The National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board was established in 1996 via Section 1408 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3123) to provide advice to the Secretary of Agriculture and land-grant colleges and universities on top priorities and policies for food and agricultural research, education, extension and economics. Section 1408 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3123) was amended by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2008 by deleting six membership categories in the National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board, which totals 25 members. Since the Advisory Boards inception by congressional legislation in 1996, each member has represented a specific category related to farming or ranching, food production and processing, forestry research, crop and animal science, land-grant institutions, non-land grant college or university with a historic commitment to research in the food and agricultural sciences, food retailing and marketing, rural economic development, and natural resource and consumer interest groups, among many others. The Board was first appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture in September 1996 and one-third of its members were appointed for a one, two, and three-year term, respectively. The terms for 8 members who represent specific categories will expire September 30, 2014. Nominations for a 3-year appointment for these 8 vacant categories are sought. All nominees will be carefully reviewed for their expertise, leadership, and relevance to a category.

The 8 slots to be filled are:

Nominations are solicited from organizations, associations, societies, councils, federations, groups, and companies that represent a wide variety of food and agricultural interests throughout the country. Nominations for one individual who fits several of the categories listed above, or for more than one person who fits one category, will be accepted. In your nomination letter, please indicate the specific membership category for each nominee. Each nominee must submit form AD-755, “Advisory Committee Membership Background Information” (which can be obtained from the contact person below or from: http://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/AD-755_Master_2012_508%20Ver.pdf ). All nominees will be vetted before selection.

Nominations are open to all individuals without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, mental or physical handicap, marital status, or sexual orientation. To ensure that recommendations of the Advisory Board take into account the needs of the diverse groups served by the USDA, membership shall include, to the extent practicable, individuals with demonstrated ability to represent minorities, women, and persons with disabilities. Please note that registered lobbyist and individuals already serving another USDA Federal Advisory Committee, are ineligible for nomination.

Appointments to the National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board will be made by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Additional RAC information, including the meeting agenda and the meeting summary/minutes can be found at the following Web site: https://fsplaces.fs.fed.us/fsfiles/unit/wo/secure_rural_schools.nsf/RAC/ABB47F5A670D58A688256DC9005B5AD5?OpenDocument. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by July 15, 2014 to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time for oral comments must be sent to Gerald Lawrence, Jr., Designated Federal Officer, 18551 State Highway 7 East, Kennard, Texas 75847; by email to glawrence@fs.fed.us or via facsimile to 936-655-2817.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

The Forest Service is proposing a revised clause to address water rights utilized in support of ski areas on NFS lands. One of the statutory duties of the Forest Service is to administer National Forest System (NFS) lands to provide outdoor recreation to the American public on a sustainable basis. Water for snowmaking and domestic uses is critical to the continuation of resort-based skiing on NFS lands. Because of this, the Forest Service requires ownership by the United States, either solely or in narrow circumstances jointly with the permit holder, of water rights developed on NFS lands to support operation of ski areas. This policy was adopted due to concern that if water rights used to support ski area operations are severed from a ski area the Forest Service will lose the ability to offer the area to the public for skiing. An example of this is when water rights are sold for other purposes.

It has long been the policy of the Forest Service that permit holders must acquire water rights in the name of the United States for water diverted from and used on NFS lands pursuant to special use authorizations in furtherance of the Agency's congressionally mandated multiple-use objectives through the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act (MUSYA) of 1960, which include range, watershed, timber, fish and wildlife, and outdoor recreation. The reason for this policy is straightforward: Congress has directed the Agency to manage National Forests to provide for specified multiple uses, including outdoor recreation, “in perpetuity” (16 U.S.C. 531(b)), and water is of critical importance to the Agency's ability to meet that mandate. Without water for snowmaking and domestic uses, ski areas on NFS lands would not be able to operate. However, the Forest Service does not require United States ownership of water rights for reservoirs, pipelines, or other water storage or conveyance infrastructure that is for water use on private or non-Forest Service land, such as water used by municipalities, irrigation districts, and private industries. The use of NFS lands for these infrastructures merely involve access to NFS lands through a Special Use Authorization.

To effectuate the policy, the Forest Service Manual (FSM) included directives since 1982 that require the United States to own water rights for water diverted from and used on NFS lands as a condition of issuance of special use authorizations for activities that further MUSYA objectives. For example, a 1982 permit clause for ski areas in the Forest Service's Rocky Mountain Region required that “[a]ll water rights obtained by the permittee for use on the area must be acquired in the name of the United States”; a 1989 ski area permit clause in that Region provided that water rights “shall be acquired in the name of or transferred to the United States”; and a 1997 national clause for recreation uses authorized under term permits required that “all water rights obtained by the holder for use on the area authorized must be acquired in the name of the United States.”

In 2004, after extensive discussion with the National Ski Areas Association (NSAA), the Forest Service adopted a new water rights clause for inclusion in ski area permits. In a significant departure from prior policy, the 2004 clause provided that after June 2004, rights to water diverted from and used on NFS lands inside the permit area would be jointly held by the United States and the permit holder. The 2004 clause did not address ownership of water rights that were acquired before June 2004, water rights for diversions from NFS lands, or private lands outside the permit boundary.

As the Forest Service began utilizing the 2004 clause, it become apparent that it did not operate to effectuate co-ownership of a 100 percent interest in NFS ski area water rights as intended and there were substantial misunderstandings as to its meaning with regard to application of the Forest Service's water rights policy to NFS ski area water rights. Based on these concerns, the Agency decided to revise the 2004 Clause.

On November 8, 2011, the Forest Service issued an interim directive replacing the 2004 Clause with a revised water rights clause (2011 Clause). In contrast to the 2004 Clause, the 2011 Clause addressed the different types of water rights associated with ski areas, the need to ensure that ski area water rights remain available to support the ski area, and the ability of the United States to effectuate the provisions of the clause.

The 2011 Clause identified three categories of water rights associated with ski areas: (1) Water rights for water diverted from and used on NFS lands in the permit area; (2) water rights for water diverted from NFS lands outside the permit area for use on NFS lands inside the permit area; and (3) water rights for water purchased or leased by the holder and water rights for water diverted from non-NFS lands.

Consistent with the 2004 Clause, the 2011 Clause provided that water rights for water diverted from and used on NFS lands in the permit area that were acquired after the effective date of the 2004 Clause must be jointly owned. For clarity, the 2011 Clause included provisions expressly effectuating a joint tenancy with a right of survivorship for jointly held water rights. Water rights in this category that were acquired prior to the effective date of the 2004 Clause were governed by the terms of the permit under which they were acquired. The United States had to exercise its joint ownership of ski area water rights only in support of the authorized ski area. Likewise, the permit holder could not sever its joint ownership from the ski area.

The 2011 Clause provided that water rights for water diverted from NFS lands outside the permit area for use on NFS lands inside the permit area had to be authorized by a separate permit, and addressed ownership of these water rights based on when they were acquired. Water rights in this category that were acquired after the effective date of the 2011 Clause had to be acquired in the name of the United States. Ownership of water rights in this category that were acquired prior to adoption of the 2011 Clause was governed by the permit terms under which the water rights were acquired. Under the 2011 Clause, the holder could not sever these water rights from the ski area.

The 2011 Clause also made clear that water rights purchased or leased by the permit holder could be solely owned by the holder even if they were changed or exchanged to a point of diversion and use on NFS lands in the permit area (changed or exchanged water rights). The 2011 Clause provided that changed or exchanged water rights and water rights for water diverted from non-NFS lands for use on NFS lands in the permit area that were acquired after issuance of the 2011 Clause could not be divided or transferred or severed from the ski area.

The 2011 Clause provided that upon termination or revocation of the permit, the holder had to transfer to any succeeding permit holder its interest in water rights for water diverted from and used on NFS lands within the permit area; water rights for water diverted from non-NFS lands for use on NFS lands in the permit area that were acquired after the effective date of the 2011 Clause; and water rights that were changed or exchanged after the effective date of the 2011 Clause. If the ski area was not reauthorized, the permit holder's interest in jointly held water rights had to be transferred to the United States. For water rights owned solely by the holder, the holder had the option of removing the diversion structures and water use off NFS lands or transferring the water rights to the United States.

The 2011 Clause included a provision granting limited power of attorney to the United States to execute documents on behalf of the holder as necessary to ensure that water rights were acquired and transferred as required by the 2011 Clause. The 2011 Clause also obligated the holder to waive any claims against the United States for compensation in connection with application of the 2011 Clause.

On March 6 2012, the Forest Service issued an interim directive clarifying and modifying the 2011 Clause (2012 Clause). The 2012 Clause modified the 2011 Clause in several respects. First, the Agency clarified that the Forest Service would not take any action with respect to its water rights that would adversely affect the availability of water for operation of the authorized ski area unless necessary to fulfill legal requirements. Second, the Agency clarified that for water rights for water diverted from NFS lands, the ski area could divide or transfer its ownership interest or sever its ownership interest from the ski area with the consent of the Forest Service. Third, the Agency removed any restrictions on the holder's ability to sever water rights for water diverted from non-NFS lands for use on NFS lands in the permit area.

The NSAA filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on March 12, 2012, opposing use of the 2011 and 2012 Clauses. On December 19, 2012, the court ruled that the Forest Service failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act and the National Forest Management Act by not providing an opportunity for public notice and comment on the 2011 and 2012 interim directives and that the Agency needed to conduct a Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis of the impact of the directives on small business entities that hold ski area permits. The court did not rule on the substance of the interim directives. The court vacated the interim directives and enjoined enforcement of the 2011 and 2012 Clauses in permits that contained them. 1

Publishing this proposed directive for public comment corrects procedural deficiencies associated with the 2011 and 2012 ski area water rights clauses that were identified by the court and allows those who would be affected by the proposed directive to participate in its development.

The Forest Service reached out to stakeholders by conducting four listening sessions and three open houses in April 2013 to identify interests and views from a diverse group of stakeholders regarding a revised water rights clause for ski areas (78 FR 21343, Apr. 10, 2013). Two listening sessions were held in Washington, DC; one was held in Denver, Colorado; and one was held in the Lake Tahoe area in California. Approximately 21 people attended the listening sessions. Open houses were held in Denver, Colorado; Salt Lake City, Utah; and the Lake Tahoe area in California. To generate discussion, stakeholders were presented with four themes at the meetings: The role of ski areas in ensuring natural resource sustainability, availability of water to support ski are improvements, economic sustainability, and ensuring long-term commitment of water for use at ski areas.

Approximately 40 people attended the open houses. Additionally, participants were invited to submit comments electronically by May 10, 2013. Fourteen comments were received. The input from these listening sessions and open houses (hereinafter “stakeholder recommendations”) was considered in the development of this proposed directive. A summary of the stakeholder recommendations follows.

• Do not issue a ski area water rights clause. The United States should apply for water rights in its own name and participate in State proceedings.

• Follow applicable State water law and pertinent Supreme Court decisions.

• Conduct a negotiated rulemaking to establish a new ski area water rights clause and obtain an outside facilitator.

• All previous ski area water rights clauses must be declared null and void.

• Rescind water rights clauses for other types of special uses.

• Intergovernmental and private contractual agreements regarding water rights are essential in Colorado and are difficult to replicate. It would be difficult for a new permit holder to duplicate the complex water rights agreements that currently support ski areas.

• Assess the sufficiency of water during project analysis, including consideration of current operations.

• Assess impacts of proposals on water quality and downstream water needs.

• Assure that sufficient water is available for both current and future ski area needs to protect business operations and local recreation economies.

• Determinations of water sufficiency and fair market value should be made by a third party with substantial experience in ski area operations and water right appraisals.

• The applicable Forest plan should establish whether winter use is appropriate and how much water is available for winter use. Ski area modifications, additions, or expansions that require water could be limited to the scope of winter use and water for winter use contemplated by the applicable Forest plan.

• Requirements to operate snowmaking and other facilities in accordance with the applicable master development plan may be adequate to ensure sufficient water for ski area operations.

• Do not be short-sighted about the use of resources to benefit for-profit business versus the future of natural resources.

• Require that water rights associated with all water necessary to operate a ski area be committed to that use in perpetuity.

• Do not allow ski areas to own water rights on leased land.

• The water should remain tied to the land.

• Require a deed restriction to ensure that privately owned water rights are not severed from NFS lands.

• Create procedures that safeguard against severance of water rights from ski areas.

• Ski areas should commit to retaining water rights with the land over the term of the permit.

• Add a provision stating that a water rights clause that reduces the availability of water on or to NFS lands may injure resources and therefore is presumed to be contrary to the public interest.

• A concern regarding adequacy of water may arise if a prospective permit holder has not acquired sufficient water rights, and the current permit holder retains or sells water rights that have been historically used at the ski area.

• It may be helpful to require the Agency to make a determination of whether a prospective permit holder has acquired sufficient water rights for future ski area operations.

• The permit needs to describe the ground rules or responsibilities for the ski area when acting as the agent of the Forest Service with respect to water rights.

• Specify how compliance with the water rights clause will be measured.

• Factor the value of water rights into ski area permit fees.

• Forest Service ownership of water rights would create a disincentive for private investment.

• A clause that requires transfer of ownership to the United States or that restricts transfer of ski area water rights would substantially impair the value of ski area investments.

• The Forest Service does not need to assure long-term economic health of the ski industry.

• Ski areas have proven experience with water rights; the Forest Service has uneven knowledge of water rights.

• Water rights are an asset like a ski lift that needs to be managed by the ski area.

• Water rights are private property rights, not publicly owned resources.

• Distinguish between newly acquired water rights and existing water rights.

• Do not require change of ownership of existing, privately owned water rights.

• Do not require transfer of privately owned water rights to the United States without compensation; that would constitute a taking.

• Do not require joint ownership of water rights; that could constitute a taking.

• There are legal differences between ski area water rights located inside and ski area water rights located outside the permitted area.

• Water rights on private and other non-Federal land should not be treated the same as water rights on NFS lands within a ski area permit boundary.

• Recognize different requirements for water rights and water use in different jurisdictions.

• Do not establish terms that conflict with municipal water rights and associated agreements between suppliers and ski areas.

• Require ski area permit holders to provide written notice in advance of any water right application, including notice of filings to change a point of diversion or beneficial use.

• Provide an initial option to a subsequent ski area owner to purchase the water rights necessary to operate the ski area; provide a second option to local government to purchase those water rights; and provide a third option to the Forest Service to purchase those water rights.

• Condition the quantity rather than the ownership of water rights, for example, require ski areas to maintain a specific quantity of water rights.

These comments are addressed in the section-by-section analysis of the proposed directive to the extent they were utilized in the development of the proposed directive.

Establishing terms that govern water rights associated with a ski area permit is necessary to communicate clear expectations and to achieve consistency in administration of special uses among Forest Service administrative units. Pursuant to the court order in National Ski Areas Association v. United States Forest Service, the Forest Service is providing an opportunity for public comment in revising the water rights clause for ski areas. Comments received during the public comment period will be assessed in developing the final directive. The scope of this proposed directive is water rights clauses for ski area permits. Water rights clauses for other types of special uses are not addressed.

The Forest Service's authority to manage lands under its jurisdiction derives from the Property Clause of the United States Constitution, which empowers Congress to “make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the . . . Property belonging to the United States.”  2 The Supreme Court has emphasized that Congressional authority over Federal lands is “without limitations.”  3 In turn, Congress entrusted the Forest Service with authority to “make such rules and regulations and establish such service as will insure the objects of the [national forests], namely to regulate their occupancy and use and to preserve the forests thereon from destruction.”  4 The Organic Administration Act constitutes an “extraordinarily broad” delegation to the Forest Service to regulate use of NFS lands and “will support Forest Service regulations and management . . . unless some specific statute limits Forest Service powers.”  5 6 In the Organic Administration Act, Congress explicitly recognized that Forest Service regulations may impact the use of water on NFS lands (16 U.S.C. 481) (water on NFS lands may be used “under the laws of the United States and the rules and regulations established thereunder”).

The Forest Service has broad authority to regulate and condition the use and occupancy of NFS lands under the Term Permit Act of 1915 (16 U.S.C. 497), which authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to permit use and occupancy of National Forest land “upon such terms and conditions as he may deem proper”; the Multiple Use—Sustained Yield Act (MUSYA) (16 U.S.C. 529), which authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to develop and administer the surface resources of the National Forests; and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) (43 U.S.C. 1765), which authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to impose terms and conditions of rights-of-way on Federal land. In 1986, Congress directly addressed the Forest Service's authority to regulate development of ski areas on NFS lands. In the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 497b), Congress explicitly provided that permits are to be issued “subject to such reasonable terms and conditions as the Secretary deems appropriate” (16 U.S.C. 497(b)(7)).

Consistent with its constitutional and statutory authority, the Forest Service regulates the occupancy and use of NFS lands, including ski area operations, through issuance of special use permits and other authorizations (36 CFR part 251, subpart B). The Forest Service must include in special use authorizations terms and conditions that the Forest Service deems necessary to protect Federal property and economic interests (36 CFR 251.56(a)(ii)(A)); manage efficiently the lands subject to and adjacent to the use (36 CFR 251.56(a)(ii)(B)); protect the interests of individuals living in the general area of the use who rely on resources of the area (36 CFR 251.56(a)(ii)(E)); and otherwise protect the public interest (36 CFR 251.56(a)(ii)(G)).

By regulation, the Forest Service has also established the Directive System, through which the Chief and specified Line Officers can issue directives setting forth the Agency's administrative policy, procedure, and guidance (36 CFR 200.4(b)(1)). The Directive System consists of the Forest Service Manual (FSM) and a series of Forest Service Handbooks (FSHs), which serve as the primary source of administrative direction to Forest Service employees. The Special Uses Handbook, FSH 2709.11, governs special uses, including ski areas on NFS lands.

The proposed water rights clause for prior appropriation States would modify the Forest Service's approach to accomplishing the objective of long-term availability of water to sustain ski area uses. Unlike water rights diverted from and used on NFS lands by holders of other types of special use authorizations, water rights for water diverted from and used on NFS lands for ski area purposes involve long-term capital expenditures. In States like Colorado and New Mexico, holders of ski area permits may have to purchase senior water rights at considerable expense to meet current requirements for snowmaking to maintain viability. Holders of ski area permits need to show the value of these water rights as business assets, particularly during refinancing or sale of a ski area. The value of these water rights is commensurate with the significant investment in privately owned improvements at ski areas. These investments were recognized by Congress in enactment of the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act, which authorizes permit terms of up to 40 years. 16 U.S.C. 497b(b)(1). In addition to these financial issues, the land ownership patterns at ski areas—particularly the larger ones—often involves a mix of NFS and private lands both inside and outside the ski area permit boundary, making it difficult to implement a policy of sole Federal ownership for NFS ski area water rights. Much of the development at ski areas is located on private lands at the base of the mountains. As a result, water diverted and used on NFS lands in the ski area permit boundary is sometimes used on private land, either inside or outside the permit boundary.

Therefore, the Forest Service is proposing to require non-severability, rather than United States ownership, of NFS ski area water rights. In the context of the proposed clause, non-severability means that a privately owned water right could not be sold separately from other ski area assets (e.g., improvements such as lifts and lodges). Non-severability would prevent ski area permit holders from taking any action during the term of the permit that would adversely affect the availability of applicable water rights to support operation of the ski area. By providing for non-severability of NFS ski area water rights, the Agency will be able to ensure continued availability of water to support ski area operations, so that the Agency can fulfill its mandate to provide for recreational use of NFS lands.

The proposed directive would have no effect on water rights clauses in existing ski area permits that predate the 2011 and 2012 clauses. In addition, other aspects of the Forest Service's water rights policy, such as approval of water facilities, would remain the same for ski areas as it is for other types of special uses. Furthermore, the proposed directive would have no effect on the Forest Service's water rights policy for other multiple uses since water rights for those uses would continue to be owned and administered in accordance with applicable directives and permit clauses.

The Forest Service is proposing to add two clauses for ski area water rights to FSH 2709.11, section 52.4: Clause D-30 would be used in States that follow prior appropriation law for managing water rights, and Clause D-31 would be used in States that follow riparian law for managing water rights. Under a prior appropriation system, water rights may be severed from the land in some States. Under a riparian system, water rights are appurtenant to the land. This approach responds to the recommendation that a water rights clause should recognize different requirements for different jurisdictions. The chart below identifies which clause would be used for ski area permits in various states.

The first paragraph of the instructions would provide direction to permit administrators on when to use the prior appropriation clause. The first paragraph would limit clause D-30 to ski areas in prior appropriation States; provide that clause D-30 supersedes existing national and regional ski area water rights clauses in the Directive System in prior appropriation States; and provide for inclusion of the clause when a ski area permit is reissued or modified per 36 CFR 251.61 in a prior appropriation State.

The second paragraph would instruct that before issuing a new or modified permit in a prior appropriation State, Authorized Officers shall: Ensure that the holder is in compliance with all water facility and water use requirements in clause D-30; inventory ski area water rights; classify the ski area's water rights consistent with the tables in clause D-30; and ensure that the water rights inventory in paragraph 8 of clause D-30 is approved in writing by the Regional Forester prior to issuance or amendment of a ski area permit.

The third paragraph would provide for amending the permit to update the water rights inventory, as appropriate.

The fourth paragraph would limit water rights and water developments under a ski area permit to those that are necessary for and that primarily support the operation of the ski area; would provide that all water facilities and water rights that meet these criteria, regardless of whether they are for diversions on NFS lands inside or outside the permit boundary, should be included in the ski area permit; and would define what it means to be necessary for and primarily support the operation of a ski area.

The fifth paragraph would provide instructions for use of an optional provision when restrictions on water withdrawal are required by a regulation or policy, an adjudication, or a settlement agreement or are based on a decision document supported by environmental analysis; provide instructions for use of an additional provision in California, which has a riparian system in addition to a prior appropriation system; and require an analysis of water sufficiency prior to authorizing a permit amendment for a new water development.

The sixth paragraph would provide that prior to authorizing a permit amendment for a new water facility at a ski area, the Authorized Officer shall ensure that sufficient water is available to operate the water facility.

The last paragraph would provide that when bonding is required, direction in FSM 6560 applies and standard forms for bonding should be utilized.

These instructions on when and how to use clause D-30 are being added to FSH 2709.11, sec. 52.4, to provide direction to permit administrators to enhance consistency and accountability in authorization of water uses and ownership of water rights for ski areas. The instructions incorporate several focus group recommendations, including providing a water rights clause for prior appropriation States and a water rights clause for riparian States to recognize differences among jurisdictions; providing for the proposed clause to supersede existing water rights clauses in the Directive System; and requiring that a determination of whether sufficient water is available be made prior to authorizing new water developments.

Paragraph F—Water Facilities and Water Rights. Paragraph F would define “necessary” and “primarily supports” in relation to a water facility or water right.

Paragraph 1—Water Facilities. This paragraph contains subparagraphs a through h. Paragraph 1a would explain what constitutes a water facility; paragraph 1b would require that water facilities on NFS lands must be expressly authorized in a permit; paragraph 1c would provide that the United States can place conditions on water facilities deemed necessary to protect public property, public safety, and natural resources on NFS lands; paragraph 1d would provide that only water facilities that are necessary for and that primarily support the operation of a ski area on NFS lands be included in a ski area permit; paragraph 1e would provide that any change in water facilities must be expressly authorized by amendment to a permit; paragraph 1f would provide that a separate special use authorization is required for water facilities on NFS lands if they do not primarily support operation of the ski area; paragraph 1g would be incorporated as needed and would document restrictions on withdrawal and use of water when applicable; and paragraph 1h would be added for ski areas in California, which has both prior appropriation and riparian systems, and would provide that a ski area permit does not extinguish or otherwise effect a transfer of rights, title, or interests of the United States as a riparian or littoral landowner.

These requirements for water facilities would be added to clarify the meaning of terms; provide for the imposition of terms and conditions that the Forest Service deems necessary to protect public property, public safety, and natural resources; clarify what may and what may not be authorized by a ski area permit; and expressly require approval of changes to water facilities by the Authorized Officer and documentation of that approval through amendment to the permit.

Paragraphs 1b, d, and f would limit the scope of water facilities that could be authorized under a ski area permit. These requirements are consistent with several focus group recommendations, including recognizing differences between water facilities on and off NFS lands and water facilities inside and outside the permit boundary, requiring advance notice of changes in authorized water facilities, and imposing terms that will protect public resources.

Paragraph 1g would document any water withdrawal restrictions required by a regulation or policy, an adjudication, or a settlement agreement or based on a decision document and is consistent with the recommendation to recognize impacts on other water use or users.

Paragraph 1h, which addresses the dual water systems in California, is consistent with the recommendation to recognize different requirements in different jurisdictions.

Paragraph 2—Water Rights. Paragraph 2 clarifies that the term “water right” means a right to use water that is recognized under State law under the prior appropriation doctrine.

Paragraph 3—Acquisition and Maintenance of Water Rights. Paragraph 3a would define the term “NFS ski area water right” to mean a water right that is for water facilities that would divert or pump water from sources located on NFS lands, either inside or outside the permit boundary, for use that primarily supports operation of the ski area.

Paragraph 3b would provide that NFS ski area water rights shall be acquired in accordance with applicable State law; that the holder shall maintain NFS ski area water rights, including federally owned NFS ski area water rights, for the term of the permit and any subsequent permit; that the holder shall have the responsibility to submit water rights applications and filings that are necessary to protect NFS ski area water rights in accordance with State law; and that the holder shall bear the cost of acquiring, maintaining, and perfecting NFS ski area water rights, including federally owned NFS ski area water rights.

Paragraph 3c would provide that NFS ski area water rights that are jointly or solely owned by the United States shall remain in Federal ownership. Additionally, paragraph 3c would provide that if the holder's ski area permit utilizes NFS ski area water rights acquired in the name of or transferred to the United States or held jointly with the United States, the holder shall have the responsibility to submit any applications or other filings that are necessary to protect those water rights as the agent of the United States in accordance with State law. Furthermore, paragraph 3c would provide that notwithstanding the holder's obligation to maintain federally owned NFS ski area water rights, the United States reserves the right to take any action necessary to maintain and protect those water rights, including submitting any applications or other filings that may be necessary to protect those water rights.

