and the mercury determining that the dataset is best assuming sub-categorization of furnace emissions between FeMn and SiMn, we represented by a normal distribution melting operations into ferromanganese determined that subcategories should be and ensuring that we used the correct production operations and created for ferromanganese and equation for the distribution, we silicomanganese production operations silicomanganese production, with evaluated the variance of this unit and installing activated carbon injection separate MACT limits for mercury (furnace #7 at Felman). Our analysis (ACI) technology with brominated proposed for each ferroalloys product showed that this unit, identified as the carbon to control mercury emissions. (FeMn and SiMn). best unit based on average emissions, The BTF mercury limits would be The MACT floor dataset for mercury also had the lowest variance, indicating based on the estimated mercury from existing and new furnaces consistent performance. Therefore, we emission reduction that can be achieved producing FeMn includes 6 test runs determined that the emission limit through the use of ACI and brominated from a single furnace. As described reasonably accounts for variability and carbon. The bromine in the activated above, this dataset (for the calculation of that no changes to the standard floor carbon can oxidize elemental mercury MACT limits for mercury from furnaces calculation procedure were warranted (Hg0) to oxidized mercury (Hg+2). The producing FeMn) was considered for this pollutant and subcategory, and oxidized mercury is then suitable for limited and therefore we followed the we are proposing that the MACT floor capture on the activated carbon sorbent

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60262 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

or further reacts with the bromine to filters), we determined that a reduction NRDC v. EPA, 749 F.3d 1055, 1060 (D.C. produce mercuric bromide (HgBr2). Both of 50 percent should be used in Cir. April 18, 2014) (‘‘Section 112 does the oxidized mercury and the mercuric establishing the BTF mercury emissions not command EPA to use a particular bromide can be removed using a PM limit to ensure that the limit could be form of cost analysis.’’). We also control device. It is generally accepted achieved with brominated ACI on both consider other factors in assessing the that the installation of ACI in furnaces at all times during FeMn cost of the emission reduction as part of conjunction with a fabric filter achieves production. Therefore, the BTF limit for our beyond-the-floor analysis, at least 90 percent reduction of FeMn production for existing sources including, but not limited to, total mercury.49 would be 82 mg/dscm. capital costs, annual costs and costs All three furnaces at Felman and one We estimated the capital costs, compared to total revenues (e.g., costs to of the two furnaces at Eramet (Furnace annualized costs, emissions reductions revenue ratios). #1) are equipped with a fabric filter and cost effectiveness for the BTF limits As mentioned above, we estimate the system to reduce PM. The other furnace for FeMn and SiMn production sources. capital costs would be about $30 at Eramet (Furnace #12) controls PM The details regarding how these limits million, annualized costs of about $3.3 using a wet venturi scrubber. Limited were derived and the estimated costs million and that all these costs would be data are available for mercury reduction and expected reductions of mercury for Eramet, which is the only facility in using ACI with a venturi scrubber emissions by installing ACI controls, are the United States that produces FeMn. system, as described in the mercury provided in the Mercury Control Furthermore, we estimate the annual control options memorandum.50 Options and Impacts for the Ferroalloys costs for BTF controls for mercury at However, we identified one study Production Industry document which is Eramet (in addition to the costs for conducted by the Minnesota Taconite available in the docket. controls for fugitive HAP emissions Mercury Control Advisory Committee Regarding the BTF control option for required as part of the risk analysis that evaluated mercury reductions from existing sources that produce explained later in this preamble) would particulate scrubber systems and ACI.51 ferromanganese, we estimated the costs be about 3 percent of revenues, which In 2011, a field trial was conducted at and reductions based on the installation we believe is potentially significant Hibbing Taconite to demonstrate the of ACI on Furnaces 1 and 12 at Eramet given the facts at issue here. In addition, effectiveness of brominated ACI in with operation only during the it is our understanding that for the past controlling mercury emissions from a production of ferromanganese and a few years the plant has not made any taconite facility. The trial of the polishing baghouse on Furnace 1. Other profits. More details regarding the brominated ACI system was conducted costs include labor, materials and waste potential economic impacts of the BTF in September and October 2011 and it disposal. The emissions and annual cost option are provided in the Economic was determined that 75 percent Hg for this BTF control option are based on Impact Analysis (EIA) for the removal could be achieved with a the assumption that both furnaces at Manganese Ferroalloys RTR brominated ACI rate of about 3 lb/ Eramet produce ferromanganese 50 Supplemental Proposal document MMacf (126 lb/hr) for the taconite iron percent of the time annually and which is available in the docket for this ore processing sources. This 75 percent produce SiMn the other 50 percent of action. mercury reduction was demonstrated the year. We based this reasonable during a two-week continuous injection assumption on available information We also evaluated an approach that run in this study. The project also noted regarding production patterns for the 2 could reduce the compliance costs of that better mercury removal results products at Eramet. The estimated the BTF option. We considered the could be achieved with improved mercury reduction that would be possibility that Eramet could potentially sorbent distribution. Therefore, achieved at Furnace 1 at Eramet (which decide to produce FeMn in only one although the ferroalloys production is currently controlled with a baghouse) furnace and if so, would only need to furnaces are different than the taconite is assumed to be 90 percent based on install ACI for 1 furnace. If so, the costs production sources, we assume that the the installation of ACI and a new for Eramet to comply with the BTF retrofit of ACI on the furnace at Eramet polishing baghouse. Regarding Furnace option could be significantly lower. 12 at Eramet (which is currently controlled by a wet scrubber would This approach would reduce production controlled with a wet venturi scrubber), achieve 50 percent additional mercury flexibility, which could pose significant the mercury reductions that would be reduction beyond the level of control production issues for the company, but achieved with brominated ACI are that the scrubber is currently achieving. would allow Eramet to avoid some of assumed to be 50 percent. For the BTF Because of the lower potential mercury the emissions control costs under the control option for existing sources that reductions expected for brominated BTF option. However, we realize there produce ferromanganese, we estimate carbon ACI and a venturi scrubber would likely be production issues and the capital costs would be about $30 (compared to the reductions that would other issues, with this approach. million, annualized costs of about $3.3 be achieved with use of ACI with fabric Furthermore, we believe it would be million and would achieve about 191 inappropriate for the rule to essentially pounds per year of reductions in 49 Sargent & Lundy, IPM Model—Revisions to restrict production flexibility. Therefore Cost and Performance for APC Technologies, mercury emissions, which results in for our cost impacts analysis of the BTF Mercury Control Cost Development, Final, March estimated cost-effectiveness of about option we have assumed brominated 2013. $17,600 per pound. All the costs and ACI would be needed for both furnaces. 50 Memorandum from Bradley Nelson, EC/R to reductions would be at Eramet since Phil Mulrine, EPA OAQPS/SPPD/MICG, Mercury Eramet is the only facility in the U.S. Based on the available economic Control Options and Impacts for the Ferroalloys information, assuming market Production Industry, March 16, 2014. that produces FeMn. conditions remain approximately the 51 Michael E Berndt, Minnesota Department of As stated earlier the cost-effectiveness Natural Resources, Division of Lands and Minerals, is estimated to be $17,600/lb. However, same, we believe Eramet Marietta would Minnesota Taconite Mercury Control Advisory it is important to note that cost- not be able to sustain the costs of BTF Committee: Summary of Phase One Research effectiveness is but one factor we mercury controls (in addition to the Results (2010–2012), November 29, 2012. http:// fugitive control costs required as part of files.dnr.state.mn.us/lands_minerals/reclamation/ consider in assessing the cost of the berndt_2012_final.pdf. emission reduction at issue here. See the risk analysis explained later in this

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60263

preamble, in Section IV.C.).52 This not proposing BTF limits for mercury or major reconstructed furnace that would likely result in substantial for SiMn production. produces FeMn. Therefore we are economic impacts in the short-term and proposing a limit of 17 mg/dscm for new d. Beyond the Floor Analysis for New potential closure of the facility in the or major reconstructed furnaces that and Reconstructed Furnaces longer-term. Since Eramet Marietta is produce FeMn. the only facility in the United States Regarding BTF controls for new or major reconstructed furnaces, we However, for a new SiMn production which produces FeMn, closure of this source, the cost effectiveness would be facility would eliminate 100 percent of believe such sources would be constructed to include a baghouse as the at least $51,000/lb. Therefore, we the United States production of FeMn, believe BTF controls for new SiMn which is an important product for the primary PM control device (in order to comply with the proposed lower new production sources would not be cost- steel industry. After considering all the effective. Furthermore, for SiMn factors described above, we are not source limits for PM) and then they could add ACI after the baghouse for production, as described above, the new proposing BTF limits for mercury for source MACT floor limit is already low FeMn production. mercury control along with a polishing (i.e., 4.0 mg/dscm). Therefore we are We also evaluated possible BTF baghouse and would achieve at least 90 proposing an emissions limit of 4.0 mg/ controls for existing SiMn production percent reduction. Therefore, the BTF sources, which have much lower limit for new FeMn production sources dscm for new or major reconstructed mercury emissions as compared to is calculated to be 17 mg/dscm. SiMn production furnaces based on the FeMn production. We estimated that the Regarding SiMn, the BTF limit for new new source MACT Floor. BTF option for SiMn would achieve an sources producing SiMn would be 1.2 e. Proposed Limits for Existing, New additional 60 pounds/year reductions mg/dscm. and Reconstructed Sources and that the cost-effectiveness would be The estimated costs for beyond the about $109,000 per pound of mercury floor controls for mercury for new and Based on all our analyses described reduced for SiMn production, which we reconstructed sources are based on the above, we are proposing mercury limits conclude is not cost-effective as a BTF costs of installing and operating based on the MACT Floor (UPL) for option. Furthermore, based on our brominated ACI and a polishing each product type (ferromanganese, economic analyses, we believe that the baghouse. Based on this, we estimate silicomanganese) for existing furnaces; Felman facility could be at potential risk that the cost effectiveness of BTF BTF limits for mercury for new and of closure under this option, especially controls for a new and major reconstructed FeMn production given that these costs would be in reconstructed FeMn production source furnaces; and mercury limits for new addition to the costs for controlling would be about $12,000/lb. Therefore, and reconstructed SiMn production fugitive HAP metals emissions (such as we conclude that BTF controls would be furnaces based on the MACT Floor. Mn, As, Ni and Cd). Therefore, we are cost-effective and feasible for any new These limits are summarized in Table 4.

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED MERCURY CONTROL EMISSIONS LIMITS (μg/dscm) FROM THE FURNACE MELTING PROCESSES

FeMn SiMn FeMn production SiMn production Proposed mercury controls production (new and production (new and (existing reconstructed (existing reconstructed sources) sources) sources) sources)

MACT Floor limits for FeMn and SiMn existing sources; BTF limit for new and reconstructed FeMn sources; and MACT floor limit for new and reconstructed SiMn sources ...... 170 17 12 4.0

5. How did we develop proposed limits significant difference in PAH emissions was considered a limited dataset and for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons during FeMn production as compared to therefore we followed the steps (PAHs)? SiMn production. Furthermore, similar described in the Limited Dataset Memo to mercury, we conclude that this to determine the appropriate MACT As described above, we obtained difference is due to significant Floor limit for PAHs for these sources. additional data on PAH emissions from differences in the recipe and input This subcategory includes only two the two ferroalloys production facilities materials for FeMn compared to SiMn units, and the CAA specifies that the since the 2011 proposal. In particular, production. existing source MACT floor for we obtained data from each furnace and Therefore, we determined that it subcategories with fewer than 30 for each product type (FeMn and SiMn). would be appropriate to have two sources shall not be less stringent than We used the resulting dataset to re- subcategories for PAH emissions and ‘‘the average emission limitation evaluate the MACT floor limits and BTF establish separate MACT limits for each achieved by the best performing 5 options. For more information on this of these two subcategories. sources.’’ However, since there are only analysis, see Revised MACT Floor The MACT floor dataset for PAHs 2 units in the subcategory and we have Analysis for the Ferroalloys Production from existing furnaces producing FeMn data for both units, the data from both Source Category, which is available in includes 6 test runs from 2 furnaces. As units serve as the basis for the MACT the docket. described above, this dataset (for the floor. After determining that the dataset As in the case of the mercury analysis, calculation of the MACT Floor limit for is best represented by a normal our results show that there is a PAHs for FeMn production furnaces) distribution and ensuring that we used

52 As noted in our risk analysis explained later in for mercury (along with the controls for fugitive this preamble) provide an ample margin of safety this preamble, proposal of the MACT floor standard manganese emissions, which are explained later in to protect public health.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:38 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60264 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

the correct equation for the distribution, variance in the dataset for the unit with PAH data and how these data could we considered the selection of a lower the lowest average prompted us to affect our analyses. confidence level for determining the question whether this unit was, in fact, The current PM controls on both emission limit by evaluating whether the best performing unit and to evaluate facilities capture some of PAH the calculated limit reasonably the dataset for the unit with the next emissions. Nevertheless, we also represents the performance of the units lowest average (furnace #7 at Felman). considered BTF options for control of upon which it is based. In this case, The dataset for furnace #7 includes 3 PAH emissions based on the additional where two units make up the pool of test runs, the furnaces are controlled reductions that could be achieved via best performers, the calculated emission with the same type of add-on control control with ACI. Based on information limit is about twice the short-term technology, and the average emissions from carbon vendors, an activated average emissions from the best from furnace #2 are only about 22 carbon system that is designed to performing sources, indicating that the percent lower than the average achieve up to 90 percent reduction in emission limit is not unreasonable emissions from furnace #7. While we mercury emissions should also achieve compared to the actual performance of find the average performance of these 2 significant reductions in PAH with no the units upon which the limit is based units to be similar, the unit with the additional costs. However, significant and is within the range that we see higher average has a variance more than uncertainties remain regarding the when we evaluate larger datasets using 2 orders of magnitude lower than that of percent of reductions in PAHs that our MACT floor calculation procedures. the unit with the lower average, thus would be achieved with ACI. One Therefore, we determined that no indicating that the unit with the higher study 53 found that ACI can achieve 74– changes to our standard floor average has a far more consistent level 91 percent reduction in PAH emissions calculation procedure are warranted for of performance. The combination of depending on the concentration of this pollutant and subcategory, and we components from the unit with the activated carbon in the flue gas. Based are proposing that the MACT floor is higher average (furnace #7) yields an on this information, we assume that ACI 1,400 mg/dscm for PAHs from existing emissions limit that is lower than that probably can achieve 75 percent furnaces producing FeMn. calculated from the dataset of the unit reduction in PAH emissions from the The MACT floor dataset for PAHs (furnace #2) with the lowest average furnace. Therefore, for our analysis of from new furnaces producing FeMn (71.7 versus 132.8 mg/dscm). For these BTF options, we assumed an ACI includes 3 test runs from a single reasons, we determined that the unit system can achieve 75 percent reduction furnace (furnace #12 at Eramet) that we with the lowest average (furnace #2) is of PAH emissions from the furnace identified as the best performing unit not the best performing source for this exhaust. Based on this assumption, based on average emissions pollutant and we are instead selecting possible BTF limits for PAHs would be performance. After determining that the furnace #7 as the best performing 340 mg/dscm for FeMn production dataset is best represented by a normal source. After selecting the source upon furnaces and 28 mg/dscm for SiMn distribution and ensuring that we used which the new source limit would be production furnaces. The estimated the correct equation for the distribution, based, we next considered whether the capital and annualized costs to achieve we evaluated the variance of the best selection of a different confidence level these BTF PAH limits are the same costs performing unit. Our analysis showed would be appropriate. In this case, we as those shown for mercury in the that this unit, which was identified as determined that a lower confidence mercury control options memorandum. the best unit based on average level was not warranted given the small For FeMn production, the capital cost emissions, also had the lowest variance. amount of variability in the data for the was calculated to be $30.2 million and Therefore, we determined that the unit that we identified as the best the annual cost was calculated to be emission limit would reasonably performer. Based on the factors outlined $3.4 million and would only apply to account for variability and that no above, we are proposing that the MACT the furnaces at Eramet and the estimated changes to the standard floor calculation floor is 72 mg/dscm for PAHs from new PAH reductions would be 2.35 tons per procedure were warranted for this furnaces producing SiMn. year, which results in cost-effectiveness pollutant and subcategory, and we are With regard to PAH emissions from of $1.4 million per ton of PAH. The proposing that the MACT floor is 880 existing furnaces producing SiMn, we capital cost for a beyond the floor PAH mg/dscm for PAHs from new furnaces have 18 test runs in our dataset. This option for SiMn and FeMn production producing FeMn. dataset was not determined to be a was calculated to be $41.7 million with The MACT floor dataset for PAHs limited data set. The UPL results for this an annual cost of $6.9 million and the initially identified for new furnaces dataset using a 99 percent confidence estimated PAH reductions would be 4.0 producing SiMn includes 6 test runs level was determined to be 120 mg/dscm tons per year, which results in cost- from a single furnace (furnace #2 at for SiMn production and was effectiveness of $1.7 million per ton, Felman) that we identified as the best determined to be the MACT floor limit which we conclude is not cost-effective performing unit based on average for PAHs for existing furnaces for PAHs. Given the uncertainties emissions. After determining that the producing SiMn. regarding the percent of PAH reductions dataset is best represented by a normal Based on the data we received prior distribution and ensuring that we used to summer 2014, we estimate that that can be achieved with ACI and since the correct equation for the distribution, neither source would need to install the cost-effectiveness is relatively high we evaluated the variance of this unit additional controls to meet the MACT for this HAP, we are not proposing BTF (furnace #2 at Felman) and concluded Floor emission limits described above. limits for PAHs. Instead, we have that further consideration of the However, as mentioned in Section II.D determined that it is appropriate to variance was warranted. In particular, of today’s notice, we received additional propose PAH limits based on the MACT we noted that the variance of the dataset PAH data in August 2014. We have not Floor level of control, therefore we are for this unit was almost twice as large yet completed our review and technical proposing a MACT limit of 1,400 mg/ as the variance of the dataset for the analyses of those new data, and have 53 Hong-Cang Zhou, Zhao-Ping Zhong, Bao-Sheng pool of best performing units that was not yet incorporated these new data into Jin, Ya-Ji Huang and Rui Xiao, Experimental study used to calculate the existing source our analyses. Nevertheless, we are on the removal of PAHs using in-duct activated MACT floor. The high degree of seeking comments regarding the new carbon injection, Chemosphere, November 17, 2004.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60265

dscm for PAHs for existing FeMn FeMn production furnaces and we are production furnaces and 72 mg/dscm for production furnaces and 880 mg/dscm proposing a MACT floor limit of 120 mg/ PAHs for new and reconstructed SiMn for PAHs for new and reconstructed dscm for PAHs for existing SiMn production furnaces.

TABLE 5—PROPOSED EMISSIONS LIMITS (μG/dscm) FOR PAHS FROM THE FURNACE MELTING PROCESSES

FeMn SiMn FeMn production SiMn production production (new and production (new and (existing reconstructed (existing reconstructed sources) sources) sources) sources)

Proposed Emissions Limits for PAHs ...... 1400 880 120 72

6. How did we develop limits for identified as the best performing unit beyond the floor options to further hydrochloric acid (HCl)? based on average emissions. As reduce HCl to ensure our analyses were Like mercury and PAH, we obtained described above, this dataset (for the complete. The BTF analyses are additional HCl test data since proposal. calculation of the new source limit for described in the Revised MACT Floor However, more than half the test results HCL) was considered a limited dataset Analysis for the Ferroalloys Production (20 of the 36 test runs) were below the and therefore we followed the steps Source Category document which is detection limit. This situation required described in the Limited Dataset Memo available in the docket. We did not the use of additional statistical analysis, to determine the appropriate MACT identify any appropriate BTF options for as described in the Revised MACT Floor Floor limit for HCl for new furnaces. HCl. Analysis for the Ferroalloys Production After determining that the dataset is best Given the low emissions of HCl and Source Category, which is available in represented by a non-normal the results of our analyses, we are not the docket. We determined the data set distribution and ensuring that we used proposing beyond the floor limits for for HCl from furnace outlets has a non- the correct equation for the distribution, HCl. Therefore, in this supplemental normal distribution. The non-normal we evaluated the variance of this best proposal, we are proposing emission distribution of the data is a result of the performing unit. Our analysis showed limits for HCl of 1,100 mg/dscm for mix of analytical results reported above that this unit, identified as the best unit existing furnaces and 180 mg/dscm for and below the detection limit and is not based on average emission, also had the new or reconstructed furnaces, which due to the type of product being lowest variance, indicating consistent are at the level of the MACT floors. produced (FeMn or SiMn) in the performance. Therefore, we determined furnace. Therefore, for HCL we are not that the emission limit reasonably TABLE 6—PROPOSED EMISSIONS LIM- accounts for variability and that no establishing subcategories based on ITS (μg/dscm) FOR HCL FROM THE product. An equation for log-normally changes to the standard floor calculation FURNACE MELTING PROCESSES distributed data was used to determine procedure were warranted for this pollutant and subcategory. We also note the UPL of the HCl dataset for both FeMn FeMn and SiMn production combined. that for this standard, the calculated and new source floor level was below the FeMn The UPL for the log-normal dataset was and SiMn calculated to be 1,100 mg/dscm. Because level that can be accurately measured SiMn produc- more than half of the dataset were (the level that we refer to as ‘‘3 times the tion produc- (new reported below the detection limit, representative detection level’’ or tion and re- using EPA procedures, three times the 3xRDL). Therefore, we are proposing a (existing sources) con- representative method detection level new source MACT emission limit of 180 structed (RDL) for HCl (180 mg/dscm), was ppm for HCl, which is the 3xRDL value sources) compared to the calculated UPL. The for HCl. No facilities in the source category Proposed Emissions calculated UPL was higher and, thus, Limits for HCl ...... 1100 180 was selected as the MACT floor limit for use add-on control devices or work existing furnaces. At this level, we practices to limit emissions of HCl expect neither source would need to beyond what is normally achieved as B. What are the results of the risk install additional controls to meet the co-control of the emissions with assessment and analyses? MACT floor emission limits. particulate matter control device. Also, 1. Inhalation Risk Assessment Results The MACT floor dataset for HCl from as explained above, there are a new furnaces producing FeMn or SiMn significant number of non-detects for Table 7 of this preamble provides an includes 6 test runs from a single HCl. Thus, emissions are already low. overall summary of the results of the furnace (furnace #5 at Felman) that we Nevertheless, we evaluated possible inhalation risk assessment.

TABLE 7—FERROALLOYS PRODUCTION SOURCE CATEGORY INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Estimated An- Maximum Individual Maximum Estimated Population at Increased nual Cancer Chronic Non- Cancer Risk Incidence Maximum Screening Acute Non-cancer HQ c a Risk Levels of Cancer cancer (-in-1 million) (cases per b year) TOSHI

Actual Emissions ≥ 1-in-1 million: 31,000. 20 ...... ≥ 10-in-1 million: 400 ...... 0.002 4 HQREL = 1 (arsenic compounds, hydrofluoric acid, formaldehyde)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:56 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60266 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 7—FERROALLOYS PRODUCTION SOURCE CATEGORY INHALATION RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS—Continued

Estimated An- Maximum Maximum Individual Estimated Population at Increased nual Cancer Chronic Non- Maximum Screening Acute Non-cancer HQ c Cancer Risk Risk Levels of Cancer Incidence cancer (-in-1 million) a (cases per b year) TOSHI

≥ 100-in-1 million: 0. Allowable Emissions d ≥ 1-in-1 million: 94,000. 100 ...... ≥ 10-in-1 million: 2,500 ...... 0.005 40 — ≥ 100-in-1 million: 0. a Estimated maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk due to HAP emissions from the source category. b Maximum TOSHI. The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Ferroalloys Production source category for both actual and allowable emissions is the neurological system. The estimated population at increased levels of noncancer hazard is 1,500 based on actual emissions and 11,000 based on allowable emissions. c See Section III.A.3 of this notice for explanation of acute dose-response values. Acute assessments are not performed on allowable emis- sions. d The development of allowable emission estimates can be found in the memorandum titled Revised Development of the RTR Emissions Dataset for the Ferroalloys Production Source Category for the 2014 Supplemental Proposal, which is available in the docket.

The inhalation risk modeling estimated to have cancer risks greater worst-case acute exposures to HAP from performed to estimate risks based on than or equal to 1-in-1 million the source category at issue and in actual and allowable emissions relied considering allowable emissions from response to a key recommendation from primarily on emissions data from the ferroalloys facilities. the SAB’s peer review of the EPA’s ICRs and calculations described in the The risk results described in this section 112(f) RTR risk assessment Emissions Memo. The results of the section and shown in Table 7 are based methodologies, we examine a wider chronic baseline inhalation cancer risk on the emissions data received prior to range of available acute health metrics assessment indicate that, based on summer 2014. These results do not than we do for our chronic risk estimates of current actual emissions, reflect the new PAH, PM or mercury assessments. This is in the maximum individual lifetime cancer data we received in August 2014 (as acknowledgement that there are risk (MIR) posed by the ferroalloys described in Section II.D. in this notice). generally more data gaps and production source category is 20-in-1 We seek comment on the new data, inconsistencies in acute reference million, with chromium compounds, which are available in the docket for values than there are in chronic PAHs and nickel compounds from today’s action, and how these additional reference values. By definition, the tapping fugitives, furnace fugitives and data would impact the risk assessment. acute CalEPA REL represents a health- a furnace accounting for 70 percent of The maximum modeled chronic non- protective level of exposure, with no the MIR. The total estimated cancer cancer HI (TOSHI) value for the source risk anticipated below those levels, even incidence from ferroalloys production category based on actual emissions is for repeated exposures; however, the sources based on actual emission levels estimated to be 4, with manganese health risk from higher-level exposures is 0.002 excess cancer cases per year or emissions from tapping fugitives is unknown. Therefore, when a CalEPA one case every 500 years, with accounting for 93 percent of the HI. REL is exceeded and an AEGL–1 or emissions of PAH, chromium Approximately 1,500 people are ERPG–1 level is available (i.e., levels at compounds and cadmium compounds estimated to have exposure to HI levels which mild effects are anticipated in the contributing 42 percent, 18 percent and greater than 1 as a result of actual general public for a single exposure), we 15 percent, respectively, to this cancer emissions from this source category. have used them as a second comparative incidence. In addition, we note that When considering MACT-allowable measure. Historically, comparisons of approximately 400 people are estimated emissions, the maximum chronic non- the estimated maximum off-site 1-hour to have cancer risks greater than or cancer TOSHI value is estimated to be exposure levels have not been typically equal to 10-in-1 million, and 40, driven by allowable emissions of made to occupational levels for the approximately 31,000 people are manganese from the MOR process purpose of characterizing public health estimated to have risks greater than or baghouse outlet. Approximately 11,000 risks in RTR assessments. This is equal to 1-in-1 million as a result of people are estimated to have exposure because occupational ceiling values are actual emissions from this source to HI levels greater than 1 considering not generally considered protective for category. allowable emissions from these the general public since they are When considering MACT-allowable ferroalloys facilities. designed to protect the worker emissions, the maximum individual population (presumed healthy adults) 2. Acute Risk Results lifetime cancer risk is estimated to be up for short-duration (less than 15-minute) to 100-in-1 million, driven by emissions Our screening analysis for worst-case increases in exposure. As a result, for of arsenic compounds and cadmium acute impacts based on actual emissions most chemicals, the 15-minute compounds from the MOR process indicates the potential for three occupational ceiling values are set at baghouse outlet. The estimated cancer pollutants—arsenic compounds, levels higher than a 1-hour AEGL–1, incidence is estimated to be 0.005 formaldehyde, and hydrofluoric acid— making comparisons to them irrelevant excess cancer cases per year or one to have HQ values of 1, based on their unless the AEGL–1 or ERPG–1 levels are excess case in every 200 years. respective REL value. Both facilities also exceeded. Approximately 2,500 people are have estimated HQs of 1 for these All the HAP in this analysis have estimated to have cancer risks greater pollutants. worst-case acute HQ values of 1 or less, than or equal to 10-in-1 million and To better characterize the potential indicating that they carry no potential to approximately 94,000 people are health risks associated with estimated pose acute concerns. In characterizing

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60267

the potential for acute non-cancer as an upper-bound multi-pathway risk indicating that there is no concern for impacts of concern, it is important to associated with a facility. multi-pathway risks due to lead remember the upward bias of these While the screening analysis is not emissions. exposure estimates (e.g., worst-case designed to produce a quantitative risk 4. Multipathway Refined Risk Results meteorology coinciding with a person result, the factor by which the emissions located at the point of maximum exceed the screening level serves as a A refined multipathway analysis was concentration during the hour) and to rough gauge of the ‘‘upper-limit’’ risks conducted for one facility in this source consider the results along with the we would expect from a facility. Thus, category using the TRIM.FaTE model. conservative estimates used to develop for example, if a facility emitted a PB– The facility, Eramet Marietta peak hourly emissions as described HAP carcinogen at a level 2 times the Incorporated, in Marietta, Ohio, was earlier, as well as the screening screening level, we can say with a high selected based upon its close proximity methodology. Refer to the document degree of confidence that the actual to nearby lakes and farms as well as titled Revised Development of the RTR maximum cancer risks will be less than having the highest potential Emissions Dataset for the Ferroalloys 2-in-1 million. Likewise, if a facility multipathway risks for three of the four Production Source Category for the 2014 emitted a noncancer PB–HAP at a level PB–HAP based on the Tier II analysis. Supplemental Proposal (which is 2 times the screening level, the These three PB–HAP were cadmium, available in the docket for this action) maximum noncancer hazard would mercury and PAHs. (Even though for a detailed description of how the represent an HQ less than 2. The high neither facility exceeded the Tier II hourly emissions were developed for degree of confidence comes from the screening levels for cadmium, Eramet this source category. fact that the screens are developed using had the higher value.) Eramet also emits the very conservative (health-protective) dioxins, but the other facility had a 3. Multipathway Risk Screening Results assumptions that we describe above. higher exceedance of its Tier II Results of the worst-case Tier I Based on the Tier II screening screening level. The refined analysis screening analysis indicate that PB– analysis, no facility emits cadmium was conducted on all four PB–HAP. The HAP emissions (based on estimates of compounds above the Tier II screening refined analysis for this facility showed actual emissions) from one or both levels. One facility emits mercury that the Tier II screen for each pollutant facilities in this source category exceed compounds above the Tier II screening over-predicted the potential risk when the screening emission rates for levels and exceeds that level by a factor compared to the refined analysis results. cadmium compounds, mercury of 9. Both facilities emit chlorinated Overall, the refined analysis predicts compounds, dioxins and PAH. For the dibenzodioxins and furans (CDDF) as a potential lifetime cancer risk of 10-in- compounds and facilities that did not 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 1 million to the maximum most exposed screen out at Tier I, we conducted a Tier toxicity equivalent (TEQ) above the Tier individual due to exposure to dioxins II screen. The Tier II screen replaces II screening levels and the facility with and PAHs. The non-cancer HQ is some of the assumptions used in Tier I the highest emissions of dioxins exceeds predicted to be below 1 for cadmium with site-specific data, including the its Tier II screening level by a factor of compounds and 1 for mercury land use around the facilities, the 20. Both facilities emit POM as compounds. location of fishable lakes and local wind benzo(a)pyrene TEQ above the Tier II Further details on the refined direction and speed. The Tier II screen screening levels and the facility with the multipathway analysis can be found in continues to rely on high-end highest emissions exceeds its screening Appendix 10 of the Residual Risk assumptions about consumption of local level by a factor of 20. Assessment for the Ferroalloys fish and locally grown or raised foods Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) are Production Source Category in Support (adult female angler at 99th percentile PB–HAP that do not currently have of the September 2014 Supplemental consumption for fish 54 and 90th multi-pathway screening values and so Proposal, which is available in the percentile for consumption of locally are not evaluated for potential non- docket. 55 inhalation risks. These HAP however, grown or raised foods ) and uses an 5. Environmental Risk Screening Results assumption that the same individual are not emitted in appreciable quantities consumes each of these foods in high (estimated to be 0.00026 tpy) from the As described in Section III.A, we end quantities (i.e., that an individual ferroalloys source category and we do conducted an environmental risk has high end ingestion rates for each not believe they contribute to multi- screening assessment for the ferroalloys food). The result of this analysis was the pathway risks for this source category. source category. In the Tier I screening development of site-specific emission Results of the analysis for lead analysis for PB–HAP the individual rate screening levels for each PB–HAP. indicate that based on the baseline, modeled Tier I concentrations for one It is important to note that, even with actual emissions, the maximum annual facility in the source category exceeded the inclusion of some site-specific off-site ambient lead concentration was some sediment, fish—avian piscivorus information in the Tier II analysis, the only 50 percent of the NAAQS for lead and surface soil benchmarks for PAHs, multi-pathway screening analysis is still and if the total annual emissions methylmercury and mercuric chloride. a very conservative, health-protective occurred during a 3-month period, the Therefore, we conducted a Tier II assessment (e.g., upper-bound maximum 3-month rolling average assessment. consumption of local fish, locally grown concentrations would exceed the In the Tier II screening analysis for and/or raised foods) and in all NAAQS. However, as shown later in PAHs and methylmercury none of the likelihood will yield results that serve this preamble, based on emissions individual modeled concentrations for estimated for the post-control scenario, any facility in the source category 54 Burger, J. 2002. Daily consumption of wild fish the maximum annual off-site ambient exceeded any of the ecological and game: Exposures of high end recreationists. lead concentration was only 3 percent of benchmarks (either the LOAEL or International Journal of Environmental Health the NAAQS for lead. If the total annual NOAEL). For mercuric chloride, soil Research 12:343–354. emissions occurred during a 3-month benchmarks were exceeded for some 55 U.S. EPA. Exposure Factors Handbook 2011 Edition (Final). U.S. Environmental Protection period, the maximum 3-month rolling individual modeled points that Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–09/052F, average concentrations would be about collectively accounted for 5 percent of 2011. 12 percent of the NAAQS for lead, the modeled area. However, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60268 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

weighted average modeled included in the source category. across different social, demographic and concentration for all soil parcels was Therefore, we conclude that the facility- economic groups within the populations well below the soil benchmarks. wide risk is the same as the source living near facilities identified as having For HCl, each individual category risk and that no separate the highest risks. The methodology and concentration (i.e., each off-site data facility-wide analysis is necessary. the results of the demographic analyses point in the modeling domain) was 7. Demographic Analysis Results are included in a technical report, Risk below the ecological benchmarks for all and Technology Review—Analysis of facilities. The average modeled HCl To examine the potential for any Socio-Economic Factors for Populations concentration around each facility (i.e., environmental justice (EJ) issues that Living Near Ferroalloys Facilities, which might be associated with the source the average concentration of all off-site is available in the docket for this action. data points in the modeling domain) did category, we performed a demographic not exceed any ecological benchmark. analysis, which is an assessment of risks The results of the demographic to individual demographic groups, of analysis are summarized in Table 8 6. Facility-Wide Risk Assessment the population close to the facilities. In below. These results, for various Results this analysis, we evaluated the demographic groups, are based on the For both facilities in this source distribution of HAP-related cancer risks estimated risks from actual emissions category, there are no other HAP and non-cancer hazards from the levels for the population living within emissions sources present beyond those ferroalloys production source category 50 km of the facilities.