Paragraph 3d would provide that if a water facility corresponding to an NFS ski area water right was or is initiated, developed, certified, permitted, or adjudicated by the holder without a special use authorization, then the water facility is in trespass; that the owner of the NFS ski area water right shall apply for authorization of the water facility; and that if the application is denied, the owner shall promptly remove the water facility and petition in accordance with State law to remove the point of diversion and water use from NFS lands or abandon the NFS ski area water right.

Under paragraph 3, NFS ski area water rights that are not owned by the United States could be owned by the holder, provided that ownership by the holder is consistent with applicable State law as it applies to other parties within the State. In contrast to the 2012 clause, paragraph 3 would not require transfer of water rights to the United States under the terms of prior permits. Paragraph 3 responds to several focus group recommendations regarding transfer of water rights to the United States.

Paragraph 4—Non-Severability of Certain Water Rights. Paragraph 4a would provide that when the United States owns any NFS ski area water rights, the Forest Service shall not take action during the term of the permit that would adversely affect availability of those water rights to support the operation of the ski area unless deemed necessary by the Forest Service to satisfy legal requirements. Paragraph 4a would commit the Forest Service for the term of the permit to utilizing any NFS ski area water rights obtained in the name of the United States for ski area operations. Paragraph 4a would address concerns raised by NSAA regarding the 2011 ski area water rights clause that the Agency must assure continued availability of ski area water rights owned solely by the United States.

Paragraph 4b would provide that when the holder has an interest in any NFS ski area water rights, or water rights that the holder has purchased or leased from a party other than a prior holder that are changed or exchanged to provide for diversion from sources on NFS lands within the permit boundary for use that primarily supports operation of the ski area authorized by this permit (“changed or exchanged water rights”), the holder shall not take any action during the term of the permit that would adversely affect availability of those water rights to support the operation of the ski area unless approved in writing in advance by the Authorized Officer. Paragraph 4b would commit the holder to utilizing any changed or exchanged water rights and NFS ski area water rights owned by the holder for ski area operations. Paragraph 4b addresses focus group recommendations that water rights needed for ski area operations be committed to that use for the long term. Furthermore, non-severability is necessary to meet the objective of sustained use under MUSYA and is necessary to ensure the long-term viability of ski areas. Without the requisite water rights and associated water facilities, ski areas cannot operate.

Paragraph 5—Transfer of Certain Water Rights. Paragraph 5a would provide that upon termination or revocation of the permit, the holder shall transfer the holder's interest in any NFS ski area and changed or exchanged water rights to a subsequent holder and that the current holder shall retain the full amount of any consideration paid for those water rights. Paragraph 5b would provide that if the ski area is not reauthorized, the holder shall promptly petition in accordance with State law to remove the point of diversion and water use from NFS lands for any changed or exchanged water rights or NFS ski area water rights owned solely by the holder or shall relinquish those water rights. Paragraph 5b would further provide that in the case of any water rights owned jointly by the holder and the United States, the holder shall relinquish its ownership interest to the United States.

The restrictions in paragraph 5 help ensure that water remains available to fulfill the MUSYA purpose of providing the recreational opportunity of skiing to the American public. It is a reasonable exercise of the Agency's power over use and occupancy of NFS lands and of its mandate to provide sustainable recreation opportunities to require that water rights developed on NFS lands for ski area purposes be transferred to subsequent ski area owners through the sale of the ski area. While water rights are granted by the State agencies or courts, the beneficial use and the diversion necessary to their establishment rests on the Forest Service's discretionary decision to grant a ski area permit, and the Agency's discretionary decision to allow use of NFS lands for water facilities. The Agency's authority to deny a special use permit for a ski area or a water facility is sufficiently broad to allow the Agency to condition those authorizations by requiring the holder to sell its water rights to the subsequent holder.

If the ski area is not reauthorized, it is reasonable to require the holder to remove the point of diversion and water use for water rights owned solely by the holder or, if the holder prefers, to relinquish those water rights. The basis of the Agency's authorization of ski area water facilities is facilitation of ski area operations. Once that use ends, there is no basis for leaving the point of diversion and water use on NFS lands: Water facilities cannot be maintained on NFS lands without a special use permit (36 CFR 251.50(a)).

The transfer provisions in paragraph 5 treat privately owned water rights in the same manner as other privately owned assets covered by a ski area permit are treated under existing regulations and ski area permit provisions. Both privately owned water rights and privately owned improvements are tied to the ski area permit when the use is still authorized and must be removed or relinquished when the use is no longer authorized. A ski area permit terminates when the authorized improvements are sold, and the purchaser shall obtain a ski area permit to operate them (36 CFR 251.59). A ski area permit provides that when the use is not reauthorized, the holder shall either remove the privately owned improvements or they become the property of the United States. In addition, requiring transfer of privately owned water rights to the subsequent permit holder responds to a focus group concern regarding adequacy of water rights if a prospective holder has not acquired sufficient water rights and the current holder retains or sells water rights that have been historically used at the ski area.

There were several focus group recommendations to give an initial option to the succeeding permit holder to purchase privately owned water rights, a second option to the local government to purchase these water rights, and a third option to the United States to purchase these water rights. There are several problems with this approach. It would not ensure continuation of the ski area by keeping water rights tied to the authorized use. Rather, this approach would only require the ski area to make an offer to sell, when the desired result is the transfer of water rights needed to operate the ski area. Assuming the initial option is not exercised, there is no guarantee that the local government would ensure that the water rights remain with the land, and if the second option is not exercised, that the Federal Government would have resources to purchase the water rights.

Paragraph 6—Documentation of Transfer. Paragraph 6 would provide that when the holder is obligated to transfer the holder's interest in any NFS ski area or changed or exchanged water rights to the holder of a subsequent permit, the holder or the holder's heirs or assigns shall execute a quit claim deed to that effect. Furthermore, this paragraph would provide that the holder grants the Authorized Officer a limited power of attorney to execute documents necessary to accomplish this purpose. The Agency has broad authority to impose terms and conditions in special use permits to protect the public interest. A limited power of attorney to effectuate transfers of water rights is appropriate, given the history of holders acquiring and retaining water rights in their name despite permit terms to the contrary and the inability to effectuate transfers of water rights absent the limited power of attorney if the holder refuses to do so.

Paragraph 7—Waiver. Paragraph 7 would provide that the holder waives any claims for compensation against the United States for any water rights that the holder transfers, removes, or relinquishes as a result of the provisions in the proposed clause; any claims for compensation in connection with imposition of restrictions on severing any water rights; and any claims for compensation in connection with imposition of any conditions on installation, operation, maintenance, and removal of water facilities. While the Forest Service does not believe that this clause will result in a taking of private property, the waiver provision will shield the United States from claims involving implementation of the proposed clause. The waiver provision is also constitutional. Although the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the taking of private property for public use without just compensation, constitutional rights, including those protected by the Fifth Amendment, can be waived. See, e.g., Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 243 (1969); Bistline v. United States, 640 F.2d 1270, 1273-75 (Ct. Cl. 1981).

Paragraph 8—Inventory of Necessary Water Rights. Paragraph 8 would require the inventory of necessary ski area water rights, including NFS ski area water rights owned solely by the United States (paragraph 8a); those owned solely by the holder (paragraph 8b); those owned jointly by the United States and the holder (paragraph 8c); changed or exchanged water rights; and water rights for diversions from non-NFS lands for use on NFS lands within the permit boundary, which are owned solely by the holder (paragraph 8d). The inventory with the above classification would support the focus group recommendation to treat water rights on NFS lands differently from water rights off NFS lands. The inventory also supports the focus group recommendation to assess the sufficiency of water during project analysis, including consideration of current ski area operations.

Paragraph 9—Performance Bond. Paragraph 9 would require the holder to maintain a performance bond for the removal of privately owned ski area improvements when the holder solely owns NFS ski area water rights. A performance bond would comply with FSM 6560. This paragraph would provide surety for the protection of NFS lands if a ski area is not reauthorized, and the holder chooses to remove the point of diversion and water use from NFS lands for any NFS ski area water rights owned solely by the holder.

Acknowledgment of Agreement. This paragraph would be inserted at the end of the permit and would provide that the holder has read and agrees to all the terms and conditions of the permit, including the limited power of attorney to transfer water rights in paragraph 6.

The Forest Service is proposing a new ski area water rights clause for use in States that have a riparian system. Under the riparian water rights clause, the United States retains all rights, title, and interests as a riparian or littoral landowner.

Instructions for the Riparian Water Rights Clause. The instructions would provide direction to permit administrators on when to use the riparian water rights clause. The instructions would limit clause D-31 to ski areas in the riparian States of Michigan, New Hampshire, and Vermont; supersede all ski area water rights clauses in the Directive System in riparian States; provide for inclusion of clause D-31 when a ski area permit is reissued or modified per 36 CFR 251.61 in a riparian State; and provide that before issuing a new or modified ski area permit in a riparian State, Authorized Officers shall ensure that the holder is in compliance with all water facility and water use requirements in clause D-31.

The instructions would provide direction on use of an optional provision when restrictions on water withdrawal are required by the following: A regulation or policy; an adjudication; a settlement agreement; or based on a decision document supported by an environmental analysis.

The instructions would provide for the following: That water facilities that are necessary for and that primarily support the operation of the ski area on NFS land may be included in a ski area permit; all water facilities that meet these criteria, regardless of whether they are for diversions on NFS lands inside or outside the permit boundary, should be included in the ski area permit; define what it means to be necessary for and primarily support the operation of a ski area; and that any other water facilities must be authorized under a separate permit. Additionally, the instructions would provide that before authorizing a permit amendment for a new water facility at a ski area, the Authorized Officer shall assure that sufficient water is available to operate the water facility.

Paragraph 1—Water Facilities. Paragraph 1a would define “necessary” and “primarily supports” in relation to a water facility. Paragraph 1b would explain what constitutes a water facility; paragraph 1c would require that water facilities on NFS land must be expressly authorized in a permit; paragraph 1d would provide that the United States can place conditions on water facilities deemed necessary to protect public property, public safety, and natural resources on NFS lands; paragraph 1e would provide that only water facilities that are necessary for and that primarily support the operation of a ski area may be included in a ski area permit; paragraph 1f would provide that any change in water facilities must be expressly authorized by a permit amendment; and paragraph 1g would require a separate special use permit to initiate, develop, certify, or permit any water facility on NFS lands that does not primarily support operation of the ski area. These requirements mirror the water facilities requirements in clause D-30 to the extent applicable.

Paragraph 2—Water Rights. Paragraph 2 would provide that the ski area permit does not convey, dispose of, extinguish, or otherwise effect a transfer of any right, title, or interest of the United States as a riparian or littoral landowner, and that the United States retains all rights, title, and interests it has as a riparian or littoral landowner. Paragraph 2 is appropriate for use in ski area permits in eastern States that follow riparian law, where water rights are appurtenant to the land. Paragraph 2 is also consistent with the focus group recommendation that the proposed clause recognize legal differences among jurisdictions.

Paragraph 3—Water Use. Paragraph 3 would document any restrictions on withdrawal and use of water required by a regulation or policy, an adjudication, or a settlement agreement, or based on a decision document supported by environmental analysis. Paragraph 3 is consistent with the focus group recommendation to recognize impacts on other water use or users.

A definition for a performance bond for a ski area permit would be added to FSM 6560.5. A performance bond for a ski area permit would be defined as “a bond to guarantee repair of surface resource disturbance, removal of equipment, removal of any privately owned improvements, and forest restoration.”

This proposed directive would revise national Forest Service policy governing water rights in ski area permits. Forest Service regulations at 36 CFR 220.6(d)(2) exclude from documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement “rules, regulations, or policies to establish Service-wide administrative procedures, program processes, or instructions.” The Agency has concluded that this proposed directive falls within this category of actions and that no extraordinary circumstances exist which would require preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

This proposed directive has been reviewed under USDA procedures and Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 on regulatory planning and review. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this proposed directive is significant and therefore subject to OMB review under E.O. 12866. Consequently, as required, a Cost Benefit Analysis was prepared. However, the proposed directive is not economically significant because it would not have an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy, nor would it adversely affect productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health and safety, or State or local governments. Moreover, the proposed directive would not alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grant, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of beneficiaries of those programs or interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.

The Agency has considered the proposed directive in light of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 602 et seq. ). Pursuant to a threshold Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, the Agency has determined that as defined by the Act because the proposed directive would: Impose modest record-keeping requirements on them; not affect their competitive position in relation to large entities; and not affect their cash flow, liquidity, or ability to remain in the market. The proposed directive would likely have a positive economic effect on current and future holders and local communities close to ski areas because the proposed directive would provide for long-term sustainability of ski areas. The basis for this determination is enumerated in the threshold Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis.

The Agency has analyzed the proposed directive in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 12630 and determined that the proposed directive would not pose the risk of a taking of private property. The waiver provision is constitutional, because constitutional rights, including those protected by the Fifth Amendment, can be waived. Including requirements regarding non-severability and transfer of water rights in reissued or modified permits, rather than in existing permits, does not effect a taking of private property. While the Forest Service does not believe that this clause will result in a taking of private property, the waiver provision will shield the United States from claims involving implementation of the proposed clause. The Forest Service has broad authority to include appropriate terms and conditions in ski area permits. A ski area permit is a voluntary transaction, and a holder can decline the permit and retain ownership interest in water rights or accept the permit subject to its new conditions.

The Agency has reviewed the proposed directive under E.O. 12988 on civil justice reform. If the proposed directive were adopted, (1) all State and local laws and regulations that conflict with the proposed directive or that would impede its full implementation would be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect would be given to the proposed directive; and (3) it would not require administrative proceedings before parties file suit in court challenging its provisions.

The Agency has considered the proposed directive under the requirements of E.O. 13132 on federalism and has concluded that the proposed directive conforms to the federalism principles. The proposed directive would not impose any compliance costs on the States; and have substantial direct effects on the States or the relationship between the Federal Government and the States; or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the Agency has determined that no further assessment of federalism implications is necessary at this time.

The proposed directive does not have tribal implications as defined by E.O. 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,” and therefore advance consultation with Tribes is not required. Consultation will be concurrent with this Federal Register notice.

The Agency has reviewed the proposed directive under E.O. 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.” The Agency has determined that the proposed directive does not constitute a significant energy action as defined in the E.O.

Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538), the Agency has assessed the effects of the proposed directive on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. The proposed directive would not compel the expenditure of $100 million or more by any State, local, or Tribal government or anyone in the private sector. Therefore, a statement under section 202 of the act is not required.

In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), the information collection requirements included in this proposed rule have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget.

The bonding requirement in the proposed directive would be implemented using Standard Form 25, Performance Bond, which has been approved by OMB and assigned control number 9000-0045. Use of form SF-25 Performance Bond is new for the Forest Service special uses program. Additionally, the proposed directive involves a revision to the inventory of water rights associated with operation of the ski area by adding separate charts for changed or exchanged water rights (para. d) and water rights for diversions from non-NFS lands for use on NFS lands within the permit boundary (para. e). Furthermore, there is a new requirement to document restrictions on withdrawal and use of water, if applicable. Upon approval of the final rule, the burden associated with this information collection will be incorporated into OMB control number 0596-0082, Special Uses for utilization of form FS-2700-5b, Ski Area Term Special Use Permit. However, other than the collection of information required for the bonding requirement, the inventory of water rights, and the documentation of restrictions on withdrawal and use of water, all other information collection requirements associated with special use authorizations, including the ski area term special use permit, are already covered by control number 0596-0082.

The following summarizes the information collection requirement associated with the proposed bonding requirement, the inventory of water rights, and the documentation of restrictions on the withdrawal and use of water:

OMB Control Number: 0596—NEW.

Estimated Burden per Response: 2 Hours.

Type of Respondents: ski area permit holders.

Estimated Annual Number of Respondents: 40.

Estimated Annual Average Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.5.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 120 hours.

Comment is invited on (1) whether this collection of information is necessary for the stated purposes and proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical or scientific utility; (2) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden for collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the package submitted to OMB for approval.

The Forest Service organizes its Directive System by alphanumeric codes and subject headings. The intended audience for this direction is Forest Service employees charged with issuing and administering ski area permits. To view the proposed directive, visit the Forest Service's Web site at http://www.fs.fed.us/specialuses. Only the sections of the FSH and FSM that are the subject of this notice have been posted, i.e., FSH 2709.11, Special Uses Handbook, Chapter 50, Standard Forms and Supplemental Clauses, Section 52.4, and FSM 6560.5, Bonding Administration.

The purpose of the Advisory Committee is to provide advice to the GIPSA Administrator with respect to the implementation of the U.S. Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 71-87k). Information about the Advisory Committee is available on the GIPSA Web site at http://www.gipsa.usda.gov/fgis/adcommit.html.

The agenda will include an overview of international activities, quality control initiatives, moisture meters, market overview, optical scanning for rice brokens, Field Management Division updates and initiatives, standards and market needs, and inspector performance.

For a copy of the agenda please contact Terri L. Henry by phone at (202) 205-8281 or by email at Terri.L.Henry@usda.gov .

Public participation will be limited to written statements unless permission is received from the Committee Chairperson to orally address the Advisory Committee. The meeting will be open to the public.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication of program information or related accommodations should contact Terri L. Henry at the telephone number listed above.

On April 2, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated the first five-year (“sunset”) reviews of the AD orders on light-walled pipe and tube from Mexico, Turkey, the PRC, and Korea  1 (collectively, the AD Orders ) and the first sunset review of the countervailing duty order on light-walled pipe and tube from the PRC  2 ( CVD Order ) pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 3 As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department found that revocation of the AD Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and that revocation of the CVD Order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies and, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins of dumping and the subsidy rates likely to prevail should the AD Orders and the CVD Order be revoked. 4

On June 13, 2014, the ITC published its determination, pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(a) of the Act, that revocation of the AD Orders and the CVD Order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. 5

The merchandise subject to the orders is certain welded carbon quality light-walled steel pipe and tube, of rectangular (including square) cross section, having a wall thickness of less than 4 mm. The term carbon-quality steel includes both carbon steel and alloy steel which contains only small amounts of alloying elements. Specifically, the term carbon-quality includes products in which none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity by weight respectively indicated: 1.80 percent of manganese, or 2.25 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent of copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 0.30 percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 percent of nickel, or 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of niobium, or 0.15 percent vanadium, or 0.15 percent of zirconium. The description of carbon-quality is intended to identify carbon-quality products within the scope. The welded carbon-quality rectangular pipe and tube subject to the Orders is currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 7306.61.50.00 and 7306.61.70.60. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the orders is dispositive.

As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the AD Orders and the CVD Order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and a countervailable subsidy, and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to sections 751(c) and 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of the AD Orders and the CVD Order.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. The effective date of the continuation of the AD Orders and the CVD Order is the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of continuation. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next sunset reviews of these orders not later than 30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date of this continuation.

These sunset reviews and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act.

On January 2, 2014, the Department published the initiation of the first sunset review of the AD order on small diameter graphite electrodes from the PRC pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.218(c). 1 As a result of its review, the Department determined that revocation of the AD order on small diameter graphite electrodes from the PRC would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, and notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail should the order be revoked. 2 On June 6, 2014, pursuant to section 75l(c) of the Act, the ITC determined that revocation of the AD order on small diameter graphite electrodes from the PRC would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. 3

The merchandise covered by the order includes all small diameter graphite electrodes of any length, whether or not finished, of a kind used in furnaces, with a nominal or actual diameter of 400 millimeters (16 inches) or less, and whether or not attached to a graphite pin joining system or any other type of joining system or hardware. The merchandise covered by the order also includes graphite pin joining systems for small diameter graphite electrodes, of any length, whether or not finished, of a kind used in furnaces, and whether or not the graphite pin joining system is attached to, sold with, or sold separately from, the small diameter graphite electrodes. Small diameter graphite electrodes and graphite pin joining systems for small diameter graphite electrodes are most commonly used in primary melting, ladle metallurgy, and specialty furnace applications in industries including foundries, smelters, and steel refining operations. Small diameter graphite electrodes and graphite pin joining systems for small diameter graphite electrodes that are subject to the order are currently classified under the HTSUS subheadings 8545.11.0010, 4 3801.10, 5 and 8545.11.0020. 6 The HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, but the written description of the scope is dispositive.

As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the AD order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 75l(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(a), the Department hereby orders the continuation of the AD order on small diameter graphite electrodes from the PRC. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will continue to collect AD cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. The effective date of the continuation of the orders will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of continuation. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c)(2), the Department intends to initiate the next five-year review of this order not later than 30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date of this continuation notice.

This sunset review and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).

The subject amendment to Permit No. 13430 is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ), and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222-226).

Permit No. 13430, issued on February 17, 2010 (75 FR 8303), authorizes the permit holder to take Pacific harbor seals ( Phoca vitulina ), California sea lions ( Zalophus californianus ), and northern elephant seals ( Mirounga angustirostris ) within coastal waters and on pinniped rookeries and haul outs of Washington and Oregon during aerial, vessel, and ground surveys of pinnipeds; capture of pinnipeds for collection of tissue samples, attachment of scientific instruments and application of marks (flipper tags, brands, etc.); and harassment of marine mammals, including Eastern Distinct Population Segment Steller sea lions ( Eumetopias jubatus ) and Southern Resident killer whales ( Orcinus orca ), during underwater playback experiments. The permit also allows for a limited number of research related mortality of marine mammals. The permit is valid through January 31, 2015.

The permit holder requests an amendment to extend the expiration date to January 31, 2020, and modify one protocol. The permit holder proposes to add use of an alternate injectable sedative to reduce stress in harbor seals and California sea lions that may be caused by procedures that have prolonged handling times, such as instrument attachment. The protocols currently include administering valium; the change would be to use midazolam (and its reversal agent, flumazenil) in lieu of valium at the discretion of the attending veterinarian.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), an environmental assessment (EA) was prepared analyzing the effects on the human environment of issuing Permit No. 13430. Based on the analyses in the EA, NMFS determined that issuance of the permit would not significantly impact the quality of the human environment and that preparation of an environmental impact statement was not required. NMFS will determine whether that EA should be supplemented prior to making a final determination about potential impacts of issuing the amendment.

Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

The Advisory Panel will develop a Fishery Performance Report for consideration by the Council and the Council's SSC as they review bluefish management measures established for the 2015 fishing year.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to M. Jan Saunders at the Mid-Atlantic Council Office, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

On March 27, 2014, notice was published in the Federal Register (79 FR 17135) that a request for a permit to conduct research on captive Steller sea lions had been submitted by the above-named applicant. The requested permit has been issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ), and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

Permit No. 18534-00 authorizes the Alaska SeaLife Center to conduct studies on captive Steller sea lions from the Eastern Distinct Population Segment to (1) investigate reproductive physiology and survival, growth, and physiology of captive-bred offspring; and (2) deploy instruments to develop and validate methods for monitoring wild Steller sea lions. Research on up to 18 captive sea lions may include: Anesthesia and sedation; administration of Evan's blue dye and deuterium oxide; biological sampling; dietary supplements; mass and morphometric measurements; ultrasound and radiographs; video and audio recordings; and attachment and proximity to instrumentation. Steller sea lions may be transported to and from approved facilities. The permit authorizes four research-related mortalities over the course of the permit. No research will occur on wild populations. The permit expires May 31, 2019.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), a final determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

Background

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) directs the Secretary of Commerce to authorize, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals of a species or population stock, by United States citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if, after notice of a proposed authorization to the public for review and public comment: (1) We make certain findings; and (2) the taking is limited to harassment.

NMFS shall grant authorization for the incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals if we find that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant). The authorization must set forth the permissible methods of taking; other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the species or stock and its habitat (i.e., mitigation); and requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. NMFS have defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.”

Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].

On March 21, 2013, NMFS received an application from Transco for the taking of marine mammals incidental to the Rockaway delivery lateral project (Project) off the coast of New York over a 1-year period beginning in April 2014. We received a revised application from Transco on May 13, 2013, which reflected updates to the proposed mitigation measures, proposed monitoring measures, and incidental take requests for marine mammals. Further revisions were made to the request in October 2013 due to a change in the project schedule and the application was considered complete and adequate on November 9, 2013. On April 14, Transco amended their take request based on a shift in the offshore construction schedule.

Transco plans to expand its pipeline system to meet immediate and future demand for natural gas in the New York City market area. This project will provide an additional delivery point to National Grid's (an international electricity and gas company) local distribution companies, giving National Grid the flexibility to redirect supplies during peak demand periods. The in-water portion of the project, which will require pile driving, may result in the incidental taking of seven species of marine mammals by behavioral harassment.

The specific Project activity will be to install a sub-sea natural gas pipeline extending from the existing Lower New York Bay Lateral in the Atlantic Ocean to an onshore delivery point on the Rockaway Peninsula. The work will include the following:

Only the pile driving activities associated with horizontal directional drilling offshore construction are expected to result in the take of marine mammals by Level B harassment. Other aspects of the project are discussed in more detail in Transco's IHA application ( http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm/#applications ). No vessels will use dynamic positioning (a system to maintain position and heading), and only two vessels—a crew boat and picket boat—will make weekly trips to the Project area from shore. Elevated sound levels that may result in harassment are not expected from the clamshell dredge because the dredge will be anchored and dynamic positioning will not be used. Dredging and trenching may result in a temporary, localized increase in turbidity, but are not expected to rise to the level of harassment. A complete description of all in-water Project activities is provided in Transco's application ( http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm/#applications ).

Vibratory hammers are commonly used in steel pile installation and removal when the sediment conditions allow for this method. Transco will likely use the MKT V 52 model of vibratory hammer for the Project. The vibratory hammer is considered a continuous sound source because it continuously drives the pile into the substrate until the desired depth is reached. Transco will use a vibratory hammer to install about 70 piles (5 sets of temporary goal posts and up to 60 temporary fender piles). All piles will be 14- to 16-inch diameter steel pipe piles. Two vibratory hammers will be on site, but only one hammer will be used at a time. Each pile should take about 1 to 2 seconds to install per foot of depth driven, with each pile driven to a depth of about 25 to 30 feet below the seafloor. Therefore, each pile will take up to 60 seconds of continuous pile driving to install. All piles should be installed during a 1-week period, with less than 12 hours of pile driving operation. The goal posts and fenders would remain in the offshore environment for the duration of the horizontal directional drilling portion of construction (3 to 4 months). Extraction of all piles at the end of the construction period should take about as long as installation.

The Project will be located mostly in nearshore waters (within approximately 3 miles of the Atlantic Ocean), southeast of the Rockaway Peninsula in Queens County, New York. A linear segment of underwater land measuring approximately 2.15 miles will be required for offshore pipe lay and trenching activities from the interconnect with Transco's pipeline to the proposed horizontal directional drilling exit point in the nearshore area, seaward of Jacob Riis Park (see Figure 1 of Transco's application). The Project area is located within the greater New York Bight region, with construction occurring within approximately 2.86 miles from the Jacob Riis Park shoreline. Vessels associated with the Project will travel between the pipe yard in Elizabeth, New Jersey, to the offshore construction site. The greater Project area, therefore, is described as the waters between the pipe yard and construction site and the waters offshore of Jacob Riis Park where construction will occur. However, pile driving activities will only take place around the horizontal directional drilling exit point in the nearshore area. All work will occur in water depths between 25 and 50 feet.

Pile driving activities were originally proposed to begin in April 2014 and expected to be complete in August 2014. However, Transco adjusted their construction schedule so that pile installation will begin in June 2014 and pile removal will occur in September 2014. The IHA is valid through October 2014 to allow for construction delays. Total installation time for all piles is expected to total less than 1 day of operation and would occur during a 1-week period. Total operating time for the extraction of all piles at the end of the construction period is expected to take a similar amount of time (1 day total over a 1-week period).

This section was included in the notice of proposed IHA (78 FR 78824, December 27, 2013) as a brief explanation of the sound measurements frequently used in the discussions of acoustic effects in this document and that information has not changed.

No source levels were available for 14- to 16-inch diameter steel pipe piles at water depths of approximately 33 feet. The most applicable source levels available are for 12-inch diameter steel pipe piles in water depths of approximately 16 feet. In-water measurements for the Mad River Slough Project in Arcata, California, indicate that installation of a 12-inch steel pipe pile in about 16 feet of water measured 10 meters from the source generated 155 dB re 1 uPa RMS. To account for the increased diameter of the piles planned for use during the Project, a change in water depth, and a different location than where the reference levels were recorded, Transco increased the source levels from the Mad River Slough Project by 5 dB. The 5 dB increase was chosen due to an overall lack of current information available for reference levels of steel pipe piles of a similar size being driven with a vibratory hammer in similar water depths. Transco expects that this increase overestimates the actual source level from the vibratory hammer.

Thirteen marine mammal species under our jurisdiction may occur in the proposed Project area, including four mysticetes (baleen whales), six odontocetes (toothed cetaceans), and three pinnipeds (seals). Three of these species are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ), including: The humpback ( Megaptera novaeangliae ), fin ( Balaenoptera physalus ), and North Atlantic right ( Eubalaena glacialis ) whales.

However, based on occurrence information, stranding records, and seasonal distribution, it is unlikely that humpback whales, fin whales, minke whales, Atlantic white-sided dolphins, short-finned pilot whales, or long-finned pilot whales will be present in the Project area during the winter in-water construction period. Each of these species is discussed in detail in section 3 of Transco's IHA application ( http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm/#applications ). In summary, humpback whales are typically found in other regions of the east coast and there have been no reported observations within the vicinity of the Project area in recent years; fin whales prefer deeper offshore waters and there have been no reported observations within the vicinity of the Project area in recent years; minke whales are prevalent in other regions there have been no reported observations within the vicinity of the Project area in recent years; Atlantic white-sided dolphins generally occur in areas east and north of the Project area; and short-finned and long-finned pilot whales prefer deeper pelagic waters. Accordingly, we did not consider these species in greater detail and only authorized take for the seven species requested. After the proposed IHA was published (78 FR 78824, December 27, 2013), Transco amended their application due to a change in construction schedule. Their new schedule, which has pile installation occurring in June 2014 and pile removal occurring in September 2014, does not overlap with North Atlantic right whale season (November to April). Therefore, after consultation with NMFS, Transco amended their marine mammal take request and eliminated the request for incidental take of North Atlantic right whales. NMFS further determined that incidental take of harp seals from June through September is also highly unlikely because of its distribution.

Table 2 presents information on the abundance, distribution, and conservation status of the marine mammals that may occur in the area from June through September. While harbor porpoise are most likely in the project area during winter months, they are dispersed as far south as New Jersey during the spring and fall. Similarly, short-beaked common dolphins are most likely in the area from January to May, but may still be passing through the area during the summer and fall.

Further information on the biology and local distribution of these species can be found in section 3 of Transco's application (see ADDRESSES ), and the NMFS Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, which are available online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/ .

This section of the proposed IHA (78 FR 78824, December 27, 2013) included a summary and discussion of the ways that the types of stressors associated with the specified activity (pile driving activities) have been observed to impact marine mammals. That information has not changed and is not repeated here. In summary, the potential effects of sound from the proposed activities may include one or more of the following: Tolerance; masking of natural sounds; behavioral disturbance; non-auditory physical effects; and temporary or permanent hearing impairment (Richardson et al., 1995). However, it is unlikely that there would be any cases of temporary or permanent hearing impairment resulting from these activities.

This section of the proposed IHA (78 FR 78824, December 27, 2013) described the anticipated effects of pile driving activities on marine mammal habitat; that information has not changed and is not repeated here. In summary, because of the short duration of the activity, the impacts to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or long- term consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations.

NMFS published a proposed authorization and request for public comments in the Federal Register on December 27, 2013 (78 FR 78824). During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS only received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission). All comments are addressed below and have been compiled and posted online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications .

Comment 1: The Commission recommended that NMFS require Transco to (1) provide estimated source levels associated with other pipeline construction activities (i.e., horizontal directional drilling, pipe laying, and pipe burial); and (2) estimate the number of takes associated with those activities based on the Level B harassment threshold of 120 dB.

Response: Only two construction elements involve noise as a concern for marine mammals: Vibratory pile driving and vessel operations. Both of these activities were discussed in detail in Transco's application (see ADDRESSES ) and were addressed in the proposed IHA (78 FR 78824, December 27, 2013). Noise levels generated by activities such as pipe laying and pipe burial are generally very low (Richardson et al., 1995) and do not reach the level set forth in NMFS' noise exposure criteria that would result in take. There is no underwater construction involved with these activities and any noise generation would be conducted on a vessel. Horizontal directional drilling will begin onshore and exit offshore, and include excavation of the exit pit via clamshell dredge and vibratory installation and removal of piles. The clamshell dredge will be anchored in place and dynamic positioning will not be used. Excavation does not involve a sound source that has the potential to result in incidental take of marine mammals. No drilling will occur from the offshore HDD location. Further information on each project activity is also provided in Transco's application (see ADDRESSES ).

Comment 2: The Commission recommended that NMFS require Transco to estimate the number of takes by accounting for the number of days (i.e., seven days) that the proposed activities would occur in summer (for pile driving) and fall (for pile removal).

Response: NMFS agrees that the number of days of pile driving should be considered when estimating take. In addition, only summer and fall densities were considered to estimate take since pile driving activities will no longer take place during spring or winter months. The take estimates, summarized in Table 3 of this document, have been adjusted to account for the number of days of pile installation in the summer and removal in the fall.

Comment 3: The Commission recommended that NMFS require Transco to increase its estimated numbers of takes for North Atlantic right whales and short-beaked common dolphins to the mean group size for each season in which takes are expected to occur.

Response: As noted in the Description of Marine Mammals section of this document, Transco amended their take request after publication of the proposed IHA and NMFS believes that take of North Atlantic right whales is unlikely considering the new construction schedule. NMFS disagrees that estimated numbers of takes for short-beaked common dolphins should be increased to reflect the mean group size (which is in the hundreds) due to their seasonal presence around the construction area and the short duration of pile driving activities. Short-beaked common dolphins are most likely to be found offshore New York between January and May and prefer oceanic waters. During summer and fall months (when pile installation and removal will occur), short-beaked common dolphins are expected to be much further north near Georges Bank. NMFS authorized take of this species based on the estimated density for summer and fall months and does not expect large aggregations of short-beaked common dolphins in the area.

In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, we must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (where relevant).

To reduce the potential for disturbance from acoustic stimuli associated with the activities, Transco will implement the following mitigation measures for marine mammals:

(1) Vibratory pile driving only;

(2) Pile driving during daylight hours only;

(3) Shutdown procedures;

(4) Soft-start (ramp-up) procedures; and

(5) Discharge control.

Separately, Transco acknowledges the vessel activity and speed restrictions that are already in place along the east coast for the north Atlantic right whale. While the Seasonal Management Area is in effect (November-April), vessel operators will comply with the established regulations. The change in construction schedule (prompted by the seasonal distribution of ESA-listed Atlantic sturgeon) also reduces the overlap of pile driving activities with the North Atlantic right whale season (November-April) and the likelihood of harp seals in the area.

Transco will use a vibratory hammer instead of an impact hammer for all pile driving activities in order to reduce in-water sound levels while installing and removing up to 70 temporary steel pipe piles. The sound source level for the vibratory hammer is less than the source level for an impact hammer, and by avoiding use of an impact hammer Transco removes the potential for Level A harassment of marine mammals.

Pile driving installation and removal will only be conducted when lighting and weather conditions allow the protected species observers to visually monitor the entire Level B harassment area through the use of binoculars or other devices.

Transco will implement soft-start procedures at the beginning of each pile driving session (i.e., at the beginning of each day and after a lapse of activity for at least 30 minutes). Contractors will initiate the vibratory hammer for 15 seconds at 40 to 60 percent reduced energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting period. This procedure will be repeated two additional times before reach full energy.

Protected species observers will monitor the entire Level B harassment area for marine mammals displaying abnormal behavior. Such behavior may include aggressive signals related to noise exposure (e.g., tail/flipper slapping or abrupt directed movement), avoidance of the sound source, or an obvious startle response (e.g., rapid change in swimming speed, erratic surface movements, or sudden diving associated with the onset of a sound source). At NMFS' recommendation, if a protected species observer sees any abnormal behavior, this information will be related to the construction manager and the vibratory hammer will be shutdown until the animal has moved outside of the Level B harassment area.

All in-water construction activities will comply with federal regulations to control the discharge of operational waste such as bilge and ballast waters, trash and debris, and sanitary and domestic waste that could be generated from all vessels associated with the Project. All Project vessels will also comply with the U.S. Coast Guard requirements for the prevention and control of oil and fuel spills (see Transco's application for more detail).

NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:

• The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals;

• The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse impacts as planned; and

• The practicability of the measure for applicant implementation.

Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of the general goals listed below:

1. Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).

2. A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or number at biologically important time or location) exposed to received levels of in-water pile driving activities, or other activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes only).

3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed to received levels of in-water pile driving activities, or other activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes only).

4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number or number at biologically important time or location) to received levels of in-water pile driving activity, or other activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to a, above, or to reducing the severity of harassment takes only).

5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas, permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance of habitat during a biologically important time.

6. For monitoring directly related to mitigation—an increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation.

Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the aforementioned mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

In order to issue an incidental take authorization for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that we must set forth “requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking.” The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for an authorization must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that would result in increased knowledge of the species and our expectations of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals present in the proposed action area.

Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or more of the following general goals:

1. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, both within the mitigation zone (thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation) and in general to generate more data to contribute to the analyses mentioned below;

2. An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals are likely to be exposed to levels of in-water pile driving activity that we associate with specific adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment, TTS, or PTS;

3. An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond to stimuli expected to result in take and how anticipated adverse effects on individuals (in different ways and to varying degrees) may impact the population, species, or stock (specifically through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival) through any of the following methods:

• Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other pertinent information);

• Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other pertinent information);

• Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or areas with concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli;

4. An increased knowledge of the affected species; and

5. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of certain mitigation and monitoring measures.

Two NMFS-approved protected species observers will survey the Level B harassment area (~3 miles) for marine mammals 30 minutes before, during, and 30 minutes after all vibratory pile driving activities. The observers will be stationed on a picket boat, located about 1.5 miles from the pile hammer. The picket boat will circle the pile hammer at a 1.5-mile distance so that the entire Level B harassment area could be surveyed. Information recorded during each observation within the Level B harassment area will be used to estimate numbers of animals potentially taken and will include the following:

• Numbers of individuals observed;

• Frequency of observation;

• Location within the Level B harassment area (i.e., distance from the sound source);

• Vibratory pile driving status (i.e., soft-start, active, post pile driving, etc.); and

• Reaction of the animal(s) to pile driving (if any) and observed behavior within the Level B harassment area, including bearing and direction of travel.

If the Level B harassment area is obscured by fog or poor lighting conditions, vibratory pile driving will be delayed until the area is visible. If the Level B harassment area becomes obscured by fog or poor lighting conditions while pile driving activities are occurring, pile driving will be shut down until the area is visible again.

Transco will provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within 90 days of the conclusion of monitoring. This report will include the following:

• A summary of the activity and monitoring plan (i.e., dates, times, locations);

• A summary of mitigation implementation;

• Monitoring results and a summary that addresses the goals of the monitoring plan, including the following:

Transco will submit a final report within 30 days after receiving NMFS' comments on the draft report. If NMFS has no comments, the draft report will be considered final.

In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner not permitted by the authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement), Transco shall immediately cease the specified activities and immediately report the incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and the Northeast Regional Stranding Coordinator at 978-281-9300 ( Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov ). The report must include the following information:

Transco shall not resume its activities until we are able to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. We will work with Transco to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Transco may not resume their activities until notified by us via letter, email, or telephone.

In the event that Transco discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as we describe in the next paragraph), Transco shall immediately report the incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and the Northeast Regional Stranding Coordinator at 978-281-9300 ( Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov ). The report must include the same information identified in the paragraph above this section. Activities may continue while we review the circumstances of the incident. We would work with Transco to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.

In the event that Transco discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the authorized activities (e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or scavenger damage), Transco would report the incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and the Northeast Regional Stranding Coordinator at 978-281-9300 ( Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov ), within 24 hours of the discovery. Transco would provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to us.

Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].

This section of the proposed IHA (78 FR 78824, December 27, 2013) described the methods used to estimate marine mammal density; that information has not changed except for the fact that pile driving activities will no longer take place during spring or winter months. Therefore, the marine mammal densities for the winter and spring seasons are no longer applicable and only summer and fall densities were considered. Transco estimated potential take by multiplying the area of the zone of influence (the Level B harassment area) by the local animal density. This provides an estimate of the number of animals that might occupy the Level B harassment area at any given moment during vibratory pile driving activities. Further information on these calculations and how they were applied to each species is also provided in section 6.3 of Transco's application ( see ADDRESSES ). Based on a comment from the Marine Mammal Commission, the number of days of pile driving was also considered when estimating take.

NMFS' current acoustic exposure criteria are provided in Table 2 below. Based on these thresholds, Transco estimated the number of marine mammals that may be exposed to noise that rises to the level of take. Table 3 shows the authorized take for Transco's specified activity, based on the estimated seasonal densities for pile installation and removal and the number of days of activity (up to seven for installation and seven for removal). Table 3 was adjusted from the proposed IHA to account for the new construction schedule and the Marine Mammal Commission's comment.

Negligible impact is “an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival” (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes, alone, is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through behavioral harassment, NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any responses (critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.

We do not anticipate that any injuries, serious injuries, or mortalities will occur as a result of Transco's Project, and we are not authorizing injury, serious injury, or mortality for this Project. We have determined, provided that the aforementioned mitigation and monitoring measures are implemented, that the impact of conducting pile driving activities off Rockaway Peninsula, from June 2014 through September 2014, may result, at worst, in a modification in behavior and/or low-level physiological effects (Level B harassment) of certain species of marine mammals. There are no known important feeding areas or haul-outs within the project area. While these species may make behavioral modifications, including temporarily vacating the area during the operation of the pile hammer to avoid the resultant acoustic disturbance, the availability of similar habitat surrounding the project area and the short and sporadic duration of the specified activities, have led us to determine that this action will not adversely affect annual rates of recruitment or survival.

Many animals perform vital functions, such as feeding, resting, traveling, and socializing, on a diel cycle (i.e., 24 hour cycle). Behavioral reactions to noise exposure (such as disruption of critical life functions, displacement, or avoidance of important habitat) are more likely to be significant if they last more than one diel cycle or recur on subsequent days (Southall et al., 2007). While vibratory pile driving will occur over 2 consecutive days, this is still considered a short overall duration and it will only occur during daylight hours.

Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the required monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from Transco's specified activity will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks.

The take numbers for each marine mammal species we are authorizing are small (all estimates are less than two percent) relative to the affected stock sizes. Accordingly, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken.

There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

Transco originally requested, and NMFS proposed, the incidental take of North Atlantic right whale, which is listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Under section 7 of the Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC; the federal agency responsible for permitting Transco's construction) initiated formal consultation with our Northeast Regional Office on the Project. We (i.e., National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Protected Resources, Permits and Conservation Division), also initiated formal consultation under section 7 of the Act with the Northeast Regional Office to obtain a Biological Opinion (Opinion) evaluating the effects of issuing an incidental harassment authorization for threatened and endangered marine mammals and, if appropriate, authorizing incidental take. However, following Transco's amendment to their request, the Permits and Conservation Division and the Northeast Regional Office concluded that take of North Atlantic right whale is unlikely. Therefore, the Project is not expected to result in the take of any threatened or endangered marine mammal species.

NMFS participated as a cooperating agency on the FERC's Rockaway Delivery Lateral Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which was published on March 10, 2014 (79 FR 13295) and is available here: https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/eis/2014/02-28-14-eis.asp. NMFS determined that the EIS is adequate and appropriate to meet our responsibilities under NEPA for the issuance of an IHA. NMFS adopted FERC's FEIS on May 27, 2014.

I. Abstract

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) administers the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq., which provides for the Federal registration of trademarks, service marks, collective trademarks and service marks, collective membership marks, and certification marks. Individuals and businesses that use or intend to use such marks in commerce may file an application to register their mark with the USPTO.

Such individuals and businesses may also submit various communications to the USPTO, including providing additional information needed to process a request to delete a particular filing basis from an application or to divide an application identifying multiple goods and/or services into two or more separate applications. Applicants may seek a six-month extension of time to file a statement that the mark is in use in commerce or submit a petition to revive an application that abandoned for failure to submit a timely response to an office action or a timely statement of use or extension request. In some circumstances, an applicant may expressly abandon an application by filing a written request for withdrawal of the application.

The rules implementing the Act are set forth in 37 CFR Part 2. These rules mandate that each register entry include the mark, the goods and/or services in connection with which the mark is used, ownership information, dates of use, and certain other information. The USPTO also provides similar information concerning pending applications. The register and pending application information may be accessed by an individual or by businesses to determine the availability of a mark. By accessing the USPTO's information, parties may reduce the possibility of initiating use of a mark previously adopted by another. The Federal trademark registration process may thereby reduce the number of filings between both litigating parties and the courts.

The forms in this collection are available in electronic format through the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS), which may be accessed on the USPTO Web site. TEAS Global Forms are available for the items where a TEAS form with dedicated data fields is not yet available. Applicants may also submit the information in paper form by mail, fax, or hand delivery.

OMB Number: 0651-0054.

Form Number(s): PTO Forms 1553, 1581, 2194, 2195, 2200, and 2202.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profits; not-for-profit institutions.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 292,706 per year.

Estimated Time per Response: The USPTO estimates that it will take the public from 5 minutes (0.083 hours) to 30 minutes (0.50 hours), depending on the complexity of the situation, to gather the necessary information, prepare the appropriate documents, and submit the information to the USPTO.

Estimated Total Annual Respondent Burden Hours: 63,981.

Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost Burden: $24,888,609. The USPTO expects that the information in this collection will be prepared by attorneys at an estimated rate of $389 per hour. Therefore, the USPTO estimates that the respondent cost burden for this collection will be approximately $24,888,609 per year.

Estimated Total Annual (Non-Hour) Respondent Cost Burden: $37,707,606. There are no capital start-up, maintenance or recordkeeping costs associated with this information collection. However, this collection does have annual (non-hour) cost burden in the form of postage costs and filing fees.

Applicants incur postage costs when submitting information to the USPTO by mail through the United States Postal Service. The USPTO estimates that the majority of the paper forms are submitted to the USPTO via first-class mail at a rate of 49 cents per ounce. Therefore, the USPTO estimates that with 4,091 total paper submissions, the postage costs in this collection will be $2,006.

The filing fees for several items in this collection are charged per class of goods and/or services; therefore, the filing fees will vary for each respondent depending on the number of classes. The total filing fees of $37,705,600 shown here are based on the minimum fee of one class for those items for which a fee is required.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

The USPTO is soliciting public comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: Exceptional Family Member Program, DD Form 2792, Family Member Medical Summary, and DD Form 2792-1, Special Education/Early Intervention Summary. OMB Control Number: 0704-0411.

Type of Request: Revision.

Number of Respondents: 44,555.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 44,555.

Average Burden per Response: 27 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 20,050.

Needs And Uses: This information collection requirement is necessary to screen members of military families to determine if they have special medical (DD Form 2792) and/or educational (DD Form 2792-1) conditions so that these conditions can be taken into consideration when the Service member is being assigned to a new location with his/her family. The information is used by the personnel system to identify special considerations for future assignments. Local and state school and early intervention personnel complete DD Form 2792-1 for children requiring special educational services. The DD Form 2792 and DD Form 2792-1 are also used by TRICARE Managed Care Support Contractors to support a family member's application for further entitlements, and other Service-specific programs that require registration in the Exceptional Family Member Program. The DD Form 2792 and DD Form 2792-1 associated with this information collection, may be voluntarily submitted by a perspective civilian employee to the civilian personnel office to identify family members who have special needs in order to advise the civilian employee of the availability of services in the location where they will be potentially employed. The DD Form 2792-1 must be completed if the civilian employee intends to enroll his or her child in a school funded by the DoD.

Affected Public: Individuals or households; State and local education personnel.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by the following method:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings.

Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD Information Management Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

This Board's charter is being renewed under the provisions of 10 U.S.C. 183 and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b) (“the Sunshine Act”), and 41 CFR 102-3.50(a).

The Board is a statutory Federal advisory committee that shall provide the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense through, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD (P&R)), independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to the DoD Military Retirement Fund, the DoD Education Benefits Fund, and other funds as the Secretary of Defense shall specify.

The Board shall report to the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense through the USD (P&R). The USD(P&R) may act upon the Board's advice and recommendations.

The DoD, through the Office of the USD(P&R), shall provide support, as deemed necessary, for the Board's performance and functions, and shall ensure compliance with the requirements of the FACA, the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended) (“the Sunshine Act”), governing Federal statutes and regulations, and established DoD policies and procedures.

The Board shall be comprised of three members who are appointed by the Secretary or the Deputy Secretary of Defense from among qualified professional actuaries who are members of the Society of Actuaries. Their membership shall be renewed by the Secretary of Defense or the Deputy Secretary of Defense on an annual basis.

Board members shall serve for a term of 15 years, except that a member of the Board appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the end of the term for which the predecessor was appointed shall serve only until the end of such term. A member may serve after the end of the member's term until a successor takes office. A member of the Board may be removed by the Secretary of Defense only for misconduct or failure to perform functions vested in the Board.

Board members appointed by the Secretary of Defense or the Deputy Secretary of Defense, who are not full-time or permanent part-time federal employees, shall be appointed as experts and consultants under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 3109 to serve as special government employee (SGE) members, and shall, under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 183(b)(4), serve with compensation, to include travel and per diem for official travel. A member of the Board who is not an employee of the United States is entitled to receive pay at the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay of the highest rate of basic pay then currently being paid under the General Schedule of subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United State Code, for each day the member is engaged in the performance of the duties of the Board. Board members appointed by the Secretary of Defense or Deputy Secretary of Defense, who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal employees, shall be appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(a) to serve as regular government employee (RGE) members.

The DoD shall provide non-voting technical advisors to assist the Board in execution of its duties. The following individuals shall designate one DoD employee from each fund under the Board's purview (the DoD Military Retirement Fund, the DoD Education Benefits Fund, and other funds specified by the Secretary of Defense for purposes of 10 U.S.C. 183) to serve as a non-voting advisor to assist the Board.

a. the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer;

b. the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness and Force Management, through the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy;

c. the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs; and

d. the Department of Defense General Counsel.

Each Board member is appointed to provide advice to the government on the basis of his or her best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest.

DoD, when necessary and consistent with the Board's mission and DoD policies and procedures, may establish subcommittees, task forces, or working groups to support the Board.

Establishment of subcommittees will be based upon a written determination, to include terms of reference, by the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, or the USD (P&R), as the DoD Sponsor.

Such subcommittees shall not work independently of the Board and shall report all of their recommendations and advice solely to the Board for full and open deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees, task forces, or working groups have no authority to make decisions and recommendations, verbally or in writing, on behalf of the Board. Subcommittees and their members cannot update or report, verbally or in writing, on behalf of the Board, directly to the DoD or any Federal officer or employee.

The Secretary of Defense or the Deputy Secretary of Defense will appoint subcommittee members to a term of service of one-to-four years, with annual renewals, even if the member in question is already a member of the Board. Subcommittee members shall not serve more than two consecutive terms of service unless authorized by the Secretary of Defense or the Deputy Secretary of Defense.

Subcommittee members, if not full-time or permanent part-time Federal employees, will be appointed as experts or consultants, under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 3109 to serve as SGE members. Subcommittee members appointed by the Secretary of Defense, who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal employees, shall be appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(a) to serve as RGE members. Under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 183(b)(4), these special government employee members shall serve with compensation, to include travel and per diem for official travel.

All subcommittees operate under the provisions of FACA, the Sunshine Act, governing Federal statutes and regulations, and established DoD policies and procedures.

The Board's DFO shall be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee and shall be appointed in accordance with established DoD policies and procedures.