TABLE 8—FERROALLOY PRODUCTION DEMOGRAPHIC RISK ANALYSIS RESULTS

Population with cancer Population with chronic risk at or above 1-in-1 hazard index above 1 Nationwide million due to ferroalloys due to ferroalloys production production

Total Population ...... 312,861,265 31,283 1,521

Race by Percent

White ...... 72 96 99 All Other Races ...... 28 4 1

Race by Percent

White ...... 72 96 99 African American ...... 13 1 0 Native American ...... 1 0 0 Other and Multiracial ...... 14 2 1

Ethnicity by Percent

Hispanic ...... 17 1 1 Non-Hispanic ...... 83 99 99

Income by Percent

Below Poverty Level ...... 14 15 7 Above Poverty Level ...... 86 85 93

Education by Percent

Over 25 and without High School Diploma ...... 15 11 11 Over 25 and with a High School Diploma ...... 85 89 89

The results of the ferroalloys included in this proposal is expected to C. What are our proposed decisions production source category significantly reduce the number of regarding risk acceptability, ample demographic analysis indicate that people estimated to have a cancer risk margin of safety and adverse emissions from the source category greater than 1-in-1 million due to HAP environmental effects based on our expose approximately 31,000 people to emissions from these sources from revised analyses? a cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 million 31,000 people to about 6,600 people. 1. Risk Acceptability and approximately 1,500 people to a Implementation of the provisions As noted in Section II.A.1 of this chronic non-cancer TOSHI greater than included in the proposal also is preamble, the EPA sets standards under 1 (we note that many of those in the first expected to reduce the number of CAA section 112(f)(2) using ‘‘a two-step risk group are the same as those in the people estimated to have a chronic non- standard-setting approach, with an second). The percentages of the at-risk cancer TOSHI greater than 1 from 1,500 analytical first step to determine an population in each demographic group people to no people with a TOSHI ‘acceptable risk’ that considers all (except for White and non-Hispanic) are greater than 1. health information, including risk similar to or lower than their respective estimation uncertainty and includes a nationwide percentages. presumptive limit on maximum Implementation of the provisions individual lifetime risk (MIR) of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60269

approximately 1 in 10 thousand[56].’’ (54 assumptions that are used in the Tier II people are estimated to have exposure FR 38045, September 14, 1989). screen. to HI levels greater than 1. In this proposal, the EPA estimated The refined multipathway analysis c. Acceptability Determination risks based on both actual and allowable that the EPA conducted for one specific emissions from ferroalloy facilities. In facility showed that the Tier II screen In determining whether risks are determining acceptability, we for each pollutant over-predicted the acceptable for this source category, the considered risks based on both actual potential risk when compared to the EPA considered all available health and allowable emissions. refined analysis results. That refined information and risk estimation multipathway assessment showed that uncertainty as described above. a. Estimated Risks From Actual the Tier II screen resulted in estimated The risk results indicate that the Emissions risks that are higher than the risks allowable inhalation cancer risks to the individual most exposed are up to but The baseline inhalation cancer risk to estimated by the refined analysis by 3 times for PAH, 2 times for dioxins, and no greater than approximately 100–in-1 the individual most exposed to million, which is the presumptive limit 6 times for cadmium. The HQ for emissions from sources in the of acceptability. The MIR based on mercury went from 9 in Tier II to 1. ferroalloys source category is 20-in-1 actual emissions is 20-in-1 million, well million based on actual emissions. The The screening assessment of worst- below the presumptive limit. The estimated incidence of cancer due to case acute inhalation impacts from maximum chronic exposure to inhalation exposures is 0.002 excess baseline actual emissions indicates that manganese exceeds the human health cancer cases per year, or 1 case every all pollutants have HQ values of 1 or dose-response value for manganese by a 500 years. Approximately 31,000 people less, based on their respective REL factor of approximately 4 based on face an increased cancer risk greater values. Considering the conservative, actual emissions. For allowable than 1-in-1 million due to inhalation health-protective nature of the approach emissions, exposures could exceed the exposure to actual HAP emissions from that is used to develop these acute health value up to a factor of this source category and approximately estimates, it is highly unlikely that an approximately 40. The noncancer 400 people face an increased risk greater individual would have an acute hazard is driven by manganese than 10-in-1 million and up to 20-in-1 exposure above the REL. Specifically, emissions. million. The agency estimates that the the analysis is based on the assumption Neither the acute risk nor the risks maximum chronic non-cancer TOSHI that worst-case emissions and from the multipathway assessment from inhalation exposure is 4, with meteorology would coincide with a exceeded levels of concern, however the manganese emissions from tapping person being at the exact location of EPA does note that the refined fugitives accounting for a large portion maximum impact for a period of time multipathway exposure estimate for (93 percent) of the HI. long enough to have an exposure level mercury was at the level of the RfD. The Tier II multipathway screening above the conservative REL value. The The EPA proposes that the risks are analysis of actual emissions indicated fact that the facilities in this source unacceptable for the following reasons. the potential for PAH emissions that are category are not located in areas that First, the EPA considered the fact that about 20 times the screening level for naturally lead to people being near the the noncancer hazard quotient ranges cancer, dioxin emissions that are about fence line for periods of time indicates from 4 based on actual emissions to 40 20 times the screening level for cancer that the exposure scenario used in the based on allowable emissions. The EPA and mercury emissions that are 9 times screening assessment would be unlikely has not established under section 112 of above the screening level for non- to occur. the CAA a numerical range for risk acceptability for noncancer effects as it cancer. b. Estimated Risks From Allowable has with carcinogens, nor has it As noted above, the Tier II Emissions multipathway screen is conservative in determined that there is a bright line that it incorporates many health- The EPA estimates that the baseline above which acceptability is denied. protective assumptions. For example, inhalation cancer risk to the individual However, the Agency has established the EPA chooses inputs from the upper most exposed to emissions from sources that, as exposure increases above a end of the range of possible values for in the ferroalloys source category is up reference level (as indicated by a HQ or the influential parameters used in the to 100-in-1 million based on allowable TOSHI greater than 1), confidence that Tier II screen and assumes that the emissions, with arsenic and cadmium the public will not experience adverse exposed individual exhibits ingestion emissions driving the risks. The EPA health effects decreases and the behavior that would lead to a high total estimates that the incidence of cancer likelihood that an effect will occur exposure. A Tier II exceedance cannot due to inhalation exposures could be up increases. For the ferroalloys source be equated with a risk value or a HQ or to 0.005 excess cancer cases per year, or category, the potential for members of HI. Rather, it represents a high-end 1 case approximately every 200 years. the public to be exposed to manganese estimate of what the risk or hazard may About 94,000 people could face an at concentrations up to 40 times the be. For example, an exceedance of 2 for increased cancer risk greater than 1-in- MRL reduces the Agency’s confidence a non-carcinogen can be interpreted to 1 million due to inhalation exposure to that the public is protected from adverse mean that we have high confidence that allowable HAP emissions from these health effects and diminishes the the HI would be lower than 2. Similarly, source categories and approximately Agency’s ability to determine that such an exceedance of 30 for a carcinogen 2,500 people could face an increased exposures are acceptable. Second, the means that we have high confidence risk greater than 10-in-1 million and up EPA considered the fact that the cancer that the risk is lower than 30-in-1- to 100-in-1 million due to allowable risk estimate for actual emissions is 20- million. Confidence comes from the emissions. in-1 million and up to 100-in-1 million conservative, or health-protective, The risk assessment estimates that the for allowable emissions. While 20-in-1 maximum chronic non-cancer TOSHI million is well within the acceptable from inhalation exposure values is up to range, risks from allowable emissions 56 1-in-10 thousand is equivalent to 100-in-1 million. The EPA currently describes cancer risks 40, driven by allowable manganese are at the upper end of the range of as ‘n-in-1 million.’ emissions. Approximately 11,000 acceptability. This fact, combined with

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60270 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

the fact that the noncancer hazard is up however, that standard was only in more detail under the technology to 40 times the MRL and the refined intended to address tapping process review section of today’s notice and the multipathway HQ for mercury is at the fugitives generated under ‘‘normal’’ same control approach that we are RfD, leads the agency to conclude that tapping process operating conditions. proposing under section 112(d)(6) of the the risk from this source category is Casting and crushing and screening Act, as described below. We estimate unacceptable. process fugitives in the furnace building that this control approach will achieve were not included. Under the authority about 95 percent capture of process 2. Proposed Controls to Address fugitive emissions and will achieve Unacceptable Risks of section 112 of the Act, which allows the use of measures to enclose systems about 77 tpy reduction in HAP metals a. Stack Emissions or processes to eliminate emissions and emissions and will substantially reduce risks due to process fugitive emissions. In order to address the unacceptable measures to collect, capture or treat We conclude that achieving these risk from this source category, we such pollutants when released from a reductions is the level of control needed evaluated the potential to reduce process, stack, storage, or fugitive to address the unacceptable risks due to MACT-allowable stack emissions, emissions point, we evaluated options HAP emissions from the source which resulted in a cancer MIR of 100- to achieve improved emissions capture. category. in-1 million, primarily due to allowable In the 2011 proposal, we proposed full- stack emissions of arsenic and cadmium enclosure with negative pressure and c. Results of the Post-control Risk and contributed significantly to the viewed local capture as not being an Assessment appropriate method of risk reduction. chronic noncancer TOSHI of 40, The results of the post-control chronic primarily due to allowable stack However, based on comments and other inhalation cancer risk assessment emissions of manganese. Our analysis information gathered since the 2011 indicate that the maximum individual determined that we could lower the proposal and after further review and lifetime cancer risk posed by these two existing particulate matter emission analyses of available information, we facilities, after the implementation of limits by approximately 50 percent for reevaluated whether the necessary risk the proposed controls, could be up to furnace stack emissions, by 80 percent reduction could be accomplished by an 10-in-1 million, reduced from 20-in-1 for crushing and screening stack alternative approach to control fugitive million (i.e., pre-controls), with an emissions and by 98 percent for the emissions based on enhanced local estimated reduction in cancer incidence metal oxygen refining (MOR) process, capture of emissions. This control to 0.001 excess cancer cases per year, which would help reduce risk to an approach would include a combination reduced from 0.002 excess cancer cases acceptable level. As explained above, of primary and secondary hoods that per year. In addition, the number of the MOR is a major driver of the effectively capture process fugitive people estimated to have a cancer risk allowable risks. Therefore, by lowering emissions and vents those emissions to greater than or equal to 1-in-1 million the MOR limit by 98 percent, this PM control devices. The secondary would be reduced from 31,000 to 6,600. results in a large reduction in the capture would include hooding at the The results of the post-control allowable risks. roof-lines whereby remaining fugitives assessment also indicate that the For the reasons described above, are collected and vented to control maximum chronic noncancer inhalation under the authority of CAA section devices. As described further under the TOSHI value would be reduced to 1, 112(f)(2), we propose particulate matter technology review section of this from the baseline estimate of 4. The emission limits for the stacks at the preamble, this approach (based on number of people estimated to have a following levels: 4.0 mg/dscm for new enhanced local capture and control of TOSHI greater than 1 would be reduced or reconstructed electric arc furnaces process fugitives, using primary and from 1,500 to 0. We also estimate that and 25 mg/dscm for existing electric arc secondary hoods), will effectively after the implementation of controls, the furnaces. In the 2011 proposal, we reduce process fugitive emissions. We maximum worst-case acute HQ value proposed a limit of 3.9 mg/dscm for any conclude that this approach will would be reduced from 1 to less than 1 new, reconstructed or existing MOR achieve substantial reductions of (based on REL values). process and 13 mg/dscm for any new, process fugitive emissions Considering post-control emissions of reconstructed or existing crushing and (approximately 95 percent capture and multipathway HAP, mercury emissions screening equipment. We believe control of fugitive emissions) and will would be reduced by approximately 3 sources can achieve the limits we are also substantially reduce the estimated lbs/yr, lead would be reduced by about proposing today with existing controls. risks due to these emissions. Therefore, 1,600 lbs/yr, POM emissions would be These emissions limits will under section 112(f) of the CAA we are reduced by approximately 5,200 lbs/yr, substantially reduce potential risks due proposing this control option that is cadmium would be reduced by about to allowable emissions from the stacks. based on enhanced capture of fugitive 150 lbs/yr and dioxins and furans We propose that compliance for all emissions using primary hoods (that would be reduced by about 0.002 lbs/yr existing and new sources will be capture process fugitive emissions near from the baseline emission rates. demonstrated by periodic stack testing, the source) and secondary capture of 3. Ample Margin of Safety Analysis along with installation and continuous fugitives (which would capture operation of bag leak detection systems remaining fugitive emissions near the Under the ample margin of safety for both new and existing sources that roof-line) and includes a tight opacity analysis, we again consider all of the have baghouses, and continuous limit of 8 percent to ensure fugitives are health factors evaluated in the monitoring of liquid flow rate and effectively captured and controlled. We acceptability determination and pressure drop for sources controlled are proposing that the facilities in this evaluate the cost and feasibility of with wet scrubbers. source category must install and available control technologies and other maintain a process fugitives capture measures (including the controls, b. Process Fugitive Emissions Sources system that is designed to capture and measures and costs reviewed under the Process fugitive sources are partially control 95 percent or more of the technology review) that could be controlled by the existing MACT rule process fugitive emissions. This is the applied in this source category to via a shop building opacity standard; same exact control approach described further reduce the risks due to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60271

emissions of HAP identified in our risk and control technologies. The evaluating the available data from the assessment. particulate matter (PM) emissions, used best performing furnace (which was We estimate that the actions proposed as a surrogate for metal HAP, that were determined to be furnace #2 at Felman). under CAA section 112(f)(2), as reported by the industry in response to The new source MACT limit was described above to address unacceptable the 2010 ICR were far below the level determined to be 4.0 mg/dscm based on risks, will reduce the MIR associated specified in the current NESHAP, data from furnace #2 and was selected with arsenic, nickel, chromium and indicating improvements in the control as the proposed MACT emissions limit PAHs from 20-in-1 million to 10-in-1 of PM emissions since promulgation of for PM from new and reconstructed million for actual emissions. The cancer the current NESHAP. We re-evaluated source furnace stacks. incidence will be reduced from 0.002 to the data received in 2010, along with The PM emission limit for the local 0.001 cases per year and the number of additional data received in 2012 and ventilation control device outlet was people estimated to have cancer risks 2013, to determine whether it is also re-evaluated using compliance test greater than 1-in-1 million will be appropriate to propose revised data and test data from the 2012 ICR. A reduced, from 31,000 people to 6,600 emissions limits for PM from the local ventilation control device is used people. The chronic noncancer furnace process vents. The re-evaluation to capture tapping, casting, or ladle inhalation TOSHI will be reduced from of the PM limits was completed using treatment emissions and direct them to 4 to 1 and the number of people available PM emissions test data from a control device other than one exposed to a TOSHI level greater than all the furnaces and consideration of associated with the furnace. The 2011 1 will be reduced from 1,500 people to variability across those data. More proposal included a proposed PM limit 0. In addition, the potential details regarding the available PM data for the local ventilation control device multipathway impacts will be reduced. and this re-evaluation are provided in that was based on PM data from the Based on all of the above information, the Revised Technology Review for the furnaces. After the 2011 proposal, we we conclude that the risks after Ferroalloys Production Source Category received test data from 3 different implementation of the proposed for the Supplemental Proposal, which is emissions tests (for a total of 9 test runs) controls are acceptable. Based on our available in the docket. Unlike PAH and specifically for this local ventilation research and analysis, we did not mercury stack data, we did not see source. We determined these data were identify any cost-effective controls significant differences in variability of more appropriate for the development of beyond those proposed above that the PM data sets depending on product a limit for this source than the furnace would achieve further reduction in risk. produced (e.g., ferromanganese or data we had used for the 2011 proposal. While in theory the 2011 proposed silicomanganese). Therefore, we are not There is currently only one local approach of total enclosure would proposing to subcategorize the PM stack ventilation control device outlet provide some additional risk reduction, limits based on product type. emissions source in this source the additional risk reduction is minimal Based on this analysis, we determined category. and, as noted, we have substantial that it is appropriate to propose revised Using the new data for the one doubts that it would be feasible for these PM limits for the furnaces and that the existing local ventilation source, we facilities. Therefore we conclude that revised existing source furnace stack PM calculated a revised emissions limit of the controls to achieve acceptable risks emissions limit should be 25 milligrams 4.0 mg/dscm and determined that this (described above) will also provide an per dry standard cubic meter (mg/ was an appropriate emissions limit for ample margin of safety to protect public dscm). Therefore, we are proposing a this source. Therefore we are proposing health. revised emissions limit of 25 mg/dscm this emissions limit of 4.0 mg/dscm for for existing furnace stack PM emissions existing, new and reconstructed local D. What are the results and proposed in this supplemental proposal. This ventilation control device emissions decisions based on our technology emission limit is slightly higher than the sources. review? existing source furnace PM emission 2. Metal HAP Emissions From Process 1. Metal HAP Emissions Limits From limit of 24 mg/dscm that we proposed Fugitives Stacks in the 2011 proposal. The revised emissions limit is based on more data In the 2011 proposal, we concluded As mentioned in the previous section, than the previous proposed limit. No that a proposed requirement for sources the available test data from the five additional add-on controls are expected to enclose the furnace building, collect furnaces located at two facilities to be required by the facilities to meet fugitive emissions such that the furnace indicate that all of these furnaces have the revised existing source limit of 25 building is maintained under negative PM emission levels that are well below mg/dscm. However, this revised limit pressure and duct those emissions to a their respective emission limits (the would result in significantly lower control device represented an advance emission limits are based on size and ‘‘allowable’’ PM emissions from the in emissions control measures since the product being produced in the furnace) source category compared to the level of Ferroalloys Production NESHAP was in the 1999 MACT rule. These findings emissions allowed by the 1999 MACT originally promulgated in 1999. demonstrate that the add-on emission rule and would help prevent any Commenters on the 2011 proposal control technologies (venturi scrubber, emissions increases. To demonstrate disagreed with our assessment. Based positive pressure fabric filter, negative compliance, we propose these sources on these comments, we reassessed the pressure fabric filter) used to control would be required to conduct periodic proposed requirement for negative emissions from the furnaces are quite performance testing and develop and pressure ventilation and determined effective in reducing particulate matter operate according to a baghouse that the installation and operation of the (used as a surrogate for metal HAP) and operating plan or continuously monitor proposed system may not be feasible that all of the facilities have emissions venturi scrubber operating parameters. and would likely be very costly. For well below the current limits. We also propose that furnace baghouses example, the recent secondary lead Under section 112(d)(6) of the Clean would be required to be equipped with NESHAP requires use of such a system, Air Act (CAA), we are required to revise bag leak detection systems (BLDS). but we recognize that a much smaller emission standards, taking into account The revised new source PM standard volume of air must be evacuated at developments in practices, processes for furnaces was determined by secondary lead facilities because of their

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60272 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

smaller size compared to ferroalloy would be significantly improved with • Addition of ‘‘secondary capture’’ or facilities. We agree that we had effective local hooding and ventilation additional hoods to capture emissions underestimated the costs of such and the remaining fugitive emissions from tapping platforms or crucibles; negative pressure systems and we have (that are not captured by the primary • Addition of fugitives capture for provided updated cost analyses. hoods) would be drawn up to the roof- casting operations; Commenters also raised concerns line and captured with secondary • Improvement of existing control about worker safety and comfort in hooding and vented to control devices. devices or addition of fabric filters; and • Addition of rooftop ventilation, in designing and operating such systems In cases where additional collection which fugitive emissions escaping local based on historical examples. We of fugitives from the roof monitors is believe that such issues can be capture are collected in the roof canopy needed to comply with building opacity over process areas through addition of overcome with proper ventilation limits, fume collection areas may be design and installation of air partitions, hoods, and then directed isolated via baffles (so the area above through ducts to control devices. conditioning systems and other steps to the furnace where fumes collect may be ensure these issues are not a problem. We estimate the total capital costs of kept separated from ‘‘empty’’ spaces in installing the required ductwork, fans However, after further review and large buildings) and roof monitors over evaluation we conclude that it would be and control devices under the enhanced fume collection areas can be sealed and quite costly for these facilities to capture option (which is described directed to control devices. The fugitive become fully enclosed with negative above and in more detail in the Cost emission capture system should achieve pressure and achieve the appropriate Impacts document) to be $37.6 million inflow at the building floor, but outflow ventilation and conditioning of indoor and the total annualized cost to be $7.1 toward the roof where most of the air. million for the two plants. We estimate Going back to the original goal of remaining fugitives would be captured that this option would reduce metal identifying advances in emissions by the secondary hooding. We conclude HAP emissions by 75 tons per year, control measures since the Ferroalloys that a rigorous, systematic examination resulting in a cost per ton of metal HAP Production NESHAP was promulgated of the ventilation requirements removed to be $94,600 per ton ($47 per in 1999, we have arrived at a different throughout the building is the key to pound). The total estimated HAP conclusion than we described in the developing a fugitive emission capture reduction for the enhanced capture 2011 proposal. We re-evaluated the system (consisting of primary hoods, option is 77 tons per year at a cost per costs and operational feasibility secondary hoods, enclosures and/or ton of $91,900 ($46 per pound). We also associated with the full building building ventilation ducted to estimate that this option would achieve enclosure with negative pressure that particulate matter control devices) that PM emission reductions of 229 tons per we proposed in 2011. We consulted can be designed and operated to achieve year, resulting in cost per ton of PM with ventilation experts who have very low levels of fugitive emissions. removed of $30,900 per ton and achieve worked with hot process fugitives Such an evaluation considers worker PM2.5 emission reductions of 48 tons per similar to those found in the ferroalloys health, safety and comfort and it is year, resulting in a cost per ton of PM2.5 industry (e.g., electric arc furnace steel designed to optimize existing removal of $147,000 per ton. We believe mini-mills and secondary lead ventilation options (fan capacity and these controls for process fugitive HAP smelters). We determined that hood design) and add additional capture emissions (described above), which are substantially more air flow, air options to meet specified design criteria based on enhanced capture (with exchanges, ductwork, fans and control determined through the evaluation primary and secondary hooding) are devices and supporting structural process. Thus, we conclude that an feasible for the Ferroalloys Production improvements would be needed enhanced capture system based on these source category from a technical (compared to what we had estimated in design principles does represent an standpoint and are cost effective. This the 2011 proposal) to achieve negative advancement in technology. We cost effectiveness is in the range of cost pressure and also ensure adequate estimate that this control scenario effectiveness for PM and HAP metals ventilation and air quality in these large would capture about 95 percent of the from other previous rules. However, it is furnace buildings. Therefore, we process fugitive emissions and vent important to note that there is no bright determined that the proposed negative those emissions to PM control devices. line for determining cost-effectiveness pressure approach presented in the 2011 This enhanced local capture option is for HAP metals. Each rulemaking is proposal would be much more described in more detail in the Revised different and various factors must be expensive than what we had estimated Technology Review document and in considered. Some of the other factors we in 2011 and may not be feasible for the Cost Impacts of Control Options to consider when making decisions these facilities. Address Fugitive HAP Emissions for the whether to establish standards beyond We also evaluated another option Ferroalloys Production NESHAP the floor under section 112(d)(2) or based on enhanced capture of the Supplemental Proposal document (Cost under section 112(d)(6) include, but are process fugitive emissions using a Impacts document) which are available not limited to, the following: which of combination of effective local capture in the docket. the HAP metals are being reduced and with primary hooding close to the Under this control option, the cost by how much; total capital costs; annual emissions sources and secondary elements vary by plant and furnace and costs; and costs compared to total capture of remaining fugitives with roof- include the following: revenues (e.g., costs to revenue ratios). line capture hoods and control devices. We also re-evaluated the option based • Curtains or doors surrounding These buildings are currently designed on building ventilation as described in furnace tops to contain fugitive such that fugitive emissions that are not the 2011 proposal. This control option emissions; captured by the primary hoods flow involves installation of full building • upward with a natural draft to the open Improvements to hoods collecting ventilation at negative pressure for roof vents and are vented to the tapping emissions; furnace buildings instead of installing atmosphere uncontrolled. Under our • Upgrade fans to improve the airflow fugitive controls on individual tapping enhanced control scenario, the primary of fabric filters controlling fugitive and casting operations. This option capture close to the emissions sources emissions; would require installation of ductwork

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60273

from the roof vents of furnace buildings, the 2011 proposal relied on achieving ventilation operating system parameters additional fans, structural repairs to the requirement to maintain the shop and periodic inspections of the buildings and a new fabric filter for each building at negative pressure to at least ventilation systems would ensure that building. Both Eramet and Felman 0.007 inches of water. This was to be the ventilation systems are operating as provided extensive comments and supplemented by operation and work designed. information regarding implementation practice standards that required Also, similar to the 2011 proposal, we of building ventilation, including cost preparation of a process fugitive believe that the source should estimates based on their own emissions ventilation plan for each shop demonstrate that the overall design of engineering analyses. We thoroughly building, which would include the ventilation system is adequate to reviewed the comments and information schematics with design parameters (e.g., achieve the proposed standards. We provided by the companies along with air flow and static pressure) of the propose that the facilities in this source information gathered from other ventilation system. The source would category must maintain a process sources, and then revised our costs conduct a baseline survey to verify that fugitives capture system that is designed analyses accordingly for this building air supply and exhaust are to collect 95 percent or more of the supplemental proposal. balanced and the building will be process fugitive emissions from furnace We estimate that the full building maintained under at least 0.007 inches operations, casting MOR process, ladle enclosure option would reduce PM of water. Such plan would identify raking and slag skimming and crushing emissions from the facilities by 252 tons critical maintenance activities and and screening operations and convey per year (and total HAP emissions by 83 schedules, be submitted to the the collected emissions to a control tons per year). The total estimated permitting authority and incorporated device that meets specified emission capital cost for these fugitive controls is into the source’s operating permit. The limits and the proposed opacity limits. $61 million. Annualized capital cost baseline survey would be repeated every We believe that if the source designs the and operational and maintenance costs 5 years or following significant changes plan according to the most recent (at the are estimated at $19 million per year, to the ventilation system. time of construction) ventilation design which results in an estimated cost per principles recommended by the With the move to the proposed ton of metal HAP removed of $226,000 American Conference of Governmental enhanced local capture alternative, we per ton. We also estimate that this Industrial Hygienists (ACHIH), includes believe that more frequent opacity option would achieve PM emission detailed schematics of the ventilation monitoring based on an average of 8 reductions of 252 tons, resulting in cost system design, addresses variables that per ton of PM removed of $74,200 per percent opacity at all times, is affect capture efficiency such as cross appropriate to demonstrate compliance ton and achieve PM2.5 emission drafts and describes protocol or design reductions of 53 tons, resulting in a cost with the process fugitives standards. We characteristics to minimize such events propose that if the average opacity per ton of PM2.5 removal of $353,000 per and identifies monitoring and ton. The incremental cost effectiveness reading from the shop building is maintenance steps, the plan will be comparing the enhanced capture option greater than 8 percent opacity during an capable of ensuring the system is to the building ventilation option is observed furnace process cycle, an properly designed and continues to $501,000 per ton of PM removed, $2.4 additional two more furnace process operate as designed. We would continue cycles must be observed such that the million per ton of PM2.5 removed and to require that this plan be submitted to $2.2 million per ton of HAP removed. average opacity during the entire the permitting authority, incorporated Based on these analyses, we conclude observation period is less than 7 percent into the source’s operating permit and that the full-building enclosure option opacity. A furnace process cycle means updated every 5 years or when there is with negative pressure may not be the period in which the furnace is a significant change in variables that feasible and would have significant tapped to the time in which the furnace affect process fugitive emissions economic impacts on the facilities is tapped again and includes periods of ventilation design. This list of design (including potential closure for one or charging, smelting, tapping, casting and criteria, coupled with the requirement more facilities). However, we conclude ladle raking. We also propose that at no for frequent opacity observations and that the enhanced local capture option time during operation may any two operating parameter monitoring will is a feasible and cost-effective approach consecutive 6-minute block opacity result in enforceable requirements. We to achieve significant reductions in readings be greater than 20 percent recognize that other design fugitive HAP emissions and will achieve opacity. We believe that the longer requirements and/or more frequent almost as much reductions as the full- averaging time for this new opacity limit opacity observations may yield more building enclosure option (229 vs 252 (furnace process cycle vs. individual 6- compliance certainty, but incur greater tons PM reductions) thus achieving minute averages) addresses concerns costs and not result in measurable most of the risk reductions. In light of that small variations in an otherwise decreases in emissions. However, we the technical feasibility and cost well-controlled furnace cycle could request comment on other measures that effectiveness of the enhanced capture result in violations of the opacity could be considered to demonstrate that options, we are proposing the enhanced standard. The proposed 20 percent well designed (e.g., at least 95 percent capture option under the authority of ceiling ensures that there are no acute overall capture of process fugitive section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. events that could adversely affect public emissions) plans are developed and In the 2011 proposal, we included a health. Finally, the lower limit (8 vs. 10 maintained. We request that such requirement that emissions exiting from percent opacity) also reflects that comments include costs, measurement a shop building may not exceed more sources should achieve lower overall techniques or other information to than 10 percent opacity for more than emissions over a longer averaging evaluate their efficacy. one 6-minute period, to be period. We propose that sources be demonstrated every 5 years as part of required to conduct opacity E. What other actions are we proposing? the periodic required performance tests. observations at least once per week for In addition to the proposed actions For day-to-day continuous monitoring each operating furnace and each MOR described above, we re-evaluated to demonstrate compliance with the operation. Similar to the 2011 proposal, compliance requirements associated proposed shop building requirements, continuous monitoring of key with the 2011 proposed amendments to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60274 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

determine whether we should make enhanced local capture option described operate in a normal or usual manner changes to those proposed amendments. in this supplemental proposal . . .’’ (40 CFR 63.2). As explained in the Based on this re-evaluation, we are incorporates the features anticipated in 2011 proposal, the EPA interprets CAA proposing the following changes to what a non-negative pressure building option section 112 as not requiring emissions was proposed in the 2011 proposal. and contains compliance requirements that occur during periods of (based on meeting a tight opacity limit 1. Stack Emission Limits malfunction to be factored into and other requirements) that would development of CAA section 112 In response to public comments, we assess emissions at the point of the standards. Under section 112, emissions revisited the format of the stack maximum output, that is, from the roof standards for new sources must be no emission limits. We concluded that a monitor of the ferroalloys production less stringent than the level ‘‘achieved’’ concentration-based limit is still building. Furthermore, we determined by the best controlled similar source appropriate, but we agree that the there were various issues associated and for existing sources generally must proposed CO2 concentration correction with fenceline monitoring at facilities be no less stringent than the average poses a problem under certain control within this source category, including emission limitation ‘‘achieved’’ by the device configurations. While such a highly variable wind patterns, best performing 12 percent of sources in concentration correction is appropriate uncertainties as to how to account for the category. There is nothing in section for combustion sources such as boilers, background concentrations and road 112 that directs the Agency to consider we agree that its use in the context of dust and the large difference between malfunctions in determining the level ferroalloys production is not helpful. emissions release heights (from the high ‘‘achieved’’ by the best performing The PM stack limits proposed above do roof vents and stacks) compared to sources when setting emission not include a CO2 correction. heights where fenceline monitors would standards. As the DC Circuit has 2. Emissions Averaging be located (near ground level). recognized, the phrase ‘‘average Therefore, we are proposing to not As described above, we have decided emissions limitation achieved by the include fenceline monitoring in the best performing 12 percent of’’ sources to retain a concentration format for the final rule as an alternative method to emissions limits for the stacks but we ‘‘says nothing about how the demonstrate compliance with a specific performance of the best units is to be are not retaining the emissions ambient level as was described in the averaging provision in this calculated.’’ Nat’l Ass’n of Clean Water 2011 proposal. We believe the proposed Agencies v. EPA, 734 F.3d 1115, 1141 supplemental proposal that we had tight opacity limit (which would be proposed in 2011. We believe a (D.C. Cir. 2013). While the EPA measured at the emissions sources), accounts for variability in setting concentration format is the best format along with the proposed requirements to for this NESHAP and we have emissions standards, nothing in section install, operate and maintain effective 112 requires the Agency to consider concluded that it is not the best format fugitive capture and control systems, to use under an emissions averaging malfunctions as part of that analysis. A emissions limits for the stacks and malfunction should not be treated in the option. We are concerned that emissions various parametric monitoring from a large furnace emitting a lower same manner as the type of variation in requirements, are appropriate control performance that occurs during routine than average concentration could still requirements to ensure effective capture emit more emissions than a small operations of a source. A malfunction is and control of emissions. However, as a failure of the source to perform in a furnace with a higher than average described in Section V.I. of this Notice, concentration. This could result in a net ‘‘normal or usual manner’’ and no we are seeking comments regarding statutory language compels the EPA to increase in emissions from the two other possible options to monitor furnaces compared to their emissions if consider such events in setting section fugitive emissions, including fenceline 112 standards. they were not allowed to average monitoring as a tool to monitor trends emissions. For this reason, we are in ambient concentrations at these Further, accounting for malfunctions proposing not to include the emissions locations and to use this information in setting emission standards would be averaging provisions in the rule, which (along with meteorological data and difficult, if not impossible, given the is a change from the 2011 proposal. modeling tools) to attempt to quantify myriad different types of malfunctions that can occur across all sources in the 3. Fenceline Monitoring Alternative trends in emissions that are leaving and entering the facility property. category and given the difficulties In the 2011 proposal, we assumed associated with predicting or accounting there could be control measures other 4. Startup, Shutdown, Malfunction for the frequency, degree and duration than maintaining the furnace buildings In the 2011 proposal, we proposed to of various malfunctions that might under negative pressure that would eliminate two provisions that exempt occur. As such, the performance of units achieve equivalent emissions sources from the requirement to comply that are malfunctioning is not reductions. Therefore, to provide some with the otherwise applicable CAA ‘‘reasonably’’ foreseeable. See, e.g., flexibility to facilities regarding how to section 112(d) emission standards Sierra Club v. EPA, 167 F.3d 658, 662 achieve the reductions of fugitive during periods of SSM. We also (D.C. Cir. 1999) (‘‘The EPA typically has emissions, in lieu of building the full included provisions for affirmative wide latitude in determining the extent enclosure and evacuation system defense to civil penalties for violations of data-gathering necessary to solve a described in the 2011 proposal, we of emission standards caused by problem. We generally defer to an proposed that sources could malfunctions. Periods of startup, normal agency’s decision to proceed on the demonstrate compliance with an operations, and shutdown are all basis of imperfect scientific information, alternative approach by conducting predictable and routine aspects of a rather than to ‘invest the resources to fenceline monitoring and demonstrate source’s operations. However, by conduct the perfect study.’ ’’) See also, that the ambient concentrations of contrast, malfunction is defined as a Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, manganese at their facility boundary ‘‘sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably 1058 (D.C. Cir. 1978) (‘‘In the nature of remain at levels no more than 0.1 mg/m3 preventable failure of air pollution things, no general limit, individual on a 60-day rolling average. However, at control and monitoring equipment, permit, or even any upset provision can this time, we believe that the proposed process equipment or a process to anticipate all upset situations. After a