The Board's DFO is required to be in attendance at all meetings of the Board and its subcommittees for the entire duration of each and every meeting. However, in the absence of the Board's DFO, a properly approved Alternate DFO, duly appointed to the Board according to established DoD policies and procedures, shall attend the entire duration of all meetings of the Board and its subcommittees.

The DFO, or the Alternate DFO, shall call all of the Board and its subcommittees; prepare and approve all meeting agendas; and adjourn any meeting, when the DFO, or the Alternate DFO, determines adjournment to be in the public interest or required by governing regulations or DoD policies and procedures; and chair meetings when directed to do so by the USD (P&R).

Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to Department of Defense Board of Actuaries membership about the Board's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of Department of Defense Board of Actuaries. All written statements shall be submitted to the DFO for the Department of Defense Board of Actuaries, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration. Contact information for the Department of Defense Board of Actuaries DFO can be obtained from the GSA's FACA Database— http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

The DFO, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, will announce planned meetings of the Department of Defense Board of Actuaries. The DFO, at that time, may provide additional guidance on the submission of written statements that are in response to the stated agenda for the planned meeting in question.

The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is an advisory group of the nation's leading scientists and engineers, appointed by the President to augment the science and technology advice available to him from inside the White House, cabinet departments, and other Federal agencies. See the Executive Order at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. PCAST is consulted about and provides analyses and recommendations concerning a wide range of issues where understandings from the domains of science, technology, and innovation may bear on the policy choices before the President. PCAST is co-chaired by Dr. John P. Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, The White House; and Dr. Eric S. Lander, President, Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard.

Type of Meeting: Open and Closed.

Proposed Schedule and Agenda: The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is scheduled to meet in open session on July 11, 2014 from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Open Portion of Meeting: During this open meeting, PCAST is scheduled to discuss its work on antibiotic resistance and on nanotechnology. PCAST will also hear from speakers who will remark on oceans policy. Additional information and the agenda, including any changes that arise, will be posted at the PCAST Web site at: http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast.

Closed Portion of the Meeting: PCAST may hold a closed meeting of approximately one hour with the President on July 11, 2014, which must take place in the White House for the President's scheduling convenience and to maintain Secret Service protection. This meeting will be closed to the public because such portion of the meeting is likely to disclose matters that are to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1).

Public Comments: It is the policy of the PCAST to accept written public comments of any length, and to accommodate oral public comments whenever possible. The PCAST expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted oral or written statements.

The public comment period for this meeting will take place on July 11, 2014 at a time specified in the meeting agenda posted on the PCAST Web site at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. This public comment period is designed only for substantive commentary on PCAST's work, not for business marketing purposes.

Oral Comments: To be considered for the public speaker list at the meeting, interested parties should register to speak at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast, no later than 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 3, 2014. Phone or email reservations will not be accepted. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per person, with a total public comment period of up to 30 minutes. If more speakers register than there is space available on the agenda, PCAST will randomly select speakers from among those who applied. Those not selected to present oral comments may always file written comments with the committee. Speakers are requested to bring at least 25 copies of their oral comments for distribution to the PCAST members.

Written Comments: Although written comments are accepted continuously, written comments should be submitted to PCAST no later than 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 3, 2014 so that the comments may be made available to the PCAST members prior to this meeting for their consideration. Information regarding how to submit comments and documents to PCAST is available at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast in the section entitled “Connect with PCAST.”

Please note that because PCAST operates under the provisions of FACA, all public comments and/or presentations will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection, including being posted on the PCAST Web site.

Meeting Accommodations: Individuals requiring special accommodation to access this public meeting should contact Dr. Ashley Predith at least ten business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be specifically of interest to firms and individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities and/or renovation and remodeling activities involving pre-1978 housing on the Bois Forte Reservation. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT .

1. Electronically. EPA has established an official record for this action under docket ID number EPA-R05-OPPT-2014-0360. The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, this notice, the Bois Forte TSCA program authorization application, any public comments received during an applicable comment period, and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as Confidential Business information (CBI).

All documents in the official record are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the address listed below.

2. In person: You may view this document and related documents by visiting the Bois Forte Tribal Government Environmental Services Office, 5344 Lakeshore Drive, P.O. Box 16, Nett Lake, Minnesota 55772, contact telephone number (218) 757-3543, or EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, contact telephone number (312) 886-7899.

You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number EPA-R05-OPPT-2014-0360 in the subject line on the first page of your response.

1. By mail: Submit your comments and hearing requests to: Emma Avant, LCD, Toxics Section, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604.

2. By person or courier: Deliver your comments and hearing requests to: EPA Region 5, LCD, Toxics Section, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604. The Regional office is open from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the regional office is (312) 886-6003.

3. Electronically: You may submit your comments and hearing requests electronically by email to: avant.emma@epa.gov or through http://www.regulations.gov, or mail your computer disk to the address identified above. Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on standard disks in Microsoft Word or ASCII file format.

You may claim information that you submit to EPA in response to this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public version of the official record. Information not marked confidential will be included in the public version of the official record without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT .

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments.

1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.

2. Describe any assumptions that you used.

3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views.

4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide.

5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.

6. Offer alternative ways to improve the notice or collection activity.

7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice.

8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

On July 14, 2010, the Bois Forte Band of Chippewa (Bois Forte or the Tribe), located in St. Louis and Koochiching Counties in Northern Minnesota, submitted an application under section 404 of TSCA requesting authorization to administer and enforce requirements for: Lead-based paint activities (such as abatement) in accordance with section 402(a) of TSCA; renovation, repair and painting (referred to as “RRP”), in accordance with section 402(c) of TSCA; and pre-renovation education in accordance with section 406(b) of TSCA. These programs contain procedures and requirements for the accreditation of lead-based paint activities and RRP training programs, procedures and requirements for the certification of individuals and firms engaged in lead-based paint activities or RRP activities, and work practice standards for performing such activities, and ensure that owners and occupants of target housing are provided information concerning potential hazards of lead-based paint exposure before certain lead-based paint activities or RRP activities are begun. Subsequently, Bois Forte supplemented the application on August 30, 2010, September 23, 2011, January 31, 2012, February 23, 2012, and July 13, 2013. After reviewing all the application materials, EPA now considers the Tribe's application to be complete.

The Tribe's application requests authorization to administer and enforce these requirements on lands held in trust for the Tribe within the reservation boundaries. The Tribe has not, at this time, requested authorization to administer and enforce these programs on non-member owned fee lands within the reservation boundaries. If EPA authorizes the Tribal program, EPA will continue to administer and enforce the requirements on non-member owned fee lands within the reservation boundaries. The Tribe may, however, apply to administer and enforce these requirements for all lands located within the exterior boundaries of the reservation at some future time, but must meet all statutory and regulatory requirements under section 404(b) of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2684(b) and 40 CFR part 745 subpart Q.

The Bois Forte Reservation includes five land areas, four of which currently include lands held in trust for the Tribe. The Lake Vermillion land area, approximately 2803 acres located near the town of Tower, Minnesota, and the Sugar Bush and Indian Point land areas, approximately 83 acres and 60 acres, respectively, both located near the town of Orr, Minnesota, consist entirely of trust land for which the Tribe will administer and enforce the program. The Nett Lake land area, comprising of 103,000 acres surrounding Nett Lake, and the vast majority of the Bois Forte Reservation land and members, includes both trust land, where the Tribe will administer and enforce the program, and non-member owned fee land, where the Tribe will not. The Deer Creek land area, approximately 23,000 acres currently includes no trust lands; at this time the Tribe will not administer the program on the Deer Creek land area. There are a total of approximately 100 pre-1978 housing properties on trust lands where the Tribe will administer and enforce the program. Because the program addresses lead-based paint found in housing constructed prior to 1978, the only scenarios under which additional housing will come into the universe of regulated properties are: (1) Pre-1978 housing is moved onto trust land, and (2) new lands are placed into trust upon which pre-1978 housing exists.

The Tribe's proposed program includes one provision for which the Tribal program is more stringent than the federal program. The Tribe's definition of “target housing” includes all buildings on Tribal trust lands. The federal program only applies to “target housing,” as defined by section 401(17) of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2681, which includes housing constructed prior to 1978, except housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities (unless any child who is less than 6 years of age resides or is expected to reside in such housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities) or any zero-bedroom dwelling. As noted below in Section IV of this notice, if approved, EPA may exercise its enforcement authority under TSCA against a violation of, or a failure or refusal to comply with, any requirement of the Bois Forte Lead Program that is consistent with federal program requirements. Therefore, if approved, EPA will not enforce the Bois Forte Lead Program for violations arising at buildings not included in the federal definition of “target housing.”

In order for EPA to authorize the Bois Forte program, it must determine that the application includes information sufficient for EPA to find Bois Forte eligible for treatment in the same manner as a state (TAS). For the TSCA lead program, TAS requirements are found in 40 CFR 745.324(b)(4), and include, among other things, that the tribe is recognized by the Secretary of the Interior; has an existing government exercising substantial governmental duties and powers; has adequate civil regulatory jurisdiction over the subject matter and entities regulated; and is reasonably expected to be capable of administering the federal program for which it is seeking authorization. In determining that the Tribe's application is complete, EPA believes that the Tribe has demonstrated that it can meet each of these requirements for TAS under this program.

Pursuant to section 404(b) of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2684(b) and 40 CFR part 745, subpart Q, EPA provides notice and an opportunity for a public hearing on a state or tribal program application before approving the program. Therefore, by this notice EPA is soliciting public comment on whether the Bois Forte application meets the requirements for EPA approval. This notice also provides an opportunity to request a public hearing on the application. If a hearing is requested, EPA will issue a Federal Register notice announcing the date, time and place of the hearing and EPA's final decision on the application will also then be published in the Federal Register .

On October 28, 1992, the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Public Law 102-550, became law. Title X of that statute was the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992. That Act amended TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. ) by adding Title IV (15 U.S.C. 2681-2692), entitled Lead Exposure Reduction. In the Federal Register of August 29, 1996 (61 FR 45813) (FRL-5389-9), April 22, 2008 (73 FR 21758) (FRL-8355-7), and June 1, 1998 (63 FR 29908) (FR-5751-7), respectively, EPA promulgated final TSCA section 402(a), 402(c), and 406(b) regulations governing lead-based paint activities (abatement) training, certification and work practice standards; renovation, repair and painting (RRP) training, certification and work practice standards; and pre-renovation education (PRE) requirements in target housing and/or child-occupied facilities. These programs establish requirements for training individuals conducting lead-based paint activities and RRP activities; accrediting lead-based paint activities and RRP activities training providers; and for lead-based paint activities and RRP work practices. The program also ensures that owners and occupants of target housing and child-occupied facilities are provided information concerning potential hazards of lead-based paint exposure before certain renovations are conducted. In addition to providing general information on the health hazards associated with exposure to lead, the lead hazard information pamphlet advises owners and occupants to take appropriate precautions to avoid exposure to lead-contaminated dust and debris that are sometimes generated during renovations. EPA believes that distribution of the pamphlet will help to reduce the exposures that cause serious lead poisonings, especially in children under age 6, who are particularly susceptible to the hazards of lead. Under section 404 of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2684, a state or tribe may seek authorization from EPA to administer and enforce its own lead-based paint activities, RRP and/or pre-renovation education program in lieu of the federal program. The regulations governing the authorization of a state or tribal program under both sections 402 and 406 of TSCA are codified at 40 CFR part 745, subpart Q. A state or tribe that chooses to apply for program authorization must submit a complete application to the appropriate regional EPA office for review. Those applications will be reviewed by EPA within 180 days of receipt of the complete application. To receive EPA approval, a state or tribe must demonstrate that its program is at least as protective of human health and the environment as the federal program, and provides for adequate enforcement under section 404(b) of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2684(b). EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 745, subpart Q provide the detailed requirements a state or tribal program must meet in order to obtain EPA approval.

The following is the Tribe's proposed TSCA Lead-Based Paint program summary, which the Bois Forte Tribe prepared as a required part of its application:

Section 404(b) of TSCA makes it unlawful for any person to violate, or fail or refuse to comply with, any requirement of an approved state or tribal program. Therefore, if EPA approves the Bois Forte Lead Program application, EPA reserves the right to exercise its enforcement authority under TSCA against a violation of, or a failure or refusal to comply with, any requirement of the Bois Forte Lead Program to the extent that such requirement is consistent with federal law.

Environmental Protection, Hazardous Substances, Lead, Renovation Notification, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements.

On May 13, 2014, the EPA announced the availability of draft updated national recommended water quality criteria for the protection of human health in a previous notice entitled “Updated National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health” in the Federal Register (79 FR 27303). EPA updated its national recommended water quality criteria for human health for ninety-four chemical pollutants to reflect the latest scientific information and current EPA policies. The draft updated criteria are based on EPA's current methodology for deriving human health criteria as described in “Methodology for Deriving Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health (2000)” and do not establish new policy. EPA's recommended water quality criteria provide technical information for States and authorized Tribes to establish water quality standards under the Clean Water Act to protect human health.

The original comment deadline was July 14, 2014. This action extends the comment period for 30 days. Written scientific views must now be received by August 13, 2014.

To fill this year's vacancies I am announcing the following:

Newly appointed members are Kathy Buto, MPA; Francis “Jay” Crosson, MD, Group Vice President, American Medical Association in Chicago, Illinois; and Warner Thomas, MBA, President and CEO of the Ochsner Health System in New Orleans, Louisiana. Their terms will expire in April 2017.

The reappointed members, whose terms will also expire in April 2017, are Willis D. Gradison, Jr., MBA, formerly a Scholar in Residence in the Health Sector Management Program at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, and William J. Hall, MD, Director of the Center for Healthy Aging at the University of Rochester School of Medicine.

In addition, Commissioner Jon B. Christianson, Ph.D., Professor in the Division of Health Policy and Management at the School of Public Health at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis has been designated as Vice Chair of the Commission. [42 U.S.C. 1395b-6.]

I. Background

Section 564 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360bbb-3) as amended by the Project BioShield Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-276) and the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113-5) allows FDA to strengthen the public health protections against biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological agents. Among other things, section 564 of the FD&C Act allows FDA to authorize the use of an unapproved medical product or an unapproved use of an approved medical product in certain situations. With this EUA authority, FDA can help assure that medical countermeasures may be used in emergencies to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by biological, chemical, nuclear, or radiological agents when there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.

Section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act provides that, before an EUA may be issued, the Secretary of HHS must declare that circumstances exist justifying the authorization based on one of the following grounds: (1) A determination by the Secretary of Homeland Security that there is a domestic emergency, or a significant potential for a domestic emergency, involving a heightened risk of attack with a biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agent or agents; (2) a determination by the Secretary of Defense that there is a military emergency, or a significant potential for a military emergency, involving a heightened risk to U.S. military forces of attack with a biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agent or agents; (3) a determination by the Secretary of HHS that there is a public health emergency, or a significant potential for a public health emergency, that affects, or has a significant potential to affect, national security or the health and security of U.S. citizens living abroad, and that involves a biological, chemical, radiological, or nuclear agent or agents, or a disease or condition that may be attributable to such agent or agents;  1 or (4) the identification of a material threat by the Secretary of Homeland Security pursuant to section 319F-2 of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 247d-6b) sufficient to affect national security or the health and security of U.S. citizens living abroad.

Once the Secretary of HHS has declared that circumstances exist justifying an authorization under section 564 of the FD&C Act, FDA may authorize the emergency use of a drug, device, or biological product if the Agency concludes that the statutory criteria are satisfied. Under section 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act, FDA is required to publish in the Federal Register a notice of each authorization, and each termination or revocation of an authorization, and an explanation of the reasons for the action. Section 564 of the FD&C Act permits FDA to authorize the introduction into interstate commerce of a drug, device, or biological product intended for use when the Secretary of HHS has declared that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use. Products appropriate for emergency use may include products and uses that are not approved, cleared, or licensed under sections 505, 510(k), or 515 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355, 360(k), and 360e) or section 351 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262). FDA may issue an EUA only if, after consultation with the HHS Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, the Director of the National Institutes of Health, and the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (to the extent feasible and appropriate given the applicable circumstances), FDA  2 concludes: (1) That an agent referred to in a declaration of emergency or threat can cause a serious or life-threatening disease or condition; (2) that, based on the totality of scientific evidence available to FDA, including data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, if available, it is reasonable to believe that: (A) The product may be effective in diagnosing, treating, or preventing (i) such disease or condition; or (ii) a serious or life-threatening disease or condition caused by a product authorized under section 564 of the FD&C Act, approved or cleared under the FD&C Act, or licensed under section 351 of the PHS Act, for diagnosing, treating, or preventing such a disease or condition caused by such an agent; and (B) the known and potential benefits of the product, when used to diagnose, prevent, or treat such disease or condition, outweigh the known and potential risks of the product, taking into consideration the material threat posed by the agent or agents identified in a declaration under section 564(b)(1)(D) of the FD&C Act, if applicable; (3) that there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating such disease or condition; and (4) that such other criteria as may be prescribed by regulation are satisfied.

No other criteria for issuance have been prescribed by regulation under section 564(c)(4) of the FD&C Act. Because the statute is self-executing, regulations or guidance are not required for FDA to implement the EUA authority.

On April 19, 2013, under section 564(b)(1)(C) of the FD&C Act, the Secretary of HHS determined that there is a significant potential for a public health emergency that has a significant potential to affect national security or the health and security of U.S. citizens living abroad and that involves the novel influenza A (H7N9) virus. Also on April 19, 2013, under section 564(b)(1) of the FD&C Act, and on the basis of such determination, the Secretary of HHS declared that circumstances exist justifying the authorization of emergency use of in vitro diagnostics for detection of the novel influenza A (H7N9) virus, subject to the terms of any authorization issued under section 564 of the FD&C Act. The Secretary of HHS also specified that this declaration is a declaration of an emergency with respect to in vitro diagnostics as defined under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act Declaration for Pandemic Influenza Diagnostics, Personal Respiratory Protection Devices, and Respiratory Support Devices signed by then Secretary Michael Leavitt on December 17, 2008 (73 FR 78362, December 22, 2008). Notice of the determination and the declaration of the Secretary were published in the Federal Register on April 30, 2013 (78 FR 25273). On April 9, 2014, Arbor Vita Corporation submitted a complete request for, and on April 25, 2014, FDA issued, an EUA for the A/H7N9 Influenza Rapid Test subject to the terms of this authorization.

An electronic version of this document and the full text of the Authorization are available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

Having concluded that the criteria for issuance of the Authorization under section 564(c) of the FD&C Act are met, FDA has authorized the emergency use of an in vitro diagnostic device for detection of the novel influenza A (H7N9) virus (detected in China in 2013) subject to the terms of the Authorization. The Authorization in its entirety (not including the authorized versions of the fact sheets and other written materials) follows and provides an explanation of the reasons for its issuance, as required by section 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act.

The Commercial Fishing Safety Advisory Committee is a federal advisory committee authorized under Title 46, United States Code, section 4508, as amended by section 604 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010, (Pub. L. 111-281) and chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Title 5, United States Code, Appendix, (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Statute 770, as amended). The Commercial Fishing Safety Advisory Committee provides advice on issues related to the safety of commercial fishing industry vessels regulated under Chapter 45 of Title 46, United States Code, which includes uninspected fish catching vessels, fish processing vessels, and fish tender vessels (See Title 46 United States Code section 4508).

The Commercial Fishing Safety Advisory Committee meets at least once a year. It may also meet for other extraordinary purposes. Its subcommittees or working groups may communicate throughout the year to prepare for meetings or develop proposals for the committee as a whole to address specific tasks.

The Commercial Fishing Safety Advisory Committee shall consist of 18 members with particular expertise, knowledge, and experience regarding the commercial fishing industry as follows:

(a) Ten (10) members who shall represent the commercial fishing industry and who—(1) reflect a regional and representational balance; and (2) have experience in the operation of vessels to which Chapter 45 of Title 46, United States Code applies, or as crew member or processing line worker on a fish processing vessel;

(b) Three (03) members who shall represent the general public, including, whenever possible—(1) An independent expert or consultant in maritime safety; (2) a marine surveyor who provides services to vessels to which Chapter 45 of Title 46, United States Code applies; and (3) a person familiar with issues affecting fishing communities and families of fishermen; and

(c) One member each of whom shall represent—(1) Naval architects and marine engineers; (2) manufacturers of equipment for vessels to which Chapter 45 of Title 46, United States Code applies; (3) education or training professionals related to fishing vessel, fish processing vessel, or fish tender vessel safety or personnel qualifications; (4) underwriters that insure vessels to which Chapter 45 of Title 46, United States Code applies; and (5) owners of vessels to which Chapter 45 of title 46, United States Code applies.

The Coast Guard will consider applications for seven (07) positions that expire or become vacant in October 2014 in the following categories:

(a) Commercial Fishing Industry representatives ( four positions);

(b) General Public, a marine surveyor who provides services to commercial fishing vessels ( one position);

(c) A representative of manufacturers of equipment for commercial fishing vessels ( one position); and

(d) A representative of owners of commercial fishing vessels ( one position).

Each member serves for a term of three years. An individual may be appointed to a term as a member more than once. All members serve at their own expense and receive no salary from the Federal Government, although travel reimbursement and per diem may be provided for called meetings.

Registered lobbyists are not eligible to serve on Federal Advisory Committees. Registered lobbyists are lobbyists required to comply with provisions contained in the Lobbying Disclosure Act, Title 2, United States Code, section 1603.

The Department of Homeland Security does not discriminate in selection of Committee members on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, disability and genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, or other non-merit factor. The Department of Homeland Security strives to achieve a widely diverse candidate pool for all of its recruitment actions.

If you are selected as a non-representative member from the general public, you will be appointed and serve as a Special Government Employee as defined in section 202(a) of Title 18, United States Code. As a candidate for appointment as a Special Government Employee, applicants are required to complete a Confidential Financial Disclosure Report (Office of Government Ethics Form 450). The Department of Homeland Security may not release the reports or the information in them to the public except under an order issued by a Federal court or as otherwise provided under the Privacy Act (Title 5, United States Code, section 552a). Applicants can obtain this form by going to the Web site of the Office of Government Ethics ( www.oge.gov ), or by contacting the individual listed above in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Applications which are not accompanied by a completed Office of Government Ethics Form 450 will not be considered.

If you are interested in applying to become a member of the Committee, send your application materials to Mr. Jack Kemerer, Commercial Fishing Safety Advisory Committee Alternate Designated Federal Officer, via one of the transmittal methods provided above by the deadline in the DATES section of this notice. Indicate the specific position(s) for which you wish to be considered and specify your areas of expertise, knowledge, and experience that qualifies you for service on the Commercial Fishing Safety Advisory Committee. Note that during the vetting process, applicants may be asked to provide their date of birth and social security number. All email submittals will receive email receipt confirmation.

To visit our online docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov , enter the docket number for this notice (USCG-2014-0482) in the Search box, and click “Search”. Please do not post your resume on this site.

The Council will conduct its operations in accordance with the provisions of the FACA. It will report to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), through the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Council will function solely as an advisory body. The Council's duties will consist of, but are not limited to:

a. Providing advice that will assist the Secretary in compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956.

b. Fulfilling responsibilities established by Executive Order 12962:

(1) Monitoring specific Federal activities affecting aquatic systems and the recreational fisheries they support.

(2) Reviewing and evaluating the relation of Federal policies and activities to the status and conditions of recreational fishery resources.

c. Recommending policies or programs to increase public awareness and support for the Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund.

d. Recommending policies or programs that foster conservation and ethics in recreational fishing and boating.

e. Recommending policies or programs to stimulate angler and boater participation in the conservation and restoration of aquatic resources through outreach and education.

f. Advising how the Secretary can foster communication and coordination among government, industry, anglers, boaters, and the public.

The Council will consist of no more than 18 members and up to 16 alternates appointed by the Secretary for 2-year terms. The Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the President of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) are ex officio members. Appointees will be selected from among, but not limited to, the following national interest groups:

a. State fish and wildlife resource management agencies (two members— one a Director of a coastal State and one a Director of an inland State),

b. Saltwater and freshwater recreational fishing organizations,

c. Recreational boating organizations,

d. Recreational fishing and boating industries,

e. Recreational fishery resources conservation organizations,

f. Tribal resource management organizations,

g. Aquatic resource outreach and education organizations, and

h. The tourism industry.

Members will be senior-level representatives of recreational fishing, boating, and aquatic resources conservation organizations, and must have the ability to represent their designated constituencies.

The Council will function solely as an advisory body and in compliance with provisions of the FACA (5 U.S.C. Appendix). This notice is published in accordance with section 9(a)(2) of the FACA. The Certification of Renewal is published below.

Certification: I hereby certify that the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council is necessary and is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the Department of the Interior under the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j), the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777-777k), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Executive Order 12962, 60 FR 30769 (June 7, 1995), as amended by Executive Order 13474, 73 FR 57229 (September 26, 2008).

Public Scoping Meetings

We will hold informal public informational sessions and present currently identified issues at the following dates and times:

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) (Eagle Act) prohibits take of bald eagles and golden eagles except pursuant to Federal regulations. The Eagle Act regulations at title 50, part 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), define the “take” of an eagle to include the following broad range of actions: “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, destroy, molest, or disturb” (§ 22.3). The Eagle Act allows the Secretary of the Interior to authorize certain otherwise prohibited activities through regulations. The Secretary is authorized to prescribe regulations permitting the “taking, possession, and transportation of [bald eagles or golden eagles] . . . for the scientific or exhibition purposes of public museums, scientific societies, and zoological parks, or for the religious purposes of Indian tribes, or . . . for the protection of wildlife or of agricultural or other interests in any particular locality,” provided such permits are “compatible with the preservation of the bald eagle or the golden eagle” (16 U.S.C. 668a).

On September 11, 2009, we published a final rule that established two new permit regulations under the Eagle Act (50 FR 46836). One permit authorizes take (removal, relocation, or destruction) of eagle nests (50 CFR 22.27). The other permit type authorizes nonpurposeful take of eagles (50 CFR 22.26). The nonpurposeful eagle take regulations provide for permits to take bald eagles and golden eagles where the taking is associated with, but not the purpose of, an activity. The regulations provide for standard permits, which authorize individual instances of take that cannot practicably be avoided, and programmatic permits, which authorize recurring take that is unavoidable even after implementation of advanced conservation practices. We have issued standard permits for commercial and residential construction, transportation projects, maintenance of utility lines and dams, and in a variety of other circumstances where take is expected to occur in a limited timeframe, such as during clearing and construction.

“Programmatic take” of eagles is defined at 50 CFR 22.3 as “take that is recurring, is not caused solely by indirect effects, and that occurs over the long term or in a location or locations that cannot be specifically identified.” Take that does not reoccur, or that is caused solely by indirect effects, such as short-term construction, does not require a programmatic permit. For additional explanation of programmatic take and programmatic permits, see 74 FR 46841-46843.

We can issue programmatic permits for disturbance as well as take resulting in mortalities, based on implementation of “advanced conservation practices” developed in coordination with the Service. “Advanced conservation practices” are defined at 50 CFR 22.3 as “scientifically supportable measures that are approved by the Service and represent the best available techniques to reduce eagle disturbance and ongoing mortalities to a level where remaining take is unavoidable.” Most take authorized under § 22.26 to this point has been in the form of disturbance; however, permits may authorize lethal take that is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity, such as mortalities caused by collisions with rotating wind turbines.

The Eagle Act requires the Service to determine that any take of eagles it authorizes is compatible with the preservation of bald eagles or golden eagles. In the preamble to the final regulations for eagle nonpurposeful take permits, and in the Final Environmental Assessment of the regulations, we defined that standard to mean “consistent with the goal of stable or increasing breeding populations” (74 FR 46838).

On April 13, 2012, the Service initiated two additional rulemakings: (1) A proposed rule (“Duration Rule”) to extend the maximum permit tenure for programmatic eagle nonpurposeful take permit regulations from 5 to 30 years (77 FR 22267), and (2) an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) soliciting input on all aspects of those eagle nonpurposeful take regulations (77 FR 22278). The ANPR highlighted three issues on which the Service particularly hoped the public would comment: Eagle population management objectives, compensatory mitigation, and programmatic permit issuance criteria.

The Duration Rule was finalized on December 9, 2013 (78 FR 73704). Under the revised regulations, the maximum term for programmatic permits was extended from 5 to 30 years. This change is intended to facilitate the responsible development of projects that will be in operation for many decades and bring them into compliance with statutory mandates protecting eagles. The longer term permits will incorporate conditions that provide for adaptive management. Permits issued for periods longer than 5 years are available only to applicants who commit to implementing adaptive management measures if monitoring shows the measures are needed and likely to be effective. The required adaptive management measures will be negotiated with the permittee at the outset and specified in the terms and conditions of the permit.

At no more than 5-year intervals from the date a permit is issued, permittees must compile a report documenting any fatalities and other pertinent information for the project and submit the report to the Service. The Service will evaluate each permit to reassess fatality rates, effectiveness of measures to reduce take, the appropriate level of compensatory mitigation, and eagle population status. Depending on the findings of the review, permittees may be required to undertake additional conservation measures consistent with the permit. The Service will make mortality information from both the annual and the 5-year compilation report available to the public.

The language of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act provides flexibility with regard to defining management objectives for bald and golden eagles. The management objective directs strategic management and monitoring actions and, ultimately, determines what level of permitted eagle removal can be allowed.

We are considering modifying current management objectives for eagles, which were established with the 2009 eagle permit regulations and Final Environmental Assessment of our regulatory permitting system under the Eagle Act. Different management objectives could be set for bald and golden eagles. At least four elements may be considered when establishing a management objective: (1) The population objective and relevant timeframe for it to be met; (2) eagle management units (EMUs), or the geographic scale over which permitted take is regulated to meet the population objective; (3) whether we also set an upper limit on take at a finer scale than the EMU to avoid creating population sinks in local breeding populations; and (4) our level of risk tolerance. The level of risk tolerance means how much risk the agency is willing to take when information is uncertain in carrying out management actions (e.g., setting levels of authorized take). For example, when information is less certain, a more conservative approach may be adopted to avoid unintended outcomes. Alternatively, to provide for more flexibility in permitting, the Service could adopt a more risk-tolerant approach.

The current management objective, also referred to as the “Eagle Act preservation standard,” is to manage populations consistent with the goal of maintaining stable or increasing breeding populations over 100 years, which is at least five eagle generations. The scale the Service uses to evaluate eagle populations is referred to as eagle management units. EMUs for the golden eagle were set at the Bird Conservation Region (BCR) level because the only range-wide estimates available for the golden eagles are BCR-scale population estimates. To establish management populations for bald eagles, we used natal populations (eagles within the natal dispersal range of each other) in our evaluation in order to look at distribution across the landscape. (Natal dispersal refers to the movement between hatching location and first breeding or potential breeding location.) Because the populations delineated by this approach roughly correspond to the Service's Regional organizational structure, we have been managing bald eagles based on populations within the eight Service Regions, with some shared populations. Estimates of bald and golden eagle population size in each EMU were calculated, and EMU-specific estimates of demographic rates were used in models to determine rates of authorized take that are compatible with maintaining stable breeding populations.

Under the current management approach, permitted take of bald eagles is capped at 5 percent estimated annual productivity for bald eagles. Because the Service lacked data to show that golden eagle populations could sustain any additional unmitigated mortality at that time, we set take thresholds for that species at zero for all regional populations. This means that any new authorized “take” of golden eagles must be at least equally offset by compensatory mitigation (specific conservation actions to replace or offset project‐induced losses). For more details and explanation about the current eagle management approach, see the 2009 Final Environmental Assessment, Proposal to Permit Take as Provided Under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, which can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/BaldAndGoldenEagleManagement.htm.

The Service also developed and applies guidance on upper limits of take at more local scales to manage cumulative impacts to local populations. Under the guidance, the Service must assess take rates both for individual projects and for the cumulative effects of other human-caused take eagles, at the scale of the local‐area eagle population. The local-area population is the population of eagles within the natal dispersal distance. The Service considers this distance to represent the geographic area that would provide recruits to replenish a local population if permitted take caused a decline in the breeding population of eagles around a permitted project. The Service identified take rates of between 1 and 5 percent of the total estimated local‐area eagle population as significant, with 5 percent being at the upper end of what might be appropriate under the Eagle Act preservation standard, whether offset by compensatory mitigation or not.

The Service is considering a range of possible alternatives to the current management objective. At one end of the spectrum, we could adopt a qualitative objective such as “to not meaningfully impair the bald or golden eagle's continued existence.” Alternatively, we could update the current management objective by incorporating newer, improved information on eagle movements, population size, and natal dispersal distances to revise the EMUs; set explicit numerical population objectives in each EMU; and refine the area we consider the local scale. We could also adopt an explicit level of risk tolerance relative to how much take to allow based on uncertainty in the population size estimates.

The scoping process announced today in this notice will inform our eagle management program and our decision to prepare either an EA or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Service staff who have been implementing the 2009 eagle permit regulations have identified a number of priority issues for evaluation during this scoping process, including the following: Eagle population management objectives; programmatic permit conditions; compensatory mitigation; evaluation of the individual and cumulative effects of low-risk (or low-effect) permits; and criteria for nest removal permits. For more information about these topics visit http://www.eaglescoping.org. In addition to these topics, during this scoping process, we invite the public to provide input on any aspect of our eagle management program.

The NEPA analysis will evaluate the environmental effects of a range of alternatives for eagle management. We also intend the NEPA analysis to:

• Evaluate up-to-date information about the status of bald and golden eagle populations;

• Enable the Service to recalculate regional take thresholds for both species (if population management will continue to incorporate regional take thresholds);

• Analyze the effects of issuing permits to take golden eagles and bold eagles throughout the U.S.;

• Further analyze the effects of longer term nonpurposeful take permits; and

• Rigorously evaluate the effects of low-risk (low-effect) projects to allow for more efficient permitting at the individual project level.

The purpose of the public scoping process with regard to NEPA is to determine relevant issues that could influence the scope of the environmental analysis, including alternatives, and guide the process for developing the EA or EIS and related compliance efforts. Factors currently being considered for analysis in the EA or EIS include, but are not limited to:

1. The direct, indirect, and cumulative effects that implementation of any reasonable alternative could have on bald and golden eagles, migratory birds, other wildlife species, and their habitats;

2. Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of projects that are likely to take a minimal number of eagles and as such can be classified as “low-risk” or “low effect” and for which permitting at the individual project level could be expedited;

3. Effects to cultural resources;

4. Potentially significant impacts on biological resources, land use, air quality, water quality, water resources, economics, and other environmental/historical resources;

5. Strategies for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating the impacts to eagles, migratory birds, wildlife, and other resources listed above;

6. Climate change effects; and

7. Any other environmental issues that should be considered with regard to potential alternatives for eagle management.

The final range of reasonable alternatives and mitigation to be analyzed in the draft EA or EIS will be determined in part by the comments received during the scoping process. The public will also have a chance to review and comment on the draft EA or EIS when it is available (a notice of availability will be published in the Federal Register ).

We are requesting information from other interested government agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, nongovernmental organizations, and other interested parties.

You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods described above under ADDRESSES at the beginning of this notice. Written comments will also be accepted at the public meetings, although these public meetings are primarily intended to provide additional information and provide a chance for the public to ask questions.

Written comments we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that the entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their entirety.

The authorities for this action are the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ).

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the BIE is announcing that the Advisory Board will hold its next meeting in Albuquerque, NM. The Advisory Board was established under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. ) to advise the Secretary of the Interior, through the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs, on the needs of Indian children with disabilities. The meetings are open to the public.

The following items will be on the agenda:

* During the July 18, 2014 meeting, time has been set aside for public comment via conference call from 1:30-2:00 p.m. Mountain Time. The call-in information is: Conference Number 1-888-417-0376, Passcode 1509140.

The National Park Service (NPS) considered three alternatives in the Final EIS: Alternative A—No Action; Alternative B—Remote Delivery Vaccination for Young Bison Only; and Alternative C—Remote Delivery Vaccination for Young Bison and Adult Females. The NPS has identified Alternative A—No Action, as the Preferred Alternative in the Final EIS and as the Selected Action in the Record of Decision based on substantial uncertainties associated with vaccine efficacy, delivery, duration of the vaccine-induced protective immune response, diagnostics, bison behavior and evaluation of public comments. Consistent with the 2000 Interagency Bison Management Plan (IBMP), under the Selected Action the NPS will continue hand-syringe vaccination of bison at capture facilities near the park boundary and conduct monitoring and research on the relationship between vaccine-induced immune responses and protection from clinical disease (e.g., abortions). Also, selective culling of potentially infectious bison based on age and diagnostic test results may be continued at capture facilities to reduce the number of abortions that maintain the disease. The NPS will continue the adaptive management program, as described in the 2000 Record of Decision for the IBMP and subsequent adaptive management adjustments, to learn more about the disease brucellosis and answer uncertainties, as well as to develop or improve suppression techniques that could be used to facilitate effective outcomes, minimize adverse impacts, and lower operational costs of efforts to reduce brucellosis prevalence in the future.

As part of the Selected Action, the NPS will also continue to work with other federal and state agencies, American Indian tribes, academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, and other interested parties to develop holistic management approaches, monitoring, and research projects that could be conducted to improve the adaptive management decision process, and better vaccines, delivery methods, and diagnostics for reducing the prevalence of brucellosis in bison and elk and transmissions to cattle. The Record of Decision includes a statement of the decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, a description of the environmentally preferable alternative, a finding of no impairment of park resources and values, a list on measures to minimize environmental harm, and an overview of public involvement in the decision-making process.

Background

On May 22, 2006, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) determined that imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea were being sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673) (71 FR 29303 and 71 FR 29310, respectively). The Commission initially determined that a U.S. industry was not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea (71 FR 39128, July 11, 2006).

Following an appeal of the negative determinations and on remand from the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), the Commission determined that a U.S. industry was threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea. On January 13, 2009, the CIT affirmed the Commission's affirmative determinations on remand. Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, Slip Op. 09-05 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2009).

On February 10, 2009, Commerce published notice of the CIT's decision and suspended liquidation for entries of the subject merchandise after the effective date of the notice until the end of all appellate proceedings (74 FR 6570). On November 4, 2009, Commerce published orders that antidumping duties be imposed on imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea, effective January 23, 2009 (74 FR 57145).

Following affirmance of the CIT's judgment by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and upon conclusion of all appellate proceedings in the action, the Commission published notice of its final determinations in the antidumping investigations of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China and Korea (75 FR 68618, November 8, 2010). Commerce revoked the order on diamonds sawblades from Korea effective as of October 24, 2011 (76 FR 66892, Oct. 28, 2011).

On July 11, 2013, the Commission received a request to review its affirmative determination in investigation No. 731-TA-1092 (Final) pursuant to section 751(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(b)). The request, filed by Husqvarna Construction Products North America, Inc. (Husqvarna) of Olathe, Kansas, argued that there were several changes since the issuance of the Commission's remand determination. Specifically, Husqvarna noted Commerce's revocation of the antidumping duty order on imports of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from Korea; additional Commerce determinations with respect to Chinese exporter Advanced Technology & Materials Co., Ltd.; the acquisition of certain petitioners by non-U.S. producers of diamond sawblades, as well as changes in those petitioners' patterns of sourcing diamond sawblades; an alleged reduction in the overlap of competition between subject imports from China and the domestic like product as a result of the preceding changes; and opposition to the continuation of the order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China by a “significant part of U.S. production.”

On August 9, 2013, the Commission published a Federal Register notice inviting comments from the public on whether changed circumstances exist sufficient to warrant the institution of changed circumstances reviews (78 FR 48717-48718, Aug. 9, 2013). In response to its Federal Register notice soliciting comments, the Commission received one submission on behalf of the Diamond Sawblades Manufacturing Coalition (DSMC), an ad hoc group of U.S. producers of diamond sawblades and the petitioning coalition in the original antidumping duty investigation, arguing that the Commission should not institute a changed circumstances review investigation.

On December 2, 2013, Commerce initiated, and the ITC instituted, five-year sunset reviews of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China (78 FR 72061 & 78 FR 72216, Dec. 2, 2013). On May 20, 2014, the Commission determined to conduct a full five-year sunset review of the order.

On April 23, 2014, the Commission determined not to conduct a changed circumstances review investigation of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China. 1 Given the fact that the Commission was concurrently conducting a five-year review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China, and was aware of the arguments that supported conducting a full review of the order, the Commission determined that conducting a changed circumstances review was unwarranted because it would be duplicative of a full five-year review. See Eveready Battery Co., Inc. v. United States, 77 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (CIT 1999) (finding that a request for a changed circumstances review was rendered moot by the Commission's institution of a full five-year sunset review).

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of this Information Collection 1140-0100:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension without change of an existing collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

Form number: ATF Form 3310.12.

Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Business or other for-profit.

Other: None.

Abstract: The purpose of this information collection is to require Federal firearms licensees to report multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of two or more rifles to the same person at one time or within any five consecutive business days with the following characteristics: (a) Semi-automatic; (b) a caliber greater than .22; and (c) the ability to accept a detachable magazine. This requirement will apply to Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) who are dealers and/or pawnbrokers in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 2,509 respondents will take 12 minutes to complete the form.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 3,615 hours.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of this Information Collection 1140-0026:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of an existing collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Report of Theft or Loss of Explosives.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

Form number: ATF Form 5400.5.

Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Business or other for-profit.

Other: None.

Abstract: Losses or theft of explosives must, by statute be reported within 24 hours of the discovery of the loss or theft. This form contains the minimum information necessary for ATF to initiate criminal investigations.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 300 respondents will take 1 hour and 48 minutes to complete the form.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 540 hours.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of this Information Collection 1140-0084:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of an existing collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Application and Permit for Temporary Importation of Firearms and Ammunition by Nonimmigrant Aliens.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

Form number: ATF Form 6NIA (5330.3D).

Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Individuals or households.

Other: None.

Abstract: This information collection is needed to determine if the firearms or ammunition listed on the application qualify for importation and to certify that a nonimmigrant alien is in compliance with 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5)(B). This application will also serve as the authorization for importation.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 15,000 respondents will take 30 minutes to complete the form.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection:

The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 7,500 hours.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of this Information Collection 1140-0007:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of an existing collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Release and Receipt of Imported Firearms, Ammunition and Implements of War.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

Form number: ATF Form 6A (5330.3C).

Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Individual or households.

Other: Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions.

Abstract: The data provided by this information collection request is used by ATF to determine if articles imported meet the statutory and regulatory criteria for importation and if the articles shown on the permit application have been actually imported.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 20,000 respondents will take 35 minutes to complete the form.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 11,667 hours.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Dispensing Records of Individual Practitioners.

(3) Agency form number: N/A.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Business or other for-profit.

Other: None.

21 U.S.C. 827 requires individual practitioners to keep records of the dispensing and administration of controlled substances. This information is needed to maintain a closed system of distribution.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The DEA estimates this collection has a public burden of 40,699 hours annually.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of this Information Collection 1140-0006:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of an existing collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Application and Permit for Firearms, Ammunition and Implements of War.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

Form number: ATF Form 6 Part II (5330.3B).

Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Individual or households.

Other: Business or other for-profit; Federal Government; State, Local, or Tribal Government.

Abstract: The information collection is needed to determine whether firearms, ammunition and implements of war are eligible for importation into the United States. The information is used to secure authorization to import such articles. The form is used by persons who are members of the United States Armed Forces.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 9,000 respondents will take 30 minutes to complete the form.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 4,500 hours.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: ARCOS Transaction Reporting.

(3) Agency form number: DEA Form 333.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Business or other for-profit.

Other: None.

Controlled substances manufacturers and distributors must report acquisition/distribution transactions to the DEA to comply with Federal law and international treaty obligations. This information helps to ensure a closed system of distribution for these substances.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The DEA estimates that 1,265 respondents, with 7,932 responses annually to this collection. The DEA estimates that it takes 1 hour to complete the form.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: DEA estimates this collection has a public burden of 7,932 hours annually.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

Overview of this information collection:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Permit to Export Controlled Substances/Application for Permit to Export Controlled Substances for Subsequent Reexport.

(3) Agency form number: DEA Forms 161 and 161r.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Business or other for-profit.

Other: None.

Title 21 CFR 1312.21 and 1312.22 require persons who export controlled substances in Schedules I and II and who reexport controlled substances in Schedules I and II and narcotic controlled substances in Schedules III and IV to obtain a permit from DEA. Information is used to issue export permits, exercise control over exportation of controlled substances, and compile data for submission to the United Nations to comply with treaty requirements.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The DEA estimates that 123 respondents will respond to Form 161, with 5,109 responses annually to this collection. The DEA estimates that it takes .5 hour to complete the Form 161. The DEA estimates that 24 respondents will respond to Form 161r, with 703 responses annually to this collection. The DEA estimates that it takes .75 hour to complete Form 161r.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The DEA estimates that Form 161 has a public burden of 2,555 hours annually, while Form 161r has a public burden of 528 hours annually.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3W-1407B, Washington, DC 20530.

This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a previously approved collection.

2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Red Ribbon Week Patch Activity Report.

3. The agency form number, if any and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: The form number is DEA-316a. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Drug Enforcement Administration, Demand Reduction Section.

4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Boy Scout and Girl Scout Troop Leaders.

Other: None.

DEA is requesting approval of an extension, with change, to an existing collection that requests information from Boy/Girl Scout Troop Leaders who express an interest in participating in DEA Red Ribbon Week Activities. This information is then used to mail patches to participants as indication of completion of the suggested activities.

5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 450 Boy/Girl Scout troop leaders will take part in the Red Ribbon Week Patch activities. It is estimated that it will take 10 minutes to complete the DEA-316a, DEA Red Ribbon Week Patch Activity Report.

6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated public burden associated with this collection is 75 hours.

If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the information collection requirements contained in Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption (PTE) 1998-54, which relates to certain employee benefit plan foreign exchange transactions executed pursuant to standing instructions. The PTE permits certain foreign exchange transactions between employee benefit plans and certain banks and broker-dealers that are parties in interest with respect to such plans. In order that such transactions will be consistent with the requirements of Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) section 408(a), 29 U.S.C. 1108(a), the PTE imposes the following conditions at the time the foreign exchange transaction is entered into: (a) The terms of the transaction must not be less favorable than those available in comparable arm's-length transactions between unrelated parties or those afforded by the bank or the broker-dealer in comparable arm's-length transactions involving unrelated parties; (b) neither the bank nor the broker-dealer has any discretionary authority with respect to the investment of the assets involved in the transaction; (c) the bank or broker-dealer maintains at all times written policies and procedures regarding the handling of foreign exchange transactions for plans for which it is a party in interest which ensure that the party acting for the bank or the broker-dealer knows it is dealing with a plan; (d) the transactions are performed in accordance with a written authorization executed in advance by an independent fiduciary of the plan whose assets are involved in the transaction and who is independent of the bank or broker-dealer engaging in the covered transaction; (e) transactions are executed within one business day of receipt of funds; (f) the bank or the broker-dealer, at least once a day at a time specified in written procedures, establishes a rate or range of rates of exchange to be used for the transactions covered by this exemption and executes transactions at either the next scheduled time or no later than twenty-four (24) hours after receipt of notice of receipt of funds; (g) prior to execution of a transaction, the bank or the broker-dealer provides the authorizing fiduciary with a copy of the applicable written policies and procedures for foreign exchange transactions involving income item conversions and de minimis purchase and sale transactions; (h) the bank or the broker-dealer furnishes the authorizing fiduciary a written confirmation statement with respect to each covered transaction within five (5) days of execution; and (i) the bank or the broker-dealer maintains, for six (6) years after the date of the transaction, records necessary for plan fiduciaries, participants, and the DOL and Internal Revenue Service to determine whether the conditions of the exemption have been met. See 63 FR 63503. The Internal Revenue Code and ERISA authorize this information collection. See 26 U.S.C. 4975 and 29 U.S.C. 1108.

This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1210-0111.

OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the current approval for this collection is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2014. The DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on November 29, 2013 (78 FR 71668).

Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1210-0111. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Agency: DOL-EBSA.

Title of Collection: Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption 1998-54 Relating to Certain Employee Benefit Plan Foreign Exchange Transactions Executed Pursuant to Standing Instructions.

OMB Control Number: 1210-0111.

Affected Public: Private Sector-businesses or other for-profits and not-for-profit institutions.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 35.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 420,000.

Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 4,200 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

Data on the academic research infrastructure are collected biennially through the NSF's congressionally mandated Facilities Survey. The survey originated in 1986 in response to Congress's concern about the state of research facilities at the nation's colleges and universities. Part 1 of the Facilities Survey collects data on the amount, condition, construction, repair, renovation, and funding of research facilities. This section, focusing largely on research space, will continue. Recognizing the growing use of networking and computing capacity (cyberinfrastructure) in conducting research, a new set of questions on these topics was added to the FY 2003 Facilities Survey and revised for the FY 2005, FY 2007, FY 2009, FY 2011 and FY 2013 surveys.

NCSES has continually reviewed the Part 2 questionnaire in an attempt to stay current with the rapidly changing developments in academic R&D cyberinfrastructure. Despite these efforts, NCSES believes that the survey provides little utility to policymakers, researchers and other data users. Field experts and review panels have noted several critical shortcomings of Part 2 collections. Rapid advances in research cyberinfrastructure make identifying current and valuable metrics difficult. This challenge is compounded by the length of the data collection and publication cycle, which typically requires 16 months after the end of the relevant fiscal year. The continual need to update metrics combined with time required for production and publication reduces the relevancy of the data. In addition, to facilitate data collection and ease survey response burden, respondents to the Facilities Survey are asked to report only on centrally-administered cyberinfrastructure capacity. More than 20 of the top 100 academic research institutions (based on research expenditures) cannot report data on their high-performance computing because these resources are not centrally-administered. Another 15 or more institutions in the top 100 report exceptionally low totals for the same reason. Because so many of the top research universities are unable to adequately report their total computing and networking capacity, the utility of these data are severely undermined. These institution-specific differences limit the ability to present national totals and trends as well as the ability to compare many leading institutions.

The NCSES is interested in all comments, especially from government policy makers, academic institution respondents, and academic researchers that specify concerns related to the discontinuation of Part 2 of the Facilities Survey.

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0147 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain information related to this action, which the NRC possesses and is publicly available, by any of the following methods:

• Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0147.

• NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ ADAMS Public Documents ” and then select “ Begin Web-based ADAMS Search. ” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The AP1000 GTSTs draft files are available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14129A393.

• NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Please include Docket ID NRC-2014-0147 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket.

The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

The content of each GTST, which includes the associated technical specification subsection(s), resides in an automated database application. Following incorporation of public comment resolutions into the database and NRC approval of the updated GTSTs, the database application will be used to efficiently generate files for the AP1000 STS, which will be published as a NUREG.

The proposed improvements to the GTS include: (1) Applicable changes made to operating reactor STS since Rev. 2 of NUREG-1431 that are contained in NRC-approved Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Travelers; (2) addition of site-specific information provided by the AP1000 lead plant combined license (COL) applicant (i.e., Southern Nuclear Operating Company for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant [VEGP] Units 3 and 4) that was approved for the plant-specific TS issued with the COL—site-specific information will be denoted by enclosing it in brackets in the AP1000 STS; (3) standard departures from the GTS, GTS Bases, or both that were proposed by the lead plant COL applicant and approved as an exemption from the GTS, GTS Bases, or both in the plant-specific TS issued with the COL; (4) changes to the lead plant's plant-specific TS that were approved by the NRC as part of an amendment to the COL (e.g., Amendment 13 to COL No. NPF-91 for VEGP Unit 3); and (5) other changes recommended by the NRC staff, including clarifications and enhancements of the GTS Bases.

In addition to automating production of files for GTSTs and AP1000 STS, in the future, the database application may be used to more efficiently process AP1000 STS change proposals and—after issuance of COLs and AP1000 plants begin operation—COL amendment applications to change plant-specific TS. A nuclear power reactor licensee, for example, could request plant-specific TS changes based on NRC approved GTST changes after confirming the applicability of the GTST's safety basis for the changes to the reactor's licensing basis and design. The NRC staff is requesting comment on the draft GTSTs prior to issuing the initial AP1000 STS and announcing its availability for referencing in license amendment applications.