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60275

certain point, the transgression of administrative proceeding can consider regulatory affirmative defense provision regulatory limits caused by any defense raised and determine in this rulemaking and in this proposal ‘uncontrollable acts of third parties,’ whether administrative penalties are has eliminated sections 63.1627 and such as strikes, sabotage, operator appropriate. 63.1662 (the affirmative defense intoxication or insanity, and a variety of As noted above, the 2011 proposal provisions in the proposed rule other eventualities, must be a matter for included an affirmative defense to civil published in the Federal Register on the administrative exercise of case-by- penalties for violations caused by November 23, 2011 (76 FR 72508)). As case enforcement discretion, not for malfunctions. EPA included the explained above, if a source is unable to specification in advance by affirmative defense in the 2011 proposal comply with emissions standards as a regulation.’’). In addition, emissions as it had in several prior rules in an result of a malfunction, the EPA may during a malfunction event can be effort to create a system that use its case-by-case enforcement significantly higher than emissions at incorporates some flexibility, discretion to provide flexibility, as any other time of source operation. For recognizing that there is a tension, appropriate. Further, as the DC Circuit example, if an air pollution control inherent in many types of air regulation, recognized, in an EPA or citizen device with 99 percent removal goes off- to ensure adequate compliance while enforcement action, the court has the line as a result of a malfunction (as simultaneously recognizing that despite discretion to consider any defense might happen if, for example, the bags the most diligent of efforts, emission raised and determine whether penalties in a baghouse catch fire) and the standards may be violated under are appropriate. Cf. NRDC at *24. emission unit is a steady state type unit circumstances entirely beyond the (arguments that violation were caused that would take days to shut down, the control of the source. Although the EPA by unavoidable technology failure can source would go from 99 percent control recognized that its case-by-case be made to the courts in future civil to zero control until the control device enforcement discretion provides cases when the issue arises). The same was repaired. The source’s emissions sufficient flexibility in these logic applies to EPA administrative during the malfunction would be 100 circumstances, it included the enforcement actions. times higher than during normal affirmative defense in the 2011 proposal F. What compliance dates are we operations. As such, the emissions over and in several prior rules to provide a a 4-day malfunction period would proposing? more formalized approach and more exceed the annual emissions of the regulatory clarity. See Weyerhaeuser Co. The proposed changes to the 2011 source during normal operations. As v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1057–58 (D.C. proposal that are set out in this this example illustrates, accounting for Cir. 1978) (holding that an informal supplementary proposal will not change malfunctions could lead to standards case-by-case enforcement discretion the compliance dates proposed. We that are not reflective of (and approach is adequate); but see Marathon continue to propose that facilities must significantly less stringent than) levels Oil Co. v. EPA, 564 F.2d 1253, 1272–73 comply with the changes set out in this that are achieved by a well-performing (9th Cir. 1977) (requiring a more supplementary proposal (which are non-malfunctioning source. It is formalized approach to consideration of being proposed under CAA sections reasonable to interpret section 112 to ‘‘upsets beyond the control of the permit 112(d)(2), 112(d)(3), 112(d)(6) and avoid such a result. The EPA’s approach 112(f)(2) for all affected sources), no to malfunctions is consistent with holder.’’). Under the EPA’s regulatory affirmative defense provisions, if a later than 2 years after the effective date section 112 and is a reasonable of the final rule. We find that 2 years are interpretation of the statute. source could demonstrate in a judicial or administrative proceeding that it had necessary to complete the installation of In the event that a source fails to the enhanced local capture system and comply with the applicable CAA section met the requirements of the affirmative defense in the regulation, civil penalties other controls. In the period between 112 standards as a result of a the effective date of this rule and the malfunction event, the EPA would would not be assessed. The United States Court of Appeals for the District compliance date, existing sources would determine an appropriate response continue to comply with the existing based on, among other things, the good of Columbia Circuit vacated an affirmative defense in one of the EPA’s requirements specified in §§ 63.1650 faith efforts of the source to minimize through 63.1661, which will protect the emissions during malfunction periods, Section 112 regulations. NRDC v. EPA, 749 F.3d 1055 No. 10–1371 (D.C. Cir., health of persons from imminent including preventative and corrective endangerment. actions, as well as root cause analyses 2014) (vacating affirmative defense to ascertain and rectify excess provisions in Section 112 rule V. Summary of the Revised Cost, emissions. The EPA would also establishing emission standards for Environmental and Economic Impacts Portland cement kilns). The court found consider whether the source’s failure to A. What are the affected sources? comply with the CAA section 112 that the EPA lacked authority to standard was, in fact, ‘‘sudden, establish an affirmative defense for We maintain, as at the 2011 proposal, infrequent, not reasonably preventable’’ private civil suits and held that under that the two manganese ferroalloys and was not instead ‘‘caused in part by the CAA, the authority to determine production facilities currently operating poor maintenance or careless civil penalty amounts in such cases lies in the United States will be affected by operation.’’ 40 CFR § 63.2 (definition of exclusively with the courts, not the these proposed amendments. We do not malfunction). EPA. Specifically, the Court found: ‘‘As know of any new facilities that are Further, to the extent the EPA files an the language of the statute makes clear, expected to be constructed in the enforcement action against a source for the courts determine, on a case-by-case foreseeable future. However, there is violation of an emission standard, the basis, whether civil penalties are one other facility that has a permit to source can raise any and all defenses in ‘appropriate.’ ’’ See NRDC at *21 produce ferromanganese or that enforcement action and the federal (‘‘[U]nder this statute, deciding whether silicomanganese in an electric arc district court will determine what, if penalties are ‘appropriate’ in a given furnace, but it is not doing so at present. any, relief is appropriate. The same is private civil suit is a job for the courts, It is possible, however, that this facility true for citizen enforcement actions. not EPA.’’). In light of NRDC, the EPA could resume production or another Similarly, the presiding officer in an is withdrawing its proposal to include a non-manganese ferroalloy producer

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60276 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

could decide to commence production provided by the facilities based on their D. What are the economic impacts? of ferromanganese or silicomanganese. engineering analyses and discussions As a result of the requirements in this Given this uncertainty, our impact with the EPA. The Cost Impacts supplemental proposal, we estimate that analysis is focused on the two existing document includes a complete the total capital cost for the Eramet sources that are currently operating. description of the revised cost estimate facility will be about $25 million and methods used for this analysis and is B. What are the air quality impacts? the total annualized costs will be about available in the docket. $5.4 million (in 2012 dollars). For The EPA revised the estimated Cost elements vary by plant and impacts to Felman Production LLC, this emissions reductions that are expected furnace and include the following facility is estimated to incur a total to result from the proposed amendments elements: to the 1999 NESHAP based on the • Curtains or doors surrounding capital cost of $12.4 million and a total proposed changes in this supplemental furnace tops to contain fugitive annualized costs of just under $1.7 proposal. A detailed documentation of emissions; million (in 2012 dollars). In total, these the analysis can be found in the Cost • Improvements to hoods collecting costs could lead to an increase in Impacts document, which is available in tapping emissions; annualized cost of as much as 1.8 the docket. • Upgraded fans to improve the percent of sales, which serves as an As noted in the 2011 proposal, airflow of fabric filters controlling estimate for the increase in product emissions of metal HAP from ferroalloys fugitive emissions; prices, and a decrease in output of as production sources have declined in • Addition of ‘‘secondary capture’’ or much as 9.5 percent. For more recent years, primarily as the result of additional hoods to capture emissions information regarding economic state actions and also due to the from tapping platforms or crucibles; impacts, please refer to the Economic industry’s own initiative. The proposed • Addition of fugitives capture for Impact Analysis report that is included amendments in this supplemental casting operations; in the public docket for this proposal would cut HAP emissions • Improvement of existing control supplemental proposal. (primarily particulate metal HAP such devices or addition of fabric filters; and • E. What are the benefits? as manganese, arsenic and nickel) by Addition of rooftop ventilation, in about 60 percent from their current which fugitive emissions escaping local The estimated reductions in HAP levels. Under the revised proposed control are collected in the roof canopy emissions (i.e., about 77 tpy) that would emissions standards for process over process areas through addition of be achieved by this proposal would fugitives emissions from the furnace partitions and hoods, then directed provide significant benefits to public building, we estimate that the HAP through roof vents and ducts to control health. For example, there would be a emissions reductions would be 77 tpy, devices. significant reduction in emissions of air including significant reductions of For purposes of the supplemental toxics (especially Mn, Ni, Cd and manganese. proposal analysis, we assumed that PAHs). In addition to the HAP As noted in the 2011 proposal, based enhanced fugitive capture and control reductions, we also estimate that this on the emissions data available to the systems and roofline ventilation will be supplemental proposal would achieve EPA, we believe that both facilities will installed for all operational furnaces at about 48 tons of reductions in PM2.5 be able to comply with the proposed both facilities and for MOR operations emissions as a co-benefit of the HAP emissions limits for HCl without at Eramet Marietta. The specific reductions annually. additional controls. Based on the elements of the capture and control This rulemaking is not an analyses presented today, we also systems selected for each facility are ‘‘economically significant regulatory anticipate that both facilities will be based on information supplied by the action’’ under Executive Order 12866 able to comply with the proposed facilities incorporating their best because it is not likely to have an emission limits for mercury and PAH estimates of the improvements to annual effect on the economy of $100 without additional controls. fugitive emission capture and control million or more. Therefore, we have not they would implement to achieve the conducted a Regulatory Impact Analysis C. What are the cost impacts? standards included in the supplemental (RIA) for this rulemaking or a benefits Under the revised proposed proposal. We estimate the total capital analysis. While we expect that these amendments, ferroalloys production costs of installing the required avoided emissions will result in facilities are expected to incur costs for ductwork, fans and control devices improvements in air quality and reduce the design of a local ventilation system, under the enhanced capture option to be health effects associated with exposure resulting in a site-specific local $37.6 million and the total annualized to air pollution associated with these ventilation plan and installation of cost to be $7.1 million (2012 dollars) for emissions, we have not quantified or custom hoods and ventilation the two plants. We estimate that this monetized the benefits of reducing these equipment and additional control option would reduce metal HAP emissions for this rulemaking. This does devices to manage the air flows emissions by 75 tons, resulting in a cost not imply that there are no benefits generated by the enhanced capture per ton of metal HAP removed to be associated with these emission systems. There would also be capital $94,700 per ton ($47 per pound). The reductions. When determining if the costs associated with installing new or total HAP reduction for the enhanced benefits of an action exceed its costs, improved continuous monitoring capture option is estimated to be 77 tons Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 systems, including installation of BLDS per year at a cost per ton of $91,900 per direct the Agency to consider qualitative on the furnace baghouses that are not ton ($46 per pound). We also estimate benefits that are difficult to quantity but currently equipped with these systems. that this option would achieve PM nevertheless essential to consider. The revised capital costs for each emission reductions of 229 tons per Directly emitted particles are facility were estimated based on the year, resulting in cost per ton of PM precursors to secondary formation of projected number and types of upgrades removed of $30,900 per ton and achieve fine particles (PM2.5). Controls installed required. The specific enhancements for PM2.5 emission reductions of 48 tons per to reduce HAP would also reduce each facility were selected for cost year, resulting in a cost per ton of PM2.5 ambient concentrations of PM2.5 as a co- estimation based on estimates directly removal of $147,000 per ton. benefit. Reducing exposure to PM2.5 is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60277

associated with significant human ATSDR,60 and California EPA 61 Web controls systems that we expect will be health benefits, including avoiding pages. installed to comply with this proposed rule. This information will also help mortality and morbidity from VI. Request for Comments cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses. improve our understanding of the We solicit comments on the revised Researchers have associated PM2.5 relationship between the process exposure with adverse health effects in risk assessment and technology review fugitive emissions and the specific and proposed changes to the previously numerous toxicological, clinical and operations within the furnace buildings. proposed amendments. We seek epidemiological studies (U.S. EPA, However, the measurements would not 57 comments on the additional data be tied to a specific emissions limit. 2009) . When adequate data and received in August 2014 (as described in resources are available and an RIA is Second, the EPA is soliciting Section II.D above) and the impacts of comment on requiring fugitive fenceline required, the EPA generally quantifies those new data on the analyses and several health effects associated with filter based measurements of particulate results presented in this notice. We seek matter and manganese emissions at the exposure to PM2.5 (e.g., U.S. EPA, comments on the sufficiency of the 2012) 58. These health effects include facilities with no less than 3 monitoring proposed controls for process fugitive systems at the property boundaries to premature mortality for adults and emissions, the design of such systems monitor trends in ambient infants, cardiovascular morbidities such and how best to monitor them to ensure concentrations at these locations and to as heart attacks, hospital admissions the systems achieve the estimated use this information (along with and respiratory morbidities such as efficiency. We also seek comments on meteorological data and modeling tools) asthma attacks, acute bronchitis, other aspects of this supplemental to attempt to quantify trends in hospital and emergency department proposal, including, but not limited to, emissions that are leaving and entering visits, work loss days, restricted activity the proposed opacity standards. the facility property. The EPA seeks The EPA is also soliciting comment days and respiratory symptoms. The comment on having the monitoring with regard to expanding the monitoring scientific literature also suggests that systems use common ambient filter requirements in this NESHAP for exposure to PM2.5 is also associated with based sampling techniques as well as fugitive particulate matter and adverse effects on birth weight, pre-term gathering data on meteorological manganese emissions being released at births, pulmonary function and other conditions simultaneously at each of the the roof vents of furnace buildings using cardiovascular and respiratory effects sampling sites. The EPA recognizes that one or more of three different options. (U.S. EPA, 2009), but the EPA has not this monitoring would be capturing both For the following three options the EPA quantified certain outcomes these ground level and other fugitive is additionally seeking comment on the impacts in its benefits analyses. PM emissions from the facilities as well as 2.5 frequency of monitoring and the cost background contributions from other also increases light extinction, which is associated with installation, operation, sources, and that this type of monitoring an important aspect of visibility. analysis and ongoing reporting. has limitations. Nevertheless, EPA is The rulemaking is also anticipated to Additional cost information of these taking comment on the application and reduce emissions of other HAP, three monitoring options is included in appropriateness of this type of the Cost Impacts document, which is including metal HAP (arsenic, monitoring as part of the requirements available in the docket. cadmium, chromium (both total and within this NESHAP to evaluate +6 First, the EPA is soliciting comment Cr ), lead compounds, manganese and emissions leaving the facility property on the potential to require the facilities nickel) and PAHs. Some of these HAP and is taking comment on where to to take periodic measurements of are carcinogenic (e.g., arsenic, PAHs) position the monitoring systems to best fugitive particulate matter and and some have effects other than cancer evaluate the fugitive emissions. (e.g., kidney disease from cadmium, manganese emissions from the roof vents using portable filter based Third, the EPA is soliciting comment respiratory and immunological effects regarding the use of new technologies to from nickel). While we cannot measurement technologies. The EPA solicits comment on requiring no less provide continuous or near continuous quantitatively estimate the benefits than 3 filter based monitoring systems long term approaches to monitoring achieved by reducing emissions of these with associated anemometers with the emissions from industrial sources such HAP, we would expect benefits by goal of quantifying trends in the process the Ferroalloys production facilities reducing exposures to these HAP. More fugitive emissions that are leaving the within this source category. To this end information about the health effects of furnace buildings. We also solicit we are seeking comment on the 59 these HAP can be found on the IRIS, comment on the appropriate sampling feasibility and practice associated with duration and frequency of such the use of automated Opacity Monitoring with ASTM D7520–13, 57 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. measurements (e.g., 8-hour samples gathered at each monitor several times using digital camera technology (DCOT) EPA). 2009. Integrated Science Assessment for at fixed points to interpret visible Particulate Matter (Final Report). EPA–600–R–08– per week or month). This monitoring 139F. National Center for Environmental could provide useful information emissions from roof vents associated Assessment—RTP Division. Available on the regarding the remaining fugitive with the processes at each facility, and Internet at http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/ emissions that will be escaping the how this technology could potentially recordisplay.cfm?deid=216546. buildings after the facilities install and be included as part of the requirements 58 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. operate the improved capture and in the NESHAP for ferroalloys EPA). 2012. Regulatory Impact Analysis for the production sources. Specifically we are Proposed Revisions to the National Ambient Air 60 interested in comments regarding how Quality Standards for Particulate Matter. Office of US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2006. Minimum Risk Levels (MRLs) for many fixed camera locations would be Air and Radiation, Research Triangle Park, NC. Hazardous Substances. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ needed to provide sufficient sun-angle Available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ mrls/index.html. _ viewing during daylight operating ttnecas1/regdata/RIAs/PMRIACombinedFile 61 CA Office of Environmental Health Hazard hours, and the frequency of the EXIF 2.1 Bookmarked.pdf. Assessment, 2005. Chronic Reference Exposure 59 US EPA, 2006. Integrated Risk Information Levels Adopted by OEHHA as of December 2008. JPG image analysis (how often the roof System. http://www.epa.gov/iris/index.html. http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/chronic_rels. vent plume should be evaluated).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60278 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

The EPA is moving toward advances commenter phone number and revision § 63.1625(c)(4) and § 63.1626. We are in information and emissions comments). not proposing changes to these monitoring technology that is setting the 3. Gather documentation for any requirements. However, in this stage for detection, processing and suggested emissions revisions (e.g., supplemental proposal we are communication capabilities that can performance test reports, material proposing more frequent opacity revolutionize environmental protection. balance calculations, etc.). monitoring requirements compared to The EPA calls this Next Generation 4. Send the entire downloaded file the 2011 proposal and are removing the Compliance. One of the advances in with suggested revisions in Microsoft® shop building process fugitives information sharing is increased Access format and all accompanying monitoring requirements (to transparency. Using transparency as a documentation to Docket ID Number demonstrate negative pressure) that we way to improve performance and EPA–HQ–OAR–*** (through one of the proposed in 2011. increase compliance, the EPA is seeking methods described in the ADDRESSES In addition, in the 2011 proposal, we comments on whether affected sources section of this preamble). included an estimate of the burden should be required to post Method 9 5. If you are providing comments on associated with the affirmative defense readings on their company Web sites a single facility or multiple facilities, in the ICR. However, as explained and/or State dashboards. you need only submit one file for all above, in this supplemental proposal we Electronic reporting is another next facilities. The file should contain all are withdrawing our proposal to include generation tool that saves time and suggested changes for all sources at that an affirmative defense and the burden money while improving results. The facility. We request that all data revision estimate has been revised accordingly. EPA is asking for comments on whether comments be submitted in the form of We estimate two regulated entities are the EPA should require affected sources updated Microsoft® Excel files that are currently subject to subpart XXX and to submit all compliance documents generated by the Microsoft® Access file. will be subject to this action. The such as notice of compliance status These files are provided on the RTR annual monitoring, reporting and form, deviations from the process Web page at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ recordkeeping burden for this collection fugitive ventilation plan and outdoor atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. (averaged over the first 3 years after the fugitive dust plan, and electronic effective date of the standards) as a records of the bag leak detection system VIII. Statutory and Executive Order result of the supplemental proposal output. Reviews revised amendments to subpart XXX We are not opening comment on A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory (Ferroalloys Production) is estimated to aspects of the 2011 proposal (76 FR Planning and Review and Executive be $643,845 per year. This includes 496 72508) that have not changed and are Order 13563: Improving Regulation and labor hours per year at a total labor cost not addressed in this supplemental Regulatory Review of $44,366 per year and total non-labor proposal. Comments received on the capital and operation and maintenance 2011 proposal along with comments Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR costs, of $599,479 per year. This received on this supplemental proposal 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a estimate includes performance tests, will be addressed in the EPA’s Response significant regulatory action because it notifications, reporting and to Comment document and final rule raises novel legal and policy issues. recordkeeping associated with the new preamble for the Ferroalloys Production Accordingly, the EPA submitted this requirements for ferroalloys production source category. action to the Office of Management and operations. The total burden for the Budget (OMB) for review under federal government (averaged over the VII. Submitting Data Corrections Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 first 3 years after the effective date of the The site-specific emissions profiles FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and any standard) is estimated to be 48 hours per used in the source category risk and changes made in response to OMB year at a total labor cost of $2,177 per demographic analyses and instructions recommendations have been year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR are available for download on the RTR documented in the docket for this 1320.3(b). Web page at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ action. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. The data files B. Paperwork Reduction Act include detailed information for each respond to, a collection of information HAP emissions release point for the The information collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB facilities in the source category. requirements in this supplemental control number. The OMB control If you believe that the data are not proposed rule have been submitted for numbers for the EPA’s regulations in 40 representative or are inaccurate, please approval to the Office of Management CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. identify the data in question, provide and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork To comment on the Agency’s need for your reason for concern and provide any Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. this information, the accuracy of the ‘‘improved’’ data that you have, if The Information Collection Request provided burden estimates and any available. When you submit data, we (ICR) document prepared by the EPA suggested methods for minimizing request that you provide documentation has been assigned EPA ICR number respondent burden, the EPA has of the basis for the revised values to 2448.01. established a public docket for this rule, support your suggested changes. To We are proposing changes to the which includes this ICR, under Docket submit comments on the data paperwork requirements to the ID number Docket ID Number EPA–HQ– downloaded from the RTR page, ferroalloys production source category OAR–2010–0895. Submit any comments complete the following steps: that were proposed in 2011. In the 2011 related to the ICR to the EPA and OMB. 1. Within this downloaded file, enter proposal, we proposed paperwork See ADDRESSES section at the beginning suggested revisions to the data fields requirements in the form of increased of this notice for where to submit appropriate for that information. frequency and number of pollutants comments to the EPA. Send comments 2. Fill in the commenter information tested for stack testing as described in to OMB at the Office of Information and fields for each suggested revision (i.e., § 63.1625(c) and tighter parameter Regulatory Affairs, Office of commenter name, commenter monitoring requirements to demonstrate Management and Budget, 725 17th organization, commenter email address, continuous compliance as described in Street NW., Washington, DC 20503,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60279

Attention: Desk Office for the EPA. subject to the requirements of sections expected to significantly reduce the Since OMB is required to make a 202 or 205 of the UMRA. number of at-risk people due to HAP decision concerning the ICR between 30 This rule is also not subject to the emissions from these sources (from up and 60 days after October 6, 2014, a requirements of section 203 of UMRA to 31,000 to about 6,600), providing comment to OMB is best assured of because it contains no regulatory significant benefit to all the having its full effect if OMB receives it requirements that might significantly or demographic groups in the at-risk by November 5, 2014. The final rule will uniquely affect small governments as it population. respond to any OMB or public contains no requirements that apply to This rule is expected to reduce comments on the information collection such governments nor does it impose environmental impacts for everyone, requirements contained in this proposal. obligations upon them. including children. This action establishes emissions limits at the levels E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism C. Regulatory Flexibility Act based on MACT, as required by the The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) This action does not have federalism CAA. Based on our analysis, we believe generally requires an agency to prepare implications. It will not have substantial that this rule does not have a a regulatory flexibility analysis of any direct effects on the states, on the disproportionate impact on children. rule subject to notice and comment relationship between the national rulemaking requirements under the government and the states, or on the H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Administrative Procedure Act, or any distribution of power and Concerning Regulations That other statute, unless the agency certifies responsibilities among the various Significantly Affect Energy Supply, that the rule will not have a significant levels of government, as specified in Distribution, or Use economic impact on a substantial Executive Order 13132. None of the This action is not a ‘‘significant number of small entities. Small entities facilities subject to this action are energy action’’ as defined under include small businesses, small owned or operated by state governments Executive Order 13211, because it is not organizations and small governmental and, because no new requirements are likely to have a significant adverse effect jurisdictions. being promulgated, nothing in this on the supply, distribution or use of For purposes of assessing the impacts action will supersede state regulations. energy. This action will not create any of this final rule on small entities, small Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not new requirements that affect the energy entity is defined as: (1) a small business apply to this action. supply, distribution or use sectors. as defined by the Small Business I. National Technology Transfer and Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Advancement Act CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental and Coordination With Indian Tribal jurisdiction that is a government of a Governments Section 12(d) of the National city, county, town, school district or This action does not have tribal Technology Transfer and Advancement special district with a population of less implications, as specified in Executive Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– than 50,000; and (3) a small Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs organization that is any not-for-profit 2000). Thus, Executive Order 13175 the EPA to use voluntary consensus enterprise that is independently owned does not apply to this action. The EPA standards (VCS) in its regulatory and operated and is not dominant in its specifically solicited comment on this activities, unless to do so would be field. For this source category, which action from tribal officials in the 2011 inconsistent with applicable law or has the NAICS code 331110 (i.e., proposal and none were received during otherwise impractical. VCS are Electrometallurgical ferroalloy product the comment period for that proposal. technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling manufacturing), the SBA small business G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of procedures and business practices) that size standard is 1,000 employees Children From Environmental Health are developed or adopted by VCS according to the SBA small business Risks and Safety Risks standards definitions. bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to After considering the economic This action is not subject to Executive provide Congress, through OMB, impacts of today’s action on small Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, explanations when the agency decides entities, I certify that this action will not 1997) because the Agency does not not to use available and applicable VCS. have a significant economic impact on believe the environmental health risks This supplemental proposal involves a substantial number of small entities. or safety risks addressed by this action technical standards. The EPA has Neither of the companies affected by present a disproportionate risk to decided to use EPA Methods 1, 2, 3A, this rule is considered to be a small children. The report, Analysis of Socio- 3B, 4, 5, 5D, 9, 10, 26A, 29, 30B, 316, entity per the definition provided in this Economic Factors for Populations Living CARB 429, SW–846 Method 3052, SW– section. Near Ferroalloys Facilities, shows that, 846 Method 7471b and EPA water prior to the implementation of the Method 1631E of 40 CFR Part 60, D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act provisions included in the proposal and Appendix A. No applicable VCS were This action does not contain a federal this supplemental proposal, on a identified for EPA Methods 30B, 5D, mandate under the provisions of Title II nationwide basis, there are 316, 1631E and CARB 429, SW–846 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act approximately 31,000 people exposed to Method 3052 and SW–846 Method of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538 for a cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 million 7471b. state, local, or tribal governments, or the and approximately 1,500 people Two VCS were identified acceptable private sector. The action would not exposed to a chronic noncancer TOSHI alternatives to the EPA test methods for result in expenditures of $100 million or greater than 1 due to emissions from the the purposes of this rule. The VCS more for state, local and tribal source category. The percentages for all standard ANSI/ASME PTC 19–10– governments, in aggregate, or the private demographic groups, including children 1981—Part 10, ‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas sector in any 1 year. This final action 18 years and younger, are similar to or Analyses’’ is an acceptable alternative to imposes no enforceable duties on any lower than their respective nationwide Method 3B. The VCS ASTM D7520–09, state, local, or tribal governments, or the percentages. Further, implementation of ‘‘Standard Test Method for Determining private sector. Thus, this action is not the provisions included in this action is the Opacity of a Plume in the Outdoor

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60280 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Ambient Atmosphere’’ is an acceptable List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 Siliceous and Organically Based alternative to Method 9 under specified Air pollution control, Environmental Matrices, Revision 0, December 1996, in conditions. The Agency identified 18 protection, Hazardous substances, EPA Publication No. SW–846, Test VCS as being potentially applicable to Incorporation by reference, Reporting Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, these methods cited in this rule. and recordkeeping requirements. Physical/Chemical Methods, Third However, the EPA determined that the Edition, IBR approved for § 63.1625(b). 18 candidate VCS would not be Dated: September 4, 2014. (22) Method 1631, Revision E: practical due to lack of equivalency, Gina McCarthy, Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge documentation, validation data and Administrator. and Trap and Cold Vapor Atomic other important technical and policy For the reasons stated in the Fluorescence Spectrometry, August considerations. The 18 VCS and other preamble, part 63 of title 40, chapter I, 2002 located at: http://water.epa.gov/ information and conclusions, including of the Code of Federal Regulations is scitech/methods/cwa/metals/mercury/ the search and review results, are in the proposed to be amended as follows: upload/2007_07_10_methods_method_ docket for this rule. mercury_1631.pdf, IBR approved for Under §§ 63.7(f) and 63.8(f) of Subpart PART 63—[AMENDED] § 63.1625(b). A of the General Provisions, a source ■ * * * * * may apply to the EPA for permission to 1. The authority citation for part 63 (s) The following material is available use alternative test methods or continues to read as follows: from the California Air Resources Board alternative monitoring requirements in Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. (CARB), 1102 Q Street, Sacramento, place of any required testing methods, ■ California 95814, (http:// performance specifications, or 2. Section 63.14 is amended by: ■ www.arb.ca.gov/testmeth/). procedures in the proposed rule. a. Adding paragraph (b)(84); ■ b. Revising paragraph (i)(1); (1) Method 429, Determination of J. Executive Order 12898: Federal ■ c. Revising paragraph (p)(6) and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Actions To Address Environmental adding paragraphs (p)(21) and (p)(22); (PAH) Emissions from Stationary Justice in Minority Populations and and Sources, Adopted September 1989, Low-Income Populations ■ d. By adding paragraph (s). Amended July 1997, IBR approved for Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, § 63.1625(b). § 63.14 Incorporations by reference. (2) [Reserved] February 16, 1994) establishes federal (b) * * * executive policy on environmental (84) ASTM D7520–09, ‘‘Standard Test Subpart XXX—[Amended] justice. Its main provision directs Method for Determining the Opacity in ■ federal agencies, to the greatest extent a Plume in an Outdoor Ambient 3. Section 63.1620 is added to read as practicable and permitted by law, to Atmosphere,’’ IBR approved for follows: make environmental justice part of their §§ 63.1625(b) and 63.1657(b). mission by identifying and addressing, § 63.1620 Am I subject to this subpart? as appropriate, disproportionately high * * * * * (a) You are subject to this subpart if and adverse human health or (i) * * * you own or operate a new or existing environmental effects of their programs, (1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, ferromanganese and/or silicomanganese policies and activities on minority Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 10, production facility that is a major source populations and low-income Instruments and Apparatus], issued or is co-located at a major source of populations in the United States. August 31, 1981 IBR approved for hazardous air pollutant emissions. The EPA has determined that the §§ 63.309(k), 63. 772(e), 63.772(h), (b) You are subject to this subpart if current health risks posed by emissions 63.865(b), 63.1282(d) and (g), you own or operate any of the following from this source category are 63.1625(b), 63.3166(a), 63.3360(e), equipment as part of a ferromanganese unacceptable. There are up to 31,000 63.3545(a), 63.3555(a), 63.4166(a), or silicomanganese production facility: people nationwide that are currently 63.4362(a), 63.4766(a), 63.4965(a), (1) Open, semi-sealed, or sealed subject to health risks which may not be 63.5160(d), 63.9307(c), 63.9323(a), submerged arc furnace, considered negligible (i.e., cancer risks 63.11148(e), 63.11155(e), 63.11162(f), (2) Casting operations, greater than 1-in-1 million or chronic 63.11163(g), 63.11410(j), 63.11551(a), (3) Metal oxygen refining (MOR) noncancer TOSHI greater than 1) due to 63.11646(a), 63.11945, table 5 to subpart process, emissions from this source category. DDDDD of this part, table 4 to subpart (4) Crushing and screening The demographic makeup of this ‘‘at- JJJJJ of this part, Table 5 of subpart operations, risk’’ population is similar to the UUUUU of this part and table 1 to (5) Outdoor fugitive dust sources. national distribution for all subpart ZZZZZ of this part. (c) A new affected source is any of the demographic groups. The proposed * * * * * sources listed in paragraph (b) of this supplemental requirements along with (p) * * * section for which construction or other proposed requirements (76 FR (6) SW–846–7471B, Mercury in Solid reconstruction commenced after [DATE 72508) will reduce the number of Or Semisolid Waste (Manual Cold- OF FINAL RULE PUBLICATION IN people in this at-risk group, from up to Vapor Technique), Revision 2, February THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. 31,000, to about 6,600 people. Based on 2007, in EPA Publication No. SW–846, (d) Table 1 of this subpart specifies this analysis, the EPA has determined Test Methods for Evaluating Solid the provisions of subpart A of this part that the proposed supplemental Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, that apply to owners and operators of requirements will not have Third Edition, IBR approved for ferromanganese and silicomanganese disproportionately high and adverse § 63.1625(b), table 6 to subpart DDDDD production facilities subject to this human health or environmental effects of this part and table 5 to subpart JJJJJJ subpart. on minority or low-income populations of this part. (e) If you are subject to the provisions because it increases the level of * * * * * of this subpart, you are also subject to environmental protection for all affected (21) SW–846–Method 3052, title V permitting requirements under 40 populations. Microwave Assisted Acid Digestion Of CFR parts 70 or 71, as applicable.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60281

(f) Emission standards in this subpart dampers, manifolds, plenums, fans and Process fugitive emissions source apply at all times. roofline ventilation systems. means a source of hazardous air ■ 4. Section 63.1621 is added to read as Casting means the period of time from pollutant emissions that is associated follows: when molten ferroalloy is removed from with a ferromanganese or the tapping station until pouring into silicomanganese production facility and § 63.1621 What are my compliance dates? casting molds or beds is completed. is not a fugitive dust source. Process (a) Existing affected sources must be This includes the following operations: fugitive sources include emissions that in compliance with the provisions pouring alloy from one ladle to another, escape capture from the electric arc specified in §§ 63.1620 through 63.1629 slag separation, slag removal and ladle furnace, tapping operations, casting no later than [DATE 2 YEARS AFTER transfer by crane, truck, or other operations, ladle treatment, MOR or EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]. conveyance. crushing and screening equipment. (b) Affected sources in existence prior Crushing and screening equipment Roofline ventilation system means an to [DATE OF FINAL RULE means the crushers, grinders, mills, exhaust system designed to evacuate PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL screens and conveying systems used to process fugitive emissions that collect in REGISTER] must be in compliance with crush, size and prepare for packing the roofline area to a control device. the provisions specified in §§ 63.1650 manganese-containing materials, Shop building means the building through 63.1661 by November 21, 2001 including raw materials, intermediate which houses one or more electric arc and until [DATE 2 YEARS AFTER products and final products. furnaces or other processes that generate EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]. As Electric arc furnace means any process fugitive emissions. of [DATE 2 YEARS AFTER EFFECTIVE furnace where electrical energy is Shutdown means the cessation of DATE OF FINAL RULE], the provisions converted to heat energy by operation of an affected source for any of §§ 63.1650 through 63.1661 cease to transmission of current between purpose. apply to affected sources in existence electrodes partially submerged in the Startup means the setting in operation prior to [DATE OF FINAL RULE furnace charge. of an affected source for any purpose. PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL Furnace process cycle means the Tapping emissions means the gases REGISTER]. The provisions of period in which the furnace is tapped to and emissions associated with removal §§ 63.1650 through 63.1661 remain the time in which the furnace is tapped of product from the electric arc furnace enforceable at a source for its activities again and includes periods of charging, under normal operating conditions, prior to [DATE 2 YEARS AFTER smelting, tapping, casting and ladle such as removal of metal under normal EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]. raking. For multiple furnaces operating pressure and movement by gravity (c) If you own or operate a new within a single shop building, furnace down the spout into the ladle and filling affected source that commences process cycle means a period sufficient the ladle. construction or reconstruction after to capture a full cycle of charging, Tapping period means the time from [DATE OF FINAL RULE PUBLICATION smelting, tapping, casting and ladle when a tap hole is opened until the time IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], you must raking for each furnace within the shop a tap hole is closed. comply with the requirements of this building. ■ 6. Section 63.1623 is added to read as subpart by [DATE OF EFFECTIVE DATE Ladle treatment means a post-tapping follows: OF FINAL RULE], or upon startup of process including metal and alloy operations, whichever is later. additions where chemistry adjustments § 63.1623 What are the emissions ■ 5. Section 63.1622 is added to read as are made in the ladle after furnace standards for new, reconstructed and existing facilities? follows: smelting to achieve a specified product. Local ventilation means hoods and (a) Electric arc furnaces. You must § 63.1622 What definitions apply to this ductwork designed to capture process install, operate and maintain an subpart? fugitive emissions close to the area effective capture system that collects the Terms in this subpart are defined in where the emissions are generated (e.g., emissions from each electric arc furnace the Clean Air Act (Act), in subpart A of tap hoods). operation (including charging, melting this part, or in this section as follows: Metal oxygen refining (MOR) process and tapping operations and emissions Bag leak detection system means a means the reduction of the carbon from any vent stacks) and conveys the system that is capable of continuously content of ferromanganese through the collected emissions to a control device monitoring particulate matter (dust) use of oxygen. for the removal of the pollutants loadings in the exhaust of a baghouse in Outdoor fugitive dust source means a specified in the emissions standards order to detect bag leaks and other upset stationary source from which hazardous specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through conditions. A bag leak detection system air pollutant-bearing particles are (a)(5) of this section. includes, but is not limited to, an discharged to the atmosphere due to (1) Particulate matter emissions. (i) instrument that operates on wind or mechanical inducement such as You must not discharge exhaust gases triboelectric, light scattering, light vehicle traffic. Fugitive dust sources from each electric arc furnace operation transmittance, or other effect to include plant roadways, yard areas and containing particulate matter in excess continuously monitor relative outdoor material storage and transfer of 4.0 milligrams per dry standard cubic particulate matter loadings. operations. meter (mg/dscm) into the atmosphere Capture system means the collection Plant roadway means any area at a from any new or reconstructed electric of components used to capture the gases ferromanganese and silicomanganese arc furnace. and fumes released from one or more production facility that is subject to (ii) You must not discharge exhaust emissions points and then convey the plant mobile equipment, such as gases from each electric arc furnace captured gas stream to a control device forklifts, front end loaders, or trucks, operation containing particulate matter or to the atmosphere. A capture system carrying manganese-bearing materials. in excess of 25 mg/dscm into the may include, but is not limited to, the Excluded from this definition are atmosphere from any existing electric following components as applicable to a employee and visitor parking areas, arc furnace. given capture system design: duct intake provided they are not subject to traffic (2) Mercury emissions. (i) You must devices, hoods, enclosures, ductwork, by plant mobile equipment. not discharge exhaust gases from each