The Design Control Document (DCD) in a design certification application for a new reactor design includes generic technical specifications (GTS). A Combined Operating License (COL) applicant who references a certified reactor design must adopt the DCD GTS approved by rulemaking (e.g., Appendix D to Part 52 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) for the AP1000 design) into the plant-specific TS. After COL issuance, the licensee can obtain changes to the plant-specific TS, which were issued with and as part of the COL, through the license amendment process prescribed by 10 CFR 50.90. The AP1000 GTS are based upon the Westinghouse STS (NUREG-1431, Revision 2). There have been two subsequent major revisions to the Westinghouse STS (Revisions 3 and 4).

Current operating reactor STS (NUREG-1430, -1431, -1432, -1433, and -1434) are revised through the industry's pressurized water reactor (PWR) and boiling water reactor (BWR) owner groups' Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) working with TS staff of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) with participation by TS staff in the Office of New Reactors (NRO) and NRC technical and projects staff as needed. The TSTF change process serves to make corrections and improvements to the STS. The TSTF usually proposes changes and after conducting a safety review the NRR TS staff either approves or disapproves the changes. The TSTF change process is intended to facilitate NRR's control of STS and plant specific TS changes by processing proposed changes to the STS in a manner that supports subsequent plant-specific TS license amendment applications. The Westinghouse STS revisions are derived from specific TSTF changes approved by NRC.

The NRO TS staff is creating STS NUREGs for the new reactor certified designs in order to maintain consistency and standardization of TS. The NRO TS staff will manage changes to the new reactor STS using a web-based automated system currently under development. The new reactor STS change process is envisioned to eventually be included with the TSTF change process for operating reactor STS. Applying the TSTF change process to new reactor STS NUREGs will promote consistency with operating reactor STS NUREGs and maintain standardization among all reactor designs for similar or equivalent TS requirements.

The NRO TS staff is preparing AP1000 STS based upon the GTS with applicable TSTF changes approved for Westinghouse STS incorporated. Each of the approved TSTF changes to Westinghouse STS (NUREG-1431, Revision 2) has been analyzed for applicability and a GTST has been created for each AP1000 GTS section incorporating the applicable approved TSTF changes. The GTSTs are designed to facilitate COL holder adoption. The GTST files are kept in a database that can be used to generate the latest version of the AP1000 STS. VEGP Units 3 and 4 (the AP1000 Reference COLs, or lead plants) were licensed to AP1000 DCD Revision 19. Shortly after COL issuance, the COL holder submitted a license amendment request (LAR) to upgrade the VEGP Units 3 and 4 plant-specific TS via approved license amendments in accordance with 10 CFR 50.90. The VEGP Units 3 and 4 license amendments to upgrade the plant-specific TS are reflected in the draft AP1000 GTSTs for which the staff is soliciting comments.

The NRC staff will evaluate any comments received, provide a response to the comments and make appropriate changes to the GTST documents. Following resolution of public comments the final GTSTs will be used to create Revision 0 of the AP1000 STS NUREG. The availability of the AP1000 STS NUREG Revision 0 and the supporting GTST documents will then be announced for consideration by licensees to upgrade plant-specific TS. Each amendment application made in response to the notice of availability will be processed and noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures.

This proposal to make available NRC approved changes to GTS provisions, as documented in GTSTs and incorporated in the AP1000 STS and associated STS Bases, for adoption in plant-specific TS is applicable to all AP1000 COL holders. COL holders are anticipated to propose license amendments to update plant-specific TS with applicable GTST changes. To efficiently process the incoming license amendment applications, the staff requests that each licensee applying for changes contained in approved GTSTs include in its application justifications for adopting the proposed changes that are consistent with the safety basis given in the GTSTs; the amendment application should also justify any plant specific deviations from the approved GTST changes proposed for adoption.

If the staff announces the availability of a GTST change, licensees wishing to adopt the change must submit an application in accordance with applicable rules and other regulatory requirements. For each application the staff will publish a notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating licenses, a proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and a notice of opportunity for a hearing.

OSC is an independent agency responsible for, among other things, (1) investigation of allegations of prohibited personnel practices defined by law at 5 U.S.C. 2302(b), protection of whistleblowers, and certain other illegal employment practices under titles 5 and 38 of the U.S. Code, affecting current or former Federal employees or applicants for employment, and covered state and local government employees; and (2) the interpretation and enforcement of Hatch Act provisions on political activity in chapters 15 and 73 of title 5 of the U.S. Code.

Title of Collections: (1) Form OSC-11, (Complaint of Possible Prohibited Personnel Practice of Other Prohibited Activity; (2) Form OSC-12 (Information about filing a Whistleblower Disclosure with the Office of Special Counsel); (3) Form OSC-13 (Complaint of Possible Prohibited Political Activity (Violation of the Hatch Act)); OMB Control Number 3255-0002, Expiration 02/28/14.

Copies of the OSC Forms 11, 12, and 13 can be found at: http://www.osc.gov/RR_OSCFORMS.htm.

Type of Information Collection Request: Approval of previously approved collection of information that expires on February 28, 2014, with no revisions.

Affected Public: Current and former Federal employees, applicants for Federal employment, state and local government employees, and their representatives, and the general public.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

Estimated Annual Number of OSC Form Respondents: 3,950.

Frequency of Use of OSC Forms: Daily.

Estimated Average Amount of Time for a Person To Respond Using OSC Forms: 64 minutes.

Estimated Annual Burden for the OSC Forms: 2,899 hours.

Abstract: These forms are used by current and former Federal employees and applicants for Federal employment to submit allegations of possible prohibited personnel practices or other prohibited activity for investigation and possible prosecution by OSC.

OMB Control Number: 0420-0545.

Title: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.

Type Of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved collection.

Affected Public: Individuals and households.

Respondents' Obligation To Reply: Voluntary.

Burden To The Public:

General Description Of Collection: The proposed information collection activity provides a means to garner qualitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the Administration's commitment to improving service delivery. By qualitative feedback we mean information that provides useful insights on perceptions and opinions, but are not statistical surveys that yield quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of study. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and actionable communications between the Agency and its customers and stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.

The solicitation of feedback will target areas such as: Timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on Peace Corps' services will be unavailable.

Peace Corps will only submit a collection for approval under this generic clearance if it meets the following conditions:

• The collections are voluntary;

• The collections are low-burden for respondents (based on considerations of total burden hours, total number of respondents, or burden-hours per respondent) and are low-cost for both the respondents and the Federal Government;

• The collections are non-controversial and do not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;

• Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future;

• Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained;

• Information gathered will be used only internally for general service improvement and program management purposes and is not intended for release outside of the agency;

• Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions; and

• Information gathered will yield qualitative information; the collections will not be designed or expected to yield statistically reliable results or used as though the results are generalizable to the population of study.

Feedback collected under this generic clearance provides useful information, but it does not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Such data uses require more rigorous designs that address: The target population to which generalizations will be made, the sampling frame, the sample design (including stratification and clustering), the precision requirements or power calculations that justify the proposed sample size, the expected response rate, methods for assessing potential non-response bias, the protocols for data collection, and any testing procedures that were or will be undertaken prior to fielding the study. Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have, such collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.

As a general matter, information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

Request For Comment: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. All written comments will be available for public inspection Regulations.gov. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget control number.

On June 13, 2014, the Postal Service filed notice that it has agreed to an Amendment to the existing Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and First-Class Package Service Contract 2 negotiated service agreement approved in this docket. 1 In support of its Notice, the Postal Service includes a redacted copy of the Amendment.

The Postal Service also filed an unredacted version of the Amendment under seal. The Postal Service seeks to incorporate by reference the Application for Non-Public Treatment originally filed in this docket for the protection of information that it has filed under seal. Id. at 1.

The Amendment modifies the price categories for which the customer's packages are eligible. The Postal Service asserts that the amendment will not affect the cost coverage of the contract as presented in the initial filing in this docket. 2

The Postal Service intends for the Amendment to become effective one business day after the date that the Commission completes its review of the Notice. Notice at 1. The Postal Service asserts that the Amendment will not impair the ability of the contract to comply with 39 U.S.C. 3633. Id.

The Commission invites comments on whether the changes presented in the Postal Service's Notice are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 3015.5, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than June 24, 2014. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site ( http://www.prc.gov ).

The Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to represent the interests of the general public (Public Representative) in this docket.

It is ordered:

1. The Commission reopens Docket No. CP2014-37 for consideration of matters raised by the Postal Service's Notice.

2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Curtis E. Kidd to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this proceeding.

3. Comments are due no later than June 24, 2014.

4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register .

The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling (202) 551-8090.

1. The Trust is a business trust organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and is registered under the Act as an open-end management investment company with multiple series.

2. The Initial Adviser is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) and will be the investment adviser to the Funds (defined below). Any other Adviser (defined below) will also be registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. The Adviser may enter into sub-advisory agreements with one or more investment advisers to act as sub-advisers to particular Funds (each, a “Sub-Adviser”). Any Sub-Adviser will either be registered under the Advisers Act or will not be required to register thereunder.

3. The Trust will enter into a distribution agreement with one or more distributors (each, a “Distributor”). Each Distributor will be a broker-dealer (“Broker”) registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and will act as distributor and principal underwriter of one or more of the Funds. The Distributor of any Fund may be an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act (“Affiliated Person”), or an affiliated person of an Affiliated Person (“Second-Tier Affiliate”), of that Fund's Adviser and/or Sub-Advisers. No Distributor will be affiliated with any Exchange (defined below).

4. Applicants request that the order apply to the initial series of the Trust described in the application (“Initial Fund”), as well as any additional series of the Trust and other open-end management investment companies, or series thereof, that may be created in the future (“Future Funds”), each of which will operate as an exchanged-traded fund (“ETF”) and will track a specified index comprised solely of domestic or foreign equity and/or fixed income securities (each, an “Underlying Index”). Any Future Fund will (a) be advised by the Initial Adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Initial Adviser (each, an “Adviser”) and (b) comply with the terms and conditions of the application. The Initial Fund and Future Funds, together, are the “Funds.”  1

5. Each Fund will hold certain securities, currencies, other assets and other investment positions (“Portfolio Holdings”) selected to correspond generally to the performance of its Underlying Index. Certain Funds will be based on Underlying Indexes which will be comprised of equity and/or fixed income securities issued by one or more of the following categories of issuers: (i) Domestic issuers; and (ii) non-domestic issuers meeting the requirements for trading in U.S. markets. Other Funds will be based on Underlying Indexes which will be comprised of foreign and domestic or solely foreign equity and/or fixed income securities (“Foreign Funds”).

6. Applicants represent that each Fund will invest at least 80% of its assets (excluding securities lending collateral) in the component securities of its respective Underlying Index (“Component Securities”) and TBA Transactions, 2 and in the case of Foreign Funds, Component Securities and Depositary Receipts  3 representing Component Securities. Each Fund may also invest up to 20% of its assets in certain index futures, options, options on index futures, swap contracts or other derivatives, as related to its respective Underlying Index and its Component Securities, cash and cash equivalents, other investment companies, as well as in securities and other instruments not included in its Underlying Index but which the Adviser or Sub-Adviser believes will help the Fund track its Underlying Index. A Fund may also engage in short sales in accordance with its investment objective.

7. The Trust may offer Funds that seek to track Underlying Indexes constructed using 130/30 investment strategies (“130/30 Funds”) or other long/short investment strategies (“Long/Short Funds”). Each Long/Short Fund will establish (i) exposures equal to approximately 100% of the long positions specified by the Long/Short Index  4 and (ii) exposures equal to approximately 100% of the short positions specified by the Long/Short Index. Each 130/30 Fund will include strategies that: (i) Establish long positions in securities so that total long exposure represents approximately 130% of a Fund's net assets; and (ii) simultaneously establish short positions in other securities so that total short exposure represents approximately 30% of such Fund's net assets. Each Business Day (defined below), for each Long/Short Fund and 130/30 Fund, the Adviser will provide full portfolio transparency on the Fund's publicly available Web site (“Web site”) by making available the Fund's Portfolio Holdings before the commencement of trading of Shares on the Listing Exchange (defined below). 5 The information provided on the Web site will be formatted to be reader-friendly.

8. A Fund will utilize either a replication or representative sampling strategy to track its Underlying Index. A Fund using a replication strategy will invest in the Component Securities of its Underlying Index in the same approximate proportions as in such Underlying Index. A Fund using a representative sampling strategy will hold some, but not necessarily all of the Component Securities of its Underlying Index. Applicants state that a Fund using a representative sampling strategy will not be expected to track the performance of its Underlying Index with the same degree of accuracy as would an investment vehicle that invested in every Component Security of the Underlying Index with the same weighting as the Underlying Index. Applicants expect that each Fund will have an annual tracking error relative to the performance of its Underlying Index of less than 5%.

9. Each Fund will be entitled to use its Underlying Index pursuant to either a licensing agreement with the entity that compiles, creates, sponsors or maintains the Underlying Index (each, an “Index Provider”) or a sub-licensing arrangement with the Adviser, which will have a licensing agreement with such Index Provider. 6 A “Self-Indexing Fund” is a Fund for which an Affiliated Person, or a Second-Tier Affiliate, of the Trust or a Fund, of the Adviser, of any Sub-Adviser to or promoter of a Fund, or of the Distributor (each, an “Affiliated Index Provider”)  7 will serve as the Index Provider. In the case of Self-Indexing Funds, an Affiliated Index Provider will create a proprietary, rules-based methodology to create Underlying Indexes (each an “Affiliated Index”). 8 Except with respect to the Self-Indexing Funds, no Index Provider is or will be an Affiliated Person, or a Second-Tier Affiliate, of the Trust or a Fund, of the Adviser, of any Sub-Adviser to or promoter of a Fund, or of the Distributor.

10. Applicants recognize that Self-Indexing Funds could raise concerns regarding the ability of the Affiliated Index Provider to manipulate the Underlying Index to the benefit or detriment of the Self-Indexing Fund. Applicants further recognize the potential for conflicts that may arise with respect to the personal trading activity of personnel of the Affiliated Index Provider who have knowledge of changes to an Underlying Index prior to the time that information is publicly disseminated. Prior orders granted to self-indexing ETFs (“Prior Self-Indexing Orders”) addressed these concerns by creating a framework that required: (i) Transparency of the Underlying Indexes; (ii) the adoption of policies and procedures not otherwise required by the Act designed to mitigate such conflicts of interest; (iii) limitations on the ability to change the rules for index compilation and the component securities of the index; (iv) that the index provider enter into an agreement with an unaffiliated third party to act as “Calculation Agent”; and (v) certain limitations designed to separate employees of the index provider, adviser and Calculation Agent (clauses (ii) through (v) are hereinafter referred to as “Policies and Procedures”). 9

11. Instead of adopting the same or similar Policies and Procedures, applicants propose that each day that a Fund, the NYSE and the national securities exchange (as defined in section 2(a)(26) of the Act) (an “Exchange”) on which the Fund's Shares are primarily listed (“Listing Exchange”) are open for business, including any day that a Fund is required to be open under section 22(e) of the Act (a “Business Day”), each Self-Indexing Fund will post on its Web site, before commencement of trading of Shares on the Listing Exchange, the identities and quantities of the Portfolio Holdings held by the Fund that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of its NAV at the end of the Business Day. Applicants believe that requiring Self-Indexing Funds to maintain full portfolio transparency will provide an effective alternative mechanism for addressing any such potential conflicts of interest.

12. Applicants represent that each Self-Indexing Fund's Portfolio Holdings will be as transparent as the portfolio holdings of existing actively managed ETFs. Applicants observe that the framework set forth in the Prior Self-Indexing Orders was established before the Commission began issuing exemptive relief to allow the offering of actively-managed ETFs. 10 Unlike passively-managed ETFs, actively-managed ETFs do not seek to replicate the performance of a specified index but rather seek to achieve their investment objectives by using an “active” management strategy. Applicants contend that the structure of actively managed ETFs presents potential conflicts of interest that are the same as those presented by Self-Indexing Funds because the portfolio managers of an actively managed ETF by definition have advance knowledge of pending portfolio changes. However, rather than requiring Policies and Procedures similar to those required under the Prior Self-Indexing Orders, applicants believe that actively managed ETFs address these potential conflicts of interest appropriately through full portfolio transparency, as the conditions to their relevant exemptive relief require.

13. In addition, applicants do not believe the potential for conflicts of interest raised by the Adviser's use of the Underlying Indexes in connection with the management of the Self Indexing Funds and the Affiliated Accounts will be substantially different from the potential conflicts presented by an adviser managing two or more registered funds. Both the Act and the Advisers Act contain various protections to address conflicts of interest where an adviser is managing two or more registered funds and these protections will also help address these conflicts with respect to the Self-Indexing Funds. 11

14. The Adviser and any Sub-Adviser have adopted or will adopt, pursuant to rule 206(4)-7 under the Advisers Act, written policies and procedures designed to prevent violations of the Advisers Act and the rules thereunder. These include policies and procedures designed to minimize potential conflicts of interest among the Self-Indexing Funds and the Affiliated Accounts, such as cross trading policies, as well as those designed to ensure the equitable allocation of portfolio transactions and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser has adopted policies and procedures as required under section 204A of the Advisers Act, which are reasonably designed in light of the nature of its business to prevent the misuse, in violation of the Advisers Act or the Exchange Act or the rules thereunder, of material non-public information by the Adviser or an associated person (“Inside Information Policy”). Any Sub-Adviser will be required to adopt and maintain a similar Inside Information Policy. In accordance with the Code of Ethics  12 and Inside Information Policy of the Adviser and Sub-Advisers, personnel of those entities with knowledge about the composition of the Portfolio Deposit  13 will be prohibited from disclosing such information to any other person, except as authorized in the course of their employment, until such information is made public. In addition, an Index Provider will not provide any information relating to changes to an Underlying Index's methodology for the inclusion of component securities, the inclusion or exclusion of specific component securities, or methodology for the calculation of the return of component securities, in advance of a public announcement of such changes by the Index Provider. The Adviser will also include under Item 10.C. of Part 2 of its Form ADV a discussion of its relationship to any Affiliated Index Provider and any material conflicts of interest resulting therefrom, regardless of whether the Affiliated Index Provider is a type of affiliate specified in Item 10.

15. To the extent the Self-Indexing Funds transact with an Affiliated Person of the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, such transactions will comply with the Act, the rules thereunder and the terms and conditions of the requested order. In this regard, each Self-Indexing Fund's board of directors or trustees (“Board”) will periodically review the Self-Indexing Fund's use of an Affiliated Index Provider. Subject to the approval of the Self-Indexing Fund's Board, the Adviser, Affiliated Persons of the Adviser (“Adviser Affiliates”) and Affiliated Persons of any Sub-Adviser (“Sub-Adviser Affiliates”) may be authorized to provide custody, fund accounting and administration and transfer agency services to the Self-Indexing Funds. Any services provided by the Adviser, Adviser Affiliates, Sub-Adviser and Sub-Adviser Affiliates will be performed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the rules under the Act and any relevant guidelines from the staff of the Commission.

16. In light of the foregoing, applicants believe it is appropriate to allow the Self-Indexing Funds to be fully transparent in lieu of Policies and Procedures from the Prior Self-Indexing Orders discussed above.

17. The Shares of each Fund will be purchased and redeemed in Creation Units and generally on an in-kind basis. Except where the purchase or redemption will include cash under the limited circumstances specified below, purchasers will be required to purchase Creation Units by making an in-kind deposit of specified instruments (“Deposit Instruments”), and shareholders redeeming their Shares will receive an in-kind transfer of specified instruments (“Redemption Instruments”). 14 On any given Business Day, the names and quantities of the instruments that constitute the Deposit Instruments and the names and quantities of the instruments that constitute the Redemption Instruments will be identical, unless the Fund is Rebalancing (as defined below). In addition, the Deposit Instruments and the Redemption Instruments will each correspond pro rata to the positions in the Fund's portfolio (including cash positions)  15 except: (a) In the case of bonds, for minor differences when it is impossible to break up bonds beyond certain minimum sizes needed for transfer and settlement; (b) for minor differences when rounding is necessary to eliminate fractional shares or lots that are not tradeable round lots;  16 (c) TBA Transactions, short positions, derivatives and other positions that cannot be transferred in kind  17 will be excluded from the Deposit Instruments and the Redemption Instruments;  18 (d) to the extent the Fund determines, on a given Business Day, to use a representative sampling of the Fund's portfolio;  19 or (e) for temporary periods, to effect changes in the Fund's portfolio as a result of the rebalancing of its Underlying Index (any such change, a “Rebalancing”). If there is a difference between the NAV attributable to a Creation Unit and the aggregate market value of the Deposit Instruments or Redemption Instruments exchanged for the Creation Unit, the party conveying instruments with the lower value will also pay to the other an amount in cash equal to that difference (the “Cash Amount”).

18. Purchases and redemptions of Creation Units may be made in whole or in part on a cash basis, rather than in kind, solely under the following circumstances: (a) To the extent there is a Cash Amount; (b) if, on a given Business Day, the Fund announces before the open of trading that all purchases, all redemptions or all purchases and redemptions on that day will be made entirely in cash; (c) if, upon receiving a purchase or redemption order from an Authorized Participant, the Fund determines to require the purchase or redemption, as applicable, to be made entirely in cash;  20 (d) if, on a given Business Day, the Fund requires all Authorized Participants purchasing or redeeming Shares on that day to deposit or receive (as applicable) cash in lieu of some or all of the Deposit Instruments or Redemption Instruments, respectively, solely because: (i) Such instruments are not eligible for transfer through either the NSCC or DTC (defined below); or (ii) in the case of Foreign Funds holding non-U.S. investments, such instruments are not eligible for trading due to local trading restrictions, local restrictions on securities transfers or other similar circumstances; or (e) if the Fund permits an Authorized Participant to deposit or receive (as applicable) cash in lieu of some or all of the Deposit Instruments or Redemption Instruments, respectively, solely because: (i) Such instruments are, in the case of the purchase of a Creation Unit, not available in sufficient quantity; (ii) such instruments are not eligible for trading by an Authorized Participant or the investor on whose behalf the Authorized Participant is acting; or (iii) a holder of Shares of a Foreign Fund holding non-U.S. investments would be subject to unfavorable income tax treatment if the holder receives redemption proceeds in kind. 21

19. Creation Units will consist of specified large aggregations of Shares, e.g., at least 25,000 Shares, and it is expected that the initial price of a Creation Unit will range from $500,000 to $25 million. All orders to purchase Creation Units must be placed with the Distributor by or through an “Authorized Participant” which is either (1) a “Participating Party,” i.e., a broker-dealer or other participant in the Continuous Net Settlement System of the NSCC, a clearing agency registered with the Commission, or (2) a participant in The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) (“DTC Participant”), which, in either case, has signed a participant agreement with the Distributor. The Distributor will be responsible for transmitting the orders to the Funds and will furnish to those placing such orders confirmation that the orders have been accepted, but applicants state that the Distributor may reject any order which is not submitted in proper form.

20. Each Business Day, before the open of trading on the Listing Exchange, each Fund will cause to be published through the NSCC the names and quantities of the instruments comprising the Deposit Instruments and the Redemption Instruments, as well as the estimated Cash Amount (if any), for that day. The list of Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments will apply until a new list is announced on the following Business Day, and there will be no intra-day changes to the list except to correct errors in the published list. Each Listing Exchange will disseminate, every 15 seconds during regular Exchange trading hours, through the facilities of the Consolidated Tape Association, an amount for each Fund stated on a per individual Share basis representing the sum of (i) the estimated Cash Amount and (ii) the current value of the Deposit Instruments.

21. Transaction expenses, including operational processing and brokerage costs, will be incurred by a Fund when investors purchase or redeem Creation Units in-kind and such costs have the potential to dilute the interests of the Fund's existing shareholders. Each Fund will impose purchase or redemption transaction fees (“Transaction Fees”) in connection with effecting such purchases or redemptions of Creation Units. In all cases, such Transaction Fees will be limited in accordance with requirements of the Commission applicable to management investment companies offering redeemable securities. Since the Transaction Fees are intended to defray the transaction expenses as well as to prevent possible shareholder dilution resulting from the purchase or redemption of Creation Units, the Transaction Fees will be borne only by such purchasers or redeemers. 22 The Distributor will be responsible for delivering the Fund's prospectus to those persons acquiring Shares in Creation Units and for maintaining records of both the orders placed with it and the confirmations of acceptance furnished by it. In addition, the Distributor will maintain a record of the instructions given to the applicable Fund to implement the delivery of its Shares.

22. Shares of each Fund will be listed and traded individually on an Exchange. It is expected that one or more member firms of an Exchange will be designated to act as a market maker (each, a “Market Maker”) and maintain a market for Shares trading on the Exchange. Prices of Shares trading on an Exchange will be based on the current bid/offer market. Transactions involving the sale of Shares on an Exchange will be subject to customary brokerage commissions and charges.

23. Applicants expect that purchasers of Creation Units will include institutional investors and arbitrageurs. Market Makers, acting in their roles to provide a fair and orderly secondary market for the Shares, may from time to time find it appropriate to purchase or redeem Creation Units. Applicants expect that secondary market purchasers of Shares will include both institutional and retail investors. 23 The price at which Shares trade will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities created by the option continually to purchase or redeem Shares in Creation Units, which should help prevent Shares from trading at a material discount or premium in relation to their NAV.

24. Shares will not be individually redeemable, and owners of Shares may acquire those Shares from the Fund, or tender such Shares for redemption to the Fund, in Creation Units only. To redeem, an investor must accumulate enough Shares to constitute a Creation Unit. Redemption requests must be placed through an Authorized Participant. A redeeming investor may pay a Transaction Fee, calculated in the same manner as a Transaction Fee payable in connection with purchases of Creation Units.