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60282 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

electric arc furnace operation containing emissions in excess of 1,100 mg/dscm particulate matter in excess of 13 mg/ mercury emissions in excess of 17 mg/ into the atmosphere from any existing dscm. dscm into the atmosphere from any new electric arc furnace. (f) At all times, you must operate and or reconstructed electric arc furnace (5) Formaldehyde emissions. You maintain any affected source, including when producing ferromanganese. must not discharge exhaust gases from associated air pollution control (ii) You must not discharge exhaust each electric arc furnace operation equipment and monitoring equipment, gases from each electric arc furnace containing formaldehyde emissions in in a manner consistent with safety and operation containing mercury emissions excess of 201 mg/dscm into the good air pollution control practices for in excess of 170 mg/dscm into the atmosphere from any new, minimizing emissions. Determination of atmosphere from any existing electric reconstructed or existing electric arc whether such operation and arc furnace when producing furnace. maintenance procedures are being used ferromanganese. (b) Process fugitive emissions. (1) You will be based on information available (iii) You must not discharge exhaust must install, operate and maintain a to the Administrator that may include, gases from each electric arc furnace capture system that is designed to but is not limited to, monitoring results, operation containing mercury emissions collect 95 percent or more of the review of operation and maintenance in excess of 4.0 mg/dscm into the emissions from the process fugitive procedures, review of operation and atmosphere from any new or emissions sources and convey the maintenance records and inspection of reconstructed electric arc furnace when collected emissions to a control device the source. producing silicomanganese. that is demonstrated to meet the ■ 7. Section 63.1624 is added to read as (iv) You must not discharge exhaust applicable emission limit specified in follows: gases from each electric arc furnace paragraph (a)(1) of this section. § 63.1624 What are the operational and operation containing mercury emissions (2) The determination of 95-percent in excess of 12 mg/dscm into the work practice standards for new, overall capture must be demonstrated as reconstructed and existing facilities? atmosphere from any existing electric required by § 63.1624(a). arc furnace when producing (a) Process fugitive emissions sources. (3) You must not cause the emissions (1) You must prepare and at all times silicomanganese. exiting from a shop building, to exceed (3) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon operate according to, a process fugitive an average of 8 percent opacity. emissions. (i) You must not discharge emissions ventilation plan that (i) The opacity readings from the shop exhaust gases from each electric arc documents the design and operations to building must be taken every 15 seconds furnace operation containing polycyclic achieve at least 95 percent overall during the observed furnace process aromatic hydrocarbon emissions in capture of process fugitive emissions. cycle and the 15 second readings excess of 1,400 mg/dscm into the The plan will be deemed to achieve this averaged to determine if the 8 percent atmosphere from any existing electric level of capture if it consists of the opacity requirement has been met. arc furnace when producing following elements: (ii) If the average opacity reading from ferromanganese. (i) Documentation of engineered (ii) You must not discharge exhaust the shop building is greater than 8 hoods and secondary fugitive capture gases from each electric arc furnace percent opacity during an observed systems designed according to the most operation containing polycyclic furnace process cycle, an additional two recent, at the time of construction, aromatic hydrocarbon emissions in more furnace process cycles must be ventilation design principles excess of 880 mg/dscm into the observed within 7 days and the average recommended by the American atmosphere from any new or opacity during the entire observation Conference of Governmental Industrial reconstructed electric arc furnace when periods must be less than 8 percent Hygienists (ACGIH). The process producing ferromanganese. opacity. fugitive emissions capture systems must (iii) You must not discharge exhaust (iii) At no time during operation may be designed to achieve sufficient air gases from each electric arc furnace the average of any two consecutive 6- changes to evacuate the collection area operation containing polycyclic minute blocks be greater than 20 percent frequently enough to ensure process aromatic hydrocarbon emissions in opacity. fugitive emissions are effectively excess of 120 mg/dscm into the (c) Local ventilation emissions. If you collected by the ventilation system and atmosphere from any existing electric operate local ventilation to capture ducted to the control device(s). Include arc furnace when producing tapping, casting, or ladle treatment a schematic for each building indicating silicomanganese. emissions and direct them to a control duct sizes and locations, hood sizes and (iv) You must not discharge exhaust device other than one associated with locations, control device types, size and gases from each electric arc furnace the electric arc furnace, you must not locations and exhaust locations. The operation containing polycyclic discharge into the atmosphere any design plan must address variables that aromatic hydrocarbon emissions in captured emissions containing affect capture efficiency such as excess of 72 mg/dscm into the particulate matter in excess of 4.0 mg/ operations that create cross-drafts and atmosphere from any new or dscm. describe protocol or design reconstructed electric arc furnace when (d) MOR process. You must not characteristics to minimize such events. producing silicomanganese. discharge into the atmosphere from any The design plan must identify the key (4) Hydrochloric acid emissions. (i) new, reconstructed or existing MOR operating parameters and measurement You must not discharge exhaust gases process exhaust gases containing locations to ensure proper operation of from each electric arc furnace operation particulate matter in excess of 3.9 mg/ the system and establish monitoring containing hydrochloric acid emissions dscm. parameter values that reflect effective in excess of 180 mg/dscm into the (e) Crushing and screening capture. atmosphere from any new or equipment. You must not discharge into (ii) List of critical maintenance reconstructed electric arc furnace. the atmosphere from any new, actions and the schedule to conduct (ii) You must not discharge exhaust reconstructed, or existing piece of them. gases from each electric arc furnace equipment associated with crushing and (2) You must submit a copy of the operation containing hydrochloric acid screening exhaust gases containing process fugitive emissions ventilation

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60283

plan to the designated permitting at least 20 minutes of a tapping period, runs is less than 10 mg, you must authority on or before the applicable whichever is less, is included in at least conduct at least one additional test run compliance date for the affected source two of the three runs. The sampling that produces at least 10 mg of filterable as specified in § 63.1621 in electronic time for each run must be at least as mass collected (i.e., at a greater sample format and whenever an update is made long as three times the average tapping volume). Report the results of all test to the plan. The requirement for you to period of the tested furnace, but no less runs. operate the facility according to the than 60 minutes. (6) Method 30B of Appendix A–8 of written process fugitives ventilation (5) You must conduct the 40 CFR part 60 to measure mercury. plan and specifications must be performance tests specified in paragraph Apply the minimum sample volume incorporated in the operating permit for (c) of this section under such conditions determination procedures as per the the facility that is issued by the as the Administrator specifies based on method. designated permitting authority under representative performance of the (7)(i) Method 26A of Appendix A–8 of part 70 of this chapter. affected source for the period being 40 CFR part 60 to determine outlet stack (3) You must update the information tested. Upon request, you must make or inlet hydrochloric acid concentration. required in paragraph (a)(1) and (a)(2) of available to the Administrator such (ii) Collect a minimum volume of 2 this section every 5 years or whenever records as may be necessary to cubic meters. there is a significant change in variables determine the conditions of (8)(i) Method 316 of Appendix A of 40 that affect process fugitives ventilation performance tests. CFR part 63 to determine outlet stack or design such as the addition of a new (b) Test methods. The following test inlet formaldehyde. process. methods in appendices of part 60 or 63 (ii) Collect a minimum volume of 1.0 (b) Outdoor fugitive dust sources. (1) of this chapter or as specified elsewhere cubic meter. You must prepare and at all times must be used to determine compliance (9) Method 9 of Appendix A–4 of 40 operate according to, an outdoor fugitive with the emission standards. CFR part 60 to determine opacity. dust control plan that describes in detail (1) Method 1 of Appendix A–1 of 40 ASTM D7520–09, ‘‘Standard Test the measures that will be put in place CFR part 60 to select the sampling port Method for Determining the Opacity of to control outdoor fugitive dust location and the number of traverse a Plume in the Outdoor Ambient emissions from the individual fugitive points. Atmosphere’’ may be used (incorporated dust sources at the facility. (2) Method 2 of Appendix A–1 of 40 by reference, see 40 CFR 63.14) with the (2) You must submit a copy of the CFR part 60 to determine the volumetric following conditions: outdoor fugitive dust control plan to the flow rate of the stack gas. (i) During the digital camera opacity designated permitting authority on or (3)(i) Method 3A or 3B of Appendix technique (DCOT) certification before the applicable compliance date A–2 of 40 CFR part 60 (with integrated procedure outlined in Section 9.2 of for the affected source as specified in bag sampling) to determine the outlet ASTM D7520–09, you or the DCOT § 63.1621. The requirement for you to stack and inlet oxygen and CO2 content. vendor must present the plumes in front operate the facility according to a (ii) You must measure CO2 of various backgrounds of color and written outdoor fugitive dust control concentrations at both the inlet and contrast representing conditions plan must be incorporated in the outlet of the positive pressure fabric anticipated during field use such as blue operating permit for the facility that is filter in conjunction with the pollutant sky, trees and mixed backgrounds issued by the designated permitting sampling in order to determine (clouds and/or a sparse tree stand). authority under part 70 of this chapter. isokinetic sampling rates. (ii) You must also have standard (3) You are permitted to use existing (iii) As an alternative to EPA operating procedures in place including manuals that describe the measures in Reference Method 3B, ASME PTC–19– daily or other frequency quality checks place to control outdoor fugitive dust 10–1981–Part 10, ‘‘Flue and Exhaust to ensure the equipment is within sources required as part of a state Gas Analyses’’ may be used manufacturing specifications as implementation plan or other federally (incorporated by reference, see 40 CFR outlined in Section 8.1 of ASTM enforceable requirement for particulate 63.14). D7520–09. (iii) You must follow the matter to satisfy the requirements of (4) Method 4 of Appendix A–3 of 40 recordkeeping procedures outlined in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. CFR part 60 to determine the moisture ■ 8. Section 63.1625 is added to read as content of the stack gas. § 63.10(b)(1) for the DCOT certification, follows: (5)(i) Method 5 of Appendix A–3 of 40 compliance report, data sheets and all CFR part 60 to determine the particulate raw unaltered JPEGs used for opacity § 63.1625 What are the performance test matter concentration of the stack gas for and certification determination. and compliance requirements for new, negative pressure baghouses and (iv) You or the DCOT vendor must reconstructed and existing facilities? positive pressure baghouses with stacks. have a minimum of four (4) (a) Performance testing. (1) All (ii) Method 5D of Appendix A–3 of 40 independent technology users apply the performance tests must be conducted CFR part 60 to determine particulate software to determine the visible according to the requirements in § 63.7 matter concentration and volumetric opacity of the 300 certification plumes. of subpart A. flow rate of the stack gas for positive For each set of 25 plumes, the user may (2) Each performance test in pressure baghouses without stacks. not exceed 20 percent opacity of any paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) must consist (iii) The sample volume for each run one reading and the average error must of three separate and complete runs must be a minimum of 4.0 cubic meters not exceed 7.5 percent opacity. using the applicable test methods. (141.2 cubic feet). For Method 5 testing (v) Use of this approved alternative (3) Each run must be conducted under only, you may choose to collect less does not provide or imply a certification conditions that are representative of than 4.0 cubic meters per run provided or validation of any vendor’s hardware normal process operations. that the filterable mass collected (e.g., or software. The onus to maintain and (4) Performance tests conducted on air net filter mass plus mass of nozzle, verify the certification and/or training of pollution control devices serving probe and filter holder rinses) is equal the DCOT camera, software and operator electric arc furnaces must be conducted to or greater than 10 mg. If the total in accordance with ASTM D7520–09 such that at least one tapping period, or mass collected for two of three of the and these requirements is on the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60284 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

facility, DCOT operator and DCOT otherwise specified, compliance with standards according to § 63.6(h)(5), vendor. each established operating limit shall be which addresses the conduct of opacity (10) Methods to determine the demonstrated for each 24-hour or visible emission observations. mercury content of manganese ore operating day. (ii) You must conduct the opacity including a total metals digestion (i) For a wet particulate matter observations according to EPA Method technique, SW–846 Method 3052 and a scrubber, you must establish the 9 of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A–4, for mercury specific analysis method, SW– minimum liquid flow rate and pressure a period that includes at least one 846 Method 7471b (Cold Vapor AA) or drop as your operating limits during the complete furnace process cycle for each Water Method 1631E (Cold Vapor three-run performance test. If you use a furnace. Atomic Fluorescence). wet particulate matter scrubber and you (iii) You must conduct the opacity (11) California Air Resources Board conduct separate performance tests for observations at least once per week for (CARB) Method 429, Determination of particulate matter, you must establish each operating furnace. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon one set of minimum liquid flow rate and (2) You must determine shop building (PAH) Emissions from Stationary pressure drop operating limits. If you opacity operating parameters based on Sources to determine total PAH conduct multiple performance tests, you either monitoring data collected during emissions. The method is available from must set the minimum liquid flow rate the compliance demonstration or California Resources Board, 1102 Q and pressure drop operating limits at established in an engineering Street, Sacramento, California 95814, the highest minimum hourly average assessment. (http://www.arb.ca.gov/testmeth/vol3/ values established during the (i) If you choose to establish M_429.pdf). performance tests. parameters based on the initial (12) The owner or operator may use (ii) For a wet acid gas scrubber, you compliance demonstration, you must alternative measurement methods must establish the minimum liquid flow simultaneously monitor parameter approved by the Administrator rate and pH, as your operating limits values for one of the following: the following the procedures described in during the three-run performance test. If capture system fan motor amperes and § 63.7(f) of subpart A. you use a wet acid gas scrubber and you all capture system damper positions, the (c) Compliance demonstration with conduct separate performance tests for total volumetric flow rate to the air the emission standards. hydrochloric acid, you must establish pollution control device and all capture (1) Initial Performance Test. You must one set of minimum liquid flow rate and system damper positions, or volumetric conduct an initial performance test for pH operating limits. If you conduct flow rate through each separately air pollution control devices or vent multiple performance tests, you must ducted hood that comprises the capture stacks subject to § 63.1623(a), (b)(1) and set the minimum liquid flow rate and system. Subsequently you must monitor (c) through (e) to demonstrate pH operating limits at the highest these parameters according to compliance with the applicable minimum hourly average values § 63.1626(h) and ensure they remain emission standards. established during the performance within 10 percent of the value recorded (2) Periodic Performance Test. (i) You tests. during the compliant opacity readings. must conduct annual particulate matter (iii) For emission sources with fabric (ii) If you choose to establish tests for wet scrubber air pollution filters that choose to demonstrate parameters based on an engineering control devices subject to § 63.1623(a)(1) continuous compliance through bag leak assessment, then a design analysis shall to demonstrate compliance with the detection systems you must install a bag include, for example, specifications, applicable emission standards. leak detection system according to the drawings, schematics and ventilation (ii) You must conduct particulate requirements in § 63.1626(d) and you system diagrams prepared by the owner matter tests every five years for fabric must set your operating limit such that or operator or capture or control system filter air pollution control devices the sum duration of bag leak detection manufacturer or vendor that describes subject to § 63.1623(a)(1) to demonstrate system alarms does not exceed 5 percent the shop building opacity system compliance with the applicable of the process operating time during a ventilation design based on acceptable emission standards. 6-month period. engineering texts. The design analysis (iii) You must conduct annual (iv) If you choose to demonstrate shall address vent stream characteristics mercury performance tests for wet continuous compliance through a and ventilation system design operating scrubber and fabric filter air pollution particulate matter CEMS, you must parameters such as fan amps, damper control devices or vent stacks subject to determine an operating limit position, flow rate and/or other § 63.1623 (a)(2) to demonstrate (particulate matter concentration in mg/ specified parameters. compliance with the applicable dscm) during performance testing for (iii) You may petition the emission standards. initial particulate matter compliance. Administrator to reestablish these (iv) You must conduct ongoing The operating limit will be the average parameter ranges whenever you can performance tests every five years for air of the PM filterable results of the three demonstrate to the Administrator’s pollution control devices or vent stacks Method 5 or Method 5D of Appendix A– satisfaction that the electric arc furnace subject to § 63.1623(a)(3) through (a)(5), 3 of 40 CFR part 60 performance test operating conditions upon which the (b)(1) and (c) through (e) to demonstrate runs. To determine continuous parameter ranges were previously compliance with the applicable compliance, the hourly average PM established are no longer applicable. emission standards. concentrations will be averaged on a The values of these parameter ranges (3) Compliance is demonstrated for all rolling 30 operating day basis. Each 30 determined during the most recent sources performing emissions tests if the operating day average would have to demonstration of compliance must be average concentration for the three runs meet the PM operating limit. maintained at the appropriate level for comprising the performance test does (d) Compliance demonstration with each applicable period. not exceed the standard. shop building opacity standards. (1)(i) If (3) You will demonstrate continuing (4) Operating Limits. You must you are subject to § 63.1623(b), you compliance with the opacity standards establish parameter operating limits must conduct opacity observations of by following the monitoring according to paragraphs (c)(4)(i) through the shop building to demonstrate requirements specified in § 63.1626(g) (c)(4)(iv) of this section. Unless compliance with the applicable opacity and the reporting and recordkeeping

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60285

requirements specified in (ii) Daily check of compressed air consistent with the guidance provided § 63.1628(b)(5). supply for pulse-jet baghouses. in ‘‘Office of Air Quality Planning and (e) Compliance demonstration with (iii) An appropriate methodology for Standards (OAQPS) Fabric Filter Bag the operational and work practice monitoring cleaning cycles to ensure Leak Detection Guidance’’ EPA–454/R– standards—(1) Process fugitive proper operation. 98–015, September 1997 (incorporated emissions sources. You will (iv) Monthly check of bag cleaning by reference) and the manufacturer’s demonstrate compliance by developing mechanisms for proper functioning written specifications and and maintaining a process fugitives through visual inspection or equivalent recommendations for installation, ventilation plan, by reporting any means. operation and adjustment of the system. deviations from the plan and by taking (v) Quarterly visual check of bag (v) The initial adjustment of the necessary corrective actions to correct tension on reverse air and shaker-type system must, at a minimum, consist of deviations or deficiencies. baghouses to ensure that the bags are establishing the baseline output by (2) Outdoor fugitive dust sources. You not kinked (kneed or bent) or lying on adjusting the sensitivity (range) and the will demonstrate compliance by their sides. Such checks are not required averaging period of the device and developing and maintaining an outdoor for shaker-type baghouses using self- establishing the alarm set points and the fugitive dust control plan, by reporting tensioning (spring loaded) devices. alarm delay time. any deviations from the plan and by (vi) Quarterly confirmation of the (vi) Following initial adjustment, you taking necessary corrective actions to physical integrity of the baghouse must not adjust the sensitivity or range, correct deviations or deficiencies. structure through visual inspection of averaging period, alarm set points, or (3) Baghouses equipped with bag leak the baghouse interior for air leaks. alarm delay time, except as detailed in detection systems. You will demonstrate (vii) Semiannual inspection of fans for the approved standard operating compliance with the bag leak detection wear, material buildup and corrosion procedures manual required under system requirements by developing through visual inspection, vibration paragraph (a) of this section. You cannot analysis and supporting documentation detectors, or equivalent means. increase the sensitivity by more than demonstrating conformance with EPA (d) Bag leak detection system. (1) For 100 percent or decrease the sensitivity guidance and specifications for bag leak each baghouse used to control emissions by more than 50 percent over a 365-day detection systems in § 60.57c(h). from an electric arc furnace, you must period unless such adjustment follows a ■ 9. Section 63.1626 is added to read as install, operate and maintain a bag leak complete baghouse inspection that follows: detection system according to demonstrates that the baghouse is in paragraphs (d)(2) through (d)(4) of this good operating condition. § 63.1626 What monitoring requirements section, unless a system meeting the (vii) You must install the bag leak must I meet? requirements of paragraph (q) of this detector downstream of the baghouse. (a) Baghouse Monitoring. You must section, for a CEMS and continuous (viii) Where multiple detectors are prepare and at all times operate emissions rate monitoring system, is required, the system’s instrumentation according to, a standard operating installed for monitoring the and alarm may be shared among procedures manual that describes in concentration of particulate matter. You detectors. detail procedures for inspection, may choose to install, operate and (4) You must include in the standard maintenance and bag leak detection and maintain a bag leak detection system for operating procedures manual required corrective action plans for all baghouses any other baghouse in operation at the by paragraph (a) of this section a (fabric filters or cartridge filters) that are facility according to paragraphs (d)(2) corrective action plan that specifies the used to control process vents, process through (d)(4) of this section. procedures to be followed in the case of fugitive, or outdoor fugitive dust (2) The procedures you specified in a bag leak detection system alarm. The emissions from any source subject to the the standard operating procedures corrective action plan must include, at emissions standards in § 63.1623. manual for baghouse maintenance must a minimum, the procedures that you (b) You must submit the standard include, at a minimum, a preventative will use to determine and record the operating procedures manual for maintenance schedule that is consistent time and cause of the alarm as well as baghouses required by paragraph (a) of with the baghouse manufacturer’s the corrective actions taken to minimize this section to the Administrator or instructions for routine and long-term emissions as specified in paragraphs delegated authority for review and maintenance. (d)(4)(i) and (d)(4)(ii) of this section. approval. (3) Each bag leak detection system (i) The procedures used to determine (c) Unless the baghouse is equipped must meet the specifications and the cause of the alarm must be initiated with a bag leak detection system, the requirements in paragraphs (d)(3)(i) within 30 minutes of the alarm. procedures that you specify in the through (d)(3)(viii) of this section. (ii) The cause of the alarm must be standard operating procedures manual (i) The bag leak detection system must alleviated by taking the necessary for inspections and routine maintenance be certified by the manufacturer to be corrective action(s) that may include, must, at a minimum, include the capable of detecting PM emissions at but not be limited to, those listed in requirements of paragraphs (c)(1) and concentrations of 1.0 milligram per dry paragraphs (d)(4)(i)(A) through (c)(2) of this section. standard cubic meter (0.00044 grains (d)(4)(i)(F) of this section. (1) You must observe the baghouse per actual cubic foot) or less. (A) Inspecting the baghouse for air outlet on a daily basis for the presence (ii) The bag leak detection system leaks, torn or broken filter elements, or of any visible emissions. sensor must provide output of relative any other malfunction that may cause (2) In addition to the daily visible PM loadings. an increase in emissions. emissions observation, you must (iii) The bag leak detection system (B) Sealing off defective bags or filter conduct the following activities: must be equipped with an alarm system media. (i) Weekly confirmation that dust is that will alarm when an increase in (C) Replacing defective bags or filter being removed from hoppers through relative particulate loadings is detected media, or otherwise repairing the visual inspection, or equivalent means over a preset level. control device. of ensuring the proper functioning of (iv) You must install and operate the (D) Sealing off a defective baghouse removal mechanisms. bag leak detection system in a manner compartment.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60286 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

(E) Cleaning the bag leak detection reproducible flow rate monitoring will section in your site-specific monitoring system probe, or otherwise repairing the result. plan. bag leak detection system. (ii) Have an accuracy ±10 percent over (1) The performance criteria and (F) Shutting down the process its normal operating range and be design specifications for the monitoring producing the particulate emissions. calibrated according to the system equipment, including the sample (e) If you use a wet particulate matter manufacturer’s instructions. interface, detector signal analyzer and scrubber, you must collect the pressure (4) The Administrator may require data acquisition and calculations; drop and liquid flow rate monitoring you to demonstrate the accuracy of the (2) Sampling interface location such system data according to § 63.1628, monitoring device(s) relative to Methods that the monitoring system will provide reduce the data to 24-hour block 1 and 2 of Appendix A–1 of part 60 of representative measurements; averages and maintain the 24-hour this chapter. (3) Equipment performance checks, average pressure drop and liquid flow- (5) Failure to maintain the appropriate system accuracy audits, or other audit rate at or above the operating limits capture system parameters (e.g., fan procedures; established during the performance test motor amperes, flow rate and/or damper (4) Ongoing operation and according to § 63.1625(c)(4)(i). positions) establishes the need to maintenance procedures in accordance (f) If you use curtains or partitions to initiate corrective action as soon as with the general requirements of prevent process fugitive emissions from practicable after the monitoring § 63.8(c)(1) and (c)(3); (5) Conditions that define a escaping the area around the process excursion in order to minimize excess emissions. continuous monitoring system that is fugitive emission source or other parts (h) Furnace Capture System. You out of control consistent with of the building, you must perform must perform quarterly (once every § 63.8(c)(7)(i) and for responding to out quarterly inspections of the physical three months) inspections of the furnace of control periods consistent with condition of these curtains or partitions fugitive capture system equipment to § 63.8(c)(7)(ii) and (c)(8) or Appendix A to determine if there are any tears or ensure that the hood locations have not to this subpart, as applicable; and openings. been changed or obstructed because of (6) Ongoing recordkeeping and (g) Shop building opacity. In order to contact with cranes or ladles, quarterly reporting procedures in accordance with demonstrate continuous compliance inspections of the physical condition of provisions in § 63.10(c), (e)(1) and with the opacity standards in § 63.1623, hoods and ductwork to the control (e)(2)(i) and Appendix A to this subpart, you must comply with the requirements device to determine if there are any as applicable. § 63.1625(d)(1) and one of the openings or leaks in the ductwork, (j) If you have an operating limit that monitoring options in paragraphs (g)(1) quarterly inspections of the hoods and requires the use of a CPMS, you must or (g)(2) of this section. The selected ductwork to determine if there are any install, operate and maintain each option must be consistent with that flow constrictions in ductwork due to continuous parameter monitoring selected during the initial performance dents or accumulated dust and quarterly system according to the procedures in test described in § 63.1625(d)(2). examinations of the operational status of paragraphs (j)(1) through (j)(7) of this Alternatively, you may use the flow rate controllers (pressure sensors, section. provisions of § 63.8(f) to request dampers, damper switches, etc.) to (1) The continuous parameter approval to use an alternative ensure they are operating correctly. Any monitoring system must complete a monitoring method. deficiencies must be recorded and minimum of one cycle of operation for (1) If you choose to establish proper maintenance and repairs each successive 15-minute period. You operating parameters during the performed. must have a minimum of four compliance test as specified in (i) Requirements for sources using successive cycles of operation to have a § 63.1625(d)(2)(i), you must meet one of CMS. If you demonstrate compliance valid hour of data. the following requirements. with any applicable emissions limit (2) Except for periods of monitoring (i) Check and record the control through use of a continuous monitoring system malfunctions, repairs associated system fan motor amperes and capture system (CMS), where a CMS includes a with monitoring system malfunctions system damper positions once per shift. continuous parameter monitoring and required monitoring system quality (ii) Install, calibrate and maintain a system (CPMS) as well as a continuous assurance or quality control activities monitoring device that continuously emissions monitoring system (CEMS), (including, as applicable, system records the volumetric flow rate through you must develop a site-specific accuracy audits and required zero and each separately ducted hood. monitoring plan and submit this site- span adjustments), you must operate the (iii) Install, calibrate and maintain a specific monitoring plan, if requested, at CMS at all times the affected source is monitoring device that continuously least 60 days before your initial operating. A monitoring system records the volumetric flow rate at the performance evaluation (where malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, inlet of the air pollution control device applicable) of your CMS. Your site- not reasonably preventable failure of the and check and record the capture specific monitoring plan must address monitoring system to provide valid data. system damper positions once per shift. the monitoring system design, data Monitoring system failures that are (2) If you choose to establish collection and the quality assurance and caused in part by poor maintenance or operating parameters during the quality control elements outlined in this careless operation are not malfunctions. compliance test as specified in section and in § 63.8(d). You must You are required to complete § 63.1625(d)(2)(ii), you must monitor the install, operate and maintain each CMS monitoring system repairs in response selected parameter(s) on a frequency according to the procedures in your to monitoring system malfunctions and specified in the assessment and approved site-specific monitoring plan. to return the monitoring system to according to a method specified in the Using the process described in operation as expeditiously as engineering assessment § 63.8(f)(4), you may request approval of practicable. (3) All flow rate monitoring devices monitoring system quality assurance (3) You may not use data recorded must meet the following requirements: and quality control procedures during monitoring system malfunctions, (i) Be installed in an appropriate alternative to those specified in repairs associated with monitoring location in the exhaust duct such that paragraphs (j)(1) through (j)(6) of this system malfunctions, or required

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60287

monitoring system quality assurance or (2) Check the pH meter’s calibration commenced construction or control activities in calculations used to on at least two points every eight hours reconstruction after [DATE OF report emissions or operating levels. of process operation. EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE], You must use all the data collected (o) Particulate Matter CEMS. If you you must submit this notification no during all other required data collection are using a CEMS to measure particulate later than 180 days before startup of the periods in assessing the operation of the matter emissions to meet requirements constructed or reconstructed control device and associated control of this subpart, you must install, certify, ferromanganese or silicomanganese system. operate and maintain the particulate production facility. For an affected (4) Except for periods of monitoring matter CEMS as specified in paragraphs source that has received a construction system malfunctions, repairs associated (q)(1) through (q)(4) of this section. permit from the Administrator or with monitoring system malfunctions (1) You must conduct a performance delegated authority on or before [DATE and required quality monitoring system evaluation of the PM CEMS according to OF EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL quality assurance or quality control the applicable requirements of § 60.13 RULE], you must submit this activities (including, as applicable, and Performance Specification 11 at 40 notification no later than [DATE 1 system accuracy audits and required CFR part 60, Appendix B of this YEAR AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF zero and span adjustments), failure to chapter. FINAL RULE]. collect required data is a deviation of (2) During each PM correlation testing (2) The plans and procedures the monitoring requirements. run of the CEMS required by documents submitted as required under (5) You must conduct other CPMS Performance Specification 11 at 40 CFR paragraph (b)(1) of this section must be equipment performance checks, system part 60, Appendix B of this chapter, PM submitted to the Administrator in accuracy audits, or other audit and oxygen (or carbon dioxide) collect electronic format for review and procedures specified in your site- data concurrently (or within a 30-to 60- approval of the initial submittal and specific monitoring plan at least once minute period) by both the CEMS and whenever an update is made to the every 12 months. by conducting performance tests using procedure. Method 5 or 5D at 40 CFR part 60, ■ (6) You must conduct a performance 11. Section 63.1628 is added to read Appendix A–3 or Method 17 at 40 CFR evaluation of each CPMS in accordance as follows: part 60, Appendix A–6 of this chapter. with your site-specific monitoring plan. (3) Perform quarterly accuracy § 63.1628 What recordkeeping and (7) You must record the results of determinations and daily calibration reporting requirements must I meet? each inspection, calibration and drift tests in accordance with Procedure (a) You must comply with all of the validation check. 2 at 40 CFR part 60, Appendix F of this recordkeeping and reporting (k) CPMS for measuring gaseous flow. chapter. Relative Response Audits must requirements specified in § 63.10 of the (1) Use a flow sensor with a be performed annually and Response General Provisions that are referenced measurement sensitivity of 5 percent of Correlation Audits must be performed in Table 1 to this subpart. the flow rate or 10 cubic feet per every three years. (1) Records must be maintained in a minute, whichever is greater, (4) Within 60 days after the date of form suitable and readily available for (2) Check all mechanical connections completing each CEMS relative expeditious review, according to for leakage at least every month and accuracy test audit or performance test § 63.10(b)(1). However, electronic (3) Perform a visual inspection at least conducted to demonstrate compliance recordkeeping and reporting is every 3 months of all components of the with this subpart, you must submit the encouraged and required for some flow CPMS for physical and operational relative accuracy test audit data and the records and reports. integrity and all electrical connections results of the performance test in the as (2) Records must be kept on site for for oxidation and galvanic corrosion if specified in § 63.1628(e). at least two years after the date of your flow CPMS is not equipped with ■ 10. Section 63.1627 is added to read occurrence, measurement, maintenance, a redundant flow sensor. as follows: corrective action, report, or record, (l) CPMS for measuring liquid flow. according to § 63.10(b)(1). § 63.1627 What notification requirements (b) You must maintain, for a period of (1) Use a flow sensor with a must I meet? measurement sensitivity of 2 percent of five years, records of the information (a) You must comply with all of the the flow rate and listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through notification requirements of § 63.9 of (2) Reduce swirling flow or abnormal (b)(13) of this section. subpart A, General Provisions. (1) Electronic records of the bag leak velocity distributions due to upstream Electronic notifications are encouraged detection system output. and downstream disturbances. when possible. (2) An identification of the date and (m) CPMS for measuring pressure. (1) (b)(1) You must submit the process time of all bag leak detection system Minimize or eliminate pulsating fugitives ventilation plan required alarms, the time that procedures to pressure, vibration and internal and under § 63.1624(a), the outdoor fugitive determine the cause of the alarm were external corrosion and dust control plan required under initiated, the cause of the alarm, an (2) Use a gauge with a minimum § 63.1624(b), the site-specific explanation of the corrective actions tolerance of 1.27 centimeters of water or monitoring plan for CMS required under taken and the date and time the cause a transducer with a minimum tolerance § 63.1626(i) and the standard operating of the alarm was corrected. of 1 percent of the pressure range. procedures manual for baghouses (3) All records of inspections and (3) Perform checks at least once each required under § 63.1626(a) to the maintenance activities required under process operating day to ensure pressure Administrator or delegated authority § 63.1626(a) as part of the practices measurements are not obstructed (e.g., along with a notification that you are described in the standard operating check for pressure tap pluggage daily). seeking review and approval of these procedures manual for baghouses (n) CPMS for measuring pH. (1) plans and procedures. You must submit required under § 63.1626(c). Ensure the sample is properly mixed this notification no later than [DATE 1 (4) Electronic records of the pressure and representative of the fluid to be YEAR AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF drop and water flow rate values for wet measured. FINAL RULE]. For sources that scrubbers used to control particulate

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60288 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

matter emissions as required in required under § 63.1624(a), the (A) For data collected using test § 63.1626(e), identification of periods fugitives dust control plan required methods supported by the EPA’s when the 1-hour average pressure drop under § 63.1624(b), the site-specific Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as and water flow rate values below the monitoring plan for CMS required under listed on the EPA’s ERT Web site established minimum established and § 63.1626(i) and the standard operating (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ an explanation of the corrective actions procedures manual for baghouses index.html), you must submit the results taken. required under § 63.1626(a). of the performance test to the (5) Electronic records of the shop (2) Reports that identify the periods Compliance and Emissions Data building capture system monitoring when the average hourly pressure drop Reporting Interface (CEDRI) that is required under § 63.1626(g)(1) and or flow rate of venturi scrubbers used to accessed through the EPA’s Central Data (g)(2), as applicable, or identification of control particulate emissions dropped Exchange (CDX) (http://cdx.epa.gov/ periods when the capture system below the levels established in epa_home.asp), unless the parameters were not maintained and an § 63.1626(e) and an explanation of the Administrator approves another explanation of the corrective actions corrective actions taken. approach. Performance test data must be taken. (3) Bag leak detection system. Reports submitted in a file format generated (6) Records of the results of quarterly including the following information: through the use of the EPA’s ERT. inspections of the furnace capture (i) Records of all alarms. Owners or operators, who claim that system required under § 63.1626(h). (ii) Description of the actions taken some of the information being submitted (7) Electronic records of the following each bag leak detection for performance tests is confidential continuous flow monitors or pressure system alarm. business information (CBI), must submit monitors required under § 63.1626(j) (4) Reports of the shop building a complete file generated through the and (k) and an identification of periods capture system monitoring required use of the EPA’s ERT, including when the flow rate or pressure was not under § 63.1626(g)(1) and (g)(2), as information claimed to be CBI, on a maintained as required in § 63.1626(e). applicable, identification of periods compact disk, flash drive, or other (8) Electronic records of the output of when the capture system parameters commonly used electronic storage any CEMS installed to monitor were not maintained and an explanation media to the EPA. The electronic media particulate matter emissions meeting the of the corrective actions taken. must be clearly marked as CBI and requirements of § 63.1626(i) (5) Reports of the results of quarterly mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI (9) Records of the occurrence and inspections of the furnace capture Office, Attention: WebFIRE duration of each startup and/or system required under § 63.1626(h). Administrator, MD C404–02, 4930 Old shutdown. (6) Reports of the CPMS required Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same (10) Records of the occurrence and under § 63.1626, an identification of ERT file with the CBI omitted must be duration of each malfunction of periods when the monitored parameters submitted to the EPA via CDX as operation (i.e., process equipment) or were not maintained as required in described earlier in this paragraph. the air pollution control equipment and § 63.1626 and corrective actions taken. (B) For any performance test monitoring equipment. (7) If a malfunction occurred during conducted using test methods that are (11) Records that explain the periods the reporting period, the report must not supported by the EPA’s ERT as when the procedures outlined in the include the number, duration and a listed on the EPA’s ERT Web site, the process fugitives ventilation plan brief description for each type of owner or operator shall submit the required under § 63.1624(a), the malfunction that occurred during the results of the performance test to the fugitives dust control plan required reporting period and caused or may Administrator at the appropriate under § 63.1624(b), the site-specific have caused any applicable emissions address listed in § 63.13. monitoring plan for CMS required under limitation to be exceeded. The report (ii) Within 60 days after the date of § 63.1626(i) and the standard operating must also include a description of completing each CEMS performance procedures manual for baghouses actions taken by an owner or operator evaluation (as defined in § 63.2), you required under § 63.1626(a). during a malfunction of an affected must submit the results of the (c) You must comply with all of the source to minimize emissions in performance evaluation according to the reporting requirements specified in accordance with § 63.1623(f), including method specified by either paragraph § 63.10 of the General Provisions that actions taken to correct a malfunction. (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section. are referenced in Table 1 to this subpart. (e) Within 60 days after the date of (A) For data collection of relative (1) You must submit reports no less completing each CEMS relative accuracy test audit (RATA) pollutants frequently than specified under accuracy test audit or performance test that are supported by the EPA’s ERT as § 63.10(e)(3) of the General Provisions. conducted to demonstrate compliance listed on the EPA’s ERT Web site, you (2) Once a source reports a violation with this subpart, you must submit the must submit the results of the of the standard or excess emissions, you relative accuracy test audit data and the performance evaluation to the CEDRI must follow the reporting format results of the performance test in the that is accessed through the EPA’s CDX, required under § 63.10(e)(3) until a method specified by paragraphs (e)(1) unless the Administrator approves request to reduce reporting frequency is through (e)(2) of this section. The results another approach. Performance approved by the Administrator. of the performance test must contain the evaluation data must be submitted in a (d) In addition to the information information listed in paragraph (e)(2) of file format generated through the use of required under the applicable sections this section. the EPA’s ERT. If you claim that some of § 63.10, you must include in the (1)(i) Within 60 days after the date of of the performance evaluation reports required under paragraph (c) of completing each performance test (as information being transmitted is CBI, this section the information specified in defined in § 63.2), you must submit the you must submit a complete file paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(7) of this results of the performance tests, generated through the use of the EPA’s section. including any associated fuel analyses, ERT, including information claimed to (1) Reports that explain the periods required by this subpart according to the be CBI, on a compact disk or other when the procedures outlined in the methods specified in paragraphs commonly used electronic storage process fugitives ventilation plan (e)(1)(i)(A) or (e)(1)(i)(B) of this section. media (including, but not limited to,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60289

flash drives) by registered letter to the (c) The authorities that cannot be § 63.1656 Performance testing, test EPA. The compact disk shall be clearly delegated to state, local, or tribal methods and compliance demonstrations. marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/ agencies are as specified in paragraphs (a) * * * OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section. (6) You must conduct the WebFIRE Administrator, MD C404–02, (1) Approval of alternatives to performance tests specified in paragraph 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. requirements in §§ 63.1620 and 63.1621 (c) of this section under such conditions The same ERT file with the CBI omitted and 63.1623 and 63.1624. as the Administrator specifies based on must be submitted to the EPA via CDX (2) Approval of major alternatives to representative performance of the as described earlier in this paragraph. test methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and affected source for the period being (B) For any performance evaluations (f), as defined in § 63.90 and as required tested. Upon request, you must make with RATA pollutants that are not in this subpart. available to the Administrator such supported by the EPA’s ERT as listed on (3) Approval of major alternatives to records as may be necessary to the EPA’s ERT Web site, you shall monitoring under § 63.8(f), as defined in determine the conditions of submit the results of the performance § 63.90 and as required in this subpart. performance tests. evaluation to the Administrator at the (4) Approval of major alternatives to (b) * * * appropriate address listed in § 63.13. recordkeeping and reporting under (7) Method 9 of Appendix A–4 of 40 § 63.10(f), as defined in § 63.90 and as (2) The results of a performance test CFR part 60 to determine opacity. required in this subpart. ASTM D7520–09, ‘‘Standard Test shall include the purpose of the test; a ■ 13. Section 63.1650 is amended by: Method for Determining the Opacity of brief process description; a complete ■ a. Revising paragraph (d); a Plume in the Outdoor Ambient unit description, including a description ■ b. Removing and reserving paragraph Atmosphere’’ may be used (incorporated of feed streams and control devices; (e)(1); and sampling site description; pollutants ■ c. Revising paragraph (e)(2) to read as by reference, see 40 CFR 63.14) with the measured; description of sampling and follows: following conditions: analysis procedures and any (i) During the digital camera opacity modifications to standard procedures; § 63.1650 Applicability and Compliance technique (DCOT) certification quality assurance procedures; record of Dates. procedure outlined in Section 9.2 of operating conditions, including * * * * * ASTM D7520–09, the owner or operator operating parameters for which limits (d) Table 1 to this subpart specifies or the DCOT vendor must present the are being set, during the test; record of the provisions of subpart A of this part plumes in front of various backgrounds preparation of standards; record of that apply to owners and operators of of color and contrast representing calibrations; raw data sheets for field ferroalloy production facilities subject conditions anticipated during field use sampling; raw data sheets for field and to this subpart. such as blue sky, trees and mixed laboratory analyses; chain-of-custody (e) * * * backgrounds (clouds and/or a sparse documentation; explanation of (1) [Reserved] tree stand). laboratory data qualifiers; example (2) Each owner or operator of a new (ii) The owner or operator must also calculations of all applicable stack gas or reconstructed affected source that have standard operating procedures in parameters, emission rates, percent commences construction or place including daily or other frequency reduction rates and analytical results, as reconstruction after August 4, 1998 and quality checks to ensure the equipment applicable; and any other information before October 6, 2014, must comply is within manufacturing specifications required by the test method, a relevant with the requirements of this subpart by as outlined in Section 8.1 of ASTM standard, or the Administrator. May 20, 1999 or upon startup of D7520–09. ■ 12. Section 63.1629 is added to read operations, whichever is later. (iii) The owner or operator must 14. Section 63.1652 is amended by as follows: follow the recordkeeping procedures adding paragraph (f) to read as follows: outlined in § 63.10(b)(1) for the DCOT § 63.1629 Who implements and enforces § 63.1652 Emission standards. certification, compliance report, data this subpart? sheets and all raw unaltered JPEGs used * * * * * for opacity and certification (a) This subpart can be implemented (f) At all times, you must operate and determination. and enforced by the U.S. EPA, or a maintain any affected source, including (iv) The owner or operator or the delegated authority such as the associated air pollution control DCOT vendor must have a minimum of applicable state, local, or tribal agency. equipment and monitoring equipment, four (4) independent technology users If the U.S. EPA Administrator has in a manner consistent with safety and apply the software to determine the delegated authority to a state, local, or good air pollution control practices for visible opacity of the 300 certification tribal agency, then that agency, in minimizing emissions. Determination of plumes. For each set of 25 plumes, the addition to the U.S. EPA, has the whether such operation and user may not exceed 15 percent opacity authority to implement and enforce this maintenance procedures are being used of any one reading and the average error subpart. Contact the applicable U.S. will be based on information available must not exceed 7.5 percent opacity. EPA Regional Office to find out if this to the Administrator that may include, (v) Use of this approved alternative subpart is delegated to a state, local, or but is not limited to, monitoring results, does not provide or imply a certification tribal agency. review of operation and maintenance or validation of any vendor’s hardware (b) In delegating implementation and procedures, review of operation and or software. The onus to maintain and enforcement authority of this subpart to maintenance records and inspection of verify the certification and/or training of a state, local, or tribal agency under the source. the DCOT camera, software and operator subpart E of this part, the authorities ■ 15. Section 63.1656 is amended by: contained in paragraph (c) of this ■ a. Adding paragraph (a)(6); in accordance with ASTM D7520–09 section are retained by the ■ b. Revising paragraph (b)(7); and these requirements is on the Administrator of U.S. EPA and cannot ■ c. Revising paragraph (e)(1); and facility, DCOT operator and DCOT be transferred to the state, local, or tribal ■ d. Removing and reserving paragraph vendor. agency. (e)(2)(ii) to read as follows: * * * * *

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 60290 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules

(e) * * * requirements of paragraph (b) of this source to minimize emissions in (1) Fugitive dust sources. Failure to section would be a violation of the accordance with § 63.1652(f), including have a fugitive dust control plan or general duty to operate in a manner actions taken to correct a malfunction. failure to report deviations from the consistent with good air pollution * * * * * plan and take necessary corrective control practices that minimizes ■ 18. Section 63.1660 is amended by: action would be a violation of the emissions per § 63.1652(f). ■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and general duty to ensure that fugitive dust (c) * * * (a)(2)(ii); and sources are operated and maintained in (7) Failure to monitor or failure to ■ b. Removing and reserving paragraphs a manner consistent with good air take corrective action under the (a)(2)(iv) and (a)(2)(v) to read as follows: pollution control practices for requirements of paragraph (c) of this minimizing emissions per § 63.1652(f). section would be a violation of the § 63.1660 Recordkeeping Requirements. (2) * * * general duty to operate in a manner (a) * * * (ii) [Reserved] consistent with good air pollution (2) * * * * * * * * control practices that minimizes (i) Records of the occurrence and ■ 16. Section 63.1657 is amended by: emissions per § 63.1652(f). duration of each malfunction of ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(6); ■ 17. Section 63.1659 is amended by operation (i.e., process equipment) or ■ b. Revising paragraph (b)(3); and revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as the air pollution control equipment and ■ c. Revising paragraph (c)(7) to read as follows: monitoring equipment; follows: § 63.1659 Reporting Requirements. (ii) Records of actions taken during periods of malfunction to minimize § 63.1657 Monitoring requirements. (a) * * * emissions in accordance with (4) Reporting malfunctions. If a (a) * * * § 63.1652(f), including corrective (6) Failure to monitor or failure to malfunction occurred during the actions to restore malfunctioning take corrective action under the reporting period, the report must process and air pollution control and requirements of paragraph (a) of this include the number, duration and a monitoring equipment to its normal or section would be a violation of the brief description for each type of usual manner of operation; general duty to operate in a manner malfunction which occurred during the consistent with good air pollution reporting period and which caused or * * * * * control practices that minimizes may have caused any applicable (iv) [Reserved] emissions per § 63.1652(f). emission limitation to be exceeded. The (v) [Reserved] (b) * * * report must also include a description of * * * * * (3) Failure to monitor or failure to actions taken by an owner or operator ■ 19. Add Table 1 to the end of subpart take corrective action under the during a malfunction of an affected XXX to read as follows:

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART XXX OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART XXX

Applies to Reference subpart XXX Comment

63.1 ...... Yes 63.2 ...... Yes 63.3 ...... Yes 63.4 ...... Yes 63.5 ...... Yes 63.6(a), (b), (c) ...... Yes 63.6(d) ...... No ...... Section reserved. 63.6(e)(1)(i) ...... No ...... See 63.1623(g) and 63.1652(f) for general duty requirement. 63.6(e)(1)(ii) ...... No 63.6(e)(1)(iii) ...... Yes 63.6(e)(2) ...... No ...... Section reserved. 63.6(e)(3) ...... No 63.6(f)(1) ...... No 6.6(f)(2)–(f)(3) ...... Yes 63.6(g) ...... Yes 63.6(h)(1) ...... No 63.6(h)(2)–(h)(9) ...... Yes 63.6(i) ...... Yes 63.6(j) ...... Yes § 63.7(a)–(d) ...... Yes § 63.7(e)(1) ...... No ...... See 63.1625(a)(5) and 63.1656(a)(6) § 63.7(e)(2)–(e)(4) ...... Yes 63.7(f), (g), (h) ...... Yes 63.8(a)–(b) ...... Yes 63.8(c)(1)(i) ...... No ...... See 63.1623(g) and 63.1652(f) for general duty requirement. 63.8(c)(1)(ii) ...... Yes 63.8(c)(1)(iii) ...... No 63.8(c)(2)–(d)(2) ...... Yes 63.8(d)(3) ...... Yes, except for SSM plans are not required. last sentence. 63.8(e)–(g) ...... Yes 63.9(a),(b),(c),(e),(g),(h)(1)through (3), Yes (h)(5) and (6), (i) and (j). 63.9(f) ...... Yes

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Proposed Rules 60291

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART XXX OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART XXX—Continued

Applies to Reference subpart XXX Comment

63.9(h)(4) ...... No Reserved 63.10 (a) ...... Yes 63.10 (b)(1) ...... Yes 63.10(b)(2)(i) ...... No 63.10(b)(2)(ii) ...... No See 63.1628 and 63.1660 for recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and duration and (2) actions taken during malfunction. 63.10(b)(2)(iii) ...... Yes 63.10(b)(2)(iv)–(b)(2)(v) ...... No 63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(b)(2)(xiv) ...... Yes 63.10)(b)(3) ...... Yes 63.10(c)(1)–(9) ...... Yes 63.10(c)(10)–(11) ...... No See 63.1628 and 63.1660 for malfunction recordkeeping requirements. 63.10(c)(12)–(c)(14) ...... Yes 63.10(c)(15) ...... No 63.10(d)(1)–(4) ...... Yes 63.10(d)(5) ...... No ...... See 63.1628(d)(8) and 63.1659(a)(4) for malfunction reporting requirements. 63.10(e)–((f) ...... Yes 63.11 ...... No ...... Flares will not be used to comply with the emission limits 63.12 to 63.15 ...... Yes

[FR Doc. 2014–23266 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:04 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCP2.SGM 06OCP2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Vol. 79 Monday, No. 193 October 6, 2014

Part III

Department of State

22 CFR Part 62 Exchange Visitor Program—General Provisions; Final Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60294 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF STATE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: themselves; applicants for sponsor designation will have site visits only at Executive Summary 22 CFR Part 62 Department discretion; and sponsors This first comprehensive modification [Public Notice: 8893] need not collect and report Employment to Subpart A of 22 CFR Part 62 since Authorization Document information RIN 1400–AC36 1993 makes five significant changes, as for an accompanying spouse and well as minor, technical changes dependents in SEVIS. Exchange Visitor Program—General intended to clarify the existing Having thoroughly reviewed the Provisions language. Specifically, this final rule nearly 700 comments received in amends Subpart A to provide more response to the proposed rule published ACTION: Final rule with request for specific filing requirements for entities comment. in 2009 (see citation above), the seeking to become designated sponsors Department hereby adopts sections of AGENCY: Department of State. and for sponsors seeking to renew their the proposed rule and amends or SUMMARY: With this rulemaking, the designations, including requiring eliminates others in response to the Department of State is amending the proposed and current Responsible comments submitted. general rules covering the Exchange Officers and Alternate Responsible The next version of the SEVIS Visitor Program that govern the Officers to undergo criminal background database, which has been in place since designation of sponsors and the overall checks. The final rule adopts a 2003, will have no immediate impact on administration of the Program. This requirement that private sector sponsors this final rule, since its implementation final rule encompasses technical submit management reviews in a format date remains uncertain. The next changes to the general provisions and and on a schedule determined by the version of SEVIS will focus upon addresses public diplomacy and foreign Department. It moves certain sections increased functionality, national policy concerns, including the from Subpart F to Subpart A and security, and improved usability. Prior Department’s ability to monitor enhances provisions governing the to its implementation, the Department sponsors to protect the health, safety Student and Exchange Visitor anticipates that the Department of and welfare of foreign nationals who Information System (SEVIS) database Homeland Security will introduce any come to the United States as exchange that sponsors use to track the new requirements or procedures to the visitors. The Department previously whereabouts of exchange visitors. It also public through a proposed rule with a published a proposed rule, and, after removes Appendices A–D, which have comment period. The Department of analyzing the comments received, the been replaced by information State also will reexamine its regulations Department is promulgating this final collections through Forms DS–3036, prior to the implementation of any rule with request for comment and DS–3037 and DS–3097. In recognition of future system developments. soliciting comments over a period of 60 the increase in health and accident insurance costs since 1993, it also Analysis of Comments days. updates these requirements. The final The Department received 656 DATES: Effective Date: This rule is rule also adds, deletes, and modifies comments in response to the effective January 5, 2015. definitions of terms used throughout the Applicability date: The insurance publication of the proposed rule. Of regulations. In addition, it adds these, 494 comments (or 75% of the amounts listed in 22 CFR 62.14(b)(1)–(4) language to make explicit the discretion and the provisions of 22 CFR 62.14(h) total comments received) were form of the Assistant Secretary for letters or miscellaneous letters relating will be applicable on May 15, 2015. Educational and Cultural Affairs to Comment date: The Department will to the Camp Counselor and Summer waive or modify provisions of 22 CFR Work Travel categories of the Exchange accept written comments for up to 60 Part 62 (the regulations governing the days until December 5, 2014. Visitor Program, as follows: Exchange Visitor Program), to the extent 1. Form Letter—Camp Counselor and ADDRESSES: You may submit comments consistent with the authorities Camp Support 353 identified by any of the following described in 22 CFR 62.1(a) and other 2. Form Letter—Summer Work Travel methods: applicable law, with respect to programs • Employers 60 Email: [email protected]. You that are established pursuant to 3. Form Letter—Former Summer must include the RIN (1400–AC36) in arrangements between the United States Work Travel Participants 45 the subject line of your message. and foreign governments. The • 4. Miscellaneous Letters 36 Persons with access to the Internet Department must provide notice The remaining 162 comments were may also view this document and concerning any such program for which general letters from sponsors, support provide comments by going to the provisions of Part 62 are waived or groups, third parties, and concerned regulations.gov Web site and searching modified. Finally, it makes technical individuals. Based on the review of all for RIN (1400–AC36, docket number modifications to the text of the comments, the Department has decided DOS–2014–0018), at: http:// September 2009 proposed rule to ensure to adopt sections 62.2–62.16 of the www.regulations.gov/. that the regulatory text is clear and proposed rule with modifications Mail (paper, disk, or CD–ROM correct. prompted by the comments received. submissions): U.S. Department of State, The Department published the Section 62.17—Fees and Charges, Office of Policy and Program Support, proposed rule on September 22, 2009 remains unchanged. Appendices A–D SA–5, Floor 5, 2200 C Street NW., (RIN 1400–AC36; see 74 FR 48177), are removed to reflect changes in the Washington, DC 20522–0505. soliciting comments on proposed regulations since 1993 and the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: modifications to Subpart A. This final implementation of information Robin J. Lerner, Deputy Assistant rule does not make certain changes that collections through Forms DS–3036, Secretary for Private Sector Exchange, the Department had proposed in the DS–3037, and DS–3097. U.S. Department of State, SA–5, Floor 5, September 2009 proposed rule. 2200 C Street NW., Washington, DC Specifically, it will not require Section 62.2 Definitions 20522; or email at JExchanges@ applicants or current sponsors to secure The proposed rule contained 45 state.gov. and submit Dun & Bradstreet reports on definitions; this final rule contains 47.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60295

When adding definitions for the an accompanying spouse and Department, however, has purposefully Department-controlled forms, the dependents from this definition. excluded an exchange visitor’s Department had inadvertently excluded The Department received a total of 18 accompanying immediate family (i.e., Form DS–3097 (Annual Report), which comments regarding the change of the accompanying spouse and dependents) it now includes. Similarly, the term ‘‘accredited educational from the definition because these Department is also adding a definition institution’’ to ‘‘accredited academic regulations operate primarily for the for the ‘‘Office of Exchange institution.’’ The majority of comments benefit, and based upon the actions, of Coordination and Compliance,’’ the questioned the need for a change in the individual participant in the ‘‘Office of Private Sector Exchange terminology. The Department believes Exchange Visitor Program. When Administration,’’ which, combined with this change is necessary to reflect more necessary (e.g., section 62.14 the ‘‘Office of Designation,’’ currently accurately recent trends in the use of the (insurance)), the regulations specify comprise the Office of Private Sector term ‘‘academic.’’ In the proposed their applicability to an exchange Exchange. The Department also deletes definition section (which also affects the visitor’s immediate family. definition of ‘‘student’’ in section 62.4), On a related matter, two parties the redundant definition for ‘‘trainee,’’ the Department clarifies that commented that the title of the Form which is already covered in sections educational institutions that offer DS–2019—A Certificate of Eligibility for 62.4(c) and 62.22, and foreign medical primarily vocational or technical Exchange Visitor (J–1) Status excludes graduate which is covered in section courses of study are not considered any reference to an accompanying 62.27. academic. Accordingly, the Department spouse and dependents, even though it A total of 26 parties filed comments substitutes the term ‘‘academic’’ for is the form necessary for family about the Subpart A definitions. ‘‘educational.’’ members (since the inception of SEVIS Comments related to the three SEVIS- One party commented about the in 2003) to apply for J–2 visa status. The related definitions that have been added confusion associated with the definition Department agrees and will explore the to the regulations (i.e., ‘‘actual and of ‘‘country of nationality or last legal opportunity of replacing ‘‘(J–1)’’ with current U.S. address,’’ ‘‘site of activity,’’ permanent residence,’’ stating that the ‘‘(J—Nonimmigrant)’’ in the Form’s title and ‘‘validation’’) generally reflected conjunction ‘‘or’’ used to link the two at the time of the Form’s scheduled appreciation for these definitions and alternatives takes precedence and the revision cycle. sought guidance and information on the language does not define the meaning of Two parties commented on the consequences of non-compliance. As the term ‘‘legal permanent residence.’’ definition of ‘‘foreign medical with other regulations in Part 62, non- The program regulations have always graduate.’’ They both appreciated the compliance could subject a sponsor to referred to these two terms in tandem. Department’s decision to clarify the sanctions under 22 CFR 62.50(a). The The Department believes that the definition and requested that the first two definitions are critical as they meaning of each phrase is clear and definition be revised to locate the relate to the physical location of a concise, and therefore makes no changes definition within section 62.27 (the only nonimmigrant participating in an to the definition. Three commenting section of 22 CFR Part 62 that uses this exchange visitor program in the United parties expressed concern that the term) and to clarify how it applies to States. Indeed, Title VI, Section 641 of terms(s) did not clearly subject an non-clinical exchange programs. The Public Law 104–208, requires sponsors accompanying spouse and dependents Department acknowledges that the to ensure that the exchange visitor has travelling to the United States on J–2 definition of this category of visas to the two-year home country participation does not belong in section arrived at his or her site of activity and physical presence requirement (i.e., 62.2, and will define it when section to maintain current and accurate data in section 212(e) of the Immigration and 62.27 is revised in the future. these SEVIS fields so that officials may Nationality Act) (INA)). Because the The Department received one locate nonimmigrants, if necessary, both INA applies this requirement to comment related to the definition of the during the day (i.e., at their sites of ‘‘person[s] admitted under section terms ‘‘full course of study’’ and activity) and at night (i.e., at their actual 101(a)(15)(J) . . . or acquiring such ‘‘prescribed course of study,’’ suggesting and current U.S. addresses). status after admission,’’ it applies to that language in section 62.2 may be Accordingly, correctly maintaining this J–2 visa holders as well, if the exchange read to contain substantive regulatory information is a matter of national visitor they accompany or join is subject provisions that may be better located in security. The function of validating a to the requirement (See 22 CFR the relevant sections in Subpart B, SEVIS record is also important, as it 41.62(c)(4)). rather than in the definitions section of marks the beginning and end of a The Department received one section 62.2. The Department has sponsor’s obligation to monitor and comment regarding the proposed considered the recommendations and provide other services (i.e., insurance definition of ‘‘exchange visitor’’ as it makes no changes to these definitions, coverage) to an exchange visitor and his refers to foreign nationals who are in the since it is of the view that definitions or her accompanying spouse and United States on J–1 visas. In particular, that pertain only to an individual dependents. One commenting party the commenting party took issue with program category should be included in sought guidance and/or an explanation the language because, as written, it does sections of Subpart B that pertain to that of the consequences of failing to not include Canadian citizens who are individual category. validate the SEVIS record of an allowed to participate on the Exchange The Department received one accompanying spouse or dependents, Visitor Program without obtaining a comment concerning the definitions for entering the United States on J–2 visas J–1 visa. Also, the term does not include the terms ‘‘internship program’’ and to accompany an exchange visitor here the accompanying spouse and ‘‘student internship program.’’ Because on a J–1 visa. In response to this dependents of an exchange visitor. In of the confusion experienced in the comment, and because the validation of reviewing the comment, the Department exchange community about the a primary J–1 visa holder’s record has decided to modify the definition to similarity of these two terms, it was automatically validates the associated clarify that the term also includes suggested that the Department further J–2 visa holders’ records, the participants in the program who are not clarify these definitions by annotating Department is removing any reference to required to obtain J–1 visas. The the difference between the two types of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60296 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

internship programs. The Department concepts into Subpart B, the Department requirement was intended for existing believes that the definitions of these two will issue email guidance or guidance exchange visitor programs as well. terms (and the language in Subpart B directives. Accordingly, the Department Recently, many entities staffed by associated with these two categories) revises the definition of ‘‘third party’’ to individuals with minimal experience already provides ample clarity. Very avoid the unintended consequences have applied for designation. These simply, the definition of a ‘‘student recognized by the commenting parties. entities and individuals typically have internship program’’ specifies that the The Department is updating the worked with designated sponsors in internship program must ‘‘partially or definitions to include language that some capacity or have conducted short- fully fulfill a student’s post-secondary explains the purposes of Forms DS– term exchanges, but lack the full scope academic degree requirements.’’ This 2019, DS–3036, DS–3037, and DS–7002. of experience in all aspects of exchange does not mean, however, that a current As discussed above, this final rule activities, including the regulatory student could not participate in a corrects the inadvertent exclusion of knowledge critical to administering a regular internship program in pursuit of ‘‘Form DS–3097,’’ the existing Annual successful exchange program. Some meeting academic requirements. In Report form, from the proposed rule. exchange visitor categories involve more some situations, therefore, there would Similarly, the Department inadvertently complex administration processes than be no difference between the two excluded a definition for the ‘‘Office of others (e.g., the au pair and secondary programs, except that the sponsor in one Exchange Coordination and school student categories, which require instance would be an academic Compliance,’’ a part of the Office of locating and screening host families and institution, and in the other, it would be Private Sector Exchange (formerly schools, hiring and managing local and a private business. known as the Exchange Visitor Program regional staff, and close monitoring of One comment was submitted Services). In addition, the Office of placements). The Department believes suggesting that the term ‘‘management Private Sector Exchange has recently that three years of experience is the audit’’ be defined. The Department added the Office of Private Sector minimum necessary to develop a strong agrees and adds a definition of Exchange Administration to its foundation for the conduct of an ‘‘management review,’’ the organization. The two new offices, in exchange visitor program. Applicants Department’s preferred term, to section addition to the existing Office of may demonstrate their experience in 62.2. Designation, oversee the Exchange international exchange by providing Five parties commented on the Visitor Program. This final rule defines staff resumes, as well as information definition of ‘‘third party.’’ Among other these new offices within the Office of about the applicant entity’s or things, commenting parties claim that Private Sector Exchange. individual’s experience and the proposed language disregarded the Finally, in the NPRM, the definition involvement with other cultural sub-agent network that a sponsor’s for ‘‘Citizen of the United States exchange programs. The Department foreign entities (e.g., foreign partners or (entity)’’ with respect to nonprofit adopts the proposed regulatory change agents) may use as part of the recruiting organizations included, among other for entities applying for designation. process. They added that the language is things, a requirement that the entity be The Department will not require unclear about what entities are and are ‘‘qualified with the Internal Revenue sponsors who have been designated for not third parties, given the large number Service as a tax-exempt organization fewer than three years to demonstrate of contacts upon which exchange pursuant to section 501(c)(3) of the now three years of experience. programs rely. The Department Internal Revenue Code.’’ In this recognizes that sponsors contract with rulemaking, this language has been The proposed rule included a new or otherwise engage third parties to removed, with the result that a provision requiring that an entity provide ordinary services in the support nonprofit organization otherwise applying for sponsor designation of their business operations (e.g., qualifying as a ‘‘United States Person undergo a site visit as part of the cleaning, payroll processing, and (legal entity)’’ need not be a tax-exempt designation process. Such site visits, utilities). The Department excludes organization to participate in the conducted by the Department of State or these types of generic service providers Exchange Visitor Program. The a third party acting on its behalf, were from the definition of ‘‘third party’’ and Department realized that there might be intended to evaluate whether an includes only those that truly relate to taxable nonprofit organizations that applicant had sufficient facilities, staff, the conduct of a sponsor’s exchange might wish to participate in one of the and infrastructure necessary to conduct visitor program. Exchange Visitor Programs. Seeing no a successful exchange visitor program. As the Department updates the reason to retain this barrier to Ten parties submitted comments on this regulations governing specific categories participation, the Department proposal. Seven parties supported these of the Exchange Visitor Program determined there was good cause to site visits and three parties opposed (included in Subpart B), it may remove it in this rulemaking. them. One of the opposing parties articulate further restrictions. In the specifically stated that the site visits interim, the Department clarifies, first, Section 62.3 Sponsor Eligibility were unnecessary due to the potential that it considers ‘‘recruiting’’ to be The proposed rule increased from one costs. One party believed that site visits conduct of the sponsor’s exchange to three years the required minimum should be required of current sponsors visitor program. It also considers the experience in international exchange as part of the redesignation process and functions of the local coordinators (or that an entity seeking designation must in lieu of a management audit other similar field staff) to be conduct of show that it, or its proposed requirement. Another party opined that the sponsor’s exchange visitor program. Responsible Officer, has. Five parties the requirement was burdensome and Ordinary services in support of commented on this proposed new superfluous for longtime program sponsors’ business operations (cleaning, minimum experience requirement. One sponsors and that site visits are too payroll processing, and utilities) are not supported the increase in years of costly and disruptive of daily work considered conduct. Should there be experience, three opined that the new schedules. Finally, one party, in circumstances that require additional requirement was excessive and response to the assertion that the cost of clarification on a category-specific basis restrictive for new programs, and one the site visits would be determined ‘‘by prior to the incorporation of these asked for clarification of whether the the required bi-annual user fee study,’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60297

stated that the designation and re- not satisfy any educational or required by Forms DS–3036, as set forth designation application fees were experience requirements to be classified in section 62.5(a)) a sponsor’s ‘‘Chief sufficiently high to cover the cost of as a J–1 Trainee. A corporate program Executive Officer, President, or such site visits. sponsor ‘primarily administers’ training equivalent.’’ One party seeks The Supplementary Information while its employee(s) act as trainer(s) for clarification as to which positions are section of the proposed rule also a minimum of 95% of the exchange considered ‘‘equivalent’’ in this respect. mentioned the on-site reviews of visitor’s training.’’ In the Supplementary The Department amends the rule to existing sponsors and that the Information section of the Trainee and reflect that an executive with legal Department currently conducts on-site Intern Final Rule (RIN 1400–AC15; see authority to make commitments on reviews at its discretion. In response, 72 FR 33669, June 19, 2007), the behalf of the sponsor (as identified in parties commented that such a Department explained that a foreign the organization’s governing documents) requirement would be both burdensome national may not participate in a trainee be the signatory of such documents. and superfluous for a longtime sponsor. or intern exchange visitor program until Section 62.5(c)(9) of the proposed rule Although the Department considers he or she has acquired sufficient requires a sponsor’s Chief Executive pre-designation site visits for new education or related work experience to Officer, President, or equivalent to applicants to be a useful means of benefit sufficiently from the valuable certify that the proposed Responsible evaluating the ability of potential experiential learning opportunity that Officer and all proposed Alternate sponsors to run good exchange training programs and internships Responsible Officers are United States programs, as a matter of priority the provide. The Department confirms the persons (i.e., U.S. citizens or legal Department has elected not to require definition on the basis that an exchange permanent residents), and that the them at this time, but to retain the visitor must meet the requisite sponsor has obtained criminal discretion to conduct them. The education and work experience to be background reports on all such Department will continue its practice of suitable for participation in a training candidates and has determined their conducting on-site reviews of current program. Therefore, sponsors must suitability for these positions. Section sponsors as a part of monitoring and make sure that the selection criteria for 62.5(c)(9) requires that a sponsor compliance of sponsors. their exchange visitors indeed meet the include in its complete application both SEVIS-generated Citizenship Section 62.4 Categories of Participant regulatory requirements. The Department has amended the Certifications for the proposed Eligibility definition of a teacher to reflect Responsible Officer and proposed Five parties submitted comments language in a proposed rule. (RIN 1400– Alternate Officers as well as separate concerning four categories of participant AC60; see 78 FR 25669, dated May 2, evidence (e.g., a copy of a passport or eligibility, namely, Teacher, Research 2013). birth certificate, or green card) that they Scholar, Intern, and Trainee. The are U.S. citizens or legal permanent Section 62.5 Application Procedure Department has addressed the comment residents of the United States. One about evaluation of a teacher’s eligibility The Department received a total of commenting party supported the U.S. and experience in a separate rulemaking 514 comments regarding the proposed citizenship requirement; another on section 62.24, which was published collection of Business Information recommended that it apply only to new May 2, 2013. (RIN 1400–AC60; see 78 Reports from Dun & Bradstreet both for entities seeking designation; and a third FR 25669). new applicants (proposed section opined that the executive certification, Three parties asked the Department to 62.5(c)(6)) and for sponsors seeking SEVIS certification, and separate reinsert the term ‘‘teaching’’ into the redesignation (proposed sections evidence requirements were redundant. description of a Research Scholar. The 62.7(c)(1) and (2)). Only one The Department disagrees that the Department agrees to correct this commenting party supported this certifications are redundant. There is inadvertent exclusion. requirement, but, like many other only one certification of U.S. citizenship One party opposed the addition of the parties, was concerned about the cost. or legal permanent resident status term ‘‘full-time’’ to the description of an Some suggested that this report required. The executive certification is Intern’s enrollment, stating that the requirement could cost several hundred required on the SEVIS-generated form to current regulations do not stipulate this dollars for a medium to large sponsor ensure that the criminal background requirement and that adding ‘‘full-time’’ and would represent a significant new check has been completed on the to the category definition will expense for every sponsor. Other parties proposed Responsible Officer and all complicate the process unnecessarily. noted that many camps have never proposed Alternate Responsible The Department disagrees with the registered for a Dun & Bradstreet Officers. Providing documented proof is commenter that the proposed language Number because the registration has no already a required practice and does not will complicate the rules. The business purpose. Accordingly, pose any additional burdens on the Department adopts the proposed requiring camps to register and pay for sponsor. Therefore, the Department language, as it is a technical credit reports would be an undue adopts the language of the proposed modification conforming to language in burden on the camp community. The rule. this section with the specific regulations Department reviewed the utility of the With respect to the overall application currently governing the Trainee and Dun & Bradstreet report for oversight process, one party commented that the Intern Program. See 22 CFR purposes, and determined that it is requirements for submission of § 62.22(b)(2). outweighed by the potential financial applications for designation and In addition, one party commented on and resource implications for applicants redesignation should be differentiated the definition of the Trainee category, for designation or currently-designated by program types, since colleges and arguing that the definition of ‘‘Trainee’’ sponsors. Hence, the Department is universities already have unique is inapplicable to corporate program eliminating the Dun & Bradstreet report requirements they must meet. Another sponsors whose employees primarily requirement. party suggested that the required administer the training of the exchange The proposed rule identified as the information would place an visitor. In addition, the comment states, appropriate individuals to sign certain unnecessary administrative burden on ‘‘In such cases, the foreign national need documents (e.g., the certifications established, low-risk entities. The