25. Neither the Trust nor any Fund will be advertised or marketed or otherwise held out as a traditional open-end investment company or a “mutual fund.” Instead, each such Fund will be marketed as an “ETF.” All marketing materials that describe the features or method of obtaining, buying or selling Creation Units, or Shares traded on an Exchange, or refer to redeemability, will prominently disclose that Shares are not individually redeemable and will disclose that the owners of Shares may acquire those Shares from the Fund or tender such Shares for redemption to the Fund in Creation Units only. The Funds will provide copies of their annual and semi-annual shareholder reports to DTC Participants for distribution to beneficial owners of Shares.

1. Applicants request an order under section 6(c) of the Act for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d), and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act, and under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act.

2. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security or transaction, or any class of persons, securities or transactions, from any provision of the Act, if and to the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed transaction from section 17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that the terms of the transaction, including the consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and the proposed transaction is consistent with the policies of the registered investment company and the general provisions of the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities or transactions, from any provisions of section 12(d)(1) if the exemption is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.

3. Section 5(a)(1) of the Act defines an “open-end company” as a management investment company that is offering for sale or has outstanding any redeemable security of which it is the issuer. Section 2(a)(32) of the Act defines a redeemable security as any security, other than short-term paper, under the terms of which the owner, upon its presentation to the issuer, is entitled to receive approximately a proportionate share of the issuer's current net assets, or the cash equivalent. Because Shares will not be individually redeemable, applicants request an order that would permit the Funds to register as open-end management investment companies and issue Shares that are redeemable in Creation Units only. Applicants state that investors may purchase Shares in Creation Units and redeem Creation Units from each Fund. Applicants further state that because Creation Units may always be purchased and redeemed at NAV, the price of Shares on the secondary market should not vary materially from NAV.

4. Section 22(d) of the Act, among other things, prohibits a dealer from selling a redeemable security that is currently being offered to the public by or through an underwriter, except at a current public offering price described in the prospectus. Rule 22c-1 under the Act generally requires that a dealer selling, redeeming or repurchasing a redeemable security do so only at a price based on its NAV. Applicants state that secondary market trading in Shares will take place at negotiated prices, not at a current offering price described in a Fund's prospectus, and not at a price based on NAV. Thus, purchases and sales of Shares in the secondary market will not comply with section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act. Applicants request an exemption under section 6(c) from these provisions.

5. Applicants assert that the concerns sought to be addressed by section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act with respect to pricing are equally satisfied by the proposed method of pricing Shares. Applicants maintain that while there is little legislative history regarding section 22(d), its provisions, as well as those of rule 22c-1, appear to have been designed to (a) prevent dilution caused by certain riskless-trading schemes by principal underwriters and contract dealers, (b) prevent unjust discrimination or preferential treatment among buyers, and (c) ensure an orderly distribution of investment company shares by eliminating price competition from dealers offering shares at less than the published sales price and repurchasing shares at more than the published redemption price.

6. Applicants believe that none of these purposes will be thwarted by permitting Shares to trade in the secondary market at negotiated prices. Applicants state that (a) secondary market trading in Shares does not involve a Fund as a party and will not result in dilution of an investment in Shares, and (b) to the extent different prices exist during a given trading day, or from day to day, such variances occur as a result of third-party market forces, such as supply and demand. Therefore, applicants assert that secondary market transactions in Shares will not lead to discrimination or preferential treatment among purchasers. Finally, applicants contend that the price at which Shares trade will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities created by the option continually to purchase or redeem Shares in Creation Units, which should help prevent Shares from trading at a material discount or premium in relation to their NAV.

7. Section 22(e) of the Act generally prohibits a registered investment company from suspending the right of redemption or postponing the date of payment of redemption proceeds for more than seven days after the tender of a security for redemption. Applicants state that settlement of redemptions for Foreign Funds will be contingent not only on the settlement cycle of the United States market, but also on current delivery cycles in local markets for underlying foreign portfolio securities held by a Foreign Fund. Applicants state that the delivery cycles currently practicable for transferring Redemption Instruments to redeeming investors, coupled with local market holiday schedules, may require a delivery process of up to fifteen (15) calendar days. 24 Accordingly, with respect to Foreign Funds only, applicants hereby request relief under section 6(c) from the requirement imposed by section 22(e) to allow Foreign Funds to pay redemption proceeds within fifteen (15) calendar days following the tender of Creation Units for redemption. 25

8. Applicants believe that Congress adopted section 22(e) to prevent unreasonable, undisclosed or unforeseen delays in the actual payment of redemption proceeds. Applicants propose that allowing redemption payments for Creation Units of a Foreign Fund to be made within fifteen calendar days would not be inconsistent with the spirit and intent of section 22(e). Applicants suggest that a redemption payment occurring within fifteen calendar days following a redemption request would adequately afford investor protection.

9. Applicants are not seeking relief from section 22(e) with respect to Foreign Funds that do not effect creations and redemptions of Creation Units in-kind.

10. Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act prohibits a registered investment company from acquiring securities of an investment company if such securities represent more than 3% of the total outstanding voting stock of the acquired company, more than 5% of the total assets of the acquiring company, or, together with the securities of any other investment companies, more than 10% of the total assets of the acquiring company. Section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act prohibits a registered open-end investment company, its principal underwriter and any other broker-dealer from knowingly selling the investment company's shares to another investment company if the sale will cause the acquiring company to own more than 3% of the acquired company's voting stock, or if the sale will cause more than 10% of the acquired company's voting stock to be owned by investment companies generally.

11. Applicants request an exemption to permit registered management investment companies and unit investment trusts (“UITs”) that are not advised or sponsored by the Adviser, and not part of the same “group of investment companies,” as defined in section 12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act as the Underlying Funds (such management investment companies are referred to as “Investing Management Companies,” such UITs are referred to as “Investing Trusts,” and Investing Management Companies and Investing Trusts are collectively referred to as “Funds of Funds”), 26 to acquire Underlying Fund Shares beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act; and the Underlying Funds, and any principal underwriter for the Underlying Funds, and/or any Broker registered under the Exchange Act, to sell Underlying Fund Shares to Funds of Funds beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The “Underlying Funds” are (a) the Funds and (b) any registered open-end management investment company or any series thereof that is advised by an Adviser and that, pursuant to a separate order of the Commission, in general terms, operates as an ETF that utilizes active management investment strategies. Shares of an Underlying Fund are referred to as “Underlying Fund Shares.”

12. Each Investing Management Company will be advised by an investment adviser within the meaning of section 2(a)(20)(A) of the Act (the “Fund of Funds Adviser”) and may be sub-advised by investment advisers within the meaning of section 2(a)(20)(B) of the Act (each a “Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser”). Any investment adviser to an Investing Management Company will be registered under the Advisers Act. Each Investing Trust will be sponsored by a sponsor (“Sponsor”).

13. Applicants submit that the proposed conditions to the requested relief adequately address the concerns underlying the limits in sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B), which include concerns about undue influence by a fund of funds over underlying funds, excessive layering of fees and overly complex fund structures. Applicants believe that the requested exemption is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.

14. Applicants believe that neither a Fund of Funds nor a Fund of Funds Affiliate would be able to exert undue influence over an Underlying Fund. 27 To limit the control that a Fund of Funds may have over an Underlying Fund, applicants propose a condition prohibiting a Fund of Funds Adviser or Sponsor, any person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with a Fund of Funds Adviser or Sponsor, and any investment company and any issuer that would be an investment company but for sections 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act that is advised or sponsored by a Fund of Funds Adviser or Sponsor, or any person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with a Fund of Funds Adviser or Sponsor (“Fund of Funds Advisory Group”) from controlling (individually or in the aggregate) an Underlying Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act. The same prohibition would apply to any Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser, any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser, and any investment company or issuer that would be an investment company but for sections 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act (or portion of such investment company or issuer) advised or sponsored by the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser or any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser (“Fund of Funds Sub-Advisory Group”).

15. Applicants propose other conditions to limit the potential for undue influence over the Underlying Funds, including that no Fund of Funds or Fund of Funds Affiliate (except to the extent it is acting in its capacity as an investment adviser to an Underlying Fund) will cause an Underlying Fund to purchase a security in an offering of securities during the existence of an underwriting or selling syndicate of which a principal underwriter is an Underwriting Affiliate (“Affiliated Underwriting”). An “Underwriting Affiliate” is a principal underwriter in any underwriting or selling syndicate that is an officer, director, member of an advisory board, Fund of Funds Adviser, Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser, employee or Sponsor of the Fund of Funds, or a person of which any such officer, director, member of an advisory board, Fund of Funds Adviser or Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser, employee or Sponsor is an affiliated person (except that any person whose relationship to the Underlying Fund is covered by section 10(f) of the Act is not an Underwriting Affiliate).

16. Applicants do not believe that the proposed arrangement will involve excessive layering of fees. The board of directors or trustees of any Investing Management Company, including a majority of the directors or trustees who are not “interested persons” within the meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the Act (“disinterested directors or trustees”), will find that the advisory fees charged under the contract are based on services provided that will be in addition to, rather than duplicative of, services provided under the advisory contract of any Underlying Fund in which the Investing Management Company may invest. In addition, under condition B.5., a Fund of Funds Adviser, or a Fund of Funds' trustee or Sponsor, as applicable, will waive fees otherwise payable to it by the Fund of Funds in an amount at least equal to any compensation (including fees received pursuant to any plan adopted by a Fund under rule 12b-1 under the Act) received from an Underlying Fund by the Fund of Funds Adviser, trustee or Sponsor or an affiliated person of the Fund of Funds Adviser, trustee or Sponsor, other than any advisory fees paid to the Fund of Funds Adviser, trustee or Sponsor or its affiliated person by an Underlying Fund, in connection with the investment by the Fund of Funds in the Underlying Fund. Applicants state that any sales charges and/or service fees charged with respect to shares of a Fund of Funds will not exceed the limits applicable to a fund of funds as set forth in NASD Conduct Rule 2830. 28

17. Applicants submit that the proposed arrangement will not create an overly complex fund structure. Applicants note that no Underlying Fund will acquire securities of any investment company or company relying on section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act in excess of the limits contained in section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act, except to the extent permitted by exemptive relief from the Commission permitting the Underlying Fund to purchase shares of other investment companies for short-term cash management purposes. To ensure a Fund of Funds is aware of the terms and conditions of the requested order, the Fund of Funds will enter into an agreement with the Underlying Fund (“FOF Participation Agreement”). The FOF Participation Agreement will include an acknowledgement from the Fund of Funds that it may rely on the order only to invest in the Underlying Funds and not in any other investment company.

18. Applicants also note that an Underlying Fund may choose to reject a direct purchase of Underlying Fund Shares in Creation Units by a Fund of Funds. To the extent that a Fund of Funds purchases Underlying Fund Shares in the secondary market, an Underlying Fund would still retain its ability to reject any initial investment by a Fund of Funds in excess of the limits of section 12(d)(1)(A) by declining to enter into a FOF Participation Agreement with the Fund of Funds.

19. Sections 17(a)(1) and (2) of the Act generally prohibit an affiliated person of a registered investment company, or an affiliated person of such a person, from selling any security to or purchasing any security from the company. Section 2(a)(3) of the Act defines “affiliated person” of another person to include (a) any person directly or indirectly owning, controlling or holding with power to vote 5% or more of the outstanding voting securities of the other person, (b) any person 5% or more of whose outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly owned, controlled or held with the power to vote by the other person, and (c) any person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by or under common control with the other person. Section 2(a)(9) of the Act defines “control” as the power to exercise a controlling influence over the management or policies of a company, and provides that a control relationship will be presumed where one person owns more than 25% of a company's voting securities. The Funds may be deemed to be controlled by the Adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Adviser and hence affiliated persons of each other. In addition, the Funds may be deemed to be under common control with any other registered investment company (or series thereof) advised by an Adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with an Adviser (an “Affiliated Fund”). Any investor, including Market Makers, owning 5% or holding in excess of 25% of the Trust or such Funds, may be deemed affiliated persons of the Trust or such Funds. In addition, an investor could own 5% or more, or in excess of 25% of the outstanding shares of one or more Affiliated Funds making that investor a Second-Tier Affiliate of the Funds.

20. Applicants request an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act pursuant to sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act to permit persons that are Affiliated Persons of the Funds, or Second-Tier Affiliates of the Funds, solely by virtue of one or more of the following: (a) Holding 5% or more, or in excess of 25%, of the outstanding Shares of one or more Funds; (b) an affiliation with a person with an ownership interest described in (a); or (c) holding 5% or more, or more than 25%, of the shares of one or more Affiliated Funds, to effectuate purchases and redemptions “in-kind.”

21. Applicants assert that no useful purpose would be served by prohibiting such affiliated persons from making “in-kind” purchases or “in-kind” redemptions of Shares of a Fund in Creation Units. Both the deposit procedures for “in-kind” purchases of Creation Units and the redemption procedures for “in-kind” redemptions of Creation Units will be effected in exactly the same manner for all purchases and redemptions, regardless of size or number. There will be no discrimination between purchasers or redeemers. Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments for each Fund will be valued in the identical manner as those Portfolio Holdings currently held by such Fund and the valuation of the Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments will be made in an identical manner regardless of the identity of the purchaser or redeemer. Applicants do not believe that “in-kind” purchases and redemptions will result in abusive self-dealing or overreaching, but rather assert that such procedures will be implemented consistently with each Fund's objectives and with the general purposes of the Act. Applicants believe that “in-kind” purchases and redemptions will be made on terms reasonable to applicants and any affiliated persons because they will be valued pursuant to verifiable objective standards. The method of valuing Portfolio Holdings held by a Fund is identical to that used for calculating “in-kind” purchase or redemption values and therefore creates no opportunity for affiliated persons or Second-Tier Affiliates of applicants to effect a transaction detrimental to the other holders of Shares of that Fund. Similarly, applicants submit that, by using the same standards for valuing Portfolio Holdings held by a Fund as are used for calculating “in-kind” redemptions or purchases, the Fund will ensure that its NAV will not be adversely affected by such securities transactions. Applicants also note that the ability to take deposits and make redemptions “in-kind” will help each Fund to track closely its Underlying Index and therefore aid in achieving the Fund's objectives.

22. Applicants also seek relief under sections 6(c) and 17(b) from section 17(a) to permit an Underlying Fund that is an affiliated person, or an affiliated person of an affiliated person, of a Fund of Funds to sell its Underlying Fund Shares to and redeem its Underlying Fund Shares from a Fund of Funds, and to engage in the accompanying in-kind transactions with the Fund of Funds. 29 Applicants state that the terms of the transactions are fair and reasonable and do not involve overreaching. Applicants note that any consideration paid by a Fund of Funds for the purchase or redemption of Underlying Fund Shares directly from an Underlying Fund will be based on the NAV of the Underlying Fund. 30 Applicants believe that any proposed transactions directly between the Underlying Funds and Funds of Funds will be consistent with the policies of each Fund of Funds. The purchase of Creation Units by a Fund of Funds directly from an Underlying Fund will be accomplished in accordance with the investment restrictions of any such Fund of Funds and will be consistent with the investment policies set forth in the Fund of Funds' registration statement. Applicants also state that the proposed transactions are consistent with the general purposes of the Act and are appropriate in the public interest.

Applicants agree that any order of the Commission granting the requested relief will be subject to the following conditions:

1. The requested relief to permit ETF operations will expire on the effective date of any Commission rule under the Act that provides relief permitting the operation of index-based ETFs.

2. As long as a Fund operates in reliance on the requested order, Shares of such Fund will be listed on an Exchange.

3. Neither the Trust nor any Fund will be advertised or marketed as an open-end investment company or a mutual fund. Any advertising material that describes the purchase or sale of Creation Units or refers to redeemability will prominently disclose that Shares are not individually redeemable and that owners of Shares may acquire those Shares from the Fund and tender those Shares for redemption to a Fund in Creation Units only.

4. The Web site, which is and will be publicly accessible at no charge, will contain, on a per Share basis for each Fund, the prior Business Day's NAV and the market closing price or the midpoint of the bid/ask spread at the time of the calculation of such NAV (“Bid/Ask Price”), and a calculation of the premium or discount of the market closing price or Bid/Ask Price against such NAV.

5. Each Self-Indexing Fund, Long/Short Fund and 130/30 Fund will post on the Web site on each Business Day, before commencement of trading of Shares on the Exchange, the Fund's Portfolio Holdings.

6. No Adviser or any Sub-Adviser, directly or indirectly, will cause any Authorized Participant (or any investor on whose behalf an Authorized Participant may transact with the Fund) to acquire any Deposit Instrument for a Fund through a transaction in which the Fund could not engage directly.

1. The members of a Fund of Funds' Advisory Group will not control (individually or in the aggregate) an Underlying Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act. The members of a Fund of Funds' Sub-Advisory Group will not control (individually or in the aggregate) an Underlying Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act. If, as a result of a decrease in the outstanding voting securities of an Underlying Fund, the Fund of Funds' Advisory Group or the Fund of Funds' Sub-Advisory Group, each in the aggregate, becomes a holder of more than 25 percent of the outstanding voting securities of an Underlying Fund, it will vote its Underlying Fund Shares of the Underlying Fund in the same proportion as the vote of all other holders of the Underlying Fund's Shares. This condition does not apply to the Fund of Funds' Sub-Advisory Group with respect to an Underlying Fund for which the Fund of Funds' Sub-Adviser or a person controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Fund of Funds' Sub-Adviser acts as the investment adviser within the meaning of section 2(a)(20)(A) of the Act.

2. No Fund of Funds or Fund of Funds Affiliate will cause any existing or potential investment by the Fund of Funds in an Underlying Fund to influence the terms of any services or transactions between the Fund of Funds or Fund of Funds Affiliate and the Underlying Fund or an Underlying Fund Affiliate.

3. The board of directors or trustees of an Investing Management Company, including a majority of the disinterested directors or trustees, will adopt procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the Fund of Funds Adviser and Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser are conducting the investment program of the Investing Management Company without taking into account any consideration received by the Investing Management Company or a Fund of Funds Affiliate from an Underlying Fund or Underlying Fund Affiliate in connection with any services or transactions.

4. Once an investment by a Fund of Funds in Underlying Fund Shares exceeds the limits in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, the Board of the Underlying Fund, including a majority of the disinterested directors or trustees, will determine that any consideration paid by the Underlying Fund to the Fund of Funds or a Fund of Funds Affiliate in connection with any services or transactions: (i) Is fair and reasonable in relation to the nature and quality of the services and benefits received by the Underlying Fund; (ii) is within the range of consideration that the Underlying Fund would be required to pay to another unaffiliated entity in connection with the same services or transactions; and (iii) does not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned. This condition does not apply with respect to any services or transactions between an Underlying Fund and its investment adviser(s), or any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with such investment adviser(s).

5. The Fund of Funds Adviser, or trustee or Sponsor of an Investing Trust, as applicable, will waive fees otherwise payable to it by the Fund of Funds in an amount at least equal to any compensation (including fees received pursuant to any plan adopted by an Underlying Fund under rule 12b-l under the Act) received from an Underlying Fund by the Fund of Funds Adviser, or trustee or Sponsor of the Investing Trust, or an affiliated person of the Fund of Funds Adviser, or trustee or Sponsor of the Investing Trust, other than any advisory fees paid to the Fund of Funds Adviser, trustee or Sponsor of an Investing Trust, or its affiliated person by the Underlying Fund, in connection with the investment by the Fund of Funds in the Underlying Fund. Any Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser will waive fees otherwise payable to the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser, directly or indirectly, by the Investing Management Company in an amount at least equal to any compensation received from an Underlying Fund by the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser, or an affiliated person of the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser, other than any advisory fees paid to the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser or its affiliated person by the Underlying Fund, in connection with the investment by the Investing Management Company in the Underlying Fund made at the direction of the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser. In the event that the Fund of Funds Sub-Adviser waives fees, the benefit of the waiver will be passed through to the Investing Management Company.

6. No Fund of Funds or Fund of Funds Affiliate (except to the extent it is acting in its capacity as an investment adviser to an Underlying Fund) will cause an Underlying Fund to purchase a security in any Affiliated Underwriting.

7. The Board of an Underlying Fund, including a majority of the disinterested directors or trustees, will adopt procedures reasonably designed to monitor any purchases of securities by the Underlying Fund in an Affiliated Underwriting, once an investment by a Fund of Funds in the securities of the Underlying Fund exceeds the limit of section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, including any purchases made directly from an Underwriting Affiliate. The Board of the Underlying Fund will review these purchases periodically, but no less frequently than annually, to determine whether the purchases were influenced by the investment by the Fund of Funds in the Underlying Fund. The Board of the Underlying Fund will consider, among other things: (i) Whether the purchases were consistent with the investment objectives and policies of the Underlying Fund; (ii) how the performance of securities purchased in an Affiliated Underwriting compares to the performance of comparable securities purchased during a comparable period of time in underwritings other than Affiliated Underwritings or to a benchmark such as a comparable market index; and (iii) whether the amount of securities purchased by the Underlying Fund in Affiliated Underwritings and the amount purchased directly from an Underwriting Affiliate have changed significantly from prior years. The Board will take any appropriate actions based on its review, including, if appropriate, the institution of procedures designed to ensure that purchases of securities in Affiliated Underwritings are in the best interest of shareholders of the Underlying Fund.

8. Each Underlying Fund will maintain and preserve permanently in an easily accessible place a written copy of the procedures described in the preceding condition, and any modifications to such procedures, and will maintain and preserve for a period of not less than six years from the end of the fiscal year in which any purchase in an Affiliated Underwriting occurred, the first two years in an easily accessible place, a written record of each purchase of securities in Affiliated Underwritings once an investment by a Fund of Funds in the securities of the Underlying Fund exceeds the limit of section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, setting forth from whom the securities were acquired, the identity of the underwriting syndicate's members, the terms of the purchase, and the information or materials upon which the determinations of the Board of the Underlying Fund were made.

9. Before investing in an Underlying Fund in excess of the limit in section 12(d)(1)(A), a Fund of Funds and the Trust will execute a FOF Participation Agreement stating without limitation that their respective boards of directors or trustees and their investment advisers, or trustee and Sponsor, as applicable, understand the terms and conditions of the order, and agree to fulfill their responsibilities under the order. At the time of its investment in Underlying Fund Shares in excess of the limit in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i), a Fund of Funds will notify the Underlying Fund of the investment. At such time, the Fund of Funds will also transmit to the Underlying Fund a list of the names of each Fund of Funds Affiliate and Underwriting Affiliate. The Fund of Funds will notify the Underlying Fund of any changes to the list of the names as soon as reasonably practicable after a change occurs. The Underlying Fund and the Fund of Funds will maintain and preserve a copy of the order, the FOF Participation Agreement, and the list with any updated information for the duration of the investment and for a period of not less than six years thereafter, the first two years in an easily accessible place.

10. Before approving any advisory contract under section 15 of the Act, the board of directors or trustees of each Investing Management Company including a majority of the disinterested directors or trustees, will find that the advisory fees charged under such advisory contract are based on services provided that will be in addition to, rather than duplicative of, the services provided under the advisory contract(s) of any Underlying Fund in which the Investing Management Company may invest. These findings and their basis will be fully recorded in the minute books of the appropriate Investing Management Company.

11. Any sales charges and/or service fees charged with respect to shares of a Fund of Funds will not exceed the limits applicable to a fund of funds as set forth in NASD Conduct Rule 2830.

12. No Underlying Fund will acquire securities of an investment company or company relying on section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act in excess of the limits contained in section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act, except to the extent the Underlying Fund acquires securities of another investment company pursuant to exemptive relief from the Commission permitting the Underlying Fund to acquire securities of one or more investment companies for short term cash management purposes.

The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained via the Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling (202) 551-8090.

1. The Trust is a statutory trust organized under the laws of Delaware and is registered with the Commission as an open-end management investment company. Applicants currently intend that the initial series of the Trust will be the Global X Emerging & Frontier Bond ETF (the “Initial Fund”), which will seek exposure to emerging and frontier market debt. The Initial Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing under normal circumstances at least 80% of its total assets in a diversified portfolio of fixed income instruments of varying maturities issued by government, corporate and/or other issuers domiciled in emerging and frontier countries. The Initial Fund may invest a large percentage of its assets in issuers in a single country, a small number of countries, or a particular geographic region.

2. GXMC, a Delaware limited liability company registered with the Commission as an investment adviser under the Investment Adviser Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”), will be the investment adviser to the Initial Fund. The Advisor (as defined below) may enter into sub-advisory agreements with investment advisers to act as sub-advisors with respect to the Funds (as defined below) (each a “Sub-Advisor”). Applicants state that any Sub-Advisor will be registered, or not subject to registration, under the Advisers Act. The Distributor, a Pennsylvania corporation and registered broker-dealer (“Broker”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), will serve as the distributor and principal underwriter of the Initial Fund. Any future distributor and principal underwriter of the Funds (as defined below) would also be a Broker under the Exchange Act and would comply with the terms and conditions of the application.

3. Applicants request that the order apply to the Initial Fund and any future series of the Trust or of any open-end management companies or series thereof that may utilize active management investment strategies (collectively, “Future Funds”). Any Future Fund will (a) be advised by GXMC or an entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with GXMC (GXMC and each such other entity and any successor thereto included in the term “Advisor”), 1 and (b) comply with the terms and conditions of the application. 2 The Initial Fund and Future Funds together are the “Funds”. 3 Each Fund will consist of a portfolio of securities (including fixed income securities and/or equity securities) and/or currencies traded in the U.S. and/or non-U.S. markets, and derivatives, other assets, and other investment positions (“Portfolio Instruments”). 4 Funds may invest in “Depositary Receipts”. 5 Each Fund will operate as an actively managed exchange-traded fund (“ETF”).

4. Applicants request that any exemption under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) apply to: (i) Any Fund that is currently or subsequently part of the same “group of investment companies” as the Initial Fund within the meaning of section 12(d)(1)(G)(ii) of the Act; (ii) any principal underwriter for the Fund; (iii) any Brokers selling Shares of a Fund to an Investing Fund (as defined below); and (iv) each management investment company or unit investment trust registered under the Act that is not part of the same “group of investment companies” as the Funds, and that enters into a FOF Participation Agreement (as defined below) with a Fund (such management investment companies, “Investing Management Companies,” such unit investment trusts, “Investing Trusts,” and Investing Management Companies and Investing Trusts together, “Investing Funds”). Investing Funds do not include the Funds. 6

5. Applicants anticipate that a Creation Unit will consist of at least 25,000 Shares. Applicants anticipate that the trading price of a Share will range from $10 to $100. All orders to purchase Creation Units must be placed with the Distributor by or through a party that has entered into a participant agreement with the Distributor and the transfer agent of the Fund (“Authorized Participant”) with respect to the creation and redemption of Creation Units. An Authorized Participant is either: (a) A Broker or other participant, in the Continuous Net Settlement System of the National Securities Clearing Corporation (“NSCC”), a clearing agency registered with the Commission and affiliated with the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”), or (b) a participant in the DTC (“DTC Participant”).

6. In order to keep costs low and permit each Fund to be as fully invested as possible, Shares will be purchased and redeemed in Creation Units and generally on an in-kind basis. Except where the purchase or redemption will include cash under the limited circumstances specified below, purchasers will be required to purchase Creation Units by making an in-kind deposit of specified instruments (“Deposit Instruments”), and shareholders redeeming their Shares will receive an in-kind transfer of specified instruments (“Redemption Instruments”). 7 On any given Business Day  8 , the names and quantities of the instruments that constitute the Deposit Instruments and the names and quantities of the instruments that constitute the Redemption Instruments will be identical, and these instruments may be referred to, in the case of either a purchase or redemption, as the “Creation Basket.” In addition, the Creation Basket will correspond pro rata to the positions in a Fund's portfolio (including cash positions), 9 except: (a) In the case of bonds, for minor differences when it is impossible to break up bonds beyond certain minimum sizes needed for transfer and settlement; (b) for minor differences when rounding is necessary to eliminate fractional shares or lots that are not tradeable round lots; 10 or (c) TBA Transactions, 11 short positions and other positions that cannot be transferred in kind  12 will be excluded from the Creation Basket. 13 If there is a difference between NAV attributable to a Creation Unit and the aggregate market value of the Creation Basket exchanged for the Creation Unit, the party conveying instruments with the lower value will also pay to the other an amount in cash equal to that difference (the “Cash Amount”).

7. Purchases and redemptions of Creation Units may be made in whole or in part on a cash basis, rather than in kind, solely under the following circumstances: (a) To the extent there is a Cash Amount, as described above; (b) if, on a given Business Day, a Fund announces before the open of trading that all purchases, all redemptions or all purchases and redemptions on that day will be made entirely in cash; (c) if, upon receiving a purchase or redemption order from an Authorized Participant, a Fund determines to require the purchase or redemption, as applicable, to be made entirely in cash; (d) if, on a given Business Day, a Fund requires all Authorized Participants purchasing or redeeming Shares on that day to deposit or receive (as applicable) cash in lieu of some or all of the Deposit Instruments or Redemption Instruments, respectively, solely because: (i) Such instruments are not eligible for transfer through either the NSCC or DTC; or (ii) in the case of Funds holding non-U.S. investment (“Global Funds”), such instruments are not eligible for trading due to local trading restrictions, local restrictions on securities transfers or other similar circumstances; or (e) if a Fund permits an Authorized Participant to deposit or receive (as applicable) cash in lieu of some or all of the Deposit Instruments or Redemption Instruments, respectively, solely because: (i) Such instruments are, in the case of the purchase of a Creation Unit, not available in sufficient quantity; (ii) such instruments are not eligible for trading by an Authorized Participant or the investor on whose behalf the Authorized Participant is acting; or (iii) a holder of Shares of a Global Fund would be subject to unfavorable income tax treatment if the holder receives redemption proceeds in kind. 14

8. Each Business Day, before the open of trading on a national securities exchange, as defined in section 2(a)(26) of the Act (“Stock Exchange”), on which Shares are listed, each Fund will cause to be published through the NSCC the names and quantities of the instruments comprising the Creation Basket, as well as the estimated Cash Amount (if any), for that day. The published Creation Basket will apply until a new Creation Basket is announced on the following Business Day, and there will be no intra-day changes to the Creation Basket except to correct errors in the published Creation Basket. The Stock Exchange will disseminate every 15 seconds throughout the trading day an amount representing, on a per Share basis, the sum of the current value of the Portfolio Instruments that were publicly disclosed prior to the commencement of trading in Shares on the Stock Exchange.

9. A Fund may recoup the settlement costs charged by NSCC and DTC by imposing a transaction fee on investors purchasing or redeeming Creation Units (the “Transaction Fee”). The Transaction Fee will be borne only by purchasers and redeemers of Creation Units and will be limited to amounts that have been determined appropriate by the Advisor to defray the transaction expenses that will be incurred by a Fund when an investor purchases or redeems Creation Units. 15 All orders to purchase Creation Units will be placed with the Distributor by or through an Authorized Participant and the Distributor will transmit all purchase orders to the relevant Fund. The Distributor will be responsible for delivering a prospectus (“Prospectus”) to those persons purchasing Creation Units and for maintaining records of both the orders placed with it and the confirmations of acceptance furnished by it.

10. Shares will be listed and traded at negotiated prices on a Stock Exchange and traded in the secondary market. Applicants expect that Stock Exchange specialists or market makers (“Market Makers”) will be assigned to Shares. The price of Shares trading on the Stock Exchange will be based on a current bid/offer in the secondary market. Transactions involving the purchases and sales of Shares on the Stock Exchange will be subject to customary brokerage commissions and charges.

11. Applicants expect that purchasers of Creation Units will include institutional investors and arbitrageurs. Specialists or Market Makers, acting in their unique role to provide a fair and orderly secondary market for Shares, also may purchase Creation Units for use in their own market making activities. 16 Applicants expect that secondary market purchasers of Shares will include both institutional and retail investors. 17 Applicants expect that arbitrage opportunities created by the ability to continually purchase or redeem Creation Units at their NAV per Share should ensure that the Shares will not trade at a material discount or premium in relation to their NAV.

12. Shares will not be individually redeemable and owners of Shares may acquire those Shares from a Fund, or tender such shares for redemption to the Fund, in Creation Units only. To redeem, an investor must accumulate enough Shares to constitute a Creation Unit. Redemption requests must be placed by or through an Authorized Participant.

13. Neither the Trust nor any Fund will be marketed or otherwise held out as a “mutual fund.” Instead, each Fund will be marketed as an “actively managed exchange-traded fund”. In any advertising material where features of obtaining, buying or selling Shares traded on the Stock Exchange are described, there will be an appropriate statement to the effect that Shares are not individually redeemable.

14. The Funds' Web site, which will be publicly available prior to the public offering of Shares, will include a Prospectus and additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, on a per Share basis for each Fund, the prior Business Day's NAV and the market closing price or mid-point of the bid/ask spread at the time of the calculation of such NAV (“Bid/Ask Price”), and a calculation of the premium or discount of the market closing price or Bid/Ask Price against such NAV. On each Business Day, before commencement of trading in Shares on the Stock Exchange, the Fund will disclose on its Web site the identities and quantities of the Portfolio Instruments held by the Fund (including any short positions held in securities (“Short Positions”)) that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the Business Day. 18

1. Applicants request an order under section 6(c) of the Act for an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d) and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.

2. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security or transaction, or any class of persons, securities or transactions, from any provisions of the Act, if and to the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a proposed transaction from section 17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that the terms of the transaction, including the consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned, and the proposed transaction is consistent with the policies of the registered investment company and the general provisions of the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities or transactions, from any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the exemption is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.

3. Section 5(a)(1) of the Act defines an “open-end company” as a management investment company that is offering for sale or has outstanding any redeemable security of which it is the issuer. Section 2(a)(32) of the Act defines a redeemable security as any security, other than short-term paper, under the terms of which the holder, upon its presentation to the issuer, is entitled to receive approximately a proportionate share of the issuer's current net assets, or the cash equivalent. Because Shares will not be individually redeemable, applicants request an order that would permit each Fund to redeem Shares in Creation Units only. Applicants state that investors may purchase Shares in Creation Units from each Fund and redeem Creation Units from each Fund. Applicants further state that because the market price of Creation Units will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities, investors should be able to sell Shares in the secondary market at prices that do not vary materially from their NAV.

4. Section 22(d) of the Act, among other things, prohibits a dealer from selling a redeemable security that is currently being offered to the public by or through a principal underwriter, except at a current public offering price described in the prospectus. Rule 22c-1 under the Act generally requires that a dealer selling, redeeming, or repurchasing a redeemable security do so only at a price based on its NAV. Applicants state that secondary market trading in Shares will take place at negotiated prices, not at a current offering price described in the Prospectus, and not at a price based on NAV. Thus, purchases and sales of Shares in the secondary market will not comply with section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act. Applicants request an exemption under section 6(c) from these provisions.

5. Applicants assert that the concerns sought to be addressed by section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act with respect to pricing are equally satisfied by the proposed method of pricing Shares. Applicants maintain that while there is little legislative history regarding section 22(d), its provisions, as well as those of rule 22c-1, appear to have been designed to (a) prevent dilution caused by certain riskless-trading schemes by principal underwriters and contract dealers, (b) prevent unjust discrimination or preferential treatment among buyers resulting from sales at different prices, and (c) assure an orderly distribution system of investment company shares by eliminating price competition from brokers offering shares at less than the published sales price and repurchasing shares at more than the published redemption price.

6. Applicants believe that none of these purposes will be thwarted by permitting Shares to trade in the secondary market at negotiated prices. Applicants state that (a) secondary market trading in Shares does not involve the Funds as parties and cannot result in dilution of an investment in Shares, and (b) to the extent different prices exist during a given trading day, or from day to day, such variances occur as a result of third-party market forces, such as supply and demand. Therefore, applicants assert that secondary market transactions in Shares will not lead to discrimination or preferential treatment among purchasers. Finally, applicants contend that the proposed distribution system will be orderly because arbitrage activity should ensure that the difference between the market price of Shares and their NAV remains narrow.

7. Section 22(e) of the Act generally prohibits a registered investment company from suspending the right of redemption or postponing the date of payment of redemption proceeds for more than seven days after the tender of a security for redemption. Applicants observe that settlement of redemptions of Creation Units of Global Funds is contingent not only on the settlement cycle of the U.S. securities markets but also on the delivery cycles present in foreign markets in which those Funds invest. Applicants have been advised that, under certain circumstances, the delivery cycles for transferring Portfolio Instruments to redeeming investors, coupled with local market holiday schedules, will require a delivery process of up to 14 calendar days. Applicants therefore request relief from section 22(e) in order to provide payment or satisfaction of redemptions within the maximum number of calendar days required for such payment or satisfaction in the principal local markets where transactions in the Portfolio Instruments of each Global Fund customarily clear and settle, but in all cases no later than 14 calendar days following the tender of a Creation Unit. 19

8. Applicants state that section 22(e) was designed to prevent unreasonable, undisclosed and unforeseen delays in the actual payment of redemption proceeds. Applicants assert that the requested relief will not lead to the problems that section 22(e) was designed to prevent. Applicants state that allowing redemption payments for Creation Units of a Fund to be made within a maximum of 14 calendar days would not be inconsistent with the spirit and intent of section 22(e). Applicants state each Global Fund's statement of additional information (“SAI”) will disclose those local holidays (over the period of at least one year following the date of the SAI), if any, that are expected to prevent the delivery of redemption proceeds in seven calendar days and the maximum number of days needed to deliver the proceeds for each affected Global Fund. Applicants are not seeking relief from section 22(e) with respect to Global Funds that do not affect redemptions in-kind.

9. Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act prohibits a registered investment company from acquiring shares of an investment company if the securities represent more than 3% of the total outstanding voting stock of the acquired company, more than 5% of the total assets of the acquiring company, or, together with the securities of any other investment companies, more than 10% of the total assets of the acquiring company. Section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act prohibits a registered open-end investment company, its principal underwriter, or any other broker or dealer from selling its shares to another investment company if the sale will cause the acquiring company to own more than 3% of the acquired company's voting stock, or if the sale will cause more than 10% of the acquired company's voting stock to be owned by investment companies generally.

10. Applicants request relief to permit Investing Funds to acquire Shares in excess of the limits in section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act and to permit the Funds, their principal underwriters and any Broker to sell Shares to Investing Funds in excess of the limits in section 12(d)(l)(B) of the Act. Applicants submit that the proposed conditions to the requested relief address the concerns underlying the limits in section 12(d)(1), which include concerns about undue influence, excessive layering of fees and overly complex structures.

11. Applicants submit that their proposed conditions address any concerns regarding the potential for undue influence. To limit the control that an Investing Fund may have over a Fund, applicants propose a condition prohibiting the adviser of an Investing Management Company (“Investing Fund Advisor”), sponsor of an Investing Trust (“Sponsor”), any person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Investing Fund Advisor or Sponsor, and any investment company or issuer that would be an investment company but for sections 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act that is advised or sponsored by the Investing Fund Advisor, the Sponsor, or any person controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the Investing Fund Advisor or Sponsor (“Investing Fund's Advisory Group”) from controlling (individually or in the aggregate) a Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act. The same prohibition would apply to any sub-adviser to an Investing Management Company (“Investing Fund Sub-Advisor”), any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor, and any investment company or issuer that would be an investment company but for sections 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act (or portion of such investment company or issuer) advised or sponsored by the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor or any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor (“Investing Fund's Sub-Advisory Group”).

12. Applicants propose a condition to ensure that no Investing Fund or Investing Fund Affiliate  20 (except to the extent it is acting in its capacity as an investment adviser to a Fund) will cause a Fund to purchase a security in an offering of securities during the existence of an underwriting or selling syndicate of which a principal underwriter is an Underwriting Affiliate (“Affiliated Underwriting”). An “Underwriting Affiliate” is a principal underwriter in any underwriting or selling syndicate that is an officer, director, member of an advisory board, Investing Fund Advisor, Investing Fund Sub-Advisor, employee or Sponsor of the Investing Fund, or a person of which any such officer, director, member of an advisory board, Investing Fund Advisor, Investing Fund Sub-Advisor, employee or Sponsor is an affiliated person (except any person whose relationship to the Fund is covered by section 10(f) of the Act is not an Underwriting Affiliate).

13. Applicants propose several conditions to address the potential for layering of fees. Applicants note that the board of directors or trustees of any Investing Management Company, including a majority of the directors or trustees who are not “interested persons” within the meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the Act (“independent directors or trustees”), will be required to find that the advisory fees charged under the contract are based on services provided that will be in addition to, rather than duplicative of, services provided under the advisory contract of any Fund in which the Investing Management Company may invest. Applicants also state that any sales charges and/or service fees charged with respect to shares of an Investing Fund will not exceed the limits applicable to a fund of funds as set forth in NASD Conduct Rule 2830. 21

14. Applicants submit that the proposed arrangement will not create an overly complex fund structure. Applicants note that a Fund will be prohibited from acquiring securities of any investment company or company relying on section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act in excess of the limits contained in section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act, except to the extent permitted by exemptive relief from the Commission permitting the Fund to purchase shares of other investment companies for short-term cash management purposes.

15. To ensure that an Investing Fund is aware of the terms and conditions of the requested order, the Investing Funds must enter into an agreement with the respective Funds (“FOF Participation Agreement”). The FOF Participation Agreement will include an acknowledgement from the Investing Fund that it may rely on the order only to invest in a Fund and not in any other investment company.

16. Section 17(a) of the Act generally prohibits an affiliated person of a registered investment company, or an affiliated person of such a person (“second tier affiliate”), from selling any security to or purchasing any security from the company. Section 2(a)(3) of the Act defines “affiliated person” to include any person directly or indirectly owning, controlling, or holding with power to vote, 5% or more of the outstanding voting securities of the other person and any person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common control with, the other person. Section 2(a)(9) of the Act defines “control” as the power to exercise a controlling influence over the management or policies of a company and provides that a control relationship will be presumed where one person owns more than 25% of another person's voting securities. Each Fund may be deemed to be controlled by an Advisor and hence affiliated persons of each other. In addition, the Funds may be deemed to be under common control with any other registered investment company (or series thereof) advised by an Advisor (an “Affiliated Fund”).

17. Applicants request an exemption under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act to permit in-kind purchases and redemptions of Creation Units by persons that are affiliated persons or second tier affiliates of the Funds solely by virtue of one or more of the following: (a) Holding 5% or more, or in excess of 25% of the outstanding Shares of one or more Funds; (b) having an affiliation with a person with an ownership interest described in (a); or (c) holding 5% or more, or more than 25% of the Shares of one or more Affiliated Funds. 22 Applicants also request an exemption in order to permit a Fund to sell its Shares to and redeem its Shares from, and engage in the in-kind transactions that would accompany such sales and redemptions with, certain Investing Funds of which the Funds are affiliated persons or second-tier affiliates. 23

18. Applicants assert that no useful purpose would be served by prohibiting such affiliated persons from making in-kind purchases or in-kind redemptions of Shares of a Fund in Creation Units. Absent the unusual circumstances discussed in the application, the Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments available for a Fund will be the same for all purchasers and redeemers, respectively, and will correspond pro rata to the Fund's Portfolio Instruments. The deposit procedures for in-kind purchases of Creation Units and the redemption procedures for in-kind redemptions will be the same for all purchases and redemptions. Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments will be valued in the same manner as those Portfolio Instruments currently held by the relevant Funds, and the valuation of the Deposit Instruments and Redemption Instruments will be made in the same manner and on the same terms for all, regardless of the identity of the purchaser or redeemer. Applicants do not believe that in-kind purchases and redemptions will result in abusive self-dealing or overreaching of the Fund.

19. Applicants also submit that the sale of Shares to and redemption of Shares from an Investing Fund meets the standards for relief under sections 17(b) and 6(c) of the Act. Applicants note that any consideration paid for the purchase or redemption of Shares directly from a Fund will be based on the NAV of the Fund in accordance with policies and procedures set forth in the Fund's registration statement. 24 The FOF Participation Agreement will require any Investing Fund that purchases Creation Units directly from a Fund to represent that the purchase of Creation Units from a Fund by an Investing Fund will be accomplished in compliance with the investment restrictions of the Investing Fund and will be consistent with the investment policies set forth in the Investing Fund's registration statement. Applicants also state that the proposed transactions are consistent with the general purposes of the Act and appropriate in the public interest.

Applicants agree that any order of the Commission granting the requested relief will be subject to the following conditions:

1. As long as a Fund operates in reliance on the requested order, the Shares of the Fund will be listed on a Stock Exchange.

2. Neither the Trust nor any Fund will be advertised or marketed as an open-end investment company or a mutual fund. Any advertising material that describes the purchase or sale of Creation Units or refers to redeemability will prominently disclose that the Shares are not individually redeemable and that owners of the Shares may acquire those Shares from the Fund and tender those Shares for redemption to the Fund in Creation Units only.

3. The Web site for the Funds, which is and will be publicly accessible at no charge, will contain, on a per Share basis, for each Fund the prior Business Day's NAV and the market closing price or Bid/Ask Price, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the market closing price or Bid/Ask Price against such NAV.

4. On each Business Day, before commencement of trading in Shares on the Stock Exchange, the Fund will disclose on its Web site the identities and quantities of the Portfolio Instruments held by the Fund that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the Business Day.

5. The Advisor or any Sub-Advisor, directly or indirectly, will not cause any Authorized Participant (or any investor on whose behalf an Authorized Participant may transact with the Fund) to acquire any Deposit Instrument for the Fund through a transaction in which the Fund could not engage directly.

6. The requested relief to permit ETF operations will expire on the effective date of any Commission rule under the Act that provides relief permitting the operation of actively-managed exchange-traded funds.

1. The members of the Investing Fund's Advisory Group will not control (individually or in the aggregate) a Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act. The members of the Investing Fund's Sub-Advisory Group will not control (individually or in the aggregate) a Fund within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act. If, as a result of a decrease in the outstanding voting securities of a Fund, the Investing Fund's Advisory Group or the Investing Fund's Sub-Advisory Group, each in the aggregate, becomes a holder of more than 25 percent of the outstanding voting securities of a Fund, it will vote its Shares of the Fund in the same proportion as the vote of all other holders of the Fund's Shares. This condition does not apply to the Investing Fund's Sub-Advisory Group with respect to a Fund for which the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor or a person controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor acts as the investment adviser within the meaning of section 2(a)(20)(A) of the Act.

2. No Investing Fund or Investing Fund Affiliate will cause any existing or potential investment by the Investing Fund in a Fund to influence the terms of any services or transactions between the Investing Fund or an Investing Fund Affiliate and the Fund or a Fund Affiliate.

3. The board of directors or trustees of an Investing Management Company, including a majority of the independent directors or trustees, will adopt procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the Investing Fund Advisor and any Investing Fund Sub-Advisor are conducting the investment program of the Investing Management Company without taking into account any consideration received by the Investing Management Company or an Investing Fund Affiliate from a Fund or a Fund Affiliate in connection with any services or transactions.

4. Once an investment by an Investing Fund in the Shares of a Fund exceeds the limit in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, the Board of a Fund, including a majority of the independent directors or trustees, will determine that any consideration paid by the Fund to the Investing Fund or an Investing Fund Affiliate in connection with any services or transactions: (i) Is fair and reasonable in relation to the nature and quality of the services and benefits received by the Fund; (ii) is within the range of consideration that the Fund would be required to pay to another unaffiliated entity in connection with the same services or transactions; and (iii) does not involve overreaching on the part of any person concerned. This condition does not apply with respect to any services or transactions between a Fund and its investment adviser(s), or any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with such investment adviser(s).

5. The Investing Fund Advisor, or Trustee or Sponsor, as applicable, will waive fees otherwise payable to it by the Investing Fund in an amount at least equal to any compensation (including fees received pursuant to any plan adopted by a Fund under rule 12b-1 under the Act) received from a Fund by the Investing Fund Advisor, or Trustee or Sponsor, or an affiliated person of the Investing Fund Advisor, or Trustee or Sponsor, other than any advisory fees paid to the Investing Fund Advisor, or Trustee, or Sponsor, or its affiliated person by the Fund, in connection with the investment by the Investing Fund in the Fund. Any Investing Fund Sub-Advisor will waive fees otherwise payable to the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor, directly or indirectly, by the Investing Management Company in an amount at least equal to any compensation received from a Fund by the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor, or an affiliated person of the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor, other than any advisory fees paid to the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor or its affiliated person by the Fund, in connection with the investment by the Investing Management Company in the Fund made at the direction of the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor. In the event that the Investing Fund Sub-Advisor waives fees, the benefit of the waiver will be passed through to the Investing Management Company.

6. No Investing Fund or Investing Fund Affiliate (except to the extent it is acting in its capacity as an investment adviser to a Fund) will cause a Fund to purchase a security in an Affiliated Underwriting.

7. The Board of a Fund, including a majority of the independent directors or trustees, will adopt procedures reasonably designed to monitor any purchases of securities by the Fund in an Affiliated Underwriting, once an investment by an Investing Fund in the securities of the Fund exceeds the limit of section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, including any purchases made directly from an Underwriting Affiliate. The Board will review these purchases periodically, but no less frequently than annually, to determine whether the purchases were influenced by the investment by the Investing Fund in the Fund. The Board will consider, among other things: (i) Whether the purchases were consistent with the investment objectives and policies of the Fund; (ii) how the performance of securities purchased in an Affiliated Underwriting compares to the performance of comparable securities purchased during a comparable period of time in underwritings other than Affiliated Underwritings or to a benchmark such as a comparable market index; and (iii) whether the amount of securities purchased by the Fund in Affiliated Underwritings and the amount purchased directly from an Underwriting Affiliate have changed significantly from prior years. The Board will take any appropriate actions based on its review, including, if appropriate, the institution of procedures designed to assure that purchases of securities in Affiliated Underwritings are in the best interest of shareholders of the Fund.

8. Each Fund will maintain and preserve permanently in an easily accessible place a written copy of the procedures described in the preceding condition, and any modifications to such procedures, and will maintain and preserve for a period of not less than six years from the end of the fiscal year in which any purchase in an Affiliated Underwriting occurred, the first two years in an easily accessible place, a written record of each purchase of securities in Affiliated Underwritings once an investment by an Investing Fund in the securities of the Fund exceeds the limit of section 12(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, setting forth from whom the securities were acquired, the identity of the underwriting syndicate's members, the terms of the purchase, and the information or materials upon which the Board's determinations were made.

9. Before investing in a Fund in excess of the limits in section 12(d)(1)(A), an Investing Fund will execute a FOF Participation Agreement with the Fund stating that their respective boards of directors or trustees and their investment advisers, or Trustee and Sponsor, as applicable, understand the terms and conditions of the order, and agree to fulfill their responsibilities under the order. At the time of its investment in Shares of a Fund in excess of the limit in section 12(d)(1)(A)(i), an Investing Fund will notify the Fund of the investment. At such time, the Investing Fund will also transmit to the Fund a list of the names of each Investing Fund Affiliate and Underwriting Affiliate. The Investing Fund will notify the Fund of any changes to the list as soon as reasonably practicable after a change occurs. The Fund and the Investing Fund will maintain and preserve a copy of the order, the FOF Participation Agreement, and the list with any updated information for the duration of the investment and for a period of not less than six years thereafter, the first two years in an easily accessible place.

10. Before approving any advisory contract under section 15 of the Act, the board of directors or trustees of each Investing Management Company, including a majority of the independent directors or trustees, will find that the advisory fees charged under such contract are based on services provided that will be in addition to, rather than duplicative of, the services provided under the advisory contract(s) of any Fund in which the Investing Management Company may invest. These findings and their basis will be recorded fully in the minute books of the appropriate Investing Management Company.

11. Any sales charges and/or service fees charged with respect to shares of an Investing Fund will not exceed the limits applicable to a fund of funds as set forth in NASD Conduct Rule 2830.

12. No Fund relying on the section 12(d)(1) relief will acquire securities of any investment company or company relying on section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act in excess of the limits contained in section 12(d)(1)(A) of the Act, except to the extent permitted by exemptive relief from the Commission permitting the Fund to purchase shares of other investment companies for short-term cash management purposes.