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60298 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Department has found that the specific sponsors should be redesignated for two control of its exchange visitor program information it requests is necessary to years. Four parties commented that the not be ceded to people who do not meet evaluate an applicant’s initial or a cycle should be set at the original five the regulation’s definition of a U.S. sponsor’s ongoing qualifications to years. Under section 502(b) of Public person. Accordingly, it is incumbent participate in the Exchange Visitor Law 107–173, enacted May 14, 2002, the upon sponsors—even large Program, without regard to the program Department of State is to conduct a universities—to report and update the type or the entity’s legal status. periodic review of sponsors of exchange citizenship or legal U.S. permanent Accordingly, and to ensure equal visitors at least every two years. The residence status of the members of their treatment of all applicants, the legislation, however, does not prohibit governing boards and provide updated Department adopts the language of the the Department from reviewing a copies with an application for proposed rule. sponsor’s qualifications more redesignation. The Department believes A single party commented on the frequently. For example, experience has that this documentation is necessary to definitions of ‘‘financed directly’’ and demonstrated that there are a number of ensure that a sponsor seeking ‘‘financed indirectly,’’ as set forth in the sponsors having technical infractions redesignation continues to meet all proposed rule, noting that current that are of enough concern to cause the requirements of designation (e.g., status regulations do not require certain Department to withhold a longer period as a U.S. person, financial viability). A publicly held companies to disclose the of designation until that sponsor has sponsor’s circumstances may change names, addresses, and citizenship or corrected these problems. The over time, therefore making it necessary legal permanent resident status of their Department believes that it can work for sponsors to provide complete and Boards of Directors or the percentage of with such sponsors to assist them in current information during the stock/shares held in order to improving their program operations in redesignation process in order for the demonstrate the entity’s U.S. citizenship this area. The one-year redesignation Department to make a meaningful status. The Department determined that informs a sponsor that it needs to assessment of a sponsor’s continued this comment appears to have been correct any issues identified, but also qualifications for sponsorship. Although directed to the application process creates a time period after which the government agencies may not have all requirements and not the financial Department will formally check the the documentation specified in this support associated with an exchange extent of the sponsor’s improvement section, they too are required to submit visitor. The Department clarifies that the and determine whether it indeed all relevant documents. Accordingly, proposed rule already exempts publicly qualifies for a two-year redesignation. the Department adopts the language in held U.S. companies whose shares are Accordingly, the Department adopts the the proposed rule. traded on a U.S. stock exchange from proposed one or two year redesignation As discussed above, the Department this requirement. cycle in order to provide it with the received a total of 514 comments In addition, the Department deletes tools necessary to ensure that only regarding the proposal to collect a Dun Appendices A and B to Part 62 in light qualified entities continue to operate as & Bradstreet Report for both new of the collection of information through designated sponsors. applicants and for current sponsors Form DS–3036 (Exchange Visitor seeking redesignation. After Program Application) (OMB collection Section 62.7 Redesignation consideration, the Department has 1405–0147). The Department received a total of 24 decided to eliminate this requirement. comments regarding various aspects of Two parties recommended that the Section 62.6 Designation the redesignation process (in addition to following language be reinserted into The Department received three the 514 comments opposed to the section 62.7: ‘‘a sponsor seeking comments regarding sponsor collection of Dun & Bradstreet numbers redesignation may continue to operate designation. Comments ranged from in connection with designation and its program(s) until such time as the statements indicating that these redesignation, discussed above). Four Department of State notifies it of a requirements should be applicable only parties recommended that the decision to amend or terminate its to new entities seeking designation to redesignation cycle be changed to a five- designation.’’ The Department requests that the Department year rather than two-year cycle. inadvertently deleted this language and differentiate exchange visitor program However, as noted above, there is a has therefore reinserted it into this Final requirements by category, because statutory requirement for a minimum Rule. colleges and universities must meet biannual review cycle of all sponsors Section 62.7(c)(2) of the proposed rule other requirements in order to operate. designated to conduct exchange visitor required that, as part of the Some comments also argued that the programs. For this reason, the redesignation process, sponsors provide information being requested would Department will adopt the language of the Department with a list of foreign and place an unnecessary administrative the proposed rule. domestic third parties with whom they burden on established, low-risk entities. Nine parties complained about the have written agreements. Three parties The Department respectfully disagrees ‘‘excessive’’ amount of documentation opposed this requirement, arguing that and finds that the requested they must provide along with an it was an excessive paperwork documentation is necessary to complete application for redesignation. In requirement. Keeping in mind the a full review of all new applications for particular, post-secondary academic modification of the definition of third designation on a consistent basis over institutions opined that providing the party (which now requires sponsors to all categories. It would be tremendously Department with information about enter into written agreements with complex to have the Designation their Boards of Trustees was entities that act on behalf of the sponsor requirements be varied over the 15 superfluous, as such institutions were in the conduct of the sponsor’s categories of the exchange visitor already subject to rigorous checks and exchange visitor program), the program. other measures to ensure accountability. Department has decided to require all One party commented on the Indeed, with respect to a sponsor’s sponsors to maintain such lists, which proposed flexibility of the Department eligibility, the Department is concerned the Department may then request as part to redesignate a sponsor for one or two not only that a sponsor have financial of the redesignation process or as years, at its discretion, opining that all stability and resources, but also that circumstances require. (Note that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60299

sponsors in the Summer Work Travel the Department of State has decided not remove niche sponsors from the category of the Exchange Visitor to require applicants or sponsors to program. Accordingly, the Department Program must submit the names of all submit the results of the criminal will not increase the minimum number. foreign entities to the Department in background checks. Rather, the Chief With respect to ‘‘good cause,’’ each accordance with 22 CFR 62.32(p)(2).) Executive Officer, President, or situation is fact-specific, and, since the Finally, the Department proposed equivalent must submit a certification Department wishes to maintain requiring sponsors to confirm or that the sponsor’s Responsible Officer maximum discretion, the Department reconfirm the suitability of proposed or and Alternate Responsible Officer(s) has decided to delete the reference to current Responsible Officers and have undergone criminal background ‘‘good cause.’’ With the exception of the Alternate Responsible Officers, by checks within the last four years or removal of ‘‘good cause,’’ the requiring them to undergo criminal when a new sponsor files a designation Department adopts the current language background checks. One party objected application. The proposed regulation of the proposed rule. to requiring current Responsible did not set specific requirements for a Section 62.9 General Obligations of Officers and Alternate Responsible sponsor to follow with respect to report Sponsors Officers to repeat the process. The format, screening company, or Department will require designated assessment of criminal background The Department received a total of 56 sponsors to obtain these reports every check reports. The Department does, comments regarding various general four years; sponsors that are however, require a sponsor to utilize the program obligations of sponsors. Many redesignated for a single year, however, services of a bona fide background of the comments related to the will be required to repeat the process for screener. Although the Department does appointment of Responsible Officers their next designation application. not endorse any particular screener or and Alternate Responsible Officers. The Department anticipates that screening organization, it identifies, for One party commented on the payment thorough criminal background reports sponsors’ convenience, an organization bond requirement in section 62.9(e)(3), will provide management decision that can help identify potential suggesting that the regulations should makers with sufficient information to background companies: The National both provide objective criteria regarding determine whether candidates for Association of Professional Background when and what kind of bond may be Responsible Officer and Alternate Screeners (NAPBS). NAPBS has more required, and should exempt programs Responsible Officer positions— than 500 members (a list of which is that have proven their financial viability positions that work with a national located at www.NAPBS.com), all of from the bond requirement. The security computer system—have which are expected to adhere to the Department notes that this provision is criminal records or other blemishes on NAPBS code of conduct governing not new. Although the Department has their pasts that may make them background investigations and not required a sponsor to secure a unsuitable for the proposed positions. confidentiality. payment bond for many years, it Furthermore, the criminal background The Department emphasizes that recognizes that there may be a number check requirement reflects the obtaining a criminal background report of circumstances in which it might be importance of such individuals in a does not in and of itself confirm an necessary to do so. For example, the sponsor’s organization and their right of individual’s suitability to act as a Department could have reason to access to, and ability to manipulate data Responsible Officer or an Alternate believe that a sponsor does not have within, a controlled federal government Responsible Officer. A sponsor should either the resources to support an database that tracks foreign nationals consider the results of such a report, existing exchange visitor population or participating in the Exchange Visitor and other factors, in making a reasoned the inclination to fulfill its monitoring Program. In addition, protection of judgment about an individual’s fitness and support obligations. Unfortunately, exchange visitor personal data is to assume either of these two roles. such circumstances might befall even a important to the health, safety, and long-standing sponsor with an historical welfare of program participants. Section 62.8 General Program record of financial viability and program Responsible Officers and Alternate Requirements support. To provide another example, Responsible Officers are the only Only one party commented on the when the Department redesignates a individuals authorized to log onto general program requirements section. sponsor for a single year, it may wish to SEVIS, issue and sign a Form DS–2019, Specifically, the commenting party require that sponsor to obtain a bond the ‘‘Certificate of Eligibility for proposed that the minimum number of that provides sufficient funding to cover Exchange Visitor (J-Nonimmigrant) exchange visitors required for program the cost of supporting the sponsor’s Status,’’ and otherwise update the designation be raised from five, as current year exchange visitors and/or system with timely and accurate currently specified in section 62.8(a) of transferring the next year’s exchange information. Thus, it is of vital the proposed rule, to ten. The party also visitors to other sponsors. Were the importance that all individuals with asked the Department to specify what sponsor’s performance not to improve access to SEVIS be properly vetted. The constitutes the ‘‘good cause’’ that would and were the Department to initiate a Department will not require an permit an applicant to run an exchange suspension or other serious sanction additional background check for program with fewer than five exchange against the sponsor, a payment bond Responsible Officers and Alternate visitors. The Department established a could help ensure that there would be Responsible Officers who are working minimum number of exchange visitors sufficient funding available to take care for a federal or state government entity based on the smallest program size it of potentially stranded exchange and have already passed a government believes justifies the resources it must visitors. The Department, therefore, background check. expend to evaluate a sponsor’s must retain the flexibility to require all Nine out of 24 comments specifically redesignation application and monitor sponsors to secure payment bonds at the addressed the paperwork, including its program on an on-going basis. Department’s discretion. proof of criminal background checks, Increasing the minimum size would Three parties addressed the provision which must be submitted as part of the have no impact on any parties except in section 62.9(f)(2) that requires a redesignation application, deeming it those small programs themselves, and sponsor to ensure that its employees, excessive. Except on an ad hoc basis, could potentially and unnecessarily officers, agents, independent

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60300 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

contractors, third parties, volunteers, or records that are no older than four years continuing relationship with the other individuals associated with the at any time. In those few instances sponsor organization. Another factor administration of its exchange visitor where the Department is concerned might be that the volunteer works for a program are adequately qualified and about a sponsor’s regulatory sponsor organization that has a trained and comply with the Exchange inconsistencies related to their predominantly volunteer exchange Visitor Program regulations and administration of the program and model. immigration laws. One party stated that redesignates it for a single year, such Ten parties commented on the this regulation should be expanded to sponsor would be required to obtain requirement in section 62.9(g)(3) that include foreign nationals who work as reports for that year. sponsors replace outgoing Responsible ‘‘agents or representatives’’ of sponsors. One commenting party suggested that Officers and Alternate Responsible Although the Department believes that if a sponsor were merely required to Officers within ten calendar days, this language is already sufficiently maintain records of these criminal suggesting that this requirement was broad to include any party that a background checks and submit them to unrealistic. Comments indicated, for sponsor engages to assist in its exchange the Department only on request, it example, that it takes a long time to hire visitor program oversight and would undermine the rationale for new staff, making it not feasible to operations, it modifies the language to requesting these checks because they speedily replace personnel. The change ‘‘other individuals’’ to any would not be turned in. However, the Department understands these concerns, ‘‘other individual or entity’’ to avoid Department intends for sponsors to use but maintains the requirement. The confusion about this broad sponsor their own judgment and internal Department is not suggesting that the standards to assess the suitability of obligation to ensure the regulatory sponsor organization hire a new individuals for these jobs, based on awareness and compliance of entities it employee in this timeframe, but that it whether a report revealed any may engage to assist. designate and provide documentation Two other parties opined that, in information about a candidate’s past for an existing staff member to be placed order to adequately train staff and others that would disqualify him or her from in the position on a temporary basis on working in the SEVIS system, assuming a position of trust and until a permanent replacement is hired. sponsors must be permitted to employ responsibility. Ten days is the amount of time that the more than ten Alternate Responsible Nine out of ten parties commented Department believes that a Responsible Officers. It is not clear why individuals that the proposed maximum of ten Officer/Alternate Responsible Officer must have access to SEVIS in order to Alternate Responsible Officers specified be capable of training others on in section 62.9(g)(1) is not large enough, work could go uncompleted; after this Exchange Visitor Program regulations. and that larger sponsors with more time period, someone must take on the Regardless, as it has noted above, the exchange visitors should be permitted to Responsible Officer/Alternate Department will accept requests for have more than ten Alternate Responsible Officer monitoring additional Alternate Responsible Responsible Officers. The Department workload at the sponsor organization. Officers on a case-by-case basis. will explore the idea of expanding the The Department wishes to reiterate that Eight parties opposed the proposed maximum number of Alternate a sponsor must have in place and criminal background check requirement Responsible Officers for sponsor maintain a Responsible Officer and a for Responsible Officers and Alternate organizations that request additional minimum of one Alternate Responsible Responsible Officers in proposed officers and demonstrate a need for Officer at all times. If the Responsible section 62.9(g)(1). Fifteen parties them. Officer leaves, the sponsor may wish to supported it, although of those, thirteen Two parties addressed the designate an existing Alternate parties recommended that the requirement in section 62.9(g)(2) that Responsible Officer to that position on background checks not be required Responsible Officers and Alternate a temporary basis. If the only Alternate annually and that Responsible Officers Responsible Officers be employees of Responsible Officer leaves, the sponsor and Alternate Responsible Officers of the sponsors. One comment, from a should select another existing employee currently designated sponsors be Rotary organization, explained that or officer to be an Alternate Responsible ‘‘grandfathered’’ in. The Department Rotary uses only volunteers, not Officer. The potential Responsible considered this recommendation and employees, as Responsible Officers and Officer/Alternate Responsible Officer has decided that current Responsible Alternate Responsible Officers. The needs to undergo the criminal Officers and Alternate Responsible other comment, from a large background check and be trained in the Officers will need to obtain a corporation, raised the concern that system, unless it is a case of an background check before their sponsor company lawyers and paralegals would Alternate Responsible Officer becoming organization is next redesignated after no longer be permitted to serve as the Responsible Officer temporarily. In the promulgation of this final rule and Alternate Responsible Officers under either case, and regardless of the reason, maintain background check paperwork the new rules. The Department has when a Responsible Officer or Alternate on Responsible and Alternate reviewed this comment and has Responsible Officer departs the Responsible Officers that is no older determined that it would prefer that organization, the sponsor must ensure than four years at any time. New Responsible Officers and Alternate that the departing person’s access to sponsors seeking designation by the Responsible Officers be employees of SEVIS is terminated as quickly as Department must conduct new the sponsor organization. However, an possible, but in no event later than ten background checks on their proposed applicant entity or a sponsor that wishes calendar days after departure. This Responsible Officers and Alternate to nominate an individual who is not an action serves to limit unauthorized Responsible Officers. Thus, in employee as an Alternate Responsible SEVIS access by a person who is no accordance with section 62.5(c)(8)(iii) Officer may make a request to the longer involved with the administration below, an entity seeking designation Department, which the Department may of a sponsor’s exchange visitor program must obtain criminal background approve in its discretion. One important and, thereby, protects all involved reports on all proposed Responsible and factor that may qualify a volunteer as an parties, as well as U.S. national security. Alternate Responsible Officers, certify Alternate Responsible Officer might be The Department reminds sponsors that that it has done so, and maintain that person’s longstanding, close, and they must make it their highest priority

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60301

to replace a departing Responsible commenting on this proposed should make complaints about the Officer as quickly as possible as this role requirement, the majority opined that program. is critical to the stewardship of the ten days are not sufficient time to Section 62.11 Duties of Responsible sponsor’s exchange visitor program. update records, given the number of Officers and Alternate Responsible In addition, the Department deletes exchange visitors in programs and the Officers the second sentence of section 62.9(a); other responsibilities of the Responsible the regulations governing the imposition Officer and Alternate Responsible Proposed section 62.11(a) would of sanctions are set forth in 22 CFR Officers. Since the inception of SEVIS, require Responsible Officers and 62.50. The Department also deletes sponsors were required to update SEVIS Alternate Responsible Officers to be Appendix C to Part 62 in light of the records within 21 days. Upon review of thoroughly familiar not only with the collection of information through Form current SEVIS reporting requirements Exchange Visitor Program regulations DS–3037 (Update of Information on a and the Department’s legislative and Department codes required for Sponsor’s Exchange Visitor Program) mandate to ensure that sponsors issuing Forms DS–2019, but also with (OMB collection 1405–0147). maintain SEVIS, the Department ‘‘all federal and state regulations pertaining to the administration of its Section 62.10 Program Administration upholds the proposed language and requires sponsors to report in SEVIS exchange visitor program, including the Twenty-three parties commented on within ten business days of notification Department of State’s and Department of the proposed requirement in section by an exchange visitor of any change in Homeland Security’s policies, manuals, 62.10(a)(2) that exchange visitors be address, telephone number or email instructions, guidance and SEVIS proficient in the English language, ‘‘as address. operations relevant to the Exchange measured by an objective Thirty parties opposed the proposed Visitor Program,’’ as well as federal, measurement.’’ All but one of these requirement in section 62.10(d)(5) that state and local laws pertaining to parties recommended maintaining the sponsors report the actual and current employment, including the Fair Labor current language (i.e., ‘‘The exchange U.S. address and email address for Standards Act, if the exchange category visitor possesses sufficient proficiency accompanying spouses and dependents. overseen has an employment in the English language to participate in They argued that such a requirement component. Five commenting parties his or her program.’’) One party would be unduly burdensome, that the encouraged the Department to develop recommended that the Department information could be obtained from the clear, up-to-date policy and interpretive adopt the test set forth in the regulations Department of Homeland Security guidance on all relevant laws and for the Trainee and Intern categories (DHS), and that the requirement should regulations, and to make such guidance (Section 62.22(d)(1)). The Department be postponed until the next version of easily available to program sponsors. In believes that not only is an exchange SEVIS is operational, at which time an attempt to capture relevant visitor’s success in his or her particular exchange visitors can enter this Department guidance, regulations, and program dependent upon sufficient information directly into SEVIS other information, the Department English language capability, but good themselves. Similarly, 31 parties launched a new Web site design last English communication skills are objected to the proposed requirement in year, and all such information can now essential to ensure the health, safety, section 62.10(d)(6) that sponsors report be accessed under one section, at and welfare of exchange visitors. Employment Authorization Document http://j1visa.state.gov/sponsors/current/ Moreover, the Department continues to (EAD) information in SEVIS for regulations-compliance. Sponsors find that too many exchange visitors accompanying spouses and dependents. nonetheless may need to research some lack sufficient English proficiency to They argued that sponsors do not have federal, state, and local requirements perform their jobs or complete their this information, that this information is that may impact their exchange visitor academic programs; to navigate daily not part of the employment programs. life in the United States; to read and authorization process, or that, in any One commenting party expressed comprehend program materials; to event, U.S. Customs and Border concern about proposed section understand fully their responsibilities, Protection should collect this 62.11(d), which directs sponsors to rights, and protections; and to know information. To be ‘‘accompanying,’’ ensure that their spam filters do not how to obtain assistance, if necessary. spouses and dependents—with few block reception of SEVIS or Accordingly the Department adopts a exceptions (e.g., dependents are in a communications from either the modified version of the regulatory boarding school)—should be living with Department of State or the Department language governing the Trainee and the exchange visitors. The Department of Homeland Security. The party noted Intern categories as the program-wide finds that collection of the that it is not always possible to know if standard for determining the English accompanying spouse and dependents’ messages are being sent in the first place language proficiency of exchange email addresses is necessary for and suggested that multiple messages be visitors. The Department reminds emergency contact information and sent, including a paper notice if there is sponsors to retain evidence of how they upholds this requirement. The no response from the sponsor. The measured applicants’ English language Department deletes proposed section proposed regulation is consistent with proficiency so that it may be made 62.10(d)(6) regarding Employment the requirement set forth in 8 CFR available to the Department upon Authorization Documents from this 214.3(e)(1) that governs electronic request. final rule; however, the Department will notices sent to Student and Exchange The proposed rule moved sections review the requirements of this Visitor Program (SEVP) certified 62.70(b) and (c) to sections 62.10(d)(3) proposed section at the time another schools. Paper notices will be sent at and (4) and required that sponsors version of SEVIS is implemented. Departmental discretion in certain report in SEVIS any change in an In order to protect the health, safety, circumstances, such as when sponsors exchange visitor’s U.S. address, and welfare of exchange visitors, have notified the Department that their telephone number, email address, or language has been inserted into the electronic systems will have outages primary site of activity within ten regulation making it unlawful for within a specific timeframe. Therefore, business days of being notified by the sponsors or their foreign entities to the Department adopts the language of exchange visitor. Of the fifteen parties retaliate against exchange visitors if they the proposed rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60302 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Section 62.12 Control of Forms DS– without securing final placement prior other electronic means, copies or PDFs 2019 to issuing a Form DS–2019. It is of signed or unsigned Forms DS–2019 to The proposal in section 62.12(b)(1)(i) important to note that certain categories, any unauthorized party. The parties stated that a sponsor must verify that such as Summer Work Travel, noted that, although they appreciate the each prospective exchange visitor is secondary school students, interns and importance of keeping copies of eligible, qualified and accepted into the trainees, have their own criteria government documents secure, the sponsor’s exchange visitor program. The regarding placements within the prohibition as written in the proposed parenthetical language implies that the specific program provisions set forth in rule is too rigid. One party observed that sponsor has secured a placement, by Subpart B. the proposed regulation does not clearly Four parties opposed the new obtaining a camp offer letter or a written indicate if there are any ‘‘authorized language in section 62.12(d)(1) secondary student school acceptance, parties’’ other than the Department of regarding annual allotment of Forms before issuing a Form DS–2019. A total State and the Department of Homeland DS–2019, arguing that a limited annual of 25 parties, mostly from the secondary Security and queried whether, for allotment might result in a sponsor not school student and camp counselor example, an exchange visitor whose having enough forms to meet market DS–2019 is stolen is an ‘‘authorized communities, commented on this demand. The Department notes that the party’’ for purposes of receiving a copy proposed change, only one of which process for submitting an annual request supported it. A majority of those for the Department for allotment of of his or her own scanned DS–2019. commenting expressed concern that if Forms DS–2019 or the request for Another commenter noted that because program pre-placement—e.g., a camp additional Forms DS–2019 (i.e., an the original DS–2019 must be signed by offer letter or a written secondary expansion) is no different than the the sponsor in blue ink, a precaution student school acceptance—were process that has been in place since the that permits anyone viewing the DS– required for all exchange visitors, many publication of the original 1993 2019 to distinguish readily an original exchange visitors would be unable to regulations. The Department started from a photocopy, there is no reason to secure visas because the visa process is ‘‘allocating’’ Forms DS–2019 before the restrict a sponsor’s ability to transmit a so slow during high volume seasons. advent of SEVIS. The transition to the fax or PDF to any entity other than the The secondary school student electronic generation of such forms to be Department of State or the Department regulations set forth under section printed on a sponsor’s printer, however, of Homeland Security. In light of 62.25, for example, permit sponsors to does not eliminate the need for the current technologies that make it easy to place students up to August 31 each Department to determine how many create counterfeit copies of documents, academic year. Due to high volume of forms a sponsor may have—and thus, the Department does not wish for there visas processed every summer, waiting how many exchange visitors a sponsor to be any electronic or paper replicas of until the end of August when a school may bring to the United States each Forms DS–2019 to be available to placement is confirmed does not permit year. Indeed, the Department assesses anyone, hence, the only authorized ample time for the visa to be processed each sponsor’s financial and staffing parties are the Departments of State and and travel to the United States prior to resources in an effort to ensure that a Homeland Security. It would be the first day of school. sponsor does not sponsor more relatively simple to remove a black The Department believes that there exchange visitors than it can adequately signature from a copy of a Form DS– are many advantages to its proposal. monitor and support. The Department, 2019 and replace it with an original blue First, it would prevent sponsors from therefore, will issue Forms DS–2019 to ink signature. While sponsors are cancelling programs at the last minute sponsors based on the current need of certainly authorized to maintain copies due to their inability to secure program the sponsor, how the Department views of these forms for their internal files and placements (and a prospective exchange program expansion as a policy issue, may be called on to provide such copies visitor would know that there was no and any upcoming expressed needs of to a requesting Department, the only guarantee of a program until he or she sponsors in their implementation of the other ‘‘versions’’ of Forms DS–2019 received a Form DS–2019). It also would program. should be the original documents lessen the potential for applicants to The commenting parties noted that maintained by the exchange visitors and obtain and use visas without ever the program size expansion request their accompanying spouses and intending to participate in the Exchange procedures in section 62.12(d)(2) are dependents. Accordingly, the Visitor Program. Finally, it would unclear and require further clarification Department will adopt the proposed require sponsors to secure placements from the Department. The Department regulation as drafted. earlier in the season than they usually respectfully disagrees. The language in do, allowing more time for planning and the proposed regulations parallels the Three commenting parties opposed orientation than is now available. language in section 2.4.2 of the User the requirement in section 62.12(e)(5) Nevertheless, without further Manual for Exchange Visitor Program that a sponsor ask exchange visitor analysis, the Department cannot assess Sponsor Users (RO/ARO) of SEVIS applicants to return unused Forms DS– whether posts would be able to timely Version 6.10: Volume 1 Forms DS–3036 2019. Two of the parties pointed out grant all the necessary visa interviews, and DS–3037. Sponsors have long been that SEVIS makes this requirement in order to avoid unanticipated required to describe their source of obsolete. The Department agrees—as shrinkage in program sizes. In light of planned program growth, staff increases, long as sponsors promptly change the this, the Department is eliminating the training capacity, current financial status of the SEVIS records associated proposed parenthetical language ‘‘(e.g., status, and provide other information on with the unused Forms DS–2019 to has an offer letter from a camp, a written how they will handle program growth ‘‘invalid.’’ Otherwise, individuals with acceptance from a secondary school)’’ (id. at p. 46). Accordingly, the unscrupulous intentions could use a from section 62.12(b)(1)(i). The Department will adopt section 62.12(d) Form DS–2019 to obtain a visa to Department acknowledges that, in as proposed. illegally enter the United States. While certain categories sponsors are able to Thirteen commenting parties the Department will withdraw the meet the regulations by accepting addressed the prohibition in section requirement set forth in section exchange visitors into their program 62.12(e)(2) against forwarding, via fax or 62.12(e)(5), it reminds sponsors of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60303

critical importance of maintaining section 62.70(a)(5) requires a sponsor to days of the Program Start Date does not current and accurate SEVIS records. ‘‘[u]tilize SEVIS to up-date information work. Therefore, the SEVIS record with In addition, the Department deletes on any exchange visitor, spouse, or a program duration of less than 30 days section 62.12(b)(2)(iii); the regulations dependent child for whom a SEVIS must be validated before the Program governing the imposition of sanctions record has been created.’’ The purpose End Date listed in SEVIS. Failure to are set forth in 22 CFR 62.50. of the new language in section validate a nonimmigrant’s SEVIS record Section 62.13 Notification 62.13(b)(2) is to ensure that sponsors (e.g., before the Program End Date for Requirements understand that an exchange visitor’s program durations of less than 30 days site of activity is included in the SEVIS or within 30 days of the Program Start The Department received a total of 18 information that they are required to Date for programs with a program comments regarding various aspects of update. duration of 30 days or greater) will the notification requirements section. As ‘‘site of activity’’ is a newly result in the automatic change of the One party stated that the wording of defined term, the Department status of a SEVIS record to ‘‘Invalid’’ section 62.13(a)(1) mistakenly implies understands that additional guidance is (when no Port of Entry information is J–2 accompanying spouses and needed to inform sponsors how to contained on the SEVIS record) or ‘‘No dependents will need to be validated accommodate certain situations. One Show’’ (when Port of Entry information separately from the J–1 exchange university expressed concern at the is present on the SEVIS record). A visitors they accompany or join, even burden of updating the (secondary) site record in ‘‘Invalid’’ status indicates that though J–2s are automatically validated of activity field for an exchange visitor a foreign national did not use the in SEVIS when J–1s are validated. who goes to another site ‘‘for a few days associated Form DS–2019 to enter the Under the current SEVIS, a J–2’s record at most’’ to lecture or consult. Proposed United States. A record in ‘‘No Show’’ is automatically changed from ‘‘Initial’’ regulations at section 62.13(b)(2) require status indicates that the nonimmigrant to ‘‘Active’’ status upon the validation a sponsor to update an exchange entered the country, but failed to of the associated J–1 record. visitor’s site of activity within ten days. commence participation in the exchange Accordingly, the Department modifies Clearly, changes in activity locations visitor program for which he or she the language of section 62.13(a)(1) to that last only a few days would not need entered the United States. It is clarify that separate validation is not to be captured in SEVIS. Keeping in important to recognize that a SEVIS necessary. mind that a purpose of maintaining a record in ‘‘No Show’’ status is a negative Seven parties commented on the current site of activity in SEVIS is to indicator that alerts the proper requirement proposed at section enable law enforcement to locate authorities that the individual failed to 62.13(a)(4) that sponsors track and exchange visitors, in the above example, comply with the requirements of the report early departures of accompanying it is likely that someone at the Exchange Visitor Program regulations by spouses and dependents, stating that professor’s primary site of activity could entering the United States with no they had no system to track them, and provide law enforcement with the intention of reporting to his or her that ‘‘this requirement goes beyond professor’s itinerary. However, if an sponsor. Sponsors must use caution and regulatory requirements.’’ The individual had both a permanent office timely validate SEVIS records or they Department disagrees. There have been and a lab site, it would be appropriate could change to ‘‘No Show’’ status and 30,000 J–2 visa holders that entered the to enter as the primary address, the one unintentionally create a negative United States on the Exchange Visitor at which the exchange visitor was nonimmigrant history for the exchange Program since the program’s inception. primarily located, and to enter the other visitor, thereby impacting his or her Sponsors of exchange visitors are as secondary. The collection of this data application for visas in the future. equally responsible for tracking the will remain in the final rule. Sponsors should realize that Invalid whereabouts of accompanying spouses When a nonimmigrant enters the and No Show records will appear on the and dependents to whom they also United States and reports to his or her sponsor’s Form DS–3097, Annual issued Forms DS–2019. One exchange visitor program sponsor, the Report, and may be of concern to the commenting party, however, explains sponsor must note this occurrence in Department’s Office of Designation that there is no regulatory requirement SEVIS through the validation process, when processing Form DS–2019 for the J–1 exchange visitor to report to thereby demonstrating that the exchange allotment requests or applications for the sponsor the travel plans of his or her visitor is currently present in the United redesignation. Failure to validate SEVIS accompanying spouse and dependents. States and is participating in his or her records also may impact a sponsor’s The Department reminds sponsors that exchange visitor program identified on allotment of available SEVIS records it is incumbent upon them to draft and the Form DS–2019 used to enter the and the administrative actions that are implement programmatic rules that United States. For the purpose of this required (by both the sponsor officials allow them to satisfy the requirements rulemaking, the 30-day requirement for and the Department of State officials) to in Part 62. In other words, a sponsor can validation remains unchanged, with the correct the SEVIS status of the records; easily make it a condition of bringing an exception of those exchange visitors and is evidence of a sponsor’s failure to accompanying spouse and dependents participating in a program of which the comply with program regulations. that the exchange visitor must report if maximum duration of the program is Three parties commented on and when they depart the United States less than 30 days. Section 62.8(b), proposed section 62.13(a)(3), which prior to the exchange visitor. regarding minimum duration of provides that a sponsor must report in Accordingly, the Department retains the program, requires a sponsor, other than SEVIS any withdrawal from or early proposed language for section a federal government agency, to provide completion of an exchange visitor’s 62.13(a)(4). each exchange visitor, with the program. One party suggested changing Four parties submitted comments exception of Short-term Scholar, with a the functionality of SEVIS to allow a about the requirement proposed in minimum period of participation in the sponsor to enter a retroactive date in the section 62.13(b)(2) that a sponsor must United States of no less than three ‘‘Complete Program More than 30 days update SEVIS to reflect any change to an weeks. When an exchange program is Before Program End Date’’ field. The exchange visitor’s site of activity. This less than three weeks, the requirement second party urged the Department to is not a new requirement: current to validate the SEVIS record within 30 make reference to the impending

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60304 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

paperless environment so that ‘‘SEVIS Section 62.14 Insurance Coverage Section 62.15 Reporting Requirements can be programmed to implement This rule increases by $50,000 the Sponsors must submit annual reports Exchange Visitor Program regulations, level of insurance coverage a sponsor to the Department, to be generated rather than expecting the regulations to must require its exchange visitors (and through SEVIS. Such report must be be amended later in response to SEVIS accompanying spouses and dependents) filed on an academic (July 1–June 30), programming.’’ The third party, a to maintain for the duration of their calendar (January 1–December 31), or sponsor in the research scholar category, exchange visitor program participation, fiscal (October 1–September 30) year suggested omitting this provision from as reflected on their Forms DS–2019 basis, as directed by the Department. the Final Rule, arguing that sponsors (i.e., from the ‘‘Program Begin Date’’ The annual report has recently been sometimes overestimate the amount of through the ‘‘Program End Date’’). Many updated in SEVIS to reflect the changes time a research project can take, making sponsors already require insurance made on the Department’s Form DS– it more sensible retroactively to change policies for their exchange visitors at a 3097 (Annual Report). The statistical the program end date rather than report higher level of coverage than the current calculations for the number of exchange that the program was completed early. regulations require. Although the visitors each year is taken directly from The Department has carefully regulations do not require ‘‘entry to SEVIS records. Sponsors may input considered these comments, and will exit’’ insurance coverage, the answers to the narrative questions on adopt the language of the proposed rule. Department strongly encourages Form DS–3097 in SEVIS; however, they The Department can anticipate neither sponsors to offer this highly desirable must continue to print the form, sign the the implementation date nor the final coverage. certification, and mail it to the characteristics of a SEVIS update. The Department received a total of 47 Department until the implementation of Accordingly, it must adopt regulations comments regarding the insurance the next version of SEVIS. In addition, that address the current state of provisions. Of those, 37 parties the Department deletes Appendix D to technology and issue guidance and/or supported the increased amounts, nine Part 62 in light of the collection of new regulations after the technologies parties opposed the proposed changes, information through Form DS–3097 change. and two parties neither agreed nor (Annual Report Form) (OMB collection disagreed but made further inquiries 1405–0151). Current section 62.13(c)(8) requires about acceptable ratings. The majority of The Department received 11 sponsors to report the loss or theft of the comments recognized the need for comments regarding section 62.15(e)(2) Forms DS–2019 to the Department by an increase in the health insurance of the proposed rule (now identified as telephone. Two commenting parties coverage amounts. However, some section 62.15(a)(5)(ii) in this asked the Department to reconsider this commenters indicated that the amount rulemaking), eight of which opposed the requirement and instead permit of coverage of $200,000 per accident or stipulation that only the Chief Financial sponsors to report this information via illness was too high and that $100,000 Officer of an academic, medical, and email or in SEVIS. The Department would be sufficient. The Department private sector entity is authorized to agrees with this suggestion and, has further reviewed insurance levels sign its annual report. The annual report accordingly, will change section and recommendations and agrees that form already permits the Responsible 62.13(c)(8) to permit such information $100,000 is an acceptable level of Officer’s signature; therefore, the to be reported by telephone or email. coverage per accident or illness. The Department revises section Section 62.13(d), which has been Department also has adopted, as 62.15(a)(5)(ii) to permit an institution’s changed to require sponsors to inform prompted by two of the comments, two Chief Executive Officer or Responsible the Department of any serious problem additional insurance ratings: the ‘‘A-’’ Officer to sign the institution’s annual or controversy on or before the next rating by Fitch Ratings, Inc. and the report. business day, inspired two comments. ‘‘A3’’ rating by Moody’s Investor To strengthen program oversight, One party asked the Department to keep Services. Thirteen of the commenting proposed section 62.15(e)(3) (now the language ‘‘promptly’’ rather than parties asked the Department to delay or identified as section 62.15(b) in this change the operative language to ‘‘on or provide a grace period for rulemaking) requires management before the next business day.’’ The implementation of the new insurance reviews, currently utilized in the Au Department believes that ‘‘promptly’’ requirements in order to give sponsors Pair category, for Private Sector Program was too vague a standard to guide time to enter into new contracts with sponsors, which includes the categories sponsors in the event of a serious insurance carriers. The Department of Trainees, Interns, Teachers, problem or controversy. Thus the understands that current contracts must Secondary School Students, Camp Department will adopt the wording ‘‘on be fulfilled and that it will take some Counselors, Au Pairs, Alien Physician, or before the next business day.’’ The time to put new agreements in place. and Summer Work Travel. The Department received 59 comments on other party asked that the Department Therefore, the new insurance requirements will go into effect on the proposed management audit more explicitly define or provide January 1, 2015. Three comments requirement, 23 of which were in favor examples of what might constitute a suggested deletion of proposed section of the new requirement, 35 of which ‘‘serious problem or controversy.’’ 62.14(j), which gives the Secretary of were opposed, and one of which Examples of such instances are death or State the authority to update new requested clarification on the cost and a serious injury of an exchange visitor, mandatory minimum levels of insurance list of recommended auditors. Twenty- sexual abuse, or any other event that coverage. The comments argued that three comments recognized the value of could bring the Department or the this power is too broad and that, in any a management audit yet still raised Exchange Visitor Program into notoriety event, changes to minimum insurance concerns about the financial impact of or disrepute. coverage requirements should go such audits on small entities, the In addition, the Department deletes through the full regulatory review financial impact on organizations that section 62.13(b)(1)(iii); the regulations process. The Department agrees and has hold designations in multiple categories governing the imposition of sanctions deleted this provision from section of exchange, and the requirement that are set forth in 22 CFR 62.50. 62.14. audits be conducted annually.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60305

A management review or audit, as it exchange visitors are minors, the these foreign nationals will have direct was previously referred to, is a review Department has publicly noted on and substantial adverse effects on the of a sponsor’s internal controls. The several occasions that the overall foreign affairs of the United States. management review identifies number of problematic incidents is low. Although the Department is of the weaknesses in operating procedures in Using this language gives an inaccurate opinion that this rule is exempt from the the conduct of an organization’s impression to the general public, rulemaking provisions of the APA, the business and in meeting regulatory policymakers, and U.S. embassy staff Department previously published this requirements in the administration of its who may not be familiar with these rule as a notice of proposed rulemaking, exchange visitor program or programs. programs. The Department agrees and with a 60-day provision for public Requiring a management review would eliminates from the Final Rule language comment; and it is now publishing this give the Office of Exchange describing certain Exchange Visitor rule as a final rule with a 60-day Coordination and Compliance an Program categories as ‘‘high risk.’’ provision for public comment. This is additional tool to assess the extent to without prejudice to its determination Section 62.16 Employment which designated private sector that the Exchange Visitor Program is a exchange sponsors comply with the As discussed above with respect to foreign affairs function. Exchange Visitor Program regulations. section 62.10, the Department has The Department will provide sponsors eliminated the requirement that Small Business Regulatory Enforcement with a format and schedule of the sponsors collect Employment Fairness Act of 1996 management review timeframe. The Authorization Document numbers for This final rule is not a major rule as Department intends to roll out the accompanying spouses and dependents. defined by 5 U.S.C. 804 for the purposes management reviews beginning with the Accordingly, section 62.16(c) has also of Congressional review of agency secondary school student category. been amended to remove all reference to rulemaking under the Small Business Initial management reviews will be due the collection of Employment Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of four months after the end of each Authorization Document numbers. 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801–808). This rule will category’s annual cycle. Management Further, the language has been updated not result in an annual effect on the reviews for the other categories will be to reference the Department of economy of $100 million or more; a implemented on different schedules in Homeland Security and not the now major increase in costs or prices; or order to spread out the due dates over defunct Immigration and Naturalization significant adverse effects on a two-year period. Sponsors that Services (INS). competition, employment, investment, administer exchange programs funded Note: Current section 62.17—Fees and productivity, innovation, or on the fully by federal, state, or local Charges remains unchanged. ability of United States-based governments (e.g., public school companies to compete with foreign- Regulatory Analysis systems) are exempt from the based companies in domestic and management review requirement. These Administrative Procedure Act export markets. exchange programs are audited under The Department of State is of the other governmental requirements. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Sponsors are required to engage opinion that the Exchange Visitor This final rule will not result in the independent auditors to perform the Program is a foreign affairs function of expenditure by State, local and tribal management reviews, including the U.S. Government and that rules governments, in the aggregate, or by the reviewing internal operating procedures implementing this function are exempt private sector, of $100 million in any of the sponsor and the files of a from sections 553 (Rulemaking) and 554 year, and it will not significantly or statistically valid sampling of the (Adjudications) of the Administrative uniquely affect small governments. sponsor’s exchange visitors. Procedure Act (APA). The U.S. Therefore, no actions were deemed Three commenting parties set forth Government, by policy and necessary under the provisions of the general concerns about proposed section longstanding practice, oversees foreign Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 62.15(f) (now identified as section nationals who come to the United States 1995. 62.15(a)(6) in this rulemaking), which as participants in exchange visitor requires sponsors to report a numerical programs, either directly or through Executive Order 13175—Consultation count, by category, of all exchange private sector program sponsors or and Coordination With Indian Tribal visitors participating in the sponsor’s grantees. When problems occur, the U.S. Governments program for the reporting year. Government is often held accountable The Department has determined that Specifically, the comments called into by foreign governments for the this rulemaking will not have tribal question the accuracy of such data treatment of their nationals, regardless implications, will not impose before any SEVIS revision were to go of who is responsible for the problems. substantial direct compliance costs on into effect. The Department and SEVIS The purpose of this final rule is to Indian tribal governments, and will not have addressed these concerns since amend the general administrative pre-empt tribal law. Accordingly, the publication of the proposed rule. The provisions for the Exchange Visitor requirements of Executive Order 13175 new annual report form, Form DS–3097, Program, and associated Appendices, in do not apply to this rulemaking. was implemented in SEVIS in April accordance with the Act and to take 2011. steps to protect the health, safety and Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Five commenting parties also opposed welfare of foreign nationals entering the Order 13272 the characterization, in the United States (often on programs funded Since this final rule is exempt from 5 Supplementary Information section of by the U.S. Government) for a finite U.S.C. 553, and no other law requires the proposed rule, of certain exchange period of time and with a view that they the Department of State to give notice of visitor program categories as ‘‘high will return to their countries of proposed rulemaking, it is not subject to risk.’’ These parties stated that, although nationality upon completion of their the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. the exchange community understands programs. The Department of State 601, et seq.) and Executive Order 13272, the special vigilance required for certain represents that failure to take steps to section 3(b). In its September 22, 2009 programs where the majority of protect the health, safety and welfare of promulgation of the proposed rule, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60306 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Department certified that the proposed electronically. These types of checks cost sponsors several hundred dollars changes to the regulations were not meet the standard outlined in the each. expected to have a significant economic regulation. Health insurance should not After revising the proposed rule, the impact on a substantial number of small cause an increase in sponsor costs, as Department again reviewed the entities under the criteria of the most sponsors are already requiring regulations being promulgated in this Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– insurance at the level noted in the Final Rule in order to determine if they 612, and Executive Order 13272, section rulemaking, if not higher. The vast would potentially have a significant 3(b). majority of exchange visitors pay for economic impact on any other small their own insurance and buy from a Numbers of Small Businesses entities using the J-visa. Other than variety of vendors with different costs those comments received regarding The Department notes that the final that are affected by myriad factors. management audits, no other rule will affect the operations of the The cost per small business is commenters claimed that there would nearly 1,400 sponsors designated by the estimated at around $10,000 every two be a potential significant economic Department to conduct exchange years for the management review. The impact on small entities. programs. These 1,400 sponsors bring cost, on average, is $48–$180 every four into the United States close to 300,000 years for background checks based on Accordingly, the Department has new exchange visitors annually. The an average of three to six ROs/AROs per determined that the Final Rule is not Department has not conducted a study sponsor. expected to have an economic impact of how many of its sponsors are small The Office of Advocacy, Small on a substantial number of small businesses. However, even if all of the Business Administration, submitted a entities. 1,400 sponsors are stipulated to be small public comment letter on this rule. The Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 businesses, the proposed changes to the Office was concerned with the regulations would not be expected to Department of State’s use of the foreign The Department is of the opinion that have a significant economic impact on affairs exemption, the use of the Interim the Exchange Visitor Program is a a substantial number of small entities Final Rule format, and the lack of small foreign affairs function of the U.S. under the criteria of the Regulatory business data to justify this certification. Government and that rules governing Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612 and After receiving and analyzing the the conduct of this function are exempt Executive Order 13272, section 3(b). aforementioned 656 comments and after from the requirements of Executive consultation with the affected Order 12866. However, the Department Small Business Compliance Costs stakeholders, a number of changes were has nevertheless reviewed the final rule The Department has not specifically made to the proposed regulation. The to ensure its consistency with the studied the effect of this regulation on Department removed the requirement regulatory philosophy and principles set small businesses. However, it estimates for sponsors to collect a Dun & forth in those Executive Orders. The the cost of a management review, whose Bradstreet number on the organization following number of sponsors and parameters the Department may define, and affiliated third parties, which participants will be affected by to be around $10,000. There is a cost of would have been a cost to sponsors of regulatory changes (note that the total around $3–5 per person for an instant several hundred dollars each. In number of sponsors in the table adds up electronic-type of background check or addition, the expense of required pre- to more than 1,400, since many $15 per person cost for one where local designation on-site reviews to sponsors sponsors cover more than one category documentation is reviewed was removed, which also would have of exchange visitor):

Number of Category Number of participants sponsors (CY 2013)

Au Pair ...... 15 14,625 Camp Counselor ...... 24 18,889 College and University Student ...... 816 45,738 Intern ...... 77 21,879 Alien Physician ...... 1 2,331 Professor & Research Scholar ...... 975 31,842 International Visitor ...... 7 5,715 Government Visitor ...... 22 5,299 Secondary School Student ...... 77 23,697 Short Term Scholar ...... 834 19,572 Specialist ...... 412 801 Summer Work Travel ...... 46 86,518 Teacher ...... 54 1,176 Trainee ...... 85 9,111

Total ...... 287,193

The Department acknowledges an collections are updated. However, to reputable individuals have access to increased paperwork burden on the summarize, these requirements will SEVIS. The increased costs, as 1,400 sponsors that participate in the enhance the safety and security of the explained in the preamble above, will exchange visitor program. The reasons exchange visitor exchange visitors involve the cost of criminal background for these requirements were explained (some of whom are vulnerable minors) checks for personnel assigned to each of above, and will be explained in detail and will support interagency national the sponsors, which we estimate to be when the respective information security efforts by ensuring that less than $10 per person, for an average

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60307

of three to six Responsible Officers and the Exchange Visitor Program. (See 78 to act as sponsors of the Exchange Alternate Responsible Officers per F.R. 38429, June 26, 2013). Visitor Program. Sponsors may act sponsor, as well as costs associated with independently or with the assistance of List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 62 performing a management review. The third parties. The purpose of the management reviews will be conducted Cultural exchange programs, Program is to provide foreign nationals by sponsors in each category on a Reporting and recordkeeping with opportunities to participate in rolling basis, starting with sponsors in requirements. educational and cultural programs in the secondary school student category. Accordingly, 22 CFR Part 62 is the United States and return home to The Department intends the cost of the amended as follows: share their experiences, and to review to be around $10,000 per encourage Americans to participate in sponsor per review period. PART 62—EXCHANGE VISITOR educational and cultural programs in PROGRAM The general provisions section other countries. Exchange visitors enter (Subpart A) has not been amended since ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 62 is the United States on a J visa. The March 19, 1993. Exchange programs revised to read as follows: regulations set forth in this subpart are conducted under the authorities of the applicable to all sponsors. Exchange Visitor Program promote Authority: 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 8 U.S.C. (c) The Assistant Secretary for 1101(a)(15)(J), 1182, 1184, 1258; 22 U.S.C. mutual understanding by providing 1431 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 2451 et seq.; P.L. 105– Educational and Cultural Affairs of the exchange visitors an understanding of 277, Div. G, 112 Stat. 2681 et seq.; Department of State may, in his or her and an appreciation for the similarities Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977, 3 CFR, sole discretion and to the extent and differences between their own 1977 Comp. p. 200; E.O. 12048 of March 27, consistent with the authorities culture and that of the United States. 1978; 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. p. 168; P.L. 104– described in paragraph (a) of this Upon their return home, the exchange 208, Div. C, 110 Stat. 3009–546, as amended; section and other applicable law, waive visitors enrich their communities with P.L. 107–56, sec. 416, 115 Stat. 354; and P.L. or modify any provision of this Part 107–173, 116 Stat. 543. their fresh perspectives of U.S. culture with respect to programs that are and events. Although this is an Subpart A—General Provisions established pursuant to memoranda of intangible benefit, one that is not easily understanding, letters of intent or quantified, the Department finds that ■ 2. Sections 62.1 through 62.16 are similar arrangements between the the benefits of this rulemaking outweigh revised to read as follows: United States and foreign governments. its costs. The Department has reviewed Sec. When establishing such a program, the this rulemaking in light of Executive 62.1 Purpose. Department will publish a notice in the Order 13563, and finds that it is 62.2 Definitions. Federal Register describing the program consistent with the guidance therein. 62.3 Sponsor eligibility. and any resulting modifications to or 62.4 Categories of participant eligibility. waivers of provisions of this Part. If Executive Order 12988 62.5 Designation application procedure. 62.6 Designation. such an arrangement will not result in The Department of State has reviewed 62.7 Redesignation. a waiver of or other modification to the this final rule in light of sections 3(a) 62.8 General program requirements. provisions of this Part, then the and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to 62.9 General obligations of sponsors. Department need not publish a notice. eliminate ambiguity, minimize 62.10 Program administration. § 62.2 Definitions. litigation, establish clear legal 62.11 Duties of Responsible Officers and standards, and reduce burden. Alternate Responsible Officers. The following definitions apply to 62.12 Control of Forms DS–2019. this part: Executive Orders 12372 and 13132 62.13 Notification requirements. 62.14 Insurance. Academic institution. Any publicly or This regulation will not have 62.15 Reporting requirements. privately operated primary, secondary, substantial direct effect on the states, on 62.16 Employment. or post-secondary institution in the the relationship between the national United States or abroad that offers government and the states, or on the § 62.1 Purpose. primarily academic programs. For the distribution of power and (a) The regulations set forth in this purpose of these regulations, an responsibilities among the various part implement the Mutual Educational institution that offers primarily levels of government. Therefore, in and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (the vocational or technical programs is not accordance with section 6 of Executive ‘‘Act’’), as amended, Public Law 87–256, an academic institution unless the Order 13132, it is determined that this 22 U.S.C. 2451, et seq. (1988). The specific program or programs in which rule does not have sufficient federalism purpose of the Act is to increase mutual the exchange visitor is to participate or implications to require consultations or understanding between the people of has participated has been determined by warrant the preparation of a federalism the United States and the people of the U.S. Department of State on an summary impact statement. Executive other countries by means of educational exceptional basis to be comparable to Order 12372, regarding and cultural exchanges. Educational and those offered in academic institutions. intergovernmental consultation on cultural exchanges assist the Accompanying spouse and federal programs and activities, does not Department of State in furthering the dependents. The alien spouse and/or apply to this regulation. foreign policy objectives of the United minor unmarried child(ren), if any, of an exchange visitor who are Paperwork Reduction Act States. These exchanges are defined by section 102 of the Act, 22 U.S.C. 2452, accompanying or following to join the The information collection and section 101(a)(15)(J) of the exchange visitor and who seek to enter requirements contained in this final rule Immigration and Nationality Act, as or have entered the United States are pursuant to the Paperwork amended, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J). temporarily on non-immigrant J–2 visas Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35 (b) The Secretary of State of the or seek to acquire or have acquired such and OMB Control Number 1405–0147, Department of State facilitates activities status after admission. For the purpose Form DS–7000, which requires specified in the Act, in part, by of these regulations, a minor is a person collection of additional information for designating public and private entities under the age of 21 years old.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60308 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Accredited academic institution. Any and Americans so as to increase their as an accompanying spouse and academic institution that is duly mutual understanding of each other’s dependent. accredited by the appropriate academic society, culture, and institutions. Form DS–3036, Exchange Visitor accrediting authority of the U.S. Department of State. The U.S. Program Application. A controlled jurisdiction in which such institution is Department of State. document of the Department of State located. In addition, all post-secondary Designation. The written that an organization uses to apply to institutions also must be accredited by authorization issued by the Department become a designated sponsor of the a nationally recognized accrediting of State to an exchange visitor program Exchange Visitor Program and that a agency or association as recognized by applicant to conduct an exchange visitor designated sponsor uses to request the Secretary of Education. program as a sponsor. The term includes redesignation or amendment of an Act. The Mutual Educational and the written authorization issued to a existing exchange visitor program. Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, as current sponsor that applies to continue Form DS–3037, Update of Information amended. its designation (i.e., redesignation). on a Sponsor’s Exchange Visitor Actual and current U.S. address. The Employee. An individual who Program. A controlled document of the physical, geographic location at which provides services or labor for an Department of State that a sponsor uses an exchange visitor and accompanying employer for wages or other to update information on its exchange spouse and dependents reside while remuneration. A third party, as defined visitor programs in SEVIS. participating in an exchange program. in this section, or an independent Form DS–3097, Annual Report. A Alternate Responsible Officer. An contractor, as defined in 8 CFR controlled document of the Department employee or officer of a sponsor who 274a.1(j), is not an employee. of State in which a sponsor reports has been nominated by the sponsor and Exchange visitor. A foreign national program activity and evaluation on a approved by the Department of State to who has been selected by a sponsor to yearly basis. assist the Responsible Officer in Form DS–7002, Training/Internship participate in an exchange visitor carrying out the responsibilities Placement Plan (T/IPP). A controlled program, and who is seeking to enter or outlined in § 62.11. An Alternate document of the Department of State has entered the United States Responsible Officer must be a United used in connection only with a Trainee temporarily on a non-immigrant J–1 visa States person. or Intern under 22 CFR § 62.22, or a or who has obtained J status in the Certificate of Good Standing. A Student Intern under § 62.23 United States based on a Form DS–2019 document issued by a state Secretary of respectively, to outline an exchange issued by the sponsor. The term does State, Secretary of Commonwealth, or visitor’s program activities. other official in the state where the not include the accompanying spouse Full course of study. Full-time business entity is registered. A and dependents of the exchange visitor. enrollment in an academic program of Certificate of Good Standing confirms Exchange Visitor Program. The classroom participation and study and/ that a corporation, partnership or other international exchange program or doctoral thesis research at an legal entity is in existence or authorized administered by the Department of State accredited academic institution as to transact business. A Certificate of to implement the Act by means of follows: Good Standing is also known as a educational and cultural exchange (1) Secondary school students must Certificate of Authorization or a programs. When ‘‘exchange visitor satisfy the attendance and course Certificate of Existence. program’’ is set forth in lower case, it requirements of the state in which the Clerical work. Routine administrative refers to the individual program of a school they attend is located; and work generally performed in an office or sponsor that has been designated by the (2) College and university students office-like setting, such as data entry, Department of State. must register for and complete a full filing, typing, mail sorting and Exchange visitor’s government. The course of study, as defined by the distribution, and other general government of the exchange visitor’s accredited academic institution in administrative or support tasks. country of nationality or last legal which the student is registered, unless Consortium. A not-for-profit permanent residence. exempted in accordance with § 62.23(e). corporation, partnership, joint venture Financed directly. Financed in whole Graduate medical education or or other association formed by two or or in part by the U.S. Government or the training. Participation in a program in more accredited academic institutions exchange visitor’s government with which a foreign medical school graduate for the purpose of sharing educational funds contributed directly to the will receive graduate medical education resources, conducting research, and/or exchange visitor in connection with his or training, which generally consists of developing new programs to enrich or or her participation in an exchange a residency or fellowship program expand the opportunities offered by its visitor program. involving health care services to members. An academic institution in Form DS–2019, A Certificate of patients, but does not include programs the United States that participates in a Eligibility for Exchange Visitor (J- involving observation, consultation, consortium is not barred from having Nonimmigrant) Status. A controlled teaching or research in which there is separate exchange visitor program document of the Department of State no or only incidental patient care. This designations of its own. that a sponsor issues to a potential program may consist of a medical Country of nationality or last legal Exchange Visitor Program participant specialty, a directly related medical permanent residence. Either the country (J–1) and his or her accompanying subspecialty, or both. of which the exchange visitor is a spouse and dependents (J–2) as Home-country physical presence national at the time status as an permitted by regulations. This form, requirement. The requirement that an exchange visitor is acquired or the last together with other necessary exchange visitor, and any accompanying foreign country in which the visitor had Department of State documents, permits spouse and dependents, who are within a legal permanent residence before the named foreign national, if required, the purview of section 212(e) of the acquiring status as an exchange visitor. to schedule an interview at a U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act, as Cross-cultural activity. An activity embassy or consulate to seek to obtain amended, or Public Law 94–484 designed to promote exposure and a J visa to enter the United States as an (substantially quoted in 22 CFR 41.63), interchange between exchange visitors Exchange Visitor Program participant or must reside and be physically present in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60309

the country of nationality or last legal monitor administration of each Student internship program. A permanent residence for an aggregate of sponsor’s exchange visitor program. structured and guided work-based at least two years following departure On-the-job training. An individual’s learning program for a post-secondary from the United States before the observation of and participation in student intern as set forth in an exchange visitor is eligible to apply for given tasks demonstrated by individualized Training/Internship an immigrant visa or permanent experienced workers for the purpose of Placement Plan (Form DS–7002) that residence, a non-immigrant K visa as the acquiring competency in such tasks. partially or fully fulfills a student’s post- fiance´(e) of a U.S. citizen, a non- Prescribed course of study. A non- secondary academic degree immigrant H visa as a temporary worker degree academic program with a requirements; recognizes the need for or trainee, or a non-immigrant L visa as specific educational objective. Such work-based experience; provides on-the- an intracompany transferee, or a non- course of study may include intensive job exposure to American techniques, immigrant H or L visa as the spouse or English language training, classroom methodologies, and technologies; and minor child of a person who has been instruction, research projects, and/or enhances the student intern’s granted status in H or L non-immigrant academic training to the extent knowledge of American culture and classification as a temporary worker or permitted in § 62.23. society. trainee or an intracompany transferee. Reciprocity. The participation of a Third party. A person or legal entity Host organization. A third party in the U.S. citizen or U.S. national in an with whom a sponsor has executed a United States that conducts training educational and cultural program in a written agreement for the person or and/or internship programs on behalf of foreign country in exchange for the entity to act on behalf of a sponsor in a designated sponsor pursuant to an participation of a foreign national in the the conduct of the sponsor’s exchange executed written agreement between the Exchange Visitor Program. Where used visitor program. All entities that act on two parties. herein, ‘‘reciprocity’’ will be interpreted behalf of the sponsor in the conduct of Internship program. A structured and broadly; unless otherwise specified, the sponsor’s exchange visitor program guided work-based learning program for reciprocity does not require a one-for- must execute written agreements with an Intern as set forth in an one exchange or that exchange visitors the sponsor that outline the full individualized Training/Internship be engaged in the same activity. relationship between the entity and the Placement Plan (Form DS–7002) that Responsible Officer. An employee or sponsor on all matters involving the reinforces an intern’s academic study; officer of a sponsor who has been administration of the exchange visitor recognizes the need for work-based nominated by the sponsor, and program. A sponsor’s use of a third experience; provides on-the-job approved by the Department of State, to party does not relieve the sponsor of its exposure to American techniques, carry out the duties outlined in § 62.11. obligations to comply, and to ensure methodologies, and technologies; and A Responsible Officer must be a citizen third party compliance, with the enhances the Intern’s knowledge of of the United States or a lawful provisions of this Part. Failure by any American culture and society. permanent resident of the United States. third party to comply with the J visa. A non-immigrant visa issued Secretary of State. The Secretary of regulations set forth in this Part or with pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J). A J– State or an employee of the U.S. any additional terms and conditions 1 visa is issued to an exchange visitor. Department of State acting under a governing administration of the A J–2 visa is issued to the exchange delegation of authority from the Exchange Visitor Program that the visitor’s accompanying spouse and Secretary of State. Department of State may from time to dependents, if qualified under § 214b of SEVIS (Student and Exchange Visitor time impose will be imputed to the the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Information System). The statutorily sponsor. Sponsors are required to amended. mandated system designed to collect ensure that third parties know and Management review. A program- information on non-immigrant students comply with all applicable provisions of specific management audit in a format (F and M visas), exchange visitors (J these regulations. approved by the Department of State visas), and their spouses and Training program. A structured and that is conducted by an independent dependents (F–2, M–2, and J–2 visas). guided work-based learning program for auditor who is not an employee or third SEVIS enables schools and program a trainee as set forth in an party contractor of the sponsor, to sponsors to transmit information and individualized Training/Internship identify weaknesses in operating event notifications electronically, via Placement Plan (Form DS–7002), that procedures in the conduct of an the Internet, to the Department of develops new and advanced skills in a organization’s business and in meeting Homeland Security and the Department trainee’s occupational field through regulatory requirements in the of State throughout a student’s or exposure to American techniques, administration of a sponsor’s exchange exchange visitor’s stay in the United methodologies, and technologies; and visitor program. States. enhances a trainee’s understanding of Office of Designation. The Department Site of activity. The physical, American culture and society. of State, Bureau of Educational and geographic location(s) where an United States person (individual). A Cultural Affairs office assigned to exchange visitor participates in his or person who is born within or is a administer designations of sponsors. her exchange program. national of the United States or any of Office of Exchange Coordination and Sponsor. A legal entity designated by its territories or outlying possessions. A Compliance. The Department of State, the Secretary of State to conduct an U.S. person is a citizen or an individual Bureau of Educational and Cultural exchange visitor program. who has been lawfully admitted for Affairs office assigned to oversee Staffing/employment agency. A U.S. permanent residence, within the sponsor compliance with 22 CFR Part business that hires individuals for the meaning of section 101(a)(20) of the 62 and, as appropriate, impose express purpose of supplying workers to Immigration and Nationality Act (8 sanctions. other businesses. Typically, the other U.S.C. 1101). Office of Private Sector Exchange businesses where workers are placed United States Person (legal entity). Administration. The Department of pay an hourly fee per employee to the (1) A general or limited partnership State, Bureau of Educational and staffing/employment agency, of which created or organized under the laws of Cultural Affairs office assigned to the worker receives a percentage. the United States, or of any state, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60310 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

District of Columbia, or any territory or § 62.3 Sponsor eligibility. (4) Engaged full-time in a student outlying possession of the United States, (a) The following types of entities are internship program conducted by a of which a majority of the partners are eligible to apply for designation as a post-secondary accredited academic United States persons: sponsor of an exchange visitor program: institution. (i) Which has its principal place of (1) U.S. local, state, and federal (b) Short-term scholar. A foreign business in the United States; and government agencies to include the national who is a professor, research District of Columbia; and government scholar, or person with similar (ii) In instances where the partnership agencies of any U.S. territories and education or accomplishments who is additionally governed by a Board, the outlying possessions; enters the United States for a short-term majority of whose officers are United (2) International agencies or visit for the purpose of lecturing, States persons. organizations of which the United States observing, consulting, training, or (2) A for-profit corporation, is a member and that have an office in demonstrating special skills at research association, or other legal entity created the United States; or institutions, museums, libraries, post- or organized under the laws of the (3) Reputable organizations that are secondary accredited academic United States, or of any state, the United States Persons. institutions, or similar types of District of Columbia, or a territory or (b) To be eligible for designation as a institutions. outlying possession of the United States, sponsor, an entity is required to: (c) Trainee. A foreign national (1) Demonstrate, to the Department of whose principal place of business is participating in a structured and guided State’s satisfaction, its ability to comply located in the United States, and work-based training program in his or and remain in continual compliance her specific occupational field (in an (i) Whose shares or voting interests with all applicable provisions of this occupational category for which a are publicly traded on a U.S. stock part; exchange; or (2) Meet at all times its financial sponsor has obtained designation) who (ii) A majority of whose officers, a obligations and responsibilities has either: majority of whose shareholders, and a attendant to successful sponsorship of (1) A degree or professional certificate majority of whose members of its Board its exchange visitor program; and from a foreign ministerially-recognized of Directors are United States persons (3) Demonstrate that the organization post-secondary academic institution and and collectively hold a majority of the or its proposed Responsible Officer has at least one year of prior related work shares or stock (i.e., the de jure no fewer than three years’ experience in experience in his or her occupational controlling interest); or international exchange. field acquired outside the United States; or (3) A non-profit corporation, § 62.4 Categories of participant eligibility. (2) Five years of work experience in association, or other legal entity created Sponsors select foreign nationals to his or her occupational field acquired or organized under the laws of the participate in exchange visitor outside the United States. United States, or any state, the District program(s) in the United States. (d) Teacher. A foreign national with of Columbia, or any territory or outlying Participation is limited to foreign the equivalent of a U.S. Bachelor’s possession of the United States; and nationals who meet the following degree in either education or the subject (i) Whose principal place of business criteria for each of the following matter (or related subjects) he or she is located in the United States; and categories: intends to teach and a minimum of the (ii) A majority of whose officers and (a) Student. A foreign national who is: equivalent of two years of post-degree a majority of whose members of its (1) Studying in the United States and: full-time teaching experience, who is (i) Pursuing a full course of study at Board of Directors, Board of Trustees or employed as a teacher at the time of a secondary accredited academic other like body vested with its application for the program, for the institution; purpose of teaching full-time in a management are United States persons; (ii) Pursuing a full course of study or primary or secondary accredited leading to or culminating in the award academic institution. (4) An accredited college, university, of a U.S. degree from a post-secondary (e) Professor. A foreign national or other post-secondary academic accredited academic institution; or whose primary purpose is teaching, institution in the United States created (iii) Engaged full-time in a prescribed lecturing, observing, or consulting at or organized under the laws of the course of study of up to 24 months (non- post-secondary accredited academic United States, or of any state, county, degree) duration conducted by: institutions, museums, libraries, or municipality, or other political (A) A post-secondary accredited similar types of institutions. A professor subdivision thereof, the District of academic institution; or also may conduct research where Columbia, or of any territory or outlying (B) An institute approved by or authorized by the sponsor. possession of the United States; or acceptable to the post-secondary (f) Research scholar. A foreign (5) An agency of the United States, or accredited academic institution, where the student is to be enrolled upon national whose primary purpose is of any state or local government, the conducting research, observing, or District of Columbia, or any territory or completion of the non-degree program; (2) Engaged in academic training as consulting in connection with a outlying possession of the United States. permitted in § 62.23(f); research project at research institutions, Validation. The process by which a (3) Engaged in English language corporate research facilities, museums, Responsible Officer or Alternate training at: libraries, post-secondary accredited Responsible Officer updates the SEVIS (i) A post-secondary accredited academic institutions, or similar types record of an exchange visitor to show he academic institution, or of institutions. A research scholar also or she has entered the United States, (ii) An institute approved by or may teach or lecture where authorized and that the exchange visitor reported to acceptable to the post-secondary by the sponsor. his or her sponsor and is participating accredited academic institution where (g) Specialist. A foreign national who in the exchange visitor program at the the college or university student is to be is an expert in a field of specialized site of activity identified on his or her enrolled upon completion of the knowledge or skills who enters the Form DS–2019. language training; or United States for the purpose of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60311

observing, consulting, or demonstrating or certificate-granting post-secondary prepared by an independent certified special knowledge or skills. academic institution outside the United public accounting firm. (h) Other person of similar States, or (ii) A newly formed entity must description. A foreign national of (ii) Graduated from such an present a compilation (i.e., a balance description similar to those set forth in institution no more than 12 months sheet, statement of cash flows and all paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section prior to the exchange visitor program disclosures, revenues, expenditures, and coming to the United States as a begin date reflected on Form DS–2019. notes to financial statements) prepared participant in an exchange visitor by an independent certified public program designated by the Department § 62.5 Designation application procedure. accounting firm demonstrating that the of State under this category, for the (a) An entity meeting the eligibility entity has been capitalized with purpose of teaching, instructing or requirements set forth in § 62.3 may sufficient funds to cover general lecturing, studying, observing, apply to the Department of State for operating expenses and costs associated conducting research, consulting, designation as an Exchange Visitor with an exchange program. demonstrating special skills, or Program sponsor. An applicant must (4) A current Certificate of Good receiving training. The programs first complete and submit Form DS– Standing (see § 62.2); designated by the Department of State in 3036 in SEVIS. The complete (5) An Employer Identification this category consist of: application must consist of: Number (EIN), which specifies the date (1) Alien physician. A foreign national (1) A completed copy of Form DS– of issuance; who is a graduate of a school of 3036 signed by the applicant’s Chief (6) Evidence of current accreditation medicine who comes to the United Executive Officer, President, or other if the applicant is a secondary or post- States under a program in which he or executive with legal authority to make secondary academic institution; she will receive graduate medical commitments on behalf of the sponsor (7) Evidence of current licensure, if education or training conducted by (as identified in the organization’s required by local, state, or federal law, accredited U.S. schools of medicine or governing documents); to carry out the activity for which the scientific institutions. (2) Required supporting applicant is seeking designation; (2) International visitor. A foreign documentation and certifications as set (8) A statement signed by the Chief national who is a recognized or forth in paragraph (c); and Executive Officer, President, or other potential leader, selected by the (3) Confirmation of payment of the executive with legal authority to make Department of State for the purpose of required non-refundable application fee commitments on behalf of the sponsor consulting, observing, conducting through pay.gov as set forth in § 62.17. (as identified in the organization’s research, training, or demonstrating (b) A complete application must set governing documents), certifying that: special skills in the United States. forth, in detail, the applicant’s proposed (i) The applicant is a United States (3) Government visitor. A foreign exchange program activity and must Person as defined in § 62.2; national who is an influential or demonstrate, to the Department of (ii) The proposed Responsible Officer distinguished person, selected by a U.S. State’s satisfaction, the applicant’s and all proposed Alternate Responsible federal, state, or local government ability to comply and remain in Officers are United States citizens or agency for the purpose of consulting, continual compliance with all the lawful permanent residents of the observing, training, or demonstrating provisions of this part, and, in United States; special skills in the United States. particular, to meet the sponsor (iii) The sponsor has completed a (4) Camp counselor. A foreign eligibility requirements set forth in criminal background check on the national selected to be a counselor in a § 62.3 and the general obligations of potential Responsible Officer and all summer camp in the United States (e.g., sponsors set forth in § 62.9. Alternate Responsible Officers, and has during the U.S. summer months). (c) An application must be determined their suitability for these (5) Au pair. A foreign national who accompanied by the following positions; the criminal background comes to the United States for the supporting documentation and checks must be no older than four years purpose of residing with an American certifications, as relevant: at any time for re-designated sponsors host family and participating directly in (1) Evidence of sponsor eligibility as and must be newly conducted as part of their home life, while providing limited set forth in § 62.3(a), including evidence the designation application for new childcare services, and fulfilling an of legal status (e.g., charter, proof of sponsors and the redesignation educational requirement. incorporation, by laws, partnership application for sponsors designated for (6) Summer Work and Travel. A agreement); only one year; and foreign national who is a bona fide (2) Evidence of experience in (iv) The Responsible Officer will be foreign post-secondary student, who at operating a successful business, provided sufficient staff and resources the time of application is enrolled in including a minimum of three years of to fulfill his or her duties and and actively pursuing a degree or a full- experience in international exchange by obligations on behalf of the applicant; time course of study at a foreign the organization or by the proposed (9) A completed SEVIS-generated ministerially-recognized post-secondary Responsible Officer; Citizenship Certification for the academic institution and whose purpose (3) Evidence of the applicant’s ability proposed Responsible Officer and all is work and travel in the United States to meet at all times its financial proposed Alternate Responsible for up to four months during his or her obligations and responsibilities Officer(s) along with evidence that they break between academic years. attendant to successful sponsorship of are citizens of the United States or (7) Intern. A foreign national its exchange visitor program, and lawful permanent residents (e.g., copy participating in a structured and guided evidence that it can comply with of passport, birth certificate, green card); work-based internship program in his or § 62.9(e) and provide any supplemental and her specific academic field and who or explanatory financial information the (10) Such additional information or either: Department of State may request. In documentation that the Department of (i) Is currently enrolled full-time in addition: State may deem necessary to evaluate and actively pursuing studies at a (i) An established entity must present the application. In addition, the foreign ministerially-recognized degree- a current audit report with audit notes Department may decide, in its

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60312 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

discretion, to conduct a pre-designation (4) For a non-profit organization, a the particular category of exchange site visit of a first-time applicant. signed copy of the sponsor’s most recent visitor. Sponsors will be responsible for Form 990 filed with the Internal determining the appropriate types and § 62.6 Designation. Revenue Service; numbers of such cross-cultural (a) Upon its favorable determination (5) A statement signed by the Chief programs, unless otherwise specified by that an applicant meets all statutory and Executive Officer, President, or other the Department. The Department of regulatory requirements, the Department executive with legal authority to make State encourages sponsors to give their of State may, in its sole discretion, commitments on behalf of the sponsor exchange visitors the broadest exposure designate the applicant as an Exchange (as identified in the organization’s to American society, culture and Visitor Program sponsor. governing documents) certifying that the institutions; and (b) Initial designations are effective sponsor has completed timely criminal (2) Encourage exchange visitors to for one or two years at the sole background checks since the date of the participate voluntarily in activities that discretion of the Department of State. last designation or redesignation letter are for the purpose of sharing the (c) Designation will confer upon a on the Responsible Officer and all language, culture, or history of their sponsor the authority to engage in one Alternate Responsible Officers and has home country with Americans, or more activities specified in § 62.4. A determined their suitability for these provided such activities do not delay sponsor may engage only in the activity positions; and the completion of the exchange visitors’ or activities specifically authorized in (6) Such additional information or program. its written letter of designation. documentation that the Department of (d) The Department of State may, in State may deem necessary to evaluate § 62.9 General obligations of sponsors. its sole discretion, require a sponsor to the application. (a) Adherence to Department of State secure a payment bond in favor of the (d) Upon its favorable determination regulations. Sponsors are required to Department of State guaranteeing the that a sponsor meets all statutory and adhere to all regulations set forth in this sponsor’s obligations hereunder. regulatory requirements, the Department part. (e) Designations are not transferable or (b) Legal status. A sponsor must assignable. of State may, in its sole discretion, redesignate the organization as an maintain the legal status it had when it § 62.7 Redesignation. Exchange Visitor Program sponsor for was designated. A sponsor’s change in (a) Sponsors must file for one or two years. A sponsor seeking re- legal status (e.g., from partnership to redesignation no more than six months designation may continue to operate its corporation, non-profit to for-profit) and no fewer than three months before program(s) until such time as the requires the submission of a new the designation expiration date as set Department of State notifies it of a application for designation of the forth in the sponsor’s letter of decision to approve, amend or terminate successor legal entity within 45 days of designation or its most recent letter of its designation. the change in legal status. redesignation. (c) Accreditation and licensure. A (b) A sponsor seeking redesignation as § 62.8 General program requirements. sponsor must remain in compliance an Exchange Visitor Program sponsor (a) Size of program. A sponsor, other with all local, state, and federal laws, must first complete and submit Form than a federal government agency, must and professional requirements necessary DS–3036 in SEVIS. The complete have no fewer than five actively to carry out the activities for which it is application must consist of: participating exchange visitors during designated, including accreditation and (1) A completed copy of Form DS– the annual reporting cycle (e.g., licensure, if applicable. 3036, signed by the sponsor’s Chief academic, calendar or fiscal year), as (d) Representations and disclosures. Financial Officer, President or other stated in its letter of designation or Sponsors must: executive with legal authority to make redesignation. The Department of State (1) Provide accurate, complete, and commitments on behalf of the sponsor may, in its sole discretion, waive this timely information, to the extent (as identified in the organization’s requirement. lawfully permitted, to the Department of governing documents); (b) Minimum duration of program. A State and the Department of Homeland (2) Required supporting sponsor, other than a federal Security regarding their exchange visitor documentation and certifications as set government agency, must provide each program(s), exchange visitors, and forth in paragraph (c); and exchange visitor, except those accompanying spouses and dependents (3) Confirmation of payment of the sponsored in the short-term scholar (if any); required non-refundable application fee category, with a minimum period of (2) Provide accurate information to through pay.gov as set forth in § 62.17. participation in the United States of no the public when advertising their (c) The complete application must less than three weeks. exchange visitor program(s) or include the following supporting (c) Reciprocity. In conducting its responding to public inquiries; documentation and certifications: exchange visitor program, sponsors (3) Provide accurate program (1) A copy of the most recent year-end must make a good faith effort to develop information and materials to financial statements; and implement, to the fullest extent prospective exchange visitors, host (2) A copy of the most recent letter of possible, reciprocal exchanges of organizations, and host employers, if accreditation if the sponsor is a persons. applicable, at the time of recruitment secondary or post-secondary academic (d) Cross-cultural activities. In and before exchange visitors enter into institution; addition to category specific agreements and/or pay non-refundable (3) A list of the names, addresses and requirements, sponsors must: fees. This information must clearly citizenship or legal permanent resident (1) Offer or make available to explain program activities and terms status of the current members of its exchange visitors and the accompanying and conditions of program, including Board of Directors or the Board of spouses and dependents, if any, a the terms and conditions of any Trustees or other like body, vested with variety of appropriate cross-cultural employment activities (job duties, the management of the organization or activities. The extent and type of the number of work hours, wages and partnership, and/or the percentage of cross-cultural activities will be compensation, and any typical stocks/shares held, as applicable; determined by the needs and interests of deductions for housing and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60313

transportation), have itemized list of all (2) Their employees, officers, agents, exchange visitor program(s). These fees charged to the exchange visitor (i.e., third parties, volunteers or other responsibilities include: fees paid to the sponsor or a third party, individuals or entities associated with (a) Selection of exchange visitors. including the host employer), insurance the administration of their exchange Sponsors must establish and utilize a costs, other typical costs, conditions, visitor program are adequately qualified, method to screen and select prospective and restrictions of the exchange visitor appropriately trained, and comply with exchange visitors to ensure that they are program(s), and the type, duration, the Exchange Visitor Program eligible for program participation, and nature and importance of the cultural regulations and immigration laws that: components of the program. Program pertaining to the administration of their (1) The program is suitable to the recruitment information and materials exchange visitor program(s). exchange visitor’s background, needs, also must make clear to prospective (g) Appointment of Responsible and experience; and exchange visitors in the exchange Officers and Alternate Responsible (2) The exchange visitor possesses categories with a work component that Officers. (1) Sponsors must appoint and sufficient proficiency in the English their stipend or wages might not cover maintain a Responsible Officer and language, as determined by an objective all of their expenses and that they between one and ten Alternate measurement of English language should bring additional personal funds. Responsible Officers to assist the proficiency, successfully to participate (4) Not use the program number(s) Responsible Officer in performing the in his or her program and to function on assigned by the Department of State at duties set forth in § 62.11. Upon written a day-to-day basis. A sponsor must the time of designation on any sponsor request, the Department of State verify an applicant’s English language advertising materials or publications, may, in its sole discretion, permit a proficiency through a recognized including sponsor Web sites; and sponsor to appoint more than ten English language test, by signed (5) Not represent that its exchange Alternate Responsible Officers. A documentation from an academic visitor program is endorsed, sponsored, sponsor redesignated for two years must institution or English language school, or supported by the Department of State ensure that the proposed Responsible or through a documented interview or the U.S. Government, except for U.S. Officer and Alternate Responsible conducted by the sponsor either in- Government sponsors or exchange Officer(s) have undergone a criminal person or by videoconferencing, or by visitor programs financed directly by background check within the past four telephone if videoconferencing is not a the U.S. Government to promote years to determine their suitability for viable option. (b) Pre-arrival information. At the pre- international educational exchanges. A these positions. Responsible Officers arrival stage, sponsors must provide sponsor may, however, represent that it and Alternate Responsible Officers must exchange visitors clear information and is designated by the Department of State be U.S. persons. materials on, but not limited to, the as a sponsor of an exchange visitor (2) Responsible Officers and Alternate following topics: Program activities, program. Responsible Officers must be employees cultural goals and components of the (e) Financial responsibility. (1) or officers of the sponsor. Upon written program, employment information and Sponsors must maintain the financial sponsor request, the Department of State terms and conditions of employment capability to meet at all times their may, in its sole discretion, authorize the (including employer name and address, financial obligations and appointment of an individual who is not position duration, job duties, number of responsibilities attendant to successful an employee or officer to serve as an work hours, wages, other compensation sponsorship of their exchange visitor Alternate Responsible Officer. and benefits, deductions from wages, program. (3) In the event of the departure of a including those taken for housing and (2) The Department of State may Responsible Officer or Alternate transportation), insurance costs, and require non-government sponsors to Responsible Officer, the sponsor must other conditions and restrictions of their provide evidence satisfactory to the file a request in SEVIS for the approval exchange visitor. In addition, sponsors Department of State that funds of a replacement and forward the must provide clear information and necessary to fulfill all obligations and required documentation to the materials on: responsibilities attendant to Department of State within ten calendar (1) The purpose of the Exchange sponsorship of their exchange visitor days from the date of the Responsible Visitor Program; programs are readily available and in Officer’s or Alternate Responsible (2) The home-country physical the sponsor’s control, including such Officer’s departure. presence requirement; supplementary or explanatory financial (4) Requests to replace the (3) Travel to and entry into the United information as the Department of State Responsible Officer or add an Alternate States (e.g., procedures to be followed may deem appropriate, such as, for Responsible Officer must be submitted by exchange visitors and accompanying example, audited financial statements. in SEVIS, and a signed Form DS–3037 spouses and dependents in paying (3) The Department of State may must be either mailed or emailed to the SEVIS fees and obtaining visas for entry require a non-government sponsor to Department of State with the required to the United States, including the secure payment bonds in favor of the completed Citizenship Certification, information and documentation needed Department of State guaranteeing all along with certification that the for the interview; travel arrangements to financial obligations arising from its individual has undergone a criminal the United States, and what to expect at exchange visitor program when the background check conducted at the time the port of entry, including the necessity Department has reasonable doubt about of such Certification. of having and presenting travel the sponsor’s ability to meet its program (5) The Department of State reserves documents at the port of entry); and other financial obligations. the right to deny the appointment of a (4) Housing, including specific (f) Staffing and support services. Responsible Officer or an Alternate information on what housing is Sponsors must ensure that: Responsible Officer. provided by the program or otherwise (1) Adequate staffing and sufficient available and the expected cost to the support services are provided to § 62.10 Program administration. exchange visitor; administer their exchange visitor Sponsors are responsible for the (5) An itemized list of all fees to be program; and effective administration of their paid by a potential exchange visitor (i.e.,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60314 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

fees paid to the sponsor or a third Officer and Alternate Responsible address, and/or primary site of activity; party); Officer(s); and (6) Description and amount of other (7) The Office of Designation’s (5) Report the email address for each costs that the exchange visitor will address, telephone number, facsimile accompanying spouse and dependent. likely incur (e.g., insurance, living number, Web site and email address, (e) Requests by the Department of expenses, transportation expenses) and a copy of the Exchange Visitor State. Sponsors must, to the extent while in the United States; Program brochure or other Department lawfully permitted, furnish the (7) Health care and insurance of State materials as appropriate or Department of State within the description, costs, and requirements for required; Department-requested timeframe all exchange visitors and their (8) Wilberforce Pamphlet on the information, reports, documents, books, accompanying spouse and dependents, Rights and Protections for Temporary files, and other records or information as applicable; Workers; and requested by the Department of State on (8) Arrival notification requirements (9) The requirement that an exchange all matters related to their exchange (e.g., procedures that exchange visitors, visitor must report to the sponsor or visitor program. Sponsors must include spouses and dependents are to follow sponsor designee within ten calendar sponsor’s program number on all upon entry into the United States in days any changes in his or her responses. reporting their arrival to the sponsor telephone number, email address, actual (f) Inquiries and investigations. and reporting to the location of their and current U.S. address (i.e., physical Sponsors must cooperate with any program); and residence), and site of activity (if the inquiry or investigation that may be (9) Other information that will assist exchange visitor is permitted to make undertaken by the Department of State exchange visitors to prepare for their such change without prior sponsor or the Department of Homeland stay in the United States (e.g., how and authorization). Security. when to apply for a social security (d) Monitoring of exchange visitors. (g) Retention of records. Sponsors number, if applicable; how to apply for Exchange visitors’ participation in their must retain all records related to their a driver’s license; how to open a bank exchange program must be monitored exchange visitor program and exchange account; employee rights and laws, by employees of the sponsor. visitors (to include accompanying including workman’s compensation; Monitoring activities must not include spouse and dependents, if any) for a and how to remain in lawful non- any retaliation or discrimination against minimum of three years following the immigrant status. exchange visitors who make adverse completion of each exchange visitor (c) Orientation. A sponsor must offer comments related to the program. No program. and record participation in an sponsor or employee of a sponsor may appropriate orientation for all exchange § 62.11 Duties of Responsible Officers and threaten program termination, remove visitors. Sponsors are encouraged to Alternate Responsible Officers. from the program, ban from the provide orientation for the exchange Responsible Officers must train and program, adversely annotate an visitor’s accompanying spouse and supervise Alternate Responsible Officers exchange visitor’s SEVIS record, or dependents, especially for those and ensure that these officials are in otherwise retaliate against an exchange exchange visitors who are expected to compliance with the Exchange Visitor visitor solely because he/she has filed a be in the United States for more than Program regulations. Responsible complaint; instituted or caused to be one year. Orientation must include, but Officers and Alternate Responsible instituted any proceeding; testified or is is not limited to, information Officers must: about to testify; consulted with an concerning: (a) Be thoroughly familiar with the (1) Life and customs in the United advocacy organization, community Exchange Visitor Program regulations, States; organization, legal assistance program or relevant immigration laws, and all (2) Local community resources (e.g., attorney about a grievance or other federal and state regulations and laws public transportation, medical centers, work-related legal matter; or exercised pertaining to the administration of their schools, libraries, recreation centers, or asserted on behalf of himself/herself exchange visitor program(s), including and banks), to the fullest extent any right or protection. Sponsors must: the Department of State’s and the possible; (1) Ensure that the activities in which Department of Homeland Security’s (3) Available healthcare, emergency exchange visitors are engaged are policies, manuals, instructions, and assistance, and health insurance consistent with the category and activity guidance on SEVIS and all other coverage; listed on their Forms DS–2019; operations relevant to the Exchange (4) A description of the exchange (2) Monitor the physical location (site Visitor Program; if Responsible Officers visitor program in which the exchange of activity), and the progress and and Alternate Responsible Officers work visitor is participating such as welfare of exchange visitors to the with programs with an employment information on the length and location extent appropriate for the category; component, they also must have a of the program; a summary of the (3) Require that exchange visitors detailed knowledge of federal, state, and significant components of the program; report to the sponsor within ten local laws pertaining to employment, information on any payment (i.e., calendar days any changes in their including the Fair Labor Standards Act; stipend or wage) an exchange visitor telephone numbers, email addresses, (b) Monitor that the exchange visitor will receive; and deductions from actual and current U.S. addresses (i.e., obtains sufficient advice and assistance wages, including for housing and physical residence), and site(s) of to facilitate the successful completion of transportation; activity (if the exchange visitor is his or her exchange visitor program; (5) Sponsor rules that exchange permitted to make such change without (c) Conduct all official visitors are required to follow while prior sponsor authorization); communications relating to their participating in their exchange visitor (4) Report in SEVIS within ten sponsor’s exchange visitor program with program; business days of notification by an the Department of State and the (6) Name and address of the sponsor exchange visitor any change in the Department of Homeland Security. A and the name, email address, and exchange visitor’s actual and current sponsor must include its exchange telephone number of the Responsible U.S. address, telephone number, email visitor program number on all

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60315

correspondence submitted to the (ii) Possesses adequate financial share IDs and passwords with any other Department of State and to the resources to participate in and complete person or permit access to and use of Department of Homeland Security; his or her exchange visitor program; and SEVIS by any other person). (d) Monitor to ensure that that (iii) Possesses adequate financial (2) Sponsors, their employees, sponsor spam filters do not block resources to support an accompanying officers, agents, or other third parties receipt of SEVIS or Department of State spouse and dependents, if any. acting on behalf of the sponsor, may not and Department of Homeland Security (2) Sponsors must ensure that: forward to any unauthorized party (via notices; and (i) Only Responsible Officers or facsimile or other electronic means) (e) Control and issue Forms DS–2019 Alternate Responsible Officers who are copies or Portable Document Formats as set forth in § 62.12. physically present in the United States (PDFs) of signed or unsigned Forms DS– or in a U.S. territory may print and sign 2019. However, sponsors must forward § 62.12 Control of Forms DS–2019. Forms DS–2019; and such copies and/or PDFs to the (ii) Only the Responsible Officer or (a) Issuance of Forms DS–2019. Department of State or the Department the Alternate Responsible Officer, Sponsors must: of Homeland Security upon request. (1) Grant access only to Responsible whose name is printed on the Form DS– 2019, is permitted to sign the document. (3) Sponsors must use the reprint Officers and Alternate Responsible function in SEVIS in the event the Officers and ensure that they have The Form DS–2019 must be signed in blue ink to denote that it is the original exchange visitor’s Form DS–2019 has access to and use SEVIS to update been lost or stolen. required information; document. (c) Distribution of Forms DS–2019. (4) Sponsors must destroy any (2) Ensure that Responsible Officers Sponsors must ensure that completed damaged and/or unusable Form DS– and Alternate Responsible Officers Forms DS–2019 are distributed directly 2019 on the sponsor’s premises after input into SEVIS accurate, current, and to the exchange visitor and making a record of such forms (e.g., updated information in accordance with accompanying spouse and dependents, forms with errors or forms damaged by these regulations; and if any, or to an individual designated by a printer). (3) Issue Forms DS–2019 only for the the exchange visitor only via the following authorized purposes: § 62.13 Notification requirements. sponsor’s employees, officers, or third (i) To facilitate the initial entry of the parties in the administration of its (a) Valid program status of exchange exchange visitor and accompanying exchange visitor program. visitor. Sponsors must notify the spouse and dependents, if any, into the (d) Allotment requests. (1) Annual Department of State via SEVIS of the United States; Form DS–2019 allotment. Sponsors following: (ii) To extend the duration of must submit an electronic request via (1) Validation of program participation of an exchange visitor, SEVIS to the Department of State for an participation. Sponsors must promptly when permitted by the regulations and annual allotment of Forms DS–2019 validate an exchange visitor’s authorized by the Department of State; based on the annual reporting cycle participation in their program. This will (iii) To facilitate program transfers, (e.g., academic, calendar or fiscal year) change the status of the exchange when permitted by the regulations and/ stated in their letter of designation or visitor’s SEVIS record from ‘‘Initial’’ to or authorized in writing by the redesignation. Sponsors should allow ‘‘Active.’’ SEVIS records with program Department of State; up to four weeks for the processing of durations (e.g., the period between the (iv) To replace lost, stolen, or allotment requests. The Department of ‘‘Program Begin Date’’ and ‘‘Program damaged Forms DS–2019; State has the sole discretion to End Date’’) of 30 days or more must be (v) To facilitate the re-entry into the determine the number of Forms DS– validated within 30 days following the United States of an exchange visitor and 2019 to be issued to a sponsor. ‘‘Program Begin Date’’ identified in accompanying spouse and dependents, (2) Expansion of Program. A request SEVIS. SEVIS records with program if any, who travel outside the United for program expansion must include durations that are less than 30 days States during the exchange visitor’s information such as, but not limited to, must be validated prior to the ‘‘Program program; the source of program growth, staff End Date’’ reflected in SEVIS. As part of (vi) To facilitate a change of category, increases, confirmation of adequately the validation process, sponsors may when requested in SEVIS and trained employees, noted programmatic amend the program begin date and must authorized by the Department of State; successes, current financial information, update the SEVIS record to reflect the (vii) To update information when additional overseas affiliates, additional actual and current U.S. address and site significant changes take place in regard third party entities, explanations of how of activity in SEVIS. The status of SEVIS to the exchange visitor’s program (e.g., the sponsor will accommodate the records that are not validated according a substantial change in funding, a anticipated program growth, and any to this schedule will automatically change in the primary site of activity or other information requested by the change to ‘‘Invalid’’ or ‘‘No Show’’. a change in actual and current U.S. Department. The Department of State Accompanying spouses and address); will take into consideration the current dependents’ SEVIS records are (viii) To facilitate the correction of a size of a sponsor’s program and the automatically validated upon validation minor or technical infraction; or projected expansion of the program in of the exchange visitors’ SEVIS records. (ix) To facilitate a ‘‘reinstatement’’ or the coming 12 months and may consult (2) Failure of an exchange visitor to a ‘‘reinstatement update SEVIS status’’ with the Responsible Officer and/or begin program. Sponsors must report in when permitted by the Department of Alternate Responsible Officer prior to SEVIS, no later than 30 calendar days State. determining the number of Forms DS– after the ‘‘Program Begin Date’’ listed in (b) Verification. (1) Prior to issuing 2019 to issue to a sponsor. SEVIS, the failure of an exchange visitor Forms DS–2019, sponsors must verify (e) Safeguards and controls. (1) to report to his or her sponsor upon that each prospective exchange visitor: Responsible Officers and Alternate entry in the United States (i.e., failure of (i) Is eligible and qualified for, and Responsible Officers must secure their exchange visitor to begin an exchange accepted into, the program in which he SEVIS logon Identification Numbers visitor program as scheduled). This will or she will participate; (IDs) and passwords at all times (i.e., not change the status of the exchange

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 60316 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

visitor’s SEVIS record from ‘‘Initial’’ to maintain records in SEVIS of actual and bring the Department of State, the ‘‘No Show.’’ current U.S. addresses (e.g., dormitory, Exchange Visitor Program, or the (3) End of an exchange visitor’s building and room number) for such sponsor’s exchange visitor program into program. Sponsors must report in SEVIS exchange visitors. notoriety or disrepute, including any any withdrawal from or early (2) Change in site of activity. Sponsors potential litigation related to a sponsor’s completion of an exchange visitor’s must report in SEVIS any change to an exchange visitor program, in which the program that occurs prior to the exchange visitor’s site of activity by sponsor or an exchange visitor may be ‘‘Program End Date’’ listed in SEVIS on entering the new site within ten a named party. the exchange visitor’s Form DS–2019. business days of notification of such a Sponsors must not alter the ‘‘Program change where sponsor rules or § 62.14 Insurance. End Date’’ field, but should enter the regulations permit such a change. (a) Sponsors must require that all date of program completion in the Sponsors must promptly enter any exchange visitors have insurance in ‘‘Effective Date of Completion’’ field. change in the site of activity in those effect that covers the exchange visitors This will change the status of the instances where the sponsor is for sickness or accidents during the exchange visitor’s SEVIS record from responsible for the placement. Sponsors period of time that they participate in ‘‘Active’’ to ‘‘Inactive.’’ Such must identify the ‘‘primary’’ site of the sponsor’s exchange visitor program. notification in SEVIS ends a sponsor’s activity of an exchange visitor if In addition, sponsors must require that programmatic obligations to the multiple sites of activity are reported in accompanying spouses and dependents exchange visitor and/or his or her SEVIS. of exchange visitors have insurance for accompanying spouse and dependents. (c) Change in sponsor’s circumstance. sickness and accidents. Sponsors must (4) Accompanying spouse and Sponsors must report within ten inform all exchange visitors that they, dependent records. Sponsors must business days in SEVIS or directly to the and any accompanying spouse and report in SEVIS if accompanying Department of State, if appropriate, any dependent(s), also may be subject to the spouses and/or dependents depart from material changes to their exchange requirements of the Affordable Care Act. the United States prior to the exchange visitor program as follows: (b) The period of required coverage is visitors’ departure dates. (1) Change of business and/or mailing the actual duration of the exchange (5) Termination of an exchange address, telephone number, facsimile visitor’s participation in the sponsor’s visitor’s program. Sponsors must number, or email address; exchange visitor program as recorded in promptly report in SEVIS the (2) Change in the composition of the SEVIS in the ‘‘Program Begin Date,’’ and involuntary termination of an exchange sponsor organization that affects its as applicable, the ‘‘Program End Date,’’ visitor’s program. Sponsors must not status as a United States Person as ‘‘Effective Program End Date,’’ or alter the ‘‘Program End Date’’ field, but defined in § 62.2, which includes a new ‘‘Effective Date of Termination’’ fields. should enter the date of program Employment Identification Number Sponsors are not authorized to charge termination in the ‘‘Effective Date of (EIN); fees to their sponsored exchange visitors Termination’’ field. This will change the (3) Change of Responsible Officer or for the provision of insurance coverage status of the SEVIS record from Alternate Responsible Officer; beyond any demonstrable and justifiable ‘‘Active’’ to ‘‘Terminated’’. Such (4) Major change of ownership or staff time. Sponsors are not required to, notification in SEVIS ends a sponsor’s control of the sponsor’s organization as but may, offer supplemental ‘‘entry to programmatic obligation to the defined in § 62.60(e); exit’’ coverage (i.e., coverage from the exchange visitor and his or her (5) Change of the sponsor’s principal time the exchange visitor departs his or accompanying spouse and dependents, place of business to a location outside her home country until he or she if any, and prevents the sponsor from the United States; returns). If the sponsor provides health thereafter extending the exchange (6) Change in financial circumstances insurance, or arranges for health visitor’s duration of participation, that may render the sponsor unable to insurance to be offered the exchange transferring the exchange visitor to comply with its obligations as set forth visitor, via payroll deduction at the host another program, or changing the in § 62.9(e); organization, the exchange visitor must exchange visitor’s category. Sponsors (7) Loss of licensure or accreditation; voluntarily authorize this action in must not terminate the program of an (8) Loss or theft of Forms DS–2019, in writing and also be given the exchange visitor who voluntarily ends which case a sponsor must notify the opportunity to make other arrangements his or her program. Department of State promptly by to obtain insurance. These (b) Change of circumstance of an telephone or email of the SEVIS authorizations must be kept on file by exchange visitor. Sponsors must identification numbers of such Forms the sponsor. Minimum coverage must promptly notify the Department of State DS–2019 that have been lost or stolen; provide: via SEVIS of any of the following (9) A decision by the sponsor to (1) Medical benefits of at least circumstances: voluntarily cancel (withdraw) its $100,000 per accident or illness; (1) Change in the actual and current exchange visitor program designation; (2) Repatriation of remains in the U.S. address. Sponsors must ensure that or amount of $25,000; the actual and current U.S. addresses of (10) Any other material facts or events (3) Expenses associated with the an exchange visitor are reported in that may have an impact on the medical evacuation of exchange visitors SEVIS: sponsor’s ability to properly administer to his or her home country in the (i) Sponsors must report the U.S. or conduct its exchange visitor program. amount of $50,000; and mailing address (i.e., provide a P.O. Box (d) Serious problem or controversy. (4) Deductibles not to exceed $500 per number) in SEVIS in those limited cases Sponsors must inform the Department accident or illness. where mail cannot be delivered to the of State on or before the next business (c) Insurance policies secured to exchange visitor’s actual and current day by telephone (confirmed promptly fulfill the requirements of this section: U.S. address (e.g., the exchange visitor in writing by facsimile or email) of any (1) May require a waiting period for resides in a campus setting); and investigations of an exchange visitor’s pre-existing conditions that is (ii) If a U.S. mailing address is site of activity or serious problem or reasonable as determined by current reported to SEVIS, sponsors must also controversy that could be expected to industry standards;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 60317

(2) May include provisions for co- by insurance in the amounts set forth in (i) For exchange visitor programs insurance under the terms of which the paragraph (b) of this section. Sponsors classified as ‘‘Government Programs,’’ exchange visitor may be required to pay must inform exchange visitors of this this certification will be signed by the up to 25% of the covered benefits per requirement, in writing, in advance of Responsible Officer. accident or illness; and the exchange visitor’s arrival in the (ii) For exchange visitor programs (3) Must not unreasonably exclude United States. classified as P–1 or P–2 ‘‘Academic coverage for perils inherent to the (i) Exchange visitors who willfully fail Programs’’ this certification will be activities of the exchange program in to maintain the insurance coverage set signed by the institution’s Chief which the exchange visitor participates. forth above while a participant in an Executive Officer or Responsible (d) Any policy, plan, or contract exchange visitor program or who make Officer. secured to fill the above requirements material misrepresentations to the (iii) For exchange visitor programs must, at a minimum, be: sponsor concerning such coverage will classified as P–3 and P–4 ‘‘Private (1) Underwritten by an insurance be deemed to be in violation of these Sector Programs,’’ this certification will corporation having an A.M. Best rating regulations and will be subject to be signed by the organization’s Chief ¥ of ‘‘A ’’ or above; a McGraw Hill termination as an exchange visitor. Executive Officer or Responsible Financial/Standard & Poor’s Claims- (j) Sponsors must terminate an Officer. ¥ paying Ability rating of ‘‘A ’’ or above; exchange visitor’s participation in their (6) Program participation. A a Weiss Research, Inc. rating of ‘‘B+’’ or program if the sponsor determines that numerical count of all exchange visitors above; a Fitch Ratings, Inc. rating of the exchange visitor or any participating in the sponsor’s program ¥ ‘‘A ’’ or above; a Moody’s Investor accompanying spouse or dependent for the reporting year (i.e., by category, Services rating of ‘‘A3’’ or above; or willfully fails to remain in compliance form usage, active status at one point such other rating as the Department of with this section. during the annual cycle, and by other State may from time to time specify; or § 62.15 Reporting requirements. status). (2) Backed by the full faith and credit (b) Sponsors of P–3 and P–4 ‘‘Private (a) Sponsors must submit annual of the government of the exchange Sector’’ programs must file a program reports to the Department of State that visitor’s home country; or specific management review (in a format are generated through SEVIS on Form (3) Part of a health benefits program and on a schedule approved by the DS–3097. Such reports must be filed on offered on a group basis to employees or Department of State). enrolled students by a designated an academic, calendar, or fiscal year sponsor; or basis, as directed by the Department of § 62.16 Employment. (4) Offered through or underwritten State in the sponsor’s letter of (a) An exchange visitor may receive by a federally qualified Health designation or redesignation, and must compensation from the sponsor or the Maintenance Organization or eligible contain the following: sponsor’s appropriate designee, such as Competitive Medical Plan as (1) Program report and evaluation. A the host organization, when determined by the Centers for Medicare summary of the activities in which employment activities are part of the and Medicaid Services of the U.S. exchange visitors were engaged, exchange visitor’s program. Department of Health and Human including an evaluation of program (b) An exchange visitor who engages Services. effectiveness, program difficulties, and in unauthorized employment shall be (e) Federal, state or local government number of staff used in the deemed to be in violation of his or her agencies; state colleges and universities; administration of the exchange visitor program status and is subject to and public community colleges may, if program; termination as a participant in an permitted by law, self-insure any or all (2) Reciprocity. A description of the exchange visitor program. nature and extent of reciprocity of the above-required insurance (c) The acceptance of employment by occurring in the sponsor’s exchange coverage. the accompanying spouse and visitor program during the reporting (f) At the request of a non- dependents of an exchange visitor is year; governmental sponsor of an exchange governed by Department of Homeland (3) Cross-cultural activities. A visitor program, and upon a showing Security regulations. that such sponsor has funds readily description of the cross-cultural available and under its control sufficient activities the sponsor provided for its Subpart F—[Removed and Reserved] to meet the requirements of this section, exchange visitors during the reporting the Department of State may permit the year; ■ 3. Subpart F, consisting of §§ 62.70 sponsor to self-insure or to accept full (4) Proof of insurance. Certification of through 62.79, is removed and reserved. financial responsibility for such compliance with insurance coverage requirements. requirements set forth in § 62.14; Appendices A, B, C and D to Part 62 (g) The Department of State may, in (5) Certification. The following [Removed and Reserved] its sole discretion, condition its certification: ■ 4. Appendices A, B, C and D to Part approval of self-insurance or the ‘‘I certify that the information in this 62 are removed and reserved. acceptance of full financial report is complete and correct to the responsibility by the non-governmental best of my knowledge and belief; and, Dated: September 25, 2014. sponsor by requiring such sponsor to that the above named program sponsor Robin J. Lerner, secure a payment bond in favor of the has complied with all health and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Private Sector Department of State guaranteeing the accident insurance requirements for Exchange, Bureau of Educational and sponsor’s obligations hereunder. exchange visitors and their Cultural Affairs. (h) Accompanying spouses and accompanying spouses and dependents [FR Doc. 2014–23510 Filed 10–3–14; 8:45 am] dependents are required to be covered (22 CFR 62.14).’’ BILLING CODE 4710–05–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:32 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCR2.SGM 06OCR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 193 Monday, October 6, 2014

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING OCTOBER

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. 3 CFR Proposed Rules: Presidential Documents 23...... 59898 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proclamations: 140...... 59898 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 9174...... 59417 9175...... 59419 18 CFR Other Services 9176...... 59421 9177...... 60043 4...... 59105 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 380...... 59105 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 9178...... 60045 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 9179...... 60047 21 CFR 9180...... 60049 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 9181...... 60051 Proposed Rules: 9182...... 60053 179...... 59699 9183...... 60055 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 22 CFR Administrative Orders: World Wide Web Memorandums: 62...... 60294 Memorandum of Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 23 CFR September 24, is located at: www.fdsys.gov. 2014 ...... 60041 771...... 60100 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public Inspection List, indexes, and Code of Federal Regulations are 7 CFR 24 CFR located at: www.ofr.gov. 319...... 59087, 59089 5...... 59646 Proposed Rules: 232...... 59646 E-mail 948...... 60117 26 CFR FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 980...... 60117 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 1...... 59112 10 CFR form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 54...... 59130 of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 72...... 59623 PDF links to the full text of each document. 431...... 59090 29 CFR To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Proposed Rules: 2590...... 59130 72...... 59693 Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 30 CFR (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 431...... 59153 460...... 59154 Proposed Rules: PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 7...... 59167 11 CFR service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 75...... 59167 To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html Proposed Rules: and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 100...... 59459 31 CFR the instructions. 12 CFR Proposed Rules: 1...... 59699 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 701...... 59627 respond to specific inquiries. 706...... 59627 32 CFR Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 790...... 59627 Proposed Rules: Federal Register system to: [email protected] 14 CFR 86...... 59168 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 25...... 59423, 59431 regulations. 33 CFR 39 ...... 59091, 59093, 59096, CFR Checklist. Effective January 1, 2009, the CFR Checklist no 59102, 59630, 59633, 59636, 100...... 59647 longer appears in the Federal Register. This information can be 59640, 59643 117...... 59431, 59432 found online at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/. 73...... 59645 165 ...... 59648, 59650, 60057 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 165...... 59173, 59701 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, OCTOBER 39 ...... 59154, 59157, 59160, 59162, 59459, 59461, 59463, 38 CFR 59087–59422...... 1 59465, 59467, 59468, 59695, 59423–59622...... 2 59697 Proposed Rules: 38...... 59176 59623–60056...... 3 1245...... 60119 60057–60318...... 6 15 CFR 40 CFR Proposed Rules: 52 ...... 59433, 59435, 59663, 762...... 59166 60059, 60061, 60064, 60065, 60070, 60073, 60075, 60078, 16 CFR 60081 1240...... 59962 81 ...... 59674, 60078, 60081 180...... 59115, 59119 17 CFR 271...... 59438 200...... 59104 272...... 59438

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:14 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\06OCCU.LOC 06OCCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Reader Aids

312...... 60087 430...... 59123 155...... 59137 387...... 59450 Proposed Rules: 431...... 59123 390...... 59450 47 CFR 52 ...... 59471, 59703, 60123, 433...... 59123 391...... 59139, 59450 60124, 60125 435...... 59123 20...... 59444 392...... 59450 63...... 60238 436...... 59123 27...... 59138 395...... 59450 54...... 60090 81...... 59703 440...... 59123 397...... 59450 485...... 59675 73 ...... 59447, 60090, 60091 271...... 59471 622...... 60100 272...... 59471 488...... 59675 95...... 60092 300...... 59179, 59182 Proposed Rules: 49 CFR 721...... 59186 1001...... 59717 50 CFR 10...... 59448 1003...... 59717 17...... 59140, 59992 42 CFR 26...... 59566 648...... 59150 405...... 59675 44 CFR 355...... 59450 412...... 59121, 59675 64...... 59123, 59127 365...... 59450 Proposed Rules: 413...... 59675 369...... 59450 17...... 59195, 59364 415...... 59675 45 CFR 383...... 59450 622...... 59204 422...... 59675 146...... 59130 384...... 59450 648...... 59472 424...... 59675 147...... 59137 385...... 59450 679...... 59733

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:14 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\06OCCU.LOC 06OCCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDCU Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 193 / Monday, October 6, 2014 / Reader Aids iii

in today’s List of Public enacted public laws. To Laws. subscribe, go to http:// LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS Public Laws Electronic listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ Last List October 2, 2014 Notification Service publaws-l.html (PENS) Note: No public bills which Note: This service is strictly have become law were for E-mail notification of new received by the Office of the PENS is a free electronic mail laws. The text of laws is not Federal Register for inclusion notification service of newly available through this service. PENS cannot respond to specific inquiries sent to this address.

VerDate Sep 11 2014 20:14 Oct 03, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\06OCCU.LOC 06OCCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDCU