Forest Service
Economic Development Administration
Industry and Security Bureau
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Technical Information Service
Food and Drug Administration
National Institutes of Health
Coast Guard
Fish and Wildlife Service
Indian Affairs Bureau
Land Management Bureau
National Park Service
Ocean Energy Management Bureau
Employee Benefits Security Administration
Employment and Training Administration
Copyright Royalty Board
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of enforcement of regulation.
The Coast Guard will enforce the Mark Hahn Memorial 300 PWC Endurance Race special local regulations on the waters of Lake Havasu, Arizona on February 22 through February 23, 2020. These special local regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels, and general users of the waterway. During the enforcement period, persons and vessels are prohibited from anchoring, blocking, loitering, or impeding within this regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative.
The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1102, Table 1, Item 14 will be enforced from 8 a.m. through 6 p.m., each day from February 22, 2020 through February 23, 2020.
If you have questions about this publication of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Briana Biagas, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone (619) 278-7656, email
The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulations in 33 CFR 100.1102 for the Mark Hahn Memorial 300 PWC Endurance Race on Lake Havasu, AZ in 33 CFR 100.1102, Table 1, Item 14 of that section from 8 a.m. until 6 p.m. daily, on February 22, 2020 and February, 23, 2020. This enforcement action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during the event. The Coast Guard's regulation for recurring marine events in the San Diego Captain of the Port Zone identifies the regulated entities and area for this event. Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100.1102, persons and vessels are prohibited from anchoring, blocking, loitering, or impeding within this regulated area, unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
In addition to this document in the
If the Captain of the Port Sector San Diego or his designated representative determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated on this document, he or she may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners or other communications coordinated with the event sponsor to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone over certain navigable waters of Biscayne Bay during Super Bowl 2020 events in Miami, Florida. The security zone is necessary to protect the official party, public, and surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other hazards of a similar nature. This regulation requires vessels transit through the security zone at a steady speed and not stop or anchor unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami (COTP) or a designated representative.
This rule is effective without actual notice from January 29, 2020 through February 3, 2020. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from January 26, 2020, until January 29, 2020.
To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to
If you have questions on this rule, contact Omar Beceiro, Sector Miami Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard at 305-535-4317 or by email
The City of Miami will be hosting Super Bowl LIV (54) on February 2, 2020. In addition, several venues and hotels in the City of Miami downtown area will host Super Bowl-related events during the week preceding the Super Bowl. Major event venues include Bayfront Park, Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, and JW Marriott Marquis Hotel. The Coast Guard anticipates these events will draw large crowds and present a security concern since the venues may be accessed from or are in close proximity to the Biscayne Bay waterfront. The COTP has determined the ease of waterfront access to the various venues hosting Super Bowl events present a security concern
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP has determined the ease of waterfront access to various venues hosting Super Bowl events presents a security concern for attendees and surrounding waterways. The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure security of the public, Very important persons, official party and surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other hazards of a similar nature.
As noted above, the Coast Guard received 13 comments on the NPRM during the comment period which closed on December 5, 2019. Twelve comments were in favor of the Coast Guard establishing the security zone during the week of Super Bowl activities. One comment sought to clarify whether private parties would be allowed to access the security zone before, during and after the Super Bowl. This regulation will permit private vessels to transit the security zone but not stop or anchor unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. One of the 12 supporting comments asked that affected businesses be given ample notification prior to the Coast Guard enforcing the security zone. The NPRM which published on Novermber 5, 2019, provided approximately 11 weeks notice of the security zone to potentially affected persons, vessels, and facilities. In addition, the Coast Guard will notify the local maritime community of the security zone through various means including, local notice mariners and broadcast notice to mariners issued on VHF-FM marine radio channel 16.
There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
This rule establishes a temporary security zone that will be enforced 24 hours a day beginning at 8:00 a.m. on January 26, 2020 until 8:00 a.m. on February 3, 2020. The temporary security zone would cover all navigable waters of the Intracoastal Waterway in Biscayne Bay from approximately Venetian Causeway south to and including a portion of the Miami River. The duration of the temporary security zone is intended to ensure the security of the public, executives, official party and surrounding waterway before, during, and after the various Super Bowl-related events in the Downtown area of Miami, Florida. All persons and vessels will be required to transit the security zone at a steady speed and may not slow down, stop, or anchor without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the security zone. The security zone will only affect a small area of Biscayne Bay near Bayfront Park in the Port of Miami for approximately eight days and thus is limited in time and scope. Vessels will be able to transit the security zone along the Intracoastal Waterway with the only restriction being the inability to stop or anchor within the zone. Moreover, upon activating the security zone, the Coast Guard will notify the local maritime community through various means including, Local Notice Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners issued on VHF-FM marine radio channel 16.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the security zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a temporary security zone lasting approximately eight days that would prohibit vessels from stopping or anchoring within the zone. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementing Procedures. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(a)
(1) All waters of Biscayne Bay within the following points: Beginning at Point 1 in position 25°47′13″ N, 80°11′6″ W; thence east to Point 2 in position 25°47′13″ N, 80°10′48″ W; thence south to Point 3 in position 25°46′11″ N, 80°10′48″ W; thence west to Point 4 in position 25°46′11″ N, 80°11′27″ W; thence north to Point 5 in position 25°46′15″ N, 80°11′27″ W; thence east to Point 6 in position 25°46′15″ N, 80°11′6″ W; thence back to origin at Point 1.
(b)
(c)
(2) Persons who must notify or request authorization from the COTP may do so by telephone at (305) 535-4472, or may contact a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16.
(3) If authorization to anchor, or remain within the security zone is granted by the COTP or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the COTP or the designated representative.
(d)
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing three temporary safety zones in the navigable waters of the Humboldt Bay Bar and Entrance Channel, of Eureka, CA; Noyo River Entrance Channel, of Fort Bragg, CA; and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA to safeguard navigation during extreme environmental conditions. These safety zones are established to protect the safety of vessels transiting the areas from the dangers associated with extreme breaking surf and high wind conditions occurring in the Humboldt Bay Bar and Entrance Channel, Noyo River Entrance Channel, and Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel. Unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the safety zones without permission of the Captain of the Port San Francisco or a designated representative.
This rule is effective without actual notice from January 1, 2020 through January 29, 2020. This rule is enforceable with constructive notice from January 29, 2020 until March 31, 2020.
To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to
If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Emily Rowan, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (415) 399-7443, email at
The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking with respect to this rule because it is impracticable.
On September 21, 2019, the Coast Guard was informed of forecasted extreme environmental conditions occurring near three respective locations of California likely to exceed the maximum environmental limits of the 47-foot Motor Lifeboat employed by the Coast Guard as the primary rescue asset in each area. These three locations are: The Humboldt Bay Bar and Entrance Channel, near Eureka, CA; the Noyo River Entrance Channel, near Fort Bragg, CA; and the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, near Crescent City, CA. This area is subject to extreme weather annually, but this year's forecast of extreme weather starting in September is earlier than is typical. Last year's comparable forecast of 24-foot breaking seas occurred in November, which the month when the Coast Guard has historically established temporary safety zones for these three respective locations.
Due to the consistency of extreme environmental conditions typically observed between the months of November and March each winter, the Coast Guard is seeking to establish a permanent regulation to account for the normal storm season each year. If enacted, it will cover the period from 1 November of each year through 31 March of the following year. This regulation is still working through the public rulemaking process. The Coast Guard previously issued a temporary final rule covering the period from September 25, 2019 through December 31, 2019. The affected navigable waters remain unsafe to transit during the storm season, and there is no permanent regulation in effect, so these three safety zones are necessary to provide for the safety of mariners transiting the area due to the dangers posed by extreme environmental conditions and the resulting limited availability of rescue assets.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause also exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 46 U.S.C. 70034. Notable hazards associated with the extreme environmental conditions have been observed in the Humboldt Bay Bar and Entrance Channel near Eureka, CA; the Noyo River Entrance Channel, near Fort Bragg, CA; and the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA. These safety zones establish temporary restricted areas on the navigable waters of the Humboldt Bay Bar and Entrance Channel near Eureka, CA; the Noyo River Entrance Channel, near Fort Bragg, CA; and the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA. Because dangerous sea state conditions have historically been observed from September through March, these restricted areas are necessary to mitigate the risks associated with vessels transiting the area while extreme environmental conditions exist on scene.
The Coast Guard will enforce, independent of each other, three respective safety zones in the navigable waters of the Humboldt Bay Bar and Entrance Channel near Eureka, CA; the Noyo River Entrance Channel, near Fort Bragg, CA; and the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA, when the COTP determines that the on scene conditions are hazardous and unsafe for vessel transits, typically expected to be 20-foot breaking seas at each location. Enforcement will be announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. These safety zones will continue to be effective from January 1, 2020, through March 31, 2020. These safety zones will be enforced with actual notice until this rulemaking is published in the
The effect of the temporary safety zones is to restrict navigation in the vicinity of zones while the hazardous conditions associated with extreme environmental conditions exist, and until the Coast Guard deems the safety zone is no longer needed. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted areas during times of enforcement. As used in the rule, “designated representative” means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard vessel or at a Coast Guard unit or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting the COTP in the enforcement of the safety zones. These three regulated areas are needed to keep vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the hazardous conditions associated with the forecasted extreme weather to ensure the safety of transiting vessels in each respective area.
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory
This regulatory action determination is based on the limited duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zones. Although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by the safety zones, the effect of this rule will not be significant because the local waterway users will be notified via public Broadcast Notice to Mariners to ensure the safety zones will result in minimum impact, and because the rule will be enforced only during dangerous conditions caused by extreme weather. The entities most likely to be affected are waterfront facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: Owners and operators of waterfront facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing, if these facilities or vessels are in the vicinity of the safety zones at times when the zones are being enforced. This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: (i) This rule will encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a limited period of time while hazardous conditions exist, and (ii) the maritime public will be advised in advance of this safety zones via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01 and U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Policy, COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves three safety zones which will be implemented during periods of extreme environmental conditions in Humboldt Bay Bar and Entrance Channel near Eureka, CA; the Noyo River Entrance Channel, near Fort Bragg, CA; and the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, of Crescent City, CA. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
46 U.S.C 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;
(a)
(1) All navigable waters, from surface to bottom, of the Humboldt Bay Bar Channel and the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel, of Humboldt Bay, CA,
(2) All navigable waters, from surface to bottom, of the Noyo River Entrance Channel as defined by the Area contained seaward of the Line of Demarcation with northern boundary of the line originating in approximate position 39°25′41″ N, 123°48′37″ W and extending 1200 yards at bearing 290° T, and southern boundary of the line originating in approximate position 39°25′38″ N, 123°48′36″ W and extending 1200 yards at 281° T, in Fort Bragg, CA, and
(3) All navigable waters, from surface to bottom, of the Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel, as defined by the area contained seaward of the line originating in approximate position 41°44′36″ N, 124°11′18″W bearing 237°T and extending out to 1 NM from the Line of Demarcation in Crescent City, CA.
(b)
(c)
(2) The safety zones are closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
(3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the Humboldt Bay Entrance Channel or Crescent City Harbor Entrance Channel safety zones during times of enforcement shall contact Station Humboldt Bay on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 443-2213 if contacting between 6:30 a.m. and 10 p.m., or Sector Humboldt Bay on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 839-6113 if contacting between 10 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the Noyo River Entrance Channel safety zone during times of enforcement shall contact Station Noyo River on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 964-6611 if contacting between 6:30 a.m. and 10 p.m., or Sector Humboldt Bay on VHF-FM channel 16 or at (707) 839-6113 if contacting between 10 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zones must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
(d)
(e)
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for the navigable waters within 100 yards of the North Washington Street Bridge, Charles River, Boston, Massachusetts, from February 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023. The temporary safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created during the replacement project of the North Washington Street Bridge. When enforced, this rule would prohibit vessels and persons from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Boston or a designated representative.
This rule is effective from February 1, 2020, through December 31, 2023.
To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
If you have questions about this rulemaking, call or email Mark Cutter, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Boston; telephone 617-223-4000, email
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) notified Sector Boston that there would be times in which the navigable channels underneath the North Washington Street Bridge, Charles River, Boston, Massachusetts, will need to be closed for the removal of the old bridge spans, demolition of the swing span pier foundation, construction of the abutment, and replacement of the span. The exact times are currently unknown. However, every effort is being made by MassDOT and the contractor to schedule these closures during the winter months when the Charles River is iced over or during the fall and spring when boating traffic is minimal.
In response, on September 4, 2019, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled Safety Zone, North Washington Street Bridge Replacement Project—Charles River, Boston, MA (84 FR 46498—46501). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this safety zone. During the comment period that ended on October 4, 2019,
The replacement project started in the summer of 2018 and is expected to be completed in the spring of 2023. The COTP Boston determined that the potential hazards associated with the removal of the old bridge spans, demolition of the swing span pier foundation, construction of the abutment, and replacement of the span will be a safety concern for anyone within the work area. This temporary safety zone would be enforced during the removal of the old bridge spans, demolition of the swing span pier foundation, construction of the abutment, and replacement of the span or when other hazards to navigation arise. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the temporary safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.
The Coast Guard will notify the public of closures through the Massachusetts Bay Harbor Safety Committee meetings, Boston's Port Operators Group meetings, Local Notice to Mariners, and the Massachusetts Boating & Yacht Clubs Associations network. The Coast Guard will issue a Safety Marine Information Broadcast (SMIB) via marine channel 16 (VHF-FM) seven days in advance of the commencement of the temporary safety zone.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created during the replacement project of the North Washington Street Bridge, Charles River, Boston, Massachusetts. The Coast Guard is issuing this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).
The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034. The COTP Boston and has determined that potential hazards associated with the removal of the old bridge spans, demolition of the swing span pier foundation, construction of the abutment, and replacement of the span will be a safety concern for anyone within the work area or anyone transiting within 100 yards of the North Washington Street Bridge. The purpose of this rule is to ensure the safety of vessels and personnel within 100 yards of the North Washington Street Bridge before, during, and after removal of the old bridge spans, demolition of the swing span pier foundation, construction of the abutment, and replacement of the spans, or when other hazards to navigation arise.
As noted above, we received one comment in favor of the temporary safety zone on the NPRM published September 4, 2019. The only regulatory text change in this rule is the start date is moved from December 1, 2019 to February 1, 2020. The contractor has stated that they are behind schedule and would not need the safety zone prior to February 1, 2020.
This rule establishes a safety zone from 12:01 a.m. on February 1, 2020, to 11:59 p.m. on December 31, 2023. While the safety zone would be effective throughout this period, it would only be enforced during periods when work barges and cranes will be placed in the navigable channel or when other hazards to navigation exist. Any closure is expected to last less than two weeks. The safety zone would include all navigable waters within 100 yards of the North Washington Street Bridge, Charles River, Boston, Massachusetts. During times of enforcement, no vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP Boston or a designated representative. The Coast Guard will notify the public of closures through the Massachusetts Bay Harbor Safety Committee meetings, Boston's Port Operators Group meetings, Local Notice to Mariners, and the Massachusetts Boating & Yacht Clubs Associations network. The Coast Guard will issue a Safety Marine Information Broadcast (SMIB) via marine channel 16 (VHF-FM) seven days in advance of the commencement of the temporary safety zone.
We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time of year of the safety zone. There may be a time during the boating summer season that the safety zone needs to be enforced. However, MassDOT and the contractor are making all attempts to schedule these needed closures during the winter months. We expect the adverse economic impact of this temporary rule to be minimal.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The
This rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves the establishment of a temporary safety zone for the navigable waters within 100 yards of the North Washington Street Bridge, Charles River, Boston, Massachusetts, from February 1, 2020 through December 31, 2023 for the replacement of the bridge for the replacement of the bridge. The safety zone will only be enforced during periods when work barges and cranes will be placed in the navigable channel or when other hazards to navigation arise. As discussed in our pre-construction meeting, any closure is expected to be of less than a two-week duration and all attempts are being made by MassDOT and the contractor to schedule these closures during winter months when there is no boating traffic or during the spring and fall season when boating traffic is minimal. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60 (a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and record keeping requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(1)
(2)
(d)
(1) No person or vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone without the permission of the COTP Boston or the COTP's designated representatives. However, any person or vessel permitted to enter the safety zone must comply with the directions and orders of the COTP Boston or the COTP's designated representatives.
(2) To obtain permission required by this regulation, individuals may reach the COTP Boston or a COTP-designated representative via Channel 16 (VHF-FM) or 617-223-5757 (Sector Boston Command Center).
(3)
Office of Administrative Services (OAS), General Services Administration (GSA).
Final rule.
GSA is amending the General Services Administration's regulations implementing the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The regulations are being updated to incorporate changes brought about by the amendments to FOIA under both statutory and nonstatutory authorities. Specifically, this rule amends GSA's regulations under FOIA to incorporate certain changes made to FOIA by the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016. Additionally, the regulations are being updated to reflect developments in case law, recent guidance from the Department of Justice—Office of Information Policy for processing FOIA requests, technological advancements in how the FOIA is administered, and to update the cost figures used in calculating and charging search/or review fees. Finally, the revisions to the rule increase the amount of information that members of the public may receive from the agency without being charged processing fees through proactive agency disclosures.
Mr. Travis S. Lewis, Director of GSA, OAS, Freedom of Information Act Requester Service Center, at 202-219-3078 or via email at
GSA published a proposed rule in the
The FOIA provides that any person has a right, enforceable in Federal court, to obtain access to Federal agency records, except to the extent that such records (or portions of them) are protected from public disclosure by one of nine exemptions or by one of three special law enforcement record exclusions. FOIA thus established a statutory right of public access to Executive Branch information in the Federal Government. Part 105-60 of 41 CFR establishes the policies, responsibilities, and procedures for the release of GSA records that are under the jurisdiction of GSA to members of the public. These regulations apply to information found in all GSA agency organizations and components.
This final rule revises GSA's regulations under the FOIA to address changes to the language of several procedural provisions and to incorporate certain changes brought about by the amendments to FOIA under the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 Public Law 114-185, 130 Stat. 538 (June 30, 2016).
The final rule also incorporates changes to the language and structure of the current GSA regulations enumerated in 41 CFR part 105-60 to achieve the aforementioned updates. Please note that the final rule that applies to GSA's FOIA Fee Schedule can be found in Subpart J—Fees. The revisions also increase the amount of information that members of the public may receive from the agency without being charged processing fees through proactive disclosures of agency records online in the GSA FOIA Reading Room.
The FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 provides that agencies shall allow a minimum of 90 days for requesters to file an administrative appeal. The Act also requires that agencies notify requesters of the availability of dispute resolution services at various times throughout the FOIA process. Finally, the Act codifies the “foreseeable harm” standard. Additionally, GSA's FOIA regulations are being updated to reflect developments in case law, technological changes in the administration of FOIA, executive guidance from the Department of Justice, other non-statutory authorities such as Presidential Executive Orders, including current cost figures to be used in calculating and charging fees.
GSA has reviewed the public comments in the development of the final rule. A discussion of the comments is provided as follows:
There were no significant changes as a result of the comments received.
Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under Section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
This rule is not subject to E.O. 13771, because this rule is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866.
This final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601,
This final rule is also exempt from Congressional review prescribed under 5 U.S.C. 801 since it relates solely to agency management and personnel.
This final rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
Administrative practice and procedure, Records, Information, Confidential business information, Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act.
5 U.S.C. 301 and 552; 40 U.S.C. 486(c).
This part contains the rules that the U.S. General Services Administration, hereinafter GSA, follows in processing requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. 552. The rules in this part should be read in conjunction with the text of the FOIA and the Uniform Freedom of Information Fee Schedule and Guidelines published by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB Guidelines”). Requests made by individuals for records about themselves under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, are processed in accordance with Privacy Act regulations as well as under this part.
(a) In compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), as amended 5 U.S.C. 552, a positive and continuing obligation exists for GSA to make available to the fullest extent practicable upon request by members of the public, all records and informational materials that are generated, maintained, and controlled by GSA.
(b) This subpart also covers exemptions from disclosure of these records; procedures for the public to inspect or obtain copies of GSA records.
(c) The regulations promulgated in this subpart are consistent with amendments to 5 U.S.C. 552a as well as other applicable Federal laws germane to disclosure of information to the public.
(d) This subpart applies to all GSA organizations, portfolios, business lines, regional offices and components. The aforementioned units may establish additional rules for processing FOIA requests due to unique program requirements; however, such rules shall be consistent with these rules and have the concurrence of the GSA Administrator and GSA Chief FOIA Officer.
(e) Any internal GSA policies or procedures inconsistent with the policies and procedures promulgated in this subpart are superseded by this subpart to the extent of that inconsistency.
(f) This subpart does not entitle any person to any service or to the disclosure of any GSA records that are not required to be disclosed under the FOIA.
Records that FOIA in 5 U.S. Code section 552(a)(2) requires GSA to make available for public inspection in an electronic format can be accessed via GSA's website at
(a) To make a request for GSA records, a requester shall file their request to the GSA FOIA Requester Service Center via one of the following, via the FOIAonline website: (
(b) If it is not reasonably possible for a requester to submit an electronic request via FOIAonline, the requester shall submit their request via U.S. Mail to the following address: GSA FOIA Requester Service Center (H3), Room 7308, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405. Fax: 202-501-2727. Alternatively, a FOIA requester may email its FOIA request to
(c) FOIA request description
(1) The requester shall provide the following items of contact information when submitting a request to GSA:
(i) Full name with honorific (Mr., Ms., Mrs., Dr., etc.);
(ii) Complete mailing address; and
(iii) Telephone number.
(2) This requirement is applicable to both FOIA requests submitted electronically and via U.S. mail, respectively.
(3) Although it is not a mandatory requirement, GSA also recommends the requester provide a personal/business email address for remittance as well.
(d) A requester who is making a request for records about himself or herself shall comply with the verification of identity requirements as specified in paragraph (e) of this section.
(e) Where a request for records pertains to another individual, a requester may receive access to the requested records by submitting: Either a notarized authorization signed by the individual permitting that he or she explicitly grants access to the requested records pursuant to the requirements set forth in 28 U.S.C. 1746 or by submitting proof that the individual is deceased (
(a) Requesters shall describe the records sought in sufficient detail to enable GSA personnel to locate them with a reasonable amount of effort. To the extent possible, requesters should include the following information in their FOIA request, which may help GSA identify the requested records the date/timeframe the requested information was created or occurred, title or name, author, recipient, subject matter of the record, case number, file designation, contract number, leasing identification number, or reference number and if known, the component of GSA housing the records.
(b) Before submitting a FOIA request, requesters may contact the GSA FOIA Requester Service Center or GSA FOIA Public Liaison to discuss the records they seek and to receive assistance in describing the records. If after receiving a request, GSA determines that it does not reasonably describe the records sought, GSA shall inform the requester what additional information is needed or why the request is otherwise insufficient. Requesters who are attempting to reformulate or modify such a request may discuss their request with their assigned Government Information Specialist or FOIA Public Liaison. If a request does not reasonably describe the records sought, GSA's response to the request may be delayed.
(c) In order to efficiently respond to FOIA requests within the required 20-business-day timeframe per 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(A), GSA may close an unperfected request 10 business days after GSA notifies the requester of the information needed to perfect the request. If the request does not reasonably describe the records sought, it is unperfected. A perfected FOIA request is a FOIA request for records that adequately describes the records sought, is made in accordance with GSA's regulations, has been received by the GSA FOIA Requester Service center, and for which there is no remaining question about the payment or amount of applicable fees.
(d) Requesters may specify whether they prefer to receive paper copies of the records or receive the records electronically. GSA shall accommodate the request if the record is readily reproducible in the requested form.
(a) The GSA FOIA Requester Service Center is responsible for managing all requests for records submitted to GSA from initial receipt of the FOIA request through the agency's final decision to release in whole or in part, or withhold the requested records.
(b) Upon receiving a request for records, the GSA FOIA Requester Service Center shall determine whether the requested records reside within GSA. If GSA does not have ownership of the requested records, the GSA FOIA Requester Service Center shall make a good faith effort to redirect the requester to the appropriate record location or/entity that has control and ownership of the requested record, if known.
(c) If GSA has possession of the requested records, the FOIA Requester Service Center shall work in coordination with the appropriate GSA component/or program office to fulfill the FOIA request in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552.
(a) To the extent practicable, GSA shall communicate with requesters electronically via the FOIAonline web portal and/or email.
(b) Upon receipt of a request, GSA shall send requesters an acknowledgement letter within 2 business days containing a brief description of the records sought so requesters may more easily keep track of their requests.
(c) When a request is submitted via FOIAonline, the system automatically generates a tracking number, which allows for easy identification of each request. This tracking number shall be included in the acknowledgement letter.
(d) When GSA receives a request not directly entered by the requester into FOIAonline (
(a) GSA shall provide an estimated date by which the agency expects to provide a response to the requester. If a request involves a voluminous amount of material or searches in multiple locations, GSA may provide an interim
(b) In determining which records are responsive to a request, the agency shall include only the records in its possession as of the date the agency receives the perfected FOIA request. If any other date is used, GSA shall inform the requester accordingly. A record that is excluded from the requirements of the FOIA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(c) is not considered responsive to a request.
(c) Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552, GSA is not required to perform the following in response to a FOIA request:
(1) Answer questions or interrogatories posed as FOIA requests;
(2) Issue guidance/or opinions;
(3) Analyze and/or interpret documents for a requester;
(4) Create records;
(5) Conduct research; or
(6) Initiate investigations.
(d) The GSA Administrator and GSA Chief FOIA Officer and/or their assigned delegates are authorized to grant or deny any requests for records or portions thereof that are generated, maintained, or controlled by GSA.
(a) All consultations and referrals received by GSA shall be handled according to the date the other agency received the perfected FOIA request.
(b) GSA may establish agreements with other agencies to eliminate the need for consultations or referrals with respect to particular types of records.
(c) When GSA is reviewing records located in response to a FOIA request, GSA shall determine whether another agency of the Federal Government is better able to determine if the records are releasable under the FOIA. As to any such record, GSA shall proceed in one of the following ways:
(1)
(2)
(ii) Whenever GSA refers any part of the responsibility for responding to a record request to another agency, GSA shall maintain documentation that the referral to the other agency has occurred, and shall notify the requester of the referral. The notification to the requester shall include both the name of the agency to which the record request was referred and the contact information for the agency's FOIA office/or personnel.
(iii) This referral procedure is not appropriate where disclosure of the identity of the agency to which the referral would be made could reasonably harm an interest protected by an applicable exemption, such as the exemptions that protect personal privacy or national security interests. If a non-law enforcement agency responding to a request for records on a living third party locates within its files records originating with a law enforcement agency, and if the existence of that law enforcement interest in the third party was not publicly known, then to disclose that law enforcement interest could cause an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of the third party. Similarly, if GSA locates a record that originates with an intelligence community agency, and the involvement of that agency in the matter is classified and not publicly acknowledged, then to disclose or give attribution to the involvement of that Intelligence Community agency could cause national security harms. Records meeting these criteria shall be treated as a consultation.
(iv) In such instances, in order to avoid a harm to an interest protected by an FOIA applicable exemption, GSA should coordinate with the originating agency to seek its views on the disclosability of the record. The release determination for the record that is the subject of the coordination should then be conveyed to the requester by GSA.
(4)
(ii) Whenever GSA's records contain information that has been derivatively classified (
(a) Upon receipt of perfected request via U.S. mail, email, or facsimile, the GSA FOIA Requester Service Center shall begin processing the request for records. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(A)(i), GSA has 20 business days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays) to inform the requester of the agency's determination with respect to the request for records, unless in the alternative, the agency has negotiated a different timeframe based on scope and level of effort to prepare the FOIA request response. If a requester does not receive a response to their perfected FOIA request within the statutory timeframe requester may seek judicial review in the U.S. District Court in the district in which the requester resides or has a principal place of business, or where the records are situated, or in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
(b) GSA shall to the greatest extent practicable respond to FOIA requests by order of receipt of the requests.
(c) GSA shall designate a specific track for requests that are granted expedited processing, in accordance with the standards set forth in this subpart. GSA may also designate additional processing tracks that distinguish between simple and more complex requests based on the estimated amount of work or time needed to process the request. Among the factors GSA may consider are the number of records requested, the number of pages involved in processing the request, and the need for consultations or referrals. GSA shall advise requesters of the track into which their request falls upon request, and when appropriate, offer the requester an opportunity to narrow the scope and/or modify their requests.
(d) GSA may aggregate requests in cases where it reasonably appears that multiple requests for records were submitted either by a requester or by a group of requesters acting in concert for the same, or similar information to ensure it is fulfilled in a timely manner. GSA cannot aggregate multiple requests for unrelated subject matters.
Whenever GSA cannot meet the statutory time limit for processing a request because of “unusual circumstances,” as defined at 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(A)(iii), GSA shall, before expiration of the 20-day statutory time period to respond to a request for records, notify the requester in writing of the unusual circumstances involved and of the date by which GSA estimates the processing of the request shall be completed. Where the extension of time is anticipated to exceed 10 business days, GSA shall provide the requester with an opportunity to modify the request or arrange an alternative time period for processing the original or modified request. GSA shall make available its FOIA Public Liaison for this purpose. GSA shall also alert requesters to the availability of the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) to provide dispute resolution services.
(a) A request for expedited processing may be made at any time. In order to qualify for consideration for expedited processing, the request shall reasonably describe the records sought. Expedited requests should be described in sufficient detail to facilitate expedited processing.
(b) A requester who seeks expedited processing shall submit a statement with their FOIA request, certified to be true and correct, explaining in detail the basis for making the request for expedited processing as described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section. As a matter of administrative discretion, GSA may waive the formal certification requirement.
(c) GSA may process requests and appeals on an expedited basis whenever it is determined that they involve:
(1) Circumstances in which the lack of expedited processing could reasonably be expected to pose an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual;
(2) An urgency to inform the public about an actual or alleged Federal Government activity, if made by a person who is primarily engaged in disseminating information; or
(3) The loss of substantial due process rights; or
(4) A matter of widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exist possible questions about the Government's integrity that affect public confidence.
(d) GSA shall notify the requester within 10 calendar days of its receipt of a request for expedited processing and of its decision whether to grant or deny expedited processing. If expedited processing is granted, the request shall be given priority, placed in the processing track for expedited requests, and processed as soon as practicable. If a request for expedited processing is denied, GSA shall act on any appeal of that decision within 3 business days.
(a) 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(1)-(9) of the Freedom of Information Act provides that the disclosure requirements of FOIA do not apply to matters that are:
(1) Specifically authorized under the criteria established by an executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and are in fact properly classified pursuant to such executive order (see Executive Order No. 13,526);
(2) Related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency;
(3) Specifically exempted from disclosure by statute other than 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(1)-(9), provided that such statute:
(i) Requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue;
(ii) Establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be withheld;
(4) Trade secrets and commercial or financial information that could harm the competitive posture or business interests of a company;
(5) Interagency or intra-agency memorandums or letters that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency, provided that the deliberative process privilege shall not apply to records created 25 years or more before the date on which the records were requested;
(6) Personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
(7) Records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information:
(i) Could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings;
(ii) Would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication;
(iii) Could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
(iv) Reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution that furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source;
(v) Would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law; or
(vi) Could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual;
(8) Contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions; or
(9) Geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells.
(b) GSA will provide any reasonably segregable portion of a record to a requester after redacting the portions of the requested records that are exempt under this section.
(a) Once GSA determines that it shall grant a request in full or in part, the requester shall be notified of the decision in writing as well. GSA shall also inform the requester of any fees charged under § 105-60.804 of this part and shall disclose the requested records to the requester promptly upon payment of any applicable fees. The agency shall inform the requester of the availability of its FOIA Public Liaison to offer assistance.
(b) If GSA makes an adverse determination on any part of the FOIA request, it shall notify the requester of that determination in writing. Adverse determinations, or denials of requests, include determinations that:
(1) The requested record is exempt from disclosure, in whole or in part;
(2) The FOIA request does not reasonably describe the records sought;
(3) The information requested is not subject to FOIA;
(4) The requested record does not exist, cannot be located, or has been destroyed; or
(5) The requested record is not readily reproducible in the form or format sought by the requester.
(c) Records disclosed in part in response to a FOIA request shall be marked clearly to show the exemption under which the applicable portions of the responsive records were redacted unless doing so would harm an interest protected by an applicable exemption.
(d) Adverse determinations also include denials involving fee waiver requests, denials for expedited processing, and the administrative closure of FOIA requests due to nonpayment of search and review fees for processing the FOIA request.
(e) Any adverse determination of a FOIA request, in full or in part, shall be signed by the Chief FOIA Officer or his or her designee and shall include:
(1) The name and title or position of the person responsible for the adverse determination;
(2) A brief statement of the reasons for the adverse determination, including any FOIA exemption that is the basis for GSA's decision;
(3) An estimate of the volume of any records or information withheld, such as the number of pages or some other reasonable form of estimation, although such an estimate is not required if the volume is otherwise indicated by deletions marked on records that are disclosed in part or if providing an estimate would harm an interest protected by an applicable exemption; and
(4) A statement that the denial may be appealed under subpart I of this part, and a description of the appeal requirements.
(5) A statement notifying the requester of the assistance available from the agency's FOIA Public Liaison and the dispute resolution services offered by OGIS.
(f) Use of record exclusions pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(c):
(1) In the event that GSA identifies records that may be subject to exclusion from the requirements of the FOIA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(c), GSA shall confer with Department of Justice, Office of Information Policy (OIP), to obtain approval to apply the exclusion.
(2) If GSA invokes an exclusion, it shall maintain an administrative record of the process of invocation and approval of the exclusion by OIP.
(a) Confidential commercial information means commercial or financial information obtained by GSA from a submitter that may be protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4).
(b) Submitter means any person or entity, including a corporation, State, or foreign government, but not including another Federal Government entity, that provides confidential commercial information, either directly or indirectly to the Federal Government.
(c) A submitter of confidential commercial information shall use good faith efforts to designate by appropriate markings/or redact any portion of its submission that it considers to be protected from disclosure under Exemption 4. These designations expire 10 years after the date of the submission unless the submitter requests and provides justification for a longer designation period.
(d) When notice to submitters is required:
(1) GSA shall promptly provide written notice to the submitter of confidential commercial information whenever records containing such information are requested under the FOIA if GSA determines that it may be required to disclose the records, provided:
(i) The requested information has been designated in good faith by the submitter as information considered protected from disclosure under Exemption 4; or
(ii) GSA has a reason to believe that the requested information may be protected from disclosure under Exemption 4, but has not yet determined whether the information is protected from disclosure.
(2) The notice shall either describe the commercial information requested or include a copy of the requested records or portions of records containing the information. In cases involving a voluminous number of submitters, GSA may post or publish a notice in a place or manner reasonably likely to inform the submitters of the proposed disclosure, instead of sending individual notifications.
(e) The notice requirements of this section do not apply if:
(1) GSA determines that the information is exempt under the FOIA, and therefore shall not be disclosed;
(2) The information has been lawfully published or has been officially made available to the public;
(3) Disclosure of the information is required by a statute other than FOIA or by a regulation issued in accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 12,600 of June 23, 1987; or
(4) The designation made by the submitter under paragraph (c) of this section appears obviously frivolous. In such a case, GSA shall give the submitter written notice of any final decision to disclose the information within reasonable time prior to a specified disclosure date.
(a) GSA shall provide a submitter with 10 business days, within which the submitter shall respond to the notice referenced in § 105-60.600.
(b) If a submitter has any objections to disclosure, it should provide GSA a detailed written statement that specifies all grounds for withholding the particular information under any exemption of the FOIA. In order to rely on Exemption 4 as the basis for nondisclosure, the submitter shall explain why the information constitutes a trade secret or commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential and the harm of the release of the information to the submitter.
(c) A submitter who fails to respond within the time period specified in the notice shall be considered to have no objection to disclosure of the information.
(d) GSA is not required to consider any information received after the date of any disclosure decision. Any information provided by a submitter under this subpart may itself be subject to disclosure under the FOIA.
(e) GSA shall consider a submitter's objections and specific grounds for nondisclosure in deciding whether to disclose the requested information.
(f) Whenever GSA decides to disclose information over the objection of a submitter, the agency shall provide the submitter written notice, which shall include:
(1) A statement of the reasons why each of the submitter's disclosure objections was not sustained;
(2) A description of the information to be disclosed or copies of the records as the agency intends to release them; and
(3) The specified disclosure date.
(g) Whenever a requester files a lawsuit seeking to compel the disclosure of confidential commercial information, GSA shall promptly notify the submitter.
(h) GSA shall notify the requester whenever it provides the submitter with notice and an opportunity to object to disclosure; whenever it notifies the submitter of its intent to disclose the requested information; and whenever a submitter files a lawsuit to prevent the disclosure of the information.
(a) A requester may appeal any adverse determination (denial of access to records, denial of fee waiver, or
(b) The appeal shall include:
(1) The FOIAonline tracking number;
(2) The basis for disagreement with GSA's adverse determination that is being appealed; and
(3) A brief statement of the reasons he or she thinks GSA should release the records or provide expedited processing and enclose copies of the initial request and denial.
(c) The requester may submit the appeal electronically to
(d) The GSA FOIA Officer must receive the requester's appeal no later than 90 calendar days after receipt by the requester of any adverse determination by GSA with respect to the FOIA request. GSA has 20 business days after receipt of a proper appeal to issue a response to the requester's appeal. The 20-workday time limit shall not begin until the GSA FOIA Officer receives the appeal. As noted in § 105.60.305 of this part, the GSA FOIA Officer may extend this time limit in unusual circumstances. GSA will process appeals of denials of expedited processing as soon as possible after receiving them. The GSA FOIA Officer may also extend the time limit in the event of unusual circumstances occur during the processing of appeals as well.
(a) The GSA Chief FOIA Officer or his or her designee shall act on behalf of GSA on all appeals under this section.
(b) An appeal ordinarily shall not be adjudicated if the request that is the subject of the appeal becomes a matter of FOIA litigation. GSA shall administratively close the appeal if it becomes the subject of litigation and provide this notice to the requester in writing that the request has been administratively closed.
(c) On receipt of any appeal involving classified information, GSA shall take appropriate action to ensure compliance with applicable classification rules.
(d) GSA shall provide its review and decision on any appeal in writing. Any decision that either upholds GSA's original determination in whole or in part shall contain a statement that identifies the reasons for the affirmance, including any FOIA exemptions applied.
(e) If GSA's decision is remanded or modified on appeal, GSA shall notify the requester of that determination in writing. GSA shall then further process the request in accordance with that appeal determination and shall respond directly to the requester. If GSA affirms its original decision after timely receipt of an appeal, GSA shall inform the requester via writing as well. GSA shall inform the requester of their right to seek judicial review in the U.S. District Court in the district in which the requester resides or has a principal place of business, or where the records are situated, or in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. GSA shall also inform the requester of the mediation services offered by the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) as a non-exclusive alternative to litigation.
(f) Engaging in dispute resolution or mediation services provided by OGIS is a voluntary process. Mediation is a voluntary process. If GSA agrees to participate in the mediation services provided by OGIS, it will actively engage as a partner to the process in an attempt to resolve the dispute.
GSA shall preserve all correspondence pertaining to the requests that it receives under this subpart, as well as copies of all requested records, until disposition or destruction is authorized pursuant to title 44 of the United States Code or the General Records Schedule 4.2 of the NARA. GSA shall not dispose of or destroy records while they are the subject of a pending request, appeal, or lawsuit under FOIA.
(a) GSA shall charge for processing requests under the FOIA in accordance with the provisions of this section and with OMB Guidelines. For purposes of assessing fees, FOIA establishes three categories of requesters:
(1) Commercial use requesters;
(2) Noncommercial scientific or educational institutions or news media requesters; and
(3) All other requesters.
(b) Fees are assessed depending on the category GSA determines the requester falls under in subpart A of this part. Requesters may seek a fee waiver. GSA shall consider requests for fee waiver in accordance with the requirements in § 105-60.807 of this subpart. To resolve any fee issues that arise under this section, GSA may contact a requester for additional information. GSA shall ensure that searches, review, and duplication of FOIA records are conducted in the most efficient and the least expensive manner.
(c) GSA shall collect all applicable fees before sending copies of records to a requester. Requesters pay fees by check, credit card, or money order made payable to the U.S. General Services Administration, or by another method as determined by GSA.
(a) A commercial use request is a request that asks for information that furthers a commercial, trade, or profit interest, which can include furthering those interests through litigation. GSA's decision to place a requester in the commercial use category shall be made on a case-by-case basis and is based on the requester's intended use of the information. GSA shall notify requesters of their placement in this category.
(b) Direct costs are those expenses that GSA incurs in searching for and duplicating (and, in the case of commercial use requests, reviewing) records in order to respond to a FOIA request. For example, direct costs include the salary of the employee performing the work (
(c) Duplication is reproducing a record to respond to a FOIA request. Duplicating records can occur via paper, audiovisual materials or electronic records.
(d) An educational institution is any school that operates a program of scholarly research. A requester in this fee category shall show that the request is made in connection with his or her role at the educational institution. Agencies may seek verification from the requester that the request is in furtherance of scholarly research.
(e) A noncommercial scientific institution is an institution that is not operated on a commercial basis. The term `commercial' for purposes of this subpart is that which is defined in paragraph (a) of this section and that is operated solely for the purpose of conducting scientific research the results of which are not intended to promote any particular product or industry. A requester in this category shall show that the request is authorized by a qualifying noncommercial institution, or educational institution of vocational and higher learning and where the records are sought to further scientific, or academic scholarly research, and are not for a commercial use. GSA shall advise requesters of their placement in this category.
(f) Representative of the news media is any person or entity that gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience. The term “news” means information that is about current events or that would be of current interest to the public. Examples of news media entities include television or radio stations that broadcast “news” to the public at large and publishers of periodicals that disseminate “news” and make their products available through a variety of means to the general public, including news organizations that disseminate solely on the internet. A request for records supporting the news-dissemination function of the requester shall not be considered to be for a commercial use. “Freelance” journalists who demonstrate a solid basis for expecting publication through a news media entity shall be considered as a representative of the news media. A publishing contract would provide the clearest evidence that publication is expected; however, GSA can also consider a requester's past publication record in making this determination. GSA shall advise requesters of their placement in this category.
(g) Review is the examination of a record located in response to a request in order to determine whether any portion of it is exempt from disclosure. Review time includes the process of reviewing each individual record for possible redactions and marking the appropriate exemptions. Review costs are properly charged even if a record ultimately is not disclosed. Review time also includes time spent both obtaining and considering any formal objection to disclosure made by a confidential commercial information submitter under § 105-60.601 of this part. It does not include time spent resolving general legal or policy issues regarding the application of exemptions.
(h) Search is the process of looking for and retrieving records or information responsive to a request. Search time includes page-by-page or line-by-line identification of information within records and the reasonable efforts expended to locate and retrieve information from electronic records.
In responding to FOIA requests, GSA shall charge the following fees unless a waiver or reduction of fees has been granted under § 105-60.807 of this subpart. Because the fee amounts provided below already account for the direct costs associated with a given fee type, GSA shall not add any additional costs to charges calculated under this section.
(a)
(2) For each half hour (30 minutes) spent by GSA personnel searching for requested records, including electronic searches that do not require new programming, a $24.50 fee shall be assessed per the guidelines of the fee schedule enumerated in § 105-60.804 of this subpart.
(3) GSA shall charge the direct costs associated with conducting any search that requires the creation of a new computer program to locate the requested records. GSA shall notify the requester of the costs associated with creating such a program, and the requester shall agree to pay the associated costs before the costs may be incurred.
(4) For requests that require the retrieval of records stored by GSA at a Federal records center operated by the NARA, GSA shall charge additional costs in accordance with the Transactional Billing Rate Schedule established by NARA.
(b)
(2) Where paper documents shall be scanned in order to comply with a requester's preference to receive the records in an electronic format, the requester shall also pay the direct costs associated with scanning those materials. For other forms of duplication, GSA shall charge the direct costs.
(3) GSA determines the standard fee for duplication of records as follows:
(i) Per copy of each page (not larger than 8.5 x 14 inches) reproduced by photocopy or similar means (includes costs of personnel and equipment)—U.S. $0.10.
(ii) Per copy prepared by any other method of duplication—actual direct cost of production.
(c)
(a) When GSA determines that a requester is an educational institution, noncommercial scientific institution, or representative of the news media, and that the records are not sought for commercial use, GSA shall not charge search fees.
(b) If GSA fails to comply with the time limits in which to respond to a request for agency records under FOIA, it will not charge search fees, or in the instances of requests from requesters described in paragraph (a) of this section, may not charge duplication fees, except as described in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section. GSA will charge duplication fees in accordance with § 105-60.802(b)(1) through (3) of this subpart.
(1) If GSA has determined that unusual circumstances, as defined by FOIA, apply and the agency provided timely written notice to the requester in accordance with FOIA, a failure to comply with the time limit shall be excused for an additional 10 business days.
(2) If GSA has determined that unusual circumstances, as defined by the FOIA, apply and that more than 5,000 pages are necessary to respond to the request, GSA may charge search fees, or, in the case of requesters described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, may charge duplication fees, if the following steps are taken. GSA shall have provided timely written notice of unusual circumstances to the requester in accordance with FOIA and GSA shall have discussed with the requester via written mail, email, or telephone (or made not less than three good-faith attempts to do so) how the requester could effectively limit the scope of the request in accordance with 5. U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(B)(ii). If this exception is satisfied, the component may charge all applicable fees incurred in the processing of the request.
(3) If a court has determined that exceptional circumstances exist, as defined by FOIA, a failure to comply with the time limits shall be excused for the length of time provided by the court order.
(c) No search or review fees shall be charged for a half-hour period unless more than half of that period is required for search or review.
(d) Except for requesters seeking records for a commercial use, GSA shall provide without charge:
(1) The first 100 pages of duplication (or the cost equivalent for other media); and
(2) The first 2 hours of search time.
(e) No fee shall be charged when the total fee, after deducting the 100 free pages (or its cost equivalent) and the first 2 hours of search, is equal to or less than $49.00.
Table 1 to § 105-60.804 outlines the basic fee categories and applicable fees:
GSA's calculated hourly rate for manual search, computer operator/programmer time, and employee time spent reviewing records is set at a flat rate of 49.00 per hour. GSA charges for these FOIA services by the hour at $49.00 and half hour at $24.50.
The fee schedule of this section does not apply to fees charged under any statute that specifically requires GSA to set and collect fees for particular types of records. In instances where records responsive to a request are subject to a statutorily based fee schedule program, GSA shall inform the requester of the contact information for that program.
If GSA utilizes a contractor or agency personnel outside of the FOIA Requester Service Center to perform any services described in this subpart, the standard fee is based on the equivalent hourly rates.
(a) When GSA determines or estimates that the fees to be assessed in accordance with this section shall exceed $49.00, the agency shall notify the requester of the actual or estimated amount of the fees, including a breakdown of the fees for search, review or duplication, unless the requester has indicated a willingness to pay fees as high as those anticipated via writing. If only a portion of the fee can be estimated readily, GSA shall advise the requester accordingly. If the request is not for noncommercial use, the notice shall specify that the requester is entitled to the statutory entitlements of 100 pages of duplication at no charge and, if the requester is charged search fees, 2 hours of search time at no charge, and shall advise the requester whether those entitlements have been provided.
(b) If GSA notifies the requester that the actual or estimated fees are in excess of $49.00, the request shall not be considered received and further work shall not be completed until the requester commits in writing to pay the actual or estimated total fee, or designates some amount of fees the requester is willing to pay. Or in the case of a noncommercial use requester who has not yet been provided with the requester's statutory entitlements, designates that the requester seeks only that which can be provided by the statutory entitlements. The requester shall provide the commitment/or designate an exact dollar amount in writing the requester is willing to pay.
(c) If the requester has indicated a willingness to pay some designated amount of fees, but the agency estimates that the total fee shall exceed that amount, GSA shall toll the processing of the request when it notifies the requester of the estimated fees in excess of the amount the requester has indicated a willingness to pay. GSA shall inquire whether the requester wishes to revise the amount of fees the requester is willing to pay or modify the request. Once the requester submits the new estimated fee, the time to respond shall resume from where it was at the date of the notification.
(d) GSA's FOIA Public Liaison and other FOIA professionals shall be available to assist any requester in reformulating a request to meet the requester's needs at a lower cost.
(e) Although not required to provide special services, if GSA chooses to do so as a matter of administrative discretion, the direct costs of providing the service shall be charged. Examples of such services include certifying that records are true copies, providing multiple copies of the same document, or sending records by means other than first class mail.
(f) GSA may charge interest on any unpaid bill starting on the 31st day following the date the requester is first billed. Interest charges shall be assessed at the rate provided in 31 U.S.C. 3717 and shall accrue from the billing date until payment is received by the agency. GSA shall follow the provisions of the Debt Collection Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-365, 96 Stat. 1749), as amended, and its administrative procedures, including the use of consumer reporting agencies, collection agencies, and offset.
(g) When GSA reasonably believes that a requester or a group of requesters acting in concert are attempting to divide a single request into a series of requests for the purpose of avoiding fees, GSA may aggregate those requests and charge accordingly. GSA may presume that multiple requests of this type made within a 30-day period have been made in order to avoid fees. For requests separated by a longer period, GSA shall aggregate them only where there is a reasonable basis for determining that aggregation is warranted in view of all the circumstances involved. Multiple requests involving unrelated matters cannot be aggregated.
(a) For requests other than those described in this subpart, GSA cannot require the requester to make an advance payment before work is commenced or continued on a request. Payment owed for work already completed (
(b) When GSA determines or estimates that a total fee to be charged under this section shall exceed $250.00, it may require that the requester make an advance payment up to the amount of the entire anticipated fee before beginning to process the request. GSA may elect to process the request prior to collecting fees when it receives a satisfactory assurance of full payment from a requester with a history of prompt payment.
(c) Where a requester has previously failed to pay a properly charged FOIA fee to GSA within 30 calendar days of the billing date, GSA may require that the delinquent requester pay the full amount due, plus any applicable interest on that prior request, and require that the requester make an advance payment of the full amount of any anticipated fee before the agency begins to process a new request or continues to process a pending request or any pending appeal. If GSA has a reasonable basis to believe that a requester has misrepresented the requester's identity in order to avoid paying outstanding fees, it may require that the requester provide proof of identity.
(d) In cases in which GSA requires advance payment, the request shall not be considered received and further work shall not be completed until the required payment is received. If the requester does not pay the advance payment within 10 business days after the date of GSA's fee determination, the request shall be closed.
(a) Requests for a fee waiver shall be made when the FOIA request is first submitted to the agency and should address the criteria referenced above. A requester may submit a fee waiver request at a later time so long as the underlying record request is pending or being reviewed per an appeal. When a requester who has committed to pay fees subsequently asks for a waiver of those fees and that waiver is denied, the requester shall pay any costs incurred up to the date the fee waiver request was received.
(b) Requirements for waiver or reduction of fees:
(1) Requesters may seek a waiver of fees by submitting a written rationale as to how disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the Government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester; and
(2) GSA shall furnish records responsive to a request without charge or at a reduced rate when it determines, based on all available information, that the factors described in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section are satisfied:
(i) Disclosure of the requested information would shed light on the operations or activities of the Government. The subject of the request shall concern identifiable operations or activities of the Federal Government with a connection that is direct and clear, not remote or attenuated; and
(ii) Disclosure of the requested information is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of those operations or activities. This factor is satisfied when the following criteria are met; and
(A) Disclosure of the requested records shall be meaningfully informative about Government operations or activities. The disclosure of information that already is in the public domain, in either the same or a substantially identical form, would not be meaningfully informative if nothing new would be added to the public's understanding.
(B) The disclosure shall contribute to the understanding of a reasonably broad audience of persons interested in the subject, as opposed to the individual understanding of the requester. A requester's expertise in the subject area as well as the requester's ability and intention to effectively convey information to the public shall be considered. GSA shall presume that a representative of the news media shall satisfy this consideration;
(iii) The disclosure shall not be primarily in the commercial interest of the requester. To determine whether disclosure of the requested information is primarily in the commercial interest of the requester, GSA shall consider the following criteria:
(A) GSA shall identify whether the requester has any commercial interest that would be furthered by the requested disclosure. A commercial interest includes any commercial, trade, or profit interest. Requesters shall be given an opportunity to provide explanatory information regarding this consideration.
(B) If there is an identified commercial interest, GSA shall determine whether that is the primary interest furthered by the request. A
(c) Where only some of the records to be released satisfy the requirements for a fee waiver, a waiver shall be granted for those records.
Nothing in this subpart shall be construed to entitle any person, as of right, to any service or to the disclosure of any record to which such person is not entitled under the FOIA.
Federal Communications Commission.
Final action; requirements and procedures.
This document summarizes public notices that announce the procedures and upfront payments amounts and minimum opening bids for the auction of certain FM broadcast construction permits as well as a temporary freeze on the filing of minor change applications for FM stations. The
Applications to participate in Auction 106 must be submitted before 6 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on February 11, 2020. FM commercial and noncommercial educational minor change applications may not be filed during a period starting on January 29, 2020, and ending on February 11, 2020. Upfront payments for Auction 106 must be received by 6 p.m. ET on March 20, 2020. Bidding in Auction 106 is scheduled to start on April 28, 2020.
For auction legal questions, Lynne Milne or Daniel Habif in the OEA Auctions Division at (202) 418-0660. For general auction questions, the Auction Hotline at (717) 338-2868. For FM Broadcast service questions, Lisa Scanlan, Thomas Nessinger, or James Bradshaw in the MB Audio Division at (202) 418-2700. To request materials in accessible formats (Braille, large print, electronic files, or audio format) for people with disabilities, send an email to
This is a summary of the
1.
2. The set of construction permits listed in Attachment A of the
3. Pursuant to the policies established in the
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. The terms contained in the Commission's rules, relevant orders, and public notices are not negotiable. The Commission may amend or supplement the information contained in its public notices at any time, and will issue public notices to convey any new or supplemental information to applicants. It is the responsibility of all applicants to remain current with all Commission rules and with all public notices pertaining to this auction. Copies of most auctions-related Commission documents, including public notices, can be retrieved from the FCC Auctions internet site at
9.
10. If an applicant claims eligibility for a bidding credit, the information provided in its FCC Form 175 will be used to determine whether the applicant is eligible for the claimed bidding credit. Applicants filing a short-form application are subject to the Commission's rules against prohibited communications beginning at the deadline for filing.
11. An applicant bears full responsibility for submitting an accurate, complete and timely short-form application. Each applicant must certify on its FCC Form 175 under penalty of perjury that it is legally, technically, financially and otherwise qualified to hold a license. Each applicant should read carefully the instructions set forth in Attachment B to the
12. Each applicant should note that submission of a short-form application (and any amendments thereto) constitutes a representation by the certifying official that he or she is an authorized representative of the applicant, that he or she has read the form's instructions and certifications, and that the contents of the application, its certifications, and any attachments are true and correct. Applicants are not permitted to make major modifications to their applications; such impermissible changes include a change of the certifying official to the application. Submission of a false certification to the Commission may result in penalties, including monetary forfeitures, license forfeitures, ineligibility to participate in future auctions, and/or criminal prosecution.
13. Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.2105(a)(3), the same party may not bid on more than one auction application,
14. Consistent with the Commission's general prohibition of joint bidding agreements, a party is generally permitted to participate in a Commission auction only through a single bidding entity. Accordingly, the filing of applications in Auction 106 by multiple entities controlled by the same individual or set of individuals will generally not be permitted.
15. An applicant should consult the Commission's rules to ensure that all required information is included in its short-form application. To the extent the information in the
16.
17.
18.
19. The Commission's rules generally prohibit joint bidding and other arrangements involving auction applicants (including any party that controls or is controlled by, such applicants). For purposes of the prohibition on joint bidding arrangements, joint bidding arrangements include arrangements relating to the permits being auctioned that address or communicate, directly or indirectly, bidding at the auction, bidding strategies, including arrangements regarding price or the specific permits on which to bid, and any such arrangements relating to the post-auction market structure.
20. To implement the prohibition on joint bidding arrangements, 47 CFR 1.2105(a)(2)(viii)-(ix) require each auction applicant to certify in its short-form application that it has disclosed any arrangements or understandings of any kind relating to the licenses being auctioned to which it (or any party that controls or is controlled by it) is a party. The applicant must also certify that it (or any party that controls or is controlled by it) has not entered and will not enter into any arrangement or understanding of any kind relating directly or indirectly to bidding at auction with, among others, any other applicant.
21. Although the Commission's rules do not prohibit auction applicants from communicating about matters that are within the scope of an agreement excepted pursuant to 47 CFR 1.2105(a)(2)(ix)(A)-(C) and that has been disclosed in an FCC Form 175,certain discussions or exchanges could nonetheless touch upon impermissible subject matters, and compliance with the Commission's rules will not insulate a party from enforcement of the antitrust laws.
22. A winning bidder will be required to disclose in its long-form application (FCC Form 2100, Schedule 301-FM) following the close of the auction the specific terms, conditions and parties involved in any agreement relating to the permits or licenses being auctioned into which it had entered prior to the time bidding closed. This applies to any joint venture, partnership, or other agreement, arrangement, or understanding of any kind entered into relating to the competitive bidding process, including any agreements relating to the permits being auctioned that address or communicate directly or indirectly bids (including specific prices), bidding strategies (including the specific permits on which to bid or not to bid), or the post-auction market structure, to which the applicant, or any party that controls or is controlled by the applicant, is a party.
23.
24. In certain circumstances, an applicant may have previously filed an FCC Form 175 for a previous auction or an FCC Form 602 in which ownership information was disclosed. The most current ownership information contained in any previous FCC Form 175 or FCC Form 602 on file with the Commission that used the same FRN the applicant is using to submit its FCC Form 175 in this auction will automatically be pre-filled into certain ownership sections on the applicant's FCC Form 175, if such information is in an electronic format compatible with FCC Form 175. Each applicant must carefully review any ownership information automatically entered into its FCC Form 175, including any ownership attachments, to confirm that all information supplied on its FCC Form 175 is complete and accurate as of the application filing deadline in this auction. Any information that needs to be corrected or updated must be changed directly in the FCC Form 175 for this auction.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29. The prohibition against communicating in any manner includes public disclosures as well as private communications and indirect or implicit communications. Consequently, an applicant must take care to determine whether its auction-related communication may reach another applicant. Applicants must determine whether their communications with other parties are permissible under the rule once the prohibition begins at the deadline for submitting applications, even before the public notice identifying applicants is released.
30. Parties subject to section 1.2105(c) should take special care in circumstances where their officers, directors, and employees may receive information directly or indirectly relating to any applicant's bids or bidding strategies. Such information may be deemed to have been received by the applicant under certain circumstances. For example, Commission staff have determined that, where an individual serves as an officer and director for two or more applicants, the bids and bidding strategies of one applicant are presumed conveyed to the other applicant through the shared officer or director, which creates an apparent violation of the rule.
31. Section 1.2105(c)(1) prohibits applicants from communicating with specified other parties only with respect to their own, or each other's, or any other applicant's bids or bidding strategies. Moreover, a communication conveying bids or bidding strategies (including post-auction market structure) must also relate to the licenses being auctioned to be covered by the prohibition. Thus, the prohibition is limited in scope and does not apply to all communications between or among the specified parties. The Commission consistently has made clear that application of the rule prohibiting communications has never required total suspension of essential ongoing business. Entities subject to the prohibition may negotiate agreements during the prohibition period, provided that the communications involved do not relate both (1) to the construction permits or licenses being auctioned and (2) to bids or bidding strategies or post-auction market structure.
32. Business discussions and negotiations that are unrelated to bidding in Auction 106 and that do not convey information about the bids or bidding strategies of an applicant, including the post-auction market structure, are not prohibited by the rule. While section 1.2105(c) does not prohibit business discussions and negotiations among auction applicants that are not auction related, each applicant must remain vigilant not to communicate, directly or indirectly, information that affects, or could affect, bids or bidding strategies. Certain discussions might touch upon subject matters that could convey price or geographic information related to bidding strategies. Such subject areas include, but are not limited to, management, sales, local marketing agreements, and other transactional agreements.
33.
34. In the case of an individual, the objective precautionary measure of a firewall is not available. As a result, an individual that is privy to bids or bidding information of more than one applicant presents a greater risk of becoming a conduit for a prohibited communication. Whether a prohibited communication has taken place in a given case will depend on all the facts pertaining to the case, including who possessed what information, what information was conveyed to whom, and the course of bidding in the auction.
35. Potential applicants may discuss the short-form application or bids for specific permits with their counsel, consultant, or expert of their choice before the short-form application deadline. Furthermore, the same third-party individual could continue to give advice regarding the application after the short-form application deadline, provided that no information pertaining to bids or bidding strategies is conveyed to that individual. To the extent potential applicants can develop bidding instructions prior to the short-form deadline that a third party could implement without changes during bidding, the third party could follow such instructions for multiple applicants provided that those applicants do not communicate with the third party during the prohibition period.
36. Applicants should use caution in their dealings with other parties, such as members of the press, financial analysts, or others who might become conduits for the communication of prohibited bidding information. For example, an
37.
38.
39.
40. A party reporting any communication pursuant to sections 1.65, 1.2105(a)(2), or 1.2105(c)(4) must take care to ensure that any report of a prohibited communication does not itself give rise to a violation of section 1.2105(c). For example, a party's report of a prohibited communication could violate the rule by communicating prohibited information to other applicants through the use of Commission filing procedures that would allow such materials to be made available for public inspection such as submission through the FCC Office of the Secretary or ECFS. A party seeking to report such a prohibited communication should consider submitting its report with a request that the report or portions of the submission be withheld from public inspection by following the procedures specified in 47 CFR 0.459. Such parties also are encouraged to coordinate with the Auctions Division staff about the procedures for submitting such reports.
41.
42.
43. Applicants that qualify for the new entrant bidding credit, as specified in 47 CFR 73.5007, are eligible for a bidding credit in this auction that represents the amount by which a bidder's winning bid is discounted. The size of the new entrant bidding credit depends on the number of ownership interests in other media of mass communications that are attributable to the bidder entity and its attributable interest-holders. A 35% bidding credit will be given to a winner if it, and/or any individual or entity with an attributable interest in the winning bidder, has no attributable interest in any other media of mass communications, as defined in section 73.5008. A 25% bidding credit will be given to a winning bidder if it, and/or any individual or entity with an attributable interest in the winning bidder, has an attributable interest in no more than three mass media facilities, as defined in section 73.5008. No bidding credit will be given if any of the commonly owned mass media facilities serve the same area as the broadcast permit proposed in the auction, as defined in section 73.5007(b), or if the winning bidder, and/or any individual or entity with an attributable interest in the winning bidder, has attributable interests in more than three mass media facilities. For purposes of determining whether a broadcast permit offered in this auction is in the same area as an applicant's existing mass media facilities, the coverage area of the to-be-auctioned facility is calculated using maximum class facilities at the allotment reference coordinates, not any applicant-specified preferred site coordinates. Bidding credits are not cumulative; qualifying applicants receive either the 25% or the 35% bidding credit, but not both. The interests of the applicant, and of any individuals or entities with an attributable interest in the applicant, in other media of mass communications are considered when determining an applicant's eligibility for the New Entrant Bidding Credit. Attributable interests are defined in section 73.3555 and note 2 of that section. In Auction 106, the bidder's attributable interests and, thus, its maximum new entrant bidding credit eligibility are determined as of the short-form application filing deadline. Events occurring after the short-form application filing deadline, such as the acquisition of attributable interests in media of mass communications, may cause diminishment or loss of the bidding credit, and must be reported immediately, specifically no later than five business days after the change occurs. Each applicant has a duty to continuously maintain the accuracy of information submitted in its auction application.
44. An applicant intending to divest a media interest or make any other ownership change, such as resignation of positional interests (officer or director), in order to avoid attribution
45. Under broadcast attribution rules, those entities or individuals with an attributable interest in a bidder include: All officers and directors of a corporate bidder; any owner of 5% or more of voting stock of a corporate bidder; all partners and limited partners of a partnership bidder, unless the limited partners are sufficiently insulated; and all members of a limited liability company, unless sufficiently insulated.
46. In cases where an applicant's spouse or close family member holds other media interests, such interests are not automatically attributable to the bidder. The Commission decides attribution issues in this context based on certain factors traditionally considered relevant. See
47. In the
48. In the
49. Generally, media interests will be attributable for purposes of the New Entrant Bidding Credit to the same extent that such other media interests are considered attributable for purposes of the broadcast multiple ownership rules. Further, any bidder asserting new entrant status must have de facto as well as de jure control of the entity claiming the bidding credit. See47 CFR 73.5007. Typically, de jure control is evidenced by ownership of at least 50.1% of an entity's voting stock or equivalent level of interest in cases where the bidder is not a corporate entity. De facto control is determined on a case-by-case basis. However, attributable interests held by a winning bidder in existing low power television, television translator, or FM translator facilities will not be counted among the applicant's other mass media interests in determining its eligibility for a New Entrant Bidding Credit. A medium of mass communications is defined in Section 73.5008(b). Full power noncommercial educational stations, on both reserved and non-reserved channels, are included among media of mass communications as defined in section 73.5008(b).
50.
51.
52.
53. An applicant is considered a former defaulter or a former delinquent when, as of the FCC Form 175 filing deadline, it or any of its controlling interests has defaulted on any Commission construction permit or license or has been delinquent on any non-tax debt owed to any Federal agency, but has since remedied all such defaults and cured all of the outstanding non-tax delinquencies. A former defaulter or delinquent who has remedied all such defaults and cured all of the outstanding non-tax delinquencies prior to the FCC Form 175 filing deadline in this auction may participate so long as it is otherwise qualified and if the applicant makes an upfront payment that is 50% more than would otherwise be required. For this reason, an applicant must certify under penalty of perjury whether it (along with any of its controlling interests) has ever been in default on any payment for a Commission construction permit or license (including a down payment) or has ever been delinquent on any non-tax debt owed to any Federal agency, subject to the exclusions of any cured default on a Commission construction permit or license as well as any cured delinquency on a non-tax debt owed to a Federal agency described in 47 CFR 1.2105(a)(2)(xii). For purposes of making this certification, the term
54. For purposes of evaluating the certifications required by sections 1.2105(a)(2)(xi) and (xii), non-tax debt owed to any Federal agency includes all amounts owed under Federal programs, including contributions to the Universal Service Fund, Telecommunications Relay Services Fund, and the North American Numbering Plan Administration, notwithstanding that the administrator of any such fund may not be considered a Federal agency under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996. Public Law 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996).
55. We encourage applicants to review previous guidance provided on default and delinquency disclosure requirements in the context of the auction short-form application process. Applicants also are advised to consult with Auctions Division staff if they have questions about delinquency or default disclosure requirements.
56. The Commission considers outstanding debts owed to the United States Government, in any amount, to be a serious matter. The Commission adopted rules, including a provision referred to as the red light rule, that implement its obligations under the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, which governs the collection of debts owed to the United States. Under the red light rule, applications and other requests for benefits filed by parties that have outstanding debts owed to the Commission will not be processed. The Commission's adoption of the red light rule does not alter the applicability of any of its competitive bidding rules, including the provisions and certifications of sections 1.2105 and 1.2106, with regard to current and former defaults or delinquencies.
57. The Commission's Red Light Display System, which provides information regarding debts currently owed to the Commission, may not be determinative of an auction applicant's ability to comply with the default and delinquency disclosure requirements of section 1.2105. While the red light rule ultimately may prevent the processing of long-form applications by auction winners, an auction applicant's lack of current red light status is not necessarily determinative of its eligibility to participate in an auction (or whether it may be subject to an increased upfront payment obligation). A prospective applicant in Auction 106 should note that any long-form application filed after the close of bidding will be reviewed for compliance with the Commission's red light rule, and such review may result in the dismissal of a winning bidder's long-form application. Applicants that have their long-form applications dismissed will be deemed to have defaulted and will be subject to default payments under 47 CFR 1.2104(g) and 1.2109(c).
58. Each applicant should carefully review all records and other available Federal agency databases and information sources to determine whether the applicant, or any of its affiliates, or any of its controlling interests, or any of the affiliates of its controlling interests, owes or was ever delinquent in the payment of non-tax debt owed to any Federal agency.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64. As with filing the FCC Form 175, any amendment(s) to the application and related statements of fact must be certified by an authorized representative of the applicant with authority to bind the applicant. Applicants should note that submissions of any such amendment or related statement of fact constitutes a representation by the person certifying that he or she is an authorized representative with such authority and that the contents of the amendment or statement of fact are true and correct.
65.
66. An applicant should perform its due diligence research and analysis before proceeding, as it would with any new business venture. Each potential bidder should perform technical analyses and/or refresh its previous analyses to assure itself that, should it become a winning bidder for any Auction 106 construction permit, it will be able to build and operate facilities that will fully comply with all applicable technical and legal requirements. Each applicant should inspect any prospective transmitter sites located in, or near, the service area for which it plans to bid, to confirm the availability of such sites, and to familiarize itself with the Commission's rules regarding any applicable federal, state or local requirements. See 47 CFR pt. 1, subpart I.
67. Each applicant should continue to conduct its own research throughout Auction 106 to determine the existence of pending or future administrative or judicial proceedings that might affect its decision on continued participation in the auction. Each Auction 106 applicant is responsible for assessing the likelihood of the various possible outcomes and for considering the potential impact on construction permits available in this auction. The due diligence considerations mentioned in the
68. Applicants are solely responsible for identifying associated risks and for investigating and evaluating the degree to which such matters may affect their ability to bid on, otherwise acquire, or make use of the construction permits available in Auction 106. Each potential bidder is responsible for undertaking research to ensure that any permits won in this auction will be suitable for its business plans and needs. Each potential bidder must undertake its own assessment of the relevance and importance of information gathered as part of its due diligence efforts.
69. The Commission makes no representations or guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of information in its databases or any third-party databases, including, for example, court docketing systems. To the extent the Commission's databases may not include all information deemed necessary or desirable by an applicant, it must obtain or verify such information from independent sources or assume the risk of any incompleteness or inaccuracy in said databases. Furthermore, the Commission makes no representations or guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of information that has been provided by incumbent licensees and incorporated into its databases.
70.
71.
72. Applications may be filed at any time beginning at noon ET on January 29, 2020, until the filing window closes at 6:00 p.m. ET on February 11, 2020. Applicants are strongly encouraged to file early and are responsible for allowing adequate time for filing their applications. There are no limits or restrictions on the number of times an application can be updated or amended until the initial filing deadline on February 11, 2020.
73. An applicant must always click on the CERTIFY & SUBMIT button on the Certify & Submit screen to successfully submit its FCC Form 175 and any modifications; otherwise, the application or changes to the application will not be received or reviewed by Commission staff. Additional information about accessing, completing, and viewing the FCC Form 175 is included in Attachment B to the
74.
75. Non-mutually exclusive applications will be listed in a subsequent public notice to be released by the Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA) and MB. Such applications will not proceed to auction, but will proceed in accordance with instructions set forth in that public notice. All mutually exclusive applications will be considered under the relevant procedures for conflict resolution. Mutually exclusive applications proposing commercial stations will proceed to auction.
76. Commission staff will communicate only with an applicant's contact person or certifying official, as designated on the FCC Form 175, unless the applicant's certifying official or contact person notifies the Commission in writing that applicant's counsel or other representative is authorized to speak on its behalf. Authorizations may be sent by email to
77.
78.
79.
80. Each applicant is responsible for ensuring timely submission of its upfront payment and for timely filing of an accurate and complete Form 159. To avoid untimely payments, an applicant should discuss arrangements and deadlines with its financial institution (including that financial institution's specific wire transfer requirements) several days before it plans to make the wire transfer, and well ahead of the due date, as well as allow sufficient time for the wire transfer to be initiated and completed prior to the deadline. The Commission repeatedly has cautioned auction participants about the importance of planning ahead to prepare for unforeseen last-minute difficulties in making payments by wire transfer. Each applicant is responsible for obtaining confirmation from its financial institution that its wire transfer to U.S. Treasury was successful and from Commission staff that its upfront payment was timely received and that it was deposited into the proper account. To receive confirmation from Commission staff, contact Scott Radcliffe of the Office of Managing Director's Revenue & Receivables Operations Group/Auctions at (202) 418-7518, or Theresa Meeks at (202) 418-2945.
81. Failure to deliver a sufficient upfront payment by the March 20, 2020 deadline will result in dismissal of the short-form application and disqualification from participation in the auction.
82.
83.
84. A commenter suggests that we reduce to zero the upfront payments for certain allotments. This comment fails to recognize that the refundable upfront payments not only establish each qualified bidder's bidding eligibility and ensure that the pace of bidding is managed appropriately, but the upfront payments also protect against frivolous or insincere bidding and provide the Commission with a source of funds from which to collect payments owed at the close of the bidding. For these reasons, this proposal was rejected and the upfront payment amounts specified for those allotments were retained. The upfront payment amounts proposed in the
85. An applicant must make an upfront payment sufficient to obtain bidding eligibility on the construction permits on which it will bid. It was
86. In calculating its upfront payment amount, an applicant should determine the maximum number of bidding units on which it may wish to be active (bid on or hold provisionally winning bids on) in any single round, and submit an upfront payment amount covering that number of bidding units. To make this calculation, an applicant should add together the bidding units for all construction permits on which it seeks to be active in any given round. Applicants should check their calculations carefully, as there is no provision for increasing a bidder's eligibility after the upfront payment deadline.
87. An applicant that is a former defaulter must pay an upfront payment 50% greater than that required of an applicant that is not a former defaulter. Defaults and delinquencies of the applicant itself and its controlling interests are included. If an applicant is a former defaulter, it must calculate its upfront payment for all of its selected construction permits by multiplying the number of bidding units on which it wishes to be active by 1.5. To calculate the number of bidding units to assign to former defaulters, the Commission will divide the upfront payment received by 1.5 and round the result up to the nearest bidding unit.
88. If a former defaulter fails to submit a sufficient upfront payment to establish eligibility to bid on at least one of the construction permits selected in its FCC Form 175, the applicant will not be eligible to participate in bidding in the auction. That applicant will retain its status as an Auction 106 applicant and will remain subject to 47 CFR 1.2105(c), 73.5002(d), (e).
89.
90. Qualified bidders that do not receive this registration mailing will not be able to submit bids. Therefore, if this mailing is not received by the contact representative for a qualified bidder by noon on Wednesday, April 22, 2020, call the Auctions Hotline at (717) 338-2868. Receipt of this registration mailing is critical to participating in the auction, and each qualified bidder is responsible for ensuring it has received all of the registration materials.
91. If SecurID® tokens are lost or damaged, only an authorized bidder, the contact person, or the certifying official on the applicant's FCC Form 175 may request replacements. To request replacement of these items, call the Auction Bidder Line at the telephone number provided in the registration materials or the Auctions Hotline at (717) 338-2868.
92.
93. The Commission makes no warranties whatsoever with respect to the FCC auction application system and the auction bidding system. In no event shall the Commission, or any of its officers, employees, or agents, be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, but not limited to, loss of business profits, business interruption, loss of business information, or any other loss) arising out of or relating to the existence, furnishing, functioning, or use of the FCC auction systems that are accessible to qualified bidders in connection with this auction. Moreover, no obligation or liability will arise out of the Commission's technical, programming, or other advice or service provided in connection with the FCC auction systems.
94. To the extent an issue arises with the auction bidding system itself, the Commission will take all appropriate measures to resolve such issues quickly and equitably. The Commission periodically performs scheduled maintenance of its IT systems which typically occur over the weekends. Every effort is made to minimize any downtime to auction-related systems, including the Commission's bidding system. However, there are occasions when auction-related systems may be temporarily unavailable.
95. Should an issue arise that is outside the auction bidding system or attributable to a bidder, including, but not limited to, a bidder's hardware, software, or internet access problem that prevents the bidder from submitting a bid prior to the end of a round, the Commission shall have no obligation to resolve or remedy such an issue on behalf of the bidder. Similarly, if an issue arises due to bidder error using the auction bidding system, the Commission shall have no obligation to resolve or remedy such an issue on behalf of the bidder. After the close of a bidding round, the results of bid processing will not be altered absent evidence of any failure in the auction bidding system.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101. An Auction 106 bidder's ability to bid on specific construction permits is determined by two factors: (1) The construction permits selected by that applicant in its FCC Form 175 and (2) the bidder's bidding eligibility measured in bidding units. The FCC auction bidding system will allow bidders to submit bids on only those construction permits the bidder selected on its FCC Form 175.
102. In order to access the bidding function of the FCC auction bidding system, bidders must be logged in during a bidding round using the passcode generated by the SecurID® token and a personal identification number (PIN) created by the bidder. Bidders are strongly encouraged to print a round summary for each round after they have completed all of their activity for that round.
103.
104. Commission staff retain the discretion to change the bidding schedule in order to foster an auction pace that reasonably balances speed with the bidders' need to study round results and adjust their bidding strategies. Commission staff may change the amount of time for the bidding rounds, the amount of time between rounds, or the number of rounds per day, depending upon bidding activity and other factors, by prior announcement.
105.
106. An activity rule requires bidders to bid actively throughout the auction, rather than wait until late in the auction before participating. Bidders are required to be active on a specific percentage of their current bidding eligibility during each round of the auction. A bidder's activity level in a round is the sum of the bidding units associated with construction permits covered by the bidder's new bids in the current round and provisionally winning bids from the previous round. Provisionally winning bids are bids that would become final winning bids if the auction were to close after the given round.
107. The minimum required activity is expressed as a percentage of the bidder's current eligibility, and it increases by stage as the auction progresses. Failure to maintain the requisite activity level will result in the use of an activity rule waiver, if any remain, or a reduction in the bidder's eligibility, possibly curtaining or eliminating the bidder's ability to place additional bids in the auction.
108. To provide bidders with flexibility to pursue backup strategies if they so desire, a more flexible activity requirement is adopted than that proposed in the
109.
110. Stage One: During the first stage of the auction, a bidder desiring to maintain its current bidding eligibility will be required to be active on construction permits representing at least 80% of its current bidding eligibility in each bidding round. Failure to maintain the required activity level will result in the use of an activity rule waiver or, if the bidder has no activity rule waivers remaining, a reduction in the bidder's bidding eligibility in the next round. During Stage One, reduced eligibility for the next round will be calculated by multiplying the bidder's current round activity (the sum of bidding units of the bidder's provisionally winning bids and bids during the current round) by five-fourths (
111. Stage Two: During the second stage of the auction, a bidder desiring to maintain its current bidding eligibility is required to be active on 95% of its current bidding eligibility. Failure to maintain the required activity level will result in the use of an activity rule waiver or, if the bidder has no activity rule waivers remaining, a reduction in the bidder's bidding eligibility in the next round. During Stage Two, reduced eligibility for the next round will be calculated by multiplying the bidder's current round activity (the sum of bidding units of the bidder's provisionally winning bids and bids during the current round) by twenty-nineteenths (20/19).
Since activity requirements increase in Stage Two, bidders must carefully check their activity during the first round following a stage transition to ensure that they are meeting the increased activity requirement. This is especially critical for bidders that have provisionally winning bids and do not plan to submit new bids. In past auctions, some bidders have inadvertently lost bidding eligibility or used an activity rule waiver because they did not re-verify their activity status at stage transitions. Bidders may check their activity against the required activity level by logging into the FCC auction bidding system. Prior to any move from Stage One to Stage Two, bidders will be alerted during the auction by announcement in the auction bidding system.
112.
113. The auction will start in Stage One. The stage of the auction does not affect the auction stopping rules; the auction may conclude in Stage One. Commission staff will regulate the pace of the auction by announcement in the auction bidding system.
114. Commission staff retain the discretion to change the activity requirements during the auction as circumstances warrant, and also have other mechanisms to influence the speed of the auction. For example, there may be no transition to Stage Two if the auction is progressing satisfactorily under the Stage One activity requirement, or there may be a transition to Stage Two with an activity requirement that is higher or lower than 95%, or add an additional stage with a higher activity requirement. This determination will be based on a variety of measures of auction activity, including, but not limited to, the number of new bids and the percentages of construction permits (as measured in bidding units) on which there are new bids.
115. If Commission staff implement a stage with an activity requirement other than 80% or 95%, a bidder's reduced eligibility for the next round will be calculated by multiplying that bidder's current round activity by the reciprocal of the activity requirement. For example, if there is a 98% activity requirement, the bidder's current round activity would be multiplied by 50/49; if there is a 100 percent activity requirement, the bidder's current round activity would become its bidding eligibility (current round activity would be multiplied by
116.
117. The FCC auction bidding system will assume that a bidder that does not meet the activity requirement would prefer to use an activity rule waiver (if available) rather than lose bidding eligibility. Therefore, the system will automatically apply a waiver at the end of any bidding round in which a bidder's activity level is below the minimum required unless (1) the bidder has no activity rule waiver remaining or (2) the bidder overrides the automatic application of a waiver by reducing eligibility, therefore meeting the activity requirement. If a bidder has no waivers remaining and does not satisfy the required activity level, the bidder's current eligibility will be permanently reduced, possibly curtailing or eliminating its ability to place additional bids in the auction.
118. A bidder with insufficient activity may wish to reduce its bidding eligibility rather than use an activity
119. A bidder may apply an activity rule waiver proactively as a means to keep the auction open without placing a bid. If a bidder proactively applies an activity rule waiver during a bidding round in which no bids are placed, the auction will remain open and the bidder's eligibility will be preserved. An automatic waiver applied by the FCC auction bidding system in a round in which there is no new bid or a proactive waiver will not keep the auction open.
120.
121. Comment was sought on alternative versions of the simultaneous stopping rule for Auction 106: Option 1. The auction would close for all construction permits after the first round in which no bidder applies a proactive waiver or places any new bid on a construction permit on which it is not the provisionally winning bidder. Thus, absent any other bidding activity, a bidder placing a new bid on a construction permit for which it is the provisionally winning bidder would not keep the auction open under this modified stopping rule. Option 2. The auction would close for all construction permits after the first round in which no bidder applies a waiver or places any new bid on any construction permit that already has a provisionally winning bid. Thus, absent any other bidding activity, a bidder placing a new bid on an FCC-held construction permit (a construction permit that does not have a provisionally winning bid) would not keep the auction open under this modified stopping rule. Option 3. The auction would close using a modified version of the simultaneous stopping rule that combines Option 1 and Option 2. Option 4. The auction would close after a specified number of additional rounds (special stopping rule) to be announced in advance in the FCC auction bidding system. If this special stopping rule is invoked, bids will be accepted in the specified final round(s), after which the auction will close. Option 5. The auction would remain open even if no bidder places any new bids or applies a waiver. In this event, the effect will be the same as if a bidder had applied a waiver. Thus, the activity rule will apply as usual, and a bidder with insufficient activity will either lose bidding eligibility or use a waiver.
122. These proposed options will be exercised only in certain circumstances, for example, where the auction is proceeding unusually slowly or quickly, there is minimal overall bidding activity, or it appears likely that the auction will not close within a reasonable period of time or will close prematurely. Before exercising these options, Commission staff may attempt to change the pace of bidding in the auction. For example, the number of bidding rounds per day and/or the minimum acceptable bids may change. Commission staff retain the discretion to exercise any of these options with or without prior announcement during the auction.
123.
124. In such cases, Commission staff, in their sole discretion, may elect to resume the auction starting from the beginning of the current round or from some previous round, or cancel the auction in its entirety. This authority will be exercised solely at the discretion of Commission staff, and not as a substitute for situations in which bidders may wish to apply their activity rule waivers.
125.
126. No comments were received on the proposal to use a minimum acceptable bid increment percentage of 10% to calculate the first of the acceptable bid amounts. This means that the minimum acceptable bid amount for a construction permit will be approximately 10% greater than the provisionally winning bid amount for the construction permit. No comments were received on the proposal to use an additional bid increment percentage of 5% to calculate the eight additional acceptable bid amounts. Therefore, the auction will begin with a minimum acceptable bid increment percentage of 10% and an additional bid increment percentage of 5%.
127. In Auction 106, the minimum acceptable bid amount for a construction permit will be equal to its minimum opening bid amount until there is a provisionally winning bid for the construction permit. After there is a provisionally winning bid for a construction permit, the minimum acceptable bid amount will be calculated by multiplying the provisionally winning bid amount by one plus the minimum acceptable bid percentage—
128. In Auction 106, the FCC auction bidding system will calculate the eight additional bid amounts by multiplying the minimum acceptable bid amount by the additional bid increment percentage of 5%, and that result (rounded) is the additional increment amount. The first additional acceptable bid amount equals the minimum acceptable bid amount plus the additional increment amount. The second additional acceptable bid amount equals the minimum acceptable bid amount plus two times the additional increment amount; the third additional acceptable bid amount is the minimum acceptable bid amount plus three times the additional increment amount; etc. Because the additional bid increment percentage is 5%, the calculation of the additional increment amount is (minimum acceptable bid amount) * (0.05), rounded. The first additional acceptable bid amount equals (minimum acceptable bid amount) + (additional increment amount); the second additional acceptable bid amount equals (minimum acceptable bid amount) + (2*(additional increment amount)); the third additional acceptable bid amount equals (minimum acceptable bid amount) + (3*(additional increment amount)); etc.
129. The result of the calculation of a minimum acceptable bid increment and the result of the calculation of each additional bid increment is subject to a minimum of $100. Any results above $10,000 will be rounded to the nearest $1,000, results below $10,000 but above $1,000 will be rounded to the nearest
130. Commission staff retain the discretion to change the minimum acceptable bid amounts, the minimum acceptable bid increment percentage, the additional bid increment percentage, and the number of acceptable bid amounts, with the discretion to do so on a construction permit-by-construction permit basis, as well as to retain the discretion to limit (a) the amount by which a minimum acceptable bid for a construction permit may increase compared with the corresponding provisionally winning bid, and (b) the amount by which an additional bid amount may increase compared with the immediately preceding acceptable bid amount. For example, Commission staff could set a $1,000 limit on increases in minimum acceptable bid amounts over provisionally winning bids. Thus, if calculating a minimum acceptable bid using the minimum acceptable bid increment percentage results in a minimum acceptable bid amount that is $1,200 higher than the provisionally winning bid on a construction permit, the minimum acceptable bid amount would instead be capped at $1,000 above the provisionally winning bid. If we exercise this discretion, we will alert bidders by announcement in the FCC auction bidding system during the auction.
131.
132. A pseudo-random number generator will be used to select a single provisionally winning bid in the event that identical high bid amounts are submitted on a construction permit in a given round (
133.
134. Bidders are prohibited from withdrawing any bid after close of the round in which that bid was placed. Bidders are cautioned to select bid amounts carefully because no bid withdrawals will be allowed, even if a bid was mistakenly or erroneously made.
135.
136.
137. Shortly after bidding has closed, the Commission will issue a public notice declaring the auction closed, identifying the winning bidders, and establishing the deadlines for submitting down payments, final payments, and long-form applications (FCC Forms 2100, Schedule 301-FM).
138.
139.
140.
141.
142. In the event of a default, the Commission has the discretion to re-auction the construction permit or offer it to the next highest bidder (in descending order) at its final bid amount. In addition, if a default or disqualification involves gross misconduct, misrepresentation, or bad faith by an applicant, the Commission may declare the applicant and its principals ineligible to bid in future auctions, and may take any other action that it deems necessary, including
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.
148. To promote the efficient and fair administration of the competitive bidding process for all Auction 106 participants, including small businesses, the
149.
150.
151.
152. The specific competitive bidding procedures and minimum opening bid amounts described in the
153.
154. According to Commission staff review of the BIA/Kelsey, LLC's Media Access Pro Radio Database as of September 17, 2019, about 11,033 (or about 99.95%) of 11,039 commercial radio stations had revenues of $41.5 million or less and thus qualify as small entities under the SBA definition. The SBA size standard data does not enable us to make a meaningful estimate of the number of small entities who may participate in Auction 106.
155. Also, in assessing whether a business entity qualifies as small under the SBA definition, business control affiliations must be included. Our estimate therefore likely overstates the number of small entities that might be affected by this auction because the revenue figure on which it is based does not include or aggregate revenues from affiliated companies. Moreover, the definition of small business also requires that an entity not be dominant in its field of operation and that the entity be independently owned and operated. The estimate of small businesses to which Auction 106 competitive bidding rules may apply does not exclude any radio station from the definition of a small business on these bases and is therefore over-inclusive to that extent. Furthermore, it is not possible at this time to define or quantify the criteria that would establish whether a specific radio station is dominant in its field of operation. In addition, it is difficult to assess these criteria in the context of media entities and therefore these estimates of small businesses to which they apply may be over-inclusive to this extent.
156. It is not possible to accurately develop an estimate of how many of the entities in this auction would be small businesses based on the number of small entities that applied to participate in prior broadcast auctions because that information is not collected from applicants for broadcast auctions in which bidding credits are not based on an applicant's size (as is the case in auctions of licenses for wireless services).
157. According to the SBA, a radio station is a small business concern if it has annual revenue of $41.5 million or less. Based on Commission staff review of the BIA/Kelsey, LLC's Media Access Pro Radio Database, 6,739 (99.91%) of 6,745 FM radio stations fall at or under that revenue threshold. Accordingly, based on this data, it is estimated that the majority of Auction 106 applicants would likely meet the SBA's definition of a small business concern.
158.
159. Auction 106 applicants, including small entities, will become qualified to bid in Auction 106 only if they comply with the following: (1) Submission of a short-form application that is timely and is found to be substantially complete, and (2) timely submission of a sufficient upfront payment for at least one of the construction permits that the applicant selected on its FCC Form 175, accompanied by a complete and accurate FCC Form 159.
160. In accordance with the terms of 47 CFR 1.2105(b)(2), an applicant whose application is found to contain deficiencies will have a limited opportunity to bring their application into compliance with the Commission's competitive bidding rules during a resubmission window. In addition, each Auction 106 applicant must maintain the accuracy of its previously filed short-form application electronically using the FCC auction application system.
161. In the second phase of the process, there are additional compliance requirements only applicable to winning bidders. As with other winning bidders, any small entity that is a winning bidder will be required to comply with the terms of the following rules, among others: (1) 47 CFR 1.2107(b) by submitting as a down payment within 10 business days of release of the auction closing public notice sufficient funds (in addition to its upfront payment) to bring its total amount of money on deposit with the Commission for Auction 106 to 20% of the net amount of its winning bids; and (2) 47 CFR 1.2109(a) by submitting within 10 business days after the down payment deadline the balance of the amount for each of its winning bids; and (3) 47 CFR 73.5005(a) by electronically filing a properly completed long-form application (FCC Form 2100, Schedule 301-FM, Commercial FM Station Construction Permit Application) and required exhibits for each construction permit won through Auction 106, within 30 days following release of a closing public notice for Auction 106, unless a longer period is specified by public notice.
162. Further, as required by 47 CFR 1.2105(c), reports concerning a prohibited communication must be filed with the Chief of the Auctions Division, as detailed in the
163.
164. OEA and MB anticipate that the steps taken to make numerous resources available to small entities and other auction participants at no cost should minimize any economic impact of the auction processes and procedures on small entities and should result in both
165.
Federal Communications Commission.
Final rule.
This document amends the broadcast ownership rules to reflect the mandate of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which vacated and remanded the Commission's 2018
Effective January 29, 2020.
Ty Bream,
This is a summary of the Commission's
1. In
2. The Bureau finds that notice and comment are unnecessary for these rule amendments under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), because this ministerial order merely implements the mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and the Commission lacks discretion to depart from this mandate. Because this Order is being adopted without notice and comment, the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply.
3. Accordingly,
4. This action is taken pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 2(a), 4(i) and (j), 5(c), 257, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 154(j), 155(c), 257, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, and 403, section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and §§ 0.61 and 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.61, 0.283.
5. The Bureau has determined, and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, concurs that these rules are non-major under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission will send a copy of this Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Radio, Television.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 part 73 as follows:
47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, 307, 309, 310, 334, 336, 339.
The revisions and addition read as follows:
(b)
(1) The digital noise limited service contours of the stations (computed in accordance with § 73.622(e)) do not overlap; or
(i) At the time the application to acquire or construct the station(s) is filed, at least one of the stations is not ranked among the top four stations in the DMA, based on the most recent all-day (9 a.m.-midnight) audience share, as measured by Nielsen Media Research or by any comparable professional, accepted audience ratings service; and
(ii) At least 8 independently owned and operating, full-power commercial and noncommercial TV stations would remain post-merger in the DMA in which the communities of license of the TV stations in question are located. Count only those TV stations the digital noise limited service contours of which overlap with the digital noise limited service contour of at least one of the stations in the proposed combination. In areas where there is no DMA, count the TV stations present in an area that would be the functional equivalent of a TV market. Count only those TV stations digital noise limited service contours of which overlap with the digital noise limited service contour of at least one of the stations in the proposed combination.
(2) [Reserved]
(c)
(i) The predicted or measured 1 mV/m contour of an existing or proposed FM station (computed in accordance with § 73.313) encompasses the entire community of license of an existing or proposed commonly owned TV broadcast station(s), or the principal community contour(s) of the TV broadcast station(s) (computed in accordance with § 73.625) encompasses the entire community of license of the FM station; or
(ii) The predicted or measured 2 mV/m groundwave contour of an existing or proposed AM station (computed in accordance with § 73.183 or § 73.186), encompasses the entire community of license of an existing or proposed commonly owned TV broadcast station(s), or the principal community contour(s) of the TV broadcast station(s) (computed in accordance with § 73.625) encompass(es) the entire community of license of the AM station.
(2) An entity may directly or indirectly own, operate, or control up to two commercial TV stations (if permitted by paragraph (b) of this section, the local television multiple ownership rule) and one commercial radio station situated as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. An entity may not exceed these numbers, except as follows:
(i) If at least 20 independently owned media voices would remain in the market post-merger, an entity can directly or indirectly own, operate, or control up to:
(A) Two commercial TV and six commercial radio stations (to the extent permitted by paragraph (a) of this section, the local radio multiple ownership rule); or
(B) One commercial TV and seven commercial radio stations (to the extent that an entity would be permitted to own two commercial TV and six commercial radio stations under paragraph (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section, and to the extent permitted by paragraph (a) of this section, the local radio multiple ownership rule).
(ii) If at least 10 independently owned media voices would remain in the market post-merger, an entity can directly or indirectly own, operate, or control up to two commercial TV and four commercial radio stations (to the extent permitted by paragraph (a) of this section, the local radio multiple ownership rule).
(3) To determine how many media voices would remain in the market, count the following:
(i)
(ii)
(
(
(
(B) When a proposed combination involves stations in different radio markets, the voice requirement in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section must be met in each market; the radio stations of different radio metro markets may not be counted together.
(C) In areas where there is no radio metro market, count the radio stations present in an area that would be the functional equivalent of a radio market.
(iii)
(iv)
(d)
(i) The predicted or measured 2 mV/m groundwave contour of the AM station (computed in accordance with § 73.183 or § 73.186) encompasses the entire community in which the newspaper is published and, in areas designated as Nielsen Audio Metro markets, the AM station and the community of publication of the newspaper are located in the same Nielsen Audio Metro market;
(ii) The predicted or measured 1 mV/m contour of the FM station (computed in accordance with § 73.313) encompasses the entire community in which the newspaper is published and, in areas designated as Nielsen Audio Metro markets, the FM station and the community of publication of the newspaper are located in the same Nielsen Audio Metro market; or
(iii) The principal community contour of the TV station (computed in accordance with § 73.625) encompasses the entire community in which the newspaper is published; and the community of license of the TV station and the community of publication of the newspaper are located in the same DMA.
(2) The prohibition in paragraph (d)(1) of this section shall not apply upon a showing that either the newspaper or television station is failed or failing.
a. Except as otherwise provided herein, partnership and direct ownership interests and any voting stock interest amounting to 5% or more of the outstanding voting stock of a corporate broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper will be cognizable;
b. Investment companies, as defined in 15 U.S.C. 80a-3, insurance companies and banks holding stock through their trust departments in trust accounts will be considered to have a cognizable interest only if they hold 20% or more of the outstanding voting stock of a corporate broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper, or if any of the officers or directors of the broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper are representatives of the investment company, insurance company or bank concerned. Holdings by a bank or insurance company will be aggregated if the bank or insurance company has any right to determine how the stock will be voted. Holdings by investment companies will be aggregated if under common management.
c. Attribution of ownership interests in a broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper that are held indirectly by any party through one or more intervening corporations will be determined by successive multiplication of the ownership percentages for each link in the vertical ownership chain and application of the relevant attribution benchmark to the resulting product, except that wherever the ownership percentage for any link in the chain exceeds 50%, it shall not be included for purposes of this multiplication. For purposes of paragraph i. of this note, attribution of ownership interests in a broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper that are held indirectly by any party through one or more intervening organizations will be determined by successive multiplication of the ownership percentages for each link in the vertical ownership chain and application of the relevant attribution benchmark to the resulting product, and the ownership percentage for any link in the chain that exceeds 50% shall be included for purposes of this multiplication. [For example, except for purposes of paragraph (i) of this note, if A owns 10% of company X, which owns 60% of company Y, which owns 25% of “Licensee,” then X's interest in “Licensee” would be 25% (the same as Y's interest because X's interest in Y exceeds 50%), and A's interest in “Licensee” would be 2.5% (0.1 × 0.25). Under the 5% attribution benchmark, X's interest in “Licensee” would be cognizable, while A's interest would not be cognizable. For purposes of paragraph i. of this note, X's interest in “Licensee” would be 15% (0.6 × 0.25) and A's interest in “Licensee” would be 1.5% (0.1 x 0.6 × 0.25). Neither interest would be attributed under paragraph i. of this note.]
d. Voting stock interests held in trust shall be attributed to any person who holds or shares the power to vote such stock, to any person who has the sole power to sell such stock, and to any person who has the right to revoke the trust at will or to replace the trustee at will. If the trustee has a familial, personal or extra-trust business relationship to the grantor or the beneficiary, the grantor or beneficiary, as appropriate, will be attributed with the stock interests held in trust. An otherwise qualified trust will be ineffective to insulate the grantor or beneficiary from attribution with the trust's assets unless all voting stock interests held by the grantor or beneficiary in the relevant broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper are subject to said trust.
e. Subject to paragraph i. of this note, holders of non-voting stock shall not be attributed an interest in the issuing entity. Subject to paragraph i. of this note, holders of debt and instruments such as warrants, convertible debentures, options or other non-voting interests with rights of conversion to voting interests shall not be attributed unless and until conversion is effected.
f. 1. A limited partnership interest shall be attributed to a limited partner unless that partner is not materially involved, directly or indirectly, in the management or operation of the media-related activities of the partnership and the licensee or system so certifies. An interest in a Limited Liability Company (“LLC”) or Registered Limited Liability Partnership (“RLLP”) shall be attributed to the interest holder unless that interest holder is not materially involved, directly or indirectly, in the management or operation of the media-related activities of the partnership and the licensee or system so certifies.
2. For a licensee or system that is a limited partnership to make the certification set forth in paragraph f. 1. of this note, it must verify that the partnership agreement or certificate of limited partnership, with respect to the particular limited partner exempt from attribution, establishes that the exempt limited partner has no material involvement, directly or indirectly, in the management or operation of the media activities of the partnership. For a licensee or system that is an LLC or RLLP to make the certification set forth in paragraph f. 1. of this note, it must verify that the organizational document,
3. In the case of an LLC or RLLP, the licensee or system seeking insulation shall certify, in addition, that the relevant state statute authorizing LLCs permits an LLC member to insulate itself as required by our criteria.
g. Officers and directors of a broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper are considered to have a cognizable interest in the entity with which they are so associated. If any such entity engages in businesses in addition to its primary business of broadcasting, cable television service or newspaper publication, it may request the Commission to waive attribution for any officer or director whose duties and responsibilities are wholly unrelated to its primary business. The officers and directors of a parent company of a broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper, with an attributable interest in any such subsidiary entity, shall be deemed to have a cognizable interest in the subsidiary unless the duties and responsibilities of the officer or director involved are wholly unrelated to the broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper subsidiary, and a statement properly documenting this fact is submitted to the Commission. [This statement may be included on the appropriate Ownership Report.] The officers and directors of a sister corporation of a broadcast licensee, cable television system or daily newspaper shall not be attributed with ownership of these entities by virtue of such status.
h. Discrete ownership interests will be aggregated in determining whether or not an interest is cognizable under this section. An individual or entity will be deemed to have a cognizable investment if:
1. The sum of the interests held by or through “passive investors” is equal to or exceeds 20 percent; or
2. The sum of the interests other than those held by or through “passive investors” is equal to or exceeds 5 percent; or
3. The sum of the interests computed under paragraph h. 1. of this note plus the sum of the interests computed under paragraph h. 2. of this note is equal to or exceeds 20 percent.
i.1. Notwithstanding paragraphs e. and f. of this Note, the holder of an equity or debt interest or interests in a broadcast licensee, cable television system, daily newspaper, or other media outlet subject to the broadcast multiple ownership or cross-ownership rules (“interest holder”) shall have that interest attributed if:
A. The equity (including all stockholdings, whether voting or nonvoting, common or preferred) and debt interest or interests, in the aggregate, exceed 33 percent of the total asset value, defined as the aggregate of all equity plus all debt, of that media outlet; and
B.(i) The interest holder also holds an interest in a broadcast licensee, cable television system, newspaper, or other media outlet operating in the same market that is subject to the broadcast multiple ownership or cross-ownership rules and is attributable under paragraphs of this note other than this paragraph i.; or
(ii) The interest holder supplies over fifteen percent of the total weekly broadcast programming hours of the station in which the interest is held. For purposes of applying this paragraph, the term, “market,” will be defined as it is defined under the specific multiple ownership rule or cross-ownership rule that is being applied, except that for television stations, the term “market,” will be defined by reference to the definition contained in the local television multiple ownership rule contained in paragraph (b) of this section.
2. Notwithstanding paragraph i.1. of this Note, the interest holder may exceed the 33 percent threshold therein without triggering attribution where holding such interest would enable an eligible entity to acquire a broadcast station, provided that:
i. The combined equity and debt of the interest holder in the eligible entity is less than 50 percent, or
ii. The total debt of the interest holder in the eligible entity does not exceed 80 percent of the asset value of the station being acquired by the eligible entity and the interest holder does not hold any equity interest, option, or promise to acquire an equity interest in the eligible entity or any related entity. For purposes of this paragraph i.2, an “eligible entity” shall include any entity that qualifies as a small business under the Small Business Administration's size standards for its industry grouping, as set forth in 13 CFR 121.201, at the time the transaction is approved by the FCC, and holds:
A. 30 percent or more of the stock or partnership interests and more than 50 percent of the voting power of the corporation or partnership that will own the media outlet; or
B. 15 percent or more of the stock or partnership interests and more than 50 percent of the voting power of the corporation or partnership that will own the media outlet, provided that no other person or entity owns or controls more than 25 percent of the outstanding stock or partnership interests; or
C. More than 50 percent of the voting power of the corporation that will own the media outlet if such corporation is a publicly traded company.
j. “Time brokerage” (also known as “local marketing”) is the sale by a licensee of discrete blocks of time to a “broker” that supplies the programming to fill that time and sells the commercial spot announcements in it.
1. Where two radio stations are both located in the same market, as defined for purposes of the local radio ownership rule contained in paragraph (a) of this section, and a party (including all parties under common control) with a cognizable interest in one such station brokers more than 15 percent of the broadcast time per week of the other such station, that party shall be treated as if it has an interest in the brokered station subject to the limitations set forth in paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) of this section. This limitation shall apply regardless of the source of the brokered programming supplied by the party to the brokered station.
2. Where two television stations are both located in the same market, as defined in the local television ownership rule contained in paragraph (b) of this section, and a party (including all parties under common control) with a cognizable interest in one such station brokers more than 15 percent of the broadcast time per week of the other such station, that party shall
3. Every time brokerage agreement of the type described in this Note shall be undertaken only pursuant to a signed written agreement that shall contain a certification by the licensee or permittee of the brokered station verifying that it maintains ultimate control over the station's facilities including, specifically, control over station finances, personnel and programming, and by the brokering station that the agreement complies with the provisions of paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section if the brokering station is a television station or with paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) of this section if the brokering station is a radio station.
k. “Joint Sales Agreement” is an agreement with a licensee of a “brokered station” that authorizes a “broker” to sell advertising time for the “brokered station.”
1. Where two radio stations are both located in the same market, as defined for purposes of the local radio ownership rule contained in paragraph (a) of this section, and a party (including all parties under common control) with a cognizable interest in one such station sells more than 15 percent of the advertising time per week of the other such station, that party shall be treated as if it has an interest in the brokered station subject to the limitations set forth in paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) of this section.
2. Where two television stations are both located in the same market, as defined for purposes of the local television ownership rule contained in paragraph (b) of this section, and a party (including all parties under common control) with a cognizable interest in one such station sells more than 15 percent of the advertising time per week of the other such station, that party shall be treated as if it has an interest in the brokered station subject to the limitations set forth in paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) of this section.
3. Every joint sales agreement of the type described in this Note shall be undertaken only pursuant to a signed written agreement that shall contain a certification by the licensee or permittee of the brokered station verifying that it maintains ultimate control over the station's facilities, including, specifically, control over station finances, personnel and programming, and by the brokering station that the agreement complies with the limitations set forth in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section if the brokering station is a television station or with paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) of this section if the brokering station is a radio station.
We will entertain waiver requests as follows:
1. If one of the broadcast stations involved is a “failed” station that has
2. For paragraph (b) of this section only, if one of the television stations involved is a “failing” station that has an all-day audience share of no more than four per cent; the station has had negative cash flow for three consecutive years immediately prior to the application; and consolidation of the two stations would result in tangible and verifiable public interest benefits that outweigh any harm to competition and diversity.
3. For paragraph (b) of this section only, if the combination will result in the construction of an unbuilt station. The permittee of the unbuilt station must demonstrate that it has made reasonable efforts to construct but has been unable to do so.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.
Announcement of public meeting and request for comments.
This document announces a public meeting for Pipeline Safety officials to discuss with pipeline safety stakeholders the implementation of the gas transmission and the hazardous liquid pipeline final rules published in the
The public meeting will be held on February 26-27, 2020, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., CT. Members of the public who wish to attend in person are asked to register no later than February 18, 2020. Comments on the draft FAQs should be submitted to Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0225 by February 11, 2020, so that we can effectively discuss public comments in the public meeting. However, the comment period will remain open until March 27, 2020, to allow for public participation following the conclusion of the meeting. Individuals requiring accommodations, such as sign language interpretation or other ancillary aids, are asked to notify PHMSA by February 18, 2020. For additional information see the
The meeting will be held at the Houston Marriott Sugar Land hotel at 16090 City Walk, Sugarland, Texas 77479. The meeting room location, agenda, and any additional information will be published at
The meeting will be web cast, and any documents presented will be available on the meeting website and posted on the E-Gov website:
DOT may solicit comments from the public regarding certain general notices. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
For information about the meeting, contact Chris Hoidal, Senior Technical Advisor, at
PHMSA is holding a public meeting to assist with the implementation process for the gas transmission final rule, 84 FR 52180, and hazardous liquid pipeline final rule, 84 FR 52260, that were published in the
As part of the implementation process, PHMSA has developed draft FAQs for the new regulations. PHMSA subject matter experts on the two rules will lead a discussion on the FAQs and proposed answers. PHMSA will solicit additional FAQ topics on regulatory requirements from operators, regulators, and the public. The FAQs are intended to assist in the implementation of these final rules by providing clarification, guidance, information sources, and affirmation to operators as they strive to comply with new safety regulations. PHMSA has included the initial set of draft FAQs for the meeting in Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0225, and encourages the public to submit comments on the draft FAQs.
PHMSA intends for the public comments to help identify key areas where additional clarifying information is necessary for operators and the general public and to prioritize addressing those areas.
The final meeting agenda, presentations, clarifying statements, and FAQs will be published on a publicly available DOT website at
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Temporary rule; trip limit reduction.
NMFS reduces the commercial trip limit of Atlantic migratory group Spanish mackerel in the southern zone of the Atlantic exclusive economic zone (EEZ) to 500 lb (227 kg) in round or gutted weight per day. This commercial trip limit reduction is necessary to maximize the socioeconomic benefits of the fishery.
This temporary rule is effective from 6 a.m. eastern time on January 29, 2020, until 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 1, 2020.
Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, or email:
The fishery for coastal migratory pelagic fish in the Atlantic includes king mackerel, Spanish mackerel, and cobia on the east coast of Florida, and is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils and is implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622. All
For management purposes, the commercial sector of Atlantic Spanish mackerel is divided into northern and southern zones. The southern zone consists of Federal waters off South Carolina, Georgia, and the east coast of Florida. The southern zone boundaries for Atlantic Spanish mackerel extend from the border of North Carolina and South Carolina (which is a line extending in a direction of 135°34′55″ from true north beginning at 33°51′07.9″ N lat. and 78°32′32.6″ W long. to the intersection point with the outward boundary of the EEZ) to the border of Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties, Florida (at 25°20′24″ N. lat).
The southern zone commercial quota for Atlantic Spanish mackerel is 2,667,330 lb (1,209,881 kg). Seasonally variable trip limits are based on an adjusted commercial quota of 2,417,330 lb (1,096,482 kg). The adjusted commercial quota is calculated to allow continued harvest in the southern zone at a set rate for the remainder of the current fishing year, through February 29, 2020, in accordance with regulations at 50 CFR 622.385(b)(2).
NMFS reduced the commercial trip limit for Atlantic Spanish mackerel in or from the southern zone to 1,500 lb (680 kg) on December 24, 2019 (84 FR 70904, December 26, 2019). That temporary rule is effective through end of the fishing year, or until the commercial trip limit is reduced to 500 lb (227 kg) when 100 percent of the adjusted quota is reached or is projected to be reached, whichever occurs first. NMFS has determined that 100 percent of the adjusted commercial quota for Atlantic Spanish mackerel has been reached and is reducing the commercial trip limit. Atlantic Spanish mackerel in or from the southern zone may not be possessed on board or landed from a vessel with a Federal commercial permit for Atlantic Spanish mackerel in amounts exceeding 500 lb (227 kg) per day (50 CFR 622.385(b)(1)(ii)(C)).
The commercial trip limit of 500 lb (227 kg) per day applies to Atlantic Spanish mackerel in or from the southern zone effective at 6 a.m. eastern time on January 29, 2020, until 12:01 a.m. eastern time on March 1, 2020, unless changed by subsequent notification in the
The Regional Administrator for the NMFS Southeast Region has determined this temporary rule is necessary for the conservation and management of Atlantic Spanish mackerel and is consistent with the FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws.
This action is taken under 50 CFR 622.385(b)(1)(ii)(C) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
These measures are exempt from the procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, because the temporary rule is issued without opportunity for prior notice and opportunity for comment.
This action responds to the best scientific information available. The Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries (AA) finds that the need to immediately reduce the trip limit for the commercial sector for Atlantic Spanish mackerel constitutes good cause to waive the requirements to provide prior notice and the opportunity for public comment pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such procedures are unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. Such procedures are unnecessary because the rules implementing the commercial quotas and trip limits have already been subject to notice and comment, and all that remains is to notify the public of the trip limit reduction.
Prior notice and opportunity for public comment is contrary to the public interest, because any delay in the trip limit reduction of the commercial harvest could result in the commercial quota being exceeded. There is a need to immediately implement this action to protect the Atlantic Spanish mackerel resource, because the capacity of the fishing fleet allows for rapid harvest of the commercial quota. Prior notice and opportunity for public comment would require additional time and could potentially result in a harvest well in excess of the established commercial quota.
For the aforementioned reasons, the AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
16 U.S.C. 1801
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Temporary rule.
NMFS is reallocating the projected unused amounts of the Community Development Quota (CDQ) pollock directed fishing allowance (DFA) from the Aleutian Islands subarea to the Bering Sea subarea. This action is necessary to provide opportunity for harvest of the 2020 total allowable catch of pollock, consistent with the goals and objectives of the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI).
Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), January 29, 2020, until the effective date of the final 2020 and 2021 harvest specifications for BSAI groundfish, unless otherwise modified or superseded through publication of a notification in the
Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.
NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the BSAI exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
In the Aleutian Islands subarea, the portion of the 2020 pollock total allowable catch (TAC) allocated to the CDQ DFA is 1,900 mt as established by the final 2019 and 2020 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (84 FR 9000, March 13, 2019), and as adjusted by an inseason adjustment (85 FR 19, January 2, 2020).
As of January 15, 2020, the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, (Regional Administrator) has
This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the reallocation of Aleutian Islands pollock. Since the pollock fishery opens January 20, 2020, it is important to immediately inform the industry as to the Bering Sea subarea pollock CDQ DFA. Immediate notification is necessary to allow for the
The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment.
This action is required by § 679.20 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.
16 U.S.C. 1801
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all SAP Model IO-360-series and O-360-series reciprocating engines and certain Lycoming Engines (Lycoming) Model AEIO-360-, IO-360-, and O-360-series reciprocating engines with a certain SAP crankshaft assembly installed. This SAP crankshaft assembly is installed as original equipment on the affected SAP engines and as a replacement part under parts manufacturer approval (PMA) on the affected Lycoming engines. This proposed AD was prompted by three crankshaft assembly failures that resulted in the loss of engine power and immediate or emergency landings. This proposed AD would require the removal from service of all affected crankshaft assemblies. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 16, 2020.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Justin Carter, Aerospace Engineer, Fort Worth ACO Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX, 76177; phone: 817-222-5146; fax: 817-222-5245; email:
The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
Except for Confidential Business Information as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Justin Carter, Aerospace Engineer, Fort Worth ACO Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.
The FAA learned of three SAP crankshaft assembly failures that took place on March 6, 2017, August 3, 2017, and October 31, 2018, that resulted in the loss of engine power and immediate or emergency landings. Since the FAA received these reports, the FAA determined that the crankshaft assembly failures resulted from the manufacturing process at SAP's crankshaft vendor during 2012 and 2014.
The crankshaft assembly is a non-life-limited part, which should not fail (crack or separate) through fatigue. Rather, the crankshaft assembly is inspected during overhaul and may be replaced, on-condition, due to wear beyond limits of the cam lobes and bearing surfaces.
The FAA's analysis of the process used to manufacture the failed assemblies identified that gaseous nitrocarburization resulted in excessive residual white layer forming on the assemblies. This white layer is brittle and can lead to spalling or fatigue cracking of the crankshaft assembly as a result of the normal mechanical loads during engine operation. The FAA's analysis concluded that all three SAP crankshaft assembly failures were the result of this fatigue cracking. This condition, if not addressed, could result
These SAP crankshaft assemblies are installed as original equipment on SAP Model IO-360-series and O-360-series reciprocating engines and as a replacement part under PMA on certain Lycoming Model AEIO-360-, IO-360-, and O-360-series reciprocating engines.
The FAA considered alternatives that may be less burdensome than removing the crankshaft assembly from service, including not taking AD action and requiring periodic inspections of the crankshaft assembly. However, these options are not acceptable because taking no action does not correct this known unsafe condition and the crankshaft assembly cannot be inspected without destroying it. The FAA concluded that there is no acceptable safety alternative to the replacement of the crankshaft assembly.
The FAA is proposing this AD because it evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require the removal from service of all affected crankshaft assemblies.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable to engines, propellers, and associated appliances to the Manager, Engine and Propeller Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation Division.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354, codified as amended at 5 U.S.C. 601-612) (RFA) establishes “as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given serious consideration.” Public Law 96-354, 2(b), Sept. 19, 1980. The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA. This portion of the preamble serves as the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA).
Compliance cost of this proposed AD comes from the cost to remove and replace a crankshaft assembly. The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 115 crankshaft assemblies installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. This cost estimate does not include 77 SAP crankshafts installed on experimental engines since these engines are not included in the applicability of this AD. Compliance cost per crankshaft assembly is identified below.
Labor cost = 61 hours per crankshaft assembly replacement × $85 Hourly Wage = $5,185.
Equipment costs per crankshaft assembly replacement = $9,636 (Source: Average of the two manufacturers).
$5,185 labor per crankshaft assembly + $9,636 equipment costs per crankshaft assembly replacement = $14,821 compliance cost per engine.
The total costs to U.S. operators is $1,704,415, or $119,309 in annualized costs. There are no additional costs after removing and replacing the crankshaft assembly.
Under Section 603(b) and (c) of the RFA, the initial analysis must address the following six areas:
(1) Description of reasons the agency is considering the action;
(2) Statement of the legal basis and objectives for the proposed rule;
(3) Description of the record keeping and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule;
(4) All federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule;
(5) Description and an estimated number of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply; and
(6) Describe alternatives considered.
This proposed AD was prompted by three crankshaft assembly failures that resulted in the loss of engine power and immediate or emergency landings. The FAA is proposing this AD to prevent failure of the crankshaft assembly by requiring the removal of all affected crankshaft assemblies from service. Failure of a crankshaft assembly, if not addressed, could result in failure of the engine, in-flight shutdown, and loss of the airplane.
The FAA's legal basis for this proposed AD is discussed in detail under the “Authority for this Rulemaking” section.
This proposed AD would apply to all SAP Model IO-360-series and O-360-series reciprocating engines and certain Lycoming Model AEIO-360-, IO-360-, and O-360-series reciprocating engines with a certain SAP crankshaft assembly installed. This SAP crankshaft assembly is installed as original equipment on the affected SAP engines and as a replacement part under PMA on the affected Lycoming engines. These engines are installed on airplanes performing various activities including, but not limited to, flight training, charter flights, and agriculture.
Under the RFA, the FAA must determine whether a proposed rule significantly affects a substantial number of small entities. The FAA uses the Small Business Administration (SBA) criteria for determining whether an affected entity is small. For aircraft/engine manufacturers, aviation operators, and any business using an aircraft, the SBA criterion is 1,500 or
There are no record-keeping costs associated with this proposed rule.
There are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.
As part of the IRFA, the FAA is required to consider regulatory alternatives that may be less burdensome. The FAA considered the following alternatives:
Do nothing: This option is not acceptable because the risk of additional failures of these crankshaft assemblies constitutes a known unsafe condition.
Periodic inspections: This option is not possible as the crankshaft assembly cannot be inspected without destroying it.
There is no direct safety alternative to the replacement of the crankshaft assembly. The replacement addresses a safety issue aimed at preventing the failure of the crankshaft assembly.
Therefore, this proposed rulemaking may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The FAA invites public comments regarding this determination.
The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
The FAA must receive comments by March 16, 2020.
None.
This AD applies to the reciprocating engine models identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this AD with a Superior Air Parts, Inc. (SAP) crankshaft assembly, part number (P/N) SL36500-A20 or P/N SL36500-A31, with serial numbers 82976-01; 82976-02; SP12-0003 through SP12-0089, inclusive; SP13-0034 through SP13-0150, inclusive; or SP14-0151 through SP14-0202, inclusive; installed.
(1) With SAP crankshaft assembly, P/N SL36500-A20, installed:
(i) SAP Model IO-360-series and O-360-series reciprocating engines.
(ii) Lycoming Engines (Lycoming) Model IO-360-B2F, IO-360-L2A, O-360, O-360-A2A, O-360-A2D, O-360-A2E, O-360-A2F, O-360-A2G, O-360-B2A, O-360-C2A, O-360-C2C, O-360-C2D, O-360-C2E, O-360-D2A, and O-360-D2B reciprocating engines.
(2) With SAP crankshaft assembly, P/N SL36500-A31, installed:
(i) SAP Model IO-360-series and O-360-series reciprocating engines.
(ii) Lycoming Model AEIO-360-H1A, IO-360-B1A, IO-360-B1B, IO-360-B1D, IO-360-B1E, IO-360-B1F, IO-360-M1A, O-360, O-360-A1A, O-360-A1C, O-360-A1D, O-360-A2A, O-360-C1A, O-360-C1G, O-360-C1C, O-360-C1E, and O-360-C1F reciprocating engines.
This SAP crankshaft assembly may be installed as a replacement part under parts manufacturer approval on the affected Lycoming engines.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 8520, Reciprocating Engine Power Section.
This AD was prompted by three crankshaft assembly failures that resulted in the loss of engine power and immediate or emergency landings. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of the crankshaft assembly. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of the engine, in-flight shutdown, and loss of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 25 engine operating hours after the effective date of this AD, remove the crankshaft assembly from service.
A one-time special flight permit may be issued to fly the aircraft to a maintenance facility to perform the actions of this AD with the following limitations: No passengers, visual flight rules (VFR) day conditions only, and avoid areas of known turbulence.
(1) The Manager, Fort Worth ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
For more information about this AD, contact Justin Carter, Aerospace Engineer, Fort Worth ACO Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX, 76177; phone: 817-222-5146; fax: 817-222-5245; email:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace, designated as a surface area, at the Bryce Canyon Airport, Bryce Canyon, UT. The proposal would extend the surface area by adding a small amount of airspace to the northeast of the airport. Also, this action proposes to amend the Class E airspace by adding an area, designated as an extension to a surface area, to the southwest of the airport. Additionally, this action proposes to amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface by reducing the area to the east and southeast of the airport. Further, the actions proposes to remove Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface. This airspace is wholly contained within Class E en route airspace and duplication is not necessary. Lastly, this action proposes an administrative update to the surface airspace's legal descriptions. These changes are necessary to accommodate airspace redesign for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.
Comments must be received on or before March 16, 2020.
Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2019-1069; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANM-12, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
Matthew Van Der Wal, Federal Aviation Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200 S 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone (206) 231-3695.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend Class E airspace at Bryce Canyon Airport, Bryce Canyon, UT, to ensure the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2019-1069; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANM-12”. The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
All communications received before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the internet at
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the
This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15, 2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed in the Proposal section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.
The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by amending Class E airspace at Bryce Canyon Airport, Bryce Canyon, UT. This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace area, designated as a surface area, by adding a small amount of airspace to the northeast of the airport. The additional surface airspace is designed to contain IFR aircraft descending below 1,000 feet above the surface. The proposed surface area is described as follows: That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.2-mile radius of the
Also, this action proposes to amend the Class E airspace by adding an area, designated as an extension to a surface area, to the southwest of the airport. This area is also designed to contain IFR aircraft descending below 1,000 feet above the surface and the proposed area is described as follows: That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1 mile each side of the 227° bearing, extending from the 4.2 mile radius to 7.8 miles southwest of the Bryce Canyon Airport.
Additionally, this action proposes to amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface. The proposal reduces the area to the east and southeast of the airport. This area is designed to contain IFR arrivals descending below 1,500 feet above the surface and IFR departures until they reach 1,200 feet above the surface. This proposed area is described as follows: That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within 8 miles north and 4.2 miles south of the 227° bearing from the airport, extending from the airport to 16 miles southwest of the airport, and within 8 miles north and 4.2 miles south of the 047° bearing from the airport, extending from the airport to 16 miles northeast of the Bryce Canyon Airport.
Further, the actions proposes to remove Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface. This airspace is wholly contained within Class E en route airspace and duplication is not necessary.
Lastly, this action proposes an administrative update to the Class E surface airspace's legal descriptions. The surface airspace should be in effect full time. The following two sentences do not accurately reflect the time of use and should be removed. “This Class E airspace area is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.”
Class E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 6002, 6004 and 6005 of FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15, 2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order. FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.2-mile radius of the airport, and 1 mile each side of the 047° bearing extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 5.4 miles northeast of the Bryce Canyon Airport.
That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1 mile each side of the 227° bearing extending from the 4.2 mile radius to 7.8 miles southwest of the Bryce Canyon Airport.
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within 8 miles north and 4.2 miles south of the 227° bearing from the airport, extending from the airport to 16 miles southwest of the airport, and within 8 miles north and 4.2 miles south of the 047° bearing from the airport, extending from the airport to 16 miles northeast of the Bryce Canyon Airport.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The Coast Guard proposes to revise existing regulations and
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before February 28, 2020.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2019-0691 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email LT Chad Ray, Sector Charleston Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 843-740-3184, email
Recurring race, swim, and other marine events within the Seventh Coast Guard District are currently listed in 33 CFR 100.701, Table to § 100.701. The process for amending the table (
This rule serves two purposes: (1) Create a table of recurring marine events/special local regulations occurring solely within the COTP Charleston Zone, and (2) consolidate into that table marine events/special local regulations previously established outside of Table to § 100.701. The proposed new table would facilitate management of and public access to information about marine events within the COTP Charleston Zone.
The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70041.
This rule proposes to make the following changes:
1. Revise the contact information in § 100.701(d)(1) to read “Captain of the Port Charleston, South Carolina: (843) 740-7050.”;
2. Delete the existing special local regulation for the “Head of South” event listed in Table § 100.701(f)(5) because it is no longer held;
3. Establish § 100.704 for Special Local Regulations; Marine Events Within COTP Zone Charleston;
4. Move the remaining list of existing marine events/special local regulations listed in Table to § 100.701(f) under COTP Zone Charleston; Special Local Regulations to proposed new § 100.704, Table to § 100.704;
5. Add new event, “Cooper River Bridge Run” to proposed new Table to § 100.704, Line 1;
6. Add new event, “Myrtle Beach Triathlon” to proposed new Table § 100.704, Line 3;
7. Add new event, “North Charleston Fireworks” to proposed new Table § 100.704, Line 5;
8. Add new event, “Patriots Point Fireworks” to proposed new Table § 100.704, Line 6;
9. Add new event, “Beaufort Water Festival Air Show” to proposed new Table § 100.704, Line 8;
10. Revise the dates for the existing event, “Charleston Race Week” listed in proposed new § 100.704, Line 2 to one week (Monday through Sunday) in April;
11. Revise the dates for the existing event, “Low Country Splash” listed in proposed new § 100.704, Line 4 to one Saturday or Sunday during the last two weeks of May or the first two weeks of June § 100.704;
12. Revise the dates for the existing event, “Beaufort Water Festival” listed in proposed new § 100.704, Line 7 to ten consecutive days (Friday through Sunday) in July;
13. Revise the dates for the existing event, “Swim Around Charleston” listed in proposed new § 100.704, Line 9 to one weekend day (Saturday or Sunday) during the last two weeks of September through the first two weeks of October;
14. Revise the dates for the existing event, “Charleston Parade of Boats” to one weekend day (Friday, Saturday, or Sunday) in December; and
15. Delete existing § 100.713, which contains a special local regulation for the Annual Harborwalk Boat Race; Sampit River, Georgetown, SC because it is no longer held.
The marine events listed in proposed new Table to § 100.704 are scheduled to occur over a particular weekend and month each year. Exact dates are intentionally omitted since calendar dates for a specific weekend change from year to year. Once dates for a marine event are known, the Coast Guard will notify the public of its intent to enforce the special local regulation through various means including a Notice of Enforcement published in the
We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the special local regulations. These areas are limited in size and duration, and usually do not affect high vessel traffic areas. Moreover, the Coast Guard would provide advance notice of the regulated areas to the local maritime community Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the regulated area.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small
While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the
This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves the establishment of special local regulations for recurring marine events within the COTP Charleston Zone. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraphs L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated in
The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the
We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to
Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at
Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and Record keeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR parts 100 as follows:
46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.
The following regulations apply to the marine events listed in Table 1 of this section. These regulations will be effective annually for the duration listed in Table 1. The Coast Guard will notify the maritime community of exact dates and times each regulation will be in effect and the nature of each event (
(a)
(1)
(2)
(b)
(c)
(1) The COTP Charleston or designated representative may control the movement of all vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol vessel, a vessel in these areas shall immediately comply with the directions given. Failure to do so may result in removal from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
(2) The COTP Charleston or designated representative may terminate the event, or the operation of any vessel participating in the event, at any time it is deemed necessary for the protection of life or property.
(3) Only event sponsor designated participants and official patrol vessels are allowed to enter the regulated area, unless otherwise authorized by the COTP Charleston or designated representative.
(4) Spectators may request permission from the COTP Charleston or designated representative to enter, transit, remain within, or anchor in the regulated area. If permission is granted, spectators must abide by the directions of the COTP Charleston or a designated representative.
(d)
Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.
Notice of inquiry; extension of comment period.
The Copyright Royalty Judges extend the comment period regarding the notice of inquiry regarding categorization of claims for cable or satellite royalty funds and treatment of royalties associated with invalid claims from January 29, 2020, to March 15, 2020.
The comment period for the notice of inquiry (84 FR 71852) is extended. Comments are due on or before March 16, 2020.
You may submit comments and proposals, identified by docket number 19-CRB-0014-RM, by any of the following methods:
Anita Blaine, CRB Program Specialist, by telephone at (202) 707-7658 or email at
On January 16, 2020, MPA-Represented Program Suppliers, Joint Sports Claimants, and Settling Devotional Claimants filed a motion with the Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) requesting an extension of the comment period for the notice of inquiry, 84 FR 71852 (Dec. 30, 2019), in order to prepare comments that include any relevant factual evidence and economic analyses. On the same day, the Judges granted the motion extending the deadline as requested to March 16, 2020.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
Proposed rule; request for comments.
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose revising regulations governing the annual Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Contest (also known as the Federal Duck Stamp
We will accept comments that we receive on or before March 16, 2020. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
•
•
We will not accept emailed or faxed comments. We will post all comments on
Suzanne Fellows at: Federal Duck Stamp Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, MS:MB, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041; (703) 358-2145;
On March 16, 1934, Congress passed, and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed, the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act. Popularly known as the Duck Stamp Act, it required all waterfowl hunters 16 years or older to buy a stamp annually. The revenue generated was originally earmarked for the Department of Agriculture, but 5 years later was transferred to the Department of the Interior and the Service.
In the years since its enactment, the Federal Duck Stamp Program has become one of the most popular and successful conservation programs ever initiated. Today, some 1.5 million stamps are sold each year, and as of 2018, Federal Duck Stamps have generated more than $1 billion for the conservation of more than 6 million acres of waterfowl habitat in the United States. Numerous other birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians have similarly prospered because of habitat protection made possible by the program. An estimated one-third of the Nation's endangered and threatened species find food or shelter in refuges conserved by Duck Stamp funds. Moreover, healthy wetlands help dissipate storms, purify water supplies, store flood water, and nourish fish hatchlings important for sport and commercial fishermen.
The first Federal Duck Stamp was designed at President Roosevelt's request by Jay N. “Ding” Darling, a nationally known political cartoonist for the
Throughout the history of the Federal Duck Stamp, there has been an effort to increase its messaging capabilities. For example, in 1959, the theme of the Contest was “Retrievers Save Game,” and artists were required to produce a design which illustrated this theme. The resulting 1959-1960 stamp, the “King Buck,” featuring a black Labrador Retriever and a mallard, is arguably among the most identifiable Federal Duck Stamps. With the 1998-1999 stamp, the pressure-sensitive adhesive dollar-bill sized carrier was introduced. This gave stamp designers more area to work with to produce both visual and verbal messages. Additional opportunities exist for messages on the back of the carrier as well as on the appreciation certificates that are available to customers interested in the Duck Stamp Program.
As the only ones required to purchase a Federal Duck Stamp, waterfowl hunters have been the primary supporters of the Federal Duck Stamp program and have enabled the purchase of wetland habitats that support both hunted and nonhunted species, assist in flood control and water purification, and provide communities with an economic stimulus. To address Executive Order 13443 (Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation; 72 FR 46537, August 20, 2007) and Secretarial Order 3356 (Hunting, Fishing, Recreational Shooting, and Wildlife Conservation Opportunities and Coordination with States, Tribes, and Territories; September 15, 2017), it was determined that the theme of the 2019-2020 Federal Duck Stamp would be “celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.” To accomplish this, the 2018 Contest regulations required the mandatory inclusion of “appropriate hunting-related accessories and/or scenes.” An image of a drake wood duck with an old decoy was chosen as the winner of the 2018 Federal Duck Stamp Contest, and that image appears on the 2019-2020 Federal Duck Stamp. Text and special stamp products were developed to highlight the theme and to provide visual and verbal recognition to the contributions waterfowl hunters make to habitat conservation. By celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage and showing hunters in a positive light as active wildlife conservationists on the 2019-2020 stamp, we celebrate their contributions to providing public lands and robust wildlife populations.
The regulations governing the Contest are at 50 CFR part 91. On March 21, 2018, we published a final rule (83 FR 12275) that revised the regulations at 50 CFR part 91 governing the annual Federal Duck Stamp Contest. Of specific interest to this proposal, we set forth the 2018 Contest regulations regarding the theme, the mandatory elements, and an additional requirement for judges which we stated we would remove at a later date. In this proposed rule, we propose to specify a permanent “celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage” theme and the mandatory inclusion of an appropriate hunting element beginning with the 2020 Contest, make a permanent change to the qualifications of the judging panel, and remove references to the 2018 Contest.
Currently, § 91.14 explains that a live portrayal of any bird(s) of the five or fewer identified eligible waterfowl species must be the dominant feature of the design, but that the design may depict other appropriate elements, such as hunting dogs, as long as an eligible waterfowl species is in the foreground and clearly the focus of attention. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added § 91.14(b) with additional requirements specified for the 2018 Contest only. In this proposed rule, we propose to make it a permanent requirement that Contest entries must include one or more elements that reflect the theme “celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.”
Section 91.21(b) outlines the qualification of the judging panel. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added § 91.21(b)(2) with additional requirements specified for the 2018 Contest only. In this proposed rule, we propose to revise § 91.21(b) to remove reference to the 2018 Contest and make it a permanent requirement that all selected contest judges have an understanding and appreciation of the waterfowl hunting heritage and be able to recognize waterfowl hunting accessories.
Finally, § 91.23 sets forth the scoring criteria for the contest. In the March 21, 2018, final rule, we added § 91.23(b) with an additional scoring criterion specified for the 2018 Contest only. In this proposed rule, we propose to revise § 91.23 to remove reference to the 2018 Contest and specify that entries will also be judged on how well they illustrate the theme of “celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.”
To ensure that any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be as accurate and as effective as possible, we request that you send relevant information for our consideration. We will accept public comments we receive on or before the date listed above in
You must submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed rule by one of the methods listed above in
If you mail or hand-carry a hardcopy comment directly to us that includes personal information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. To ensure that the electronic docket for this rulemaking is complete and all comments we receive are publicly available, we will post all hardcopy comments on
In addition, comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation used in preparing this proposed rule, will be available for public inspection in two ways:
(1) You can view them on
(2) You can make an appointment, during normal business hours, to view the comments and materials in person by contacting the person listed above under
As stated above in more detail, before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publically 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.
This proposed rule is categorically excluded. It reflects an administrative modification of procedures and the impacts are limited to administrative effects (516 DM 8.5(a)(3)). A detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
Of the species on our List of Eligible Species, only two species are currently listed as endangered or threatened under section 4 of the ESA of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this proposed rule is not significant.
Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the Nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a notice of
We therefore certify that, if adopted, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a Small Entity Compliance Guide is not required.
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in
This rulemaking is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This proposed rule:
a. Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.
b. Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government agencies; or geographic regions.
c. Would not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The rulemaking does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has determined that this proposed rule does not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this proposed rule does not have significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is not required.
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, or use. This proposed rule would revise the current regulations at 50 CFR part 91 that govern the Federal Duck Stamp Contest. This rule would not significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is a not a significant energy action and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.
Under the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, “Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments” (59 FR 22951), and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible effects on federally recognized Indian Tribes and have determined that there are no effects. Individual tribal members must meet the same regulatory requirements as other individuals who enter the Federal Duck Stamp Contest.
These proposed revisions to part 91 do not contain significant Federalism implications. A federalism summary impact statement under Executive Order 13132 is not required.
This rule is not an Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action because this rule is not significant under E.O. 12866.
Hunting, Wildlife.
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 91, subchapter G of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 718j; 31 U.S.C. 9701.
(b)
(b)
Entries will be judged on the basis of anatomical accuracy, artistic composition, suitability for reduction in the production of a stamp, and how well they illustrate the theme of “celebrating our waterfowl hunting heritage.”
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Proposed rule; request for comments.
NMFS proposes regulations to implement permitting and reporting measures for private recreational tilefish vessels that were approved in Amendment 6 to the Tilefish Fishery Management Plan. These measures are being implemented after the other management measures in Amendment 6 because of additional time needed for development. The intended effect of this action is to notify private recreation tilefish vessels of the proposed changes and to solicit public comment on these measures.
Comments must be received on or before February 28, 2020.
You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2020-005, by either of the following methods:
•
•
Copies of Amendment 6, and of the Environmental Assessment (EA), are available from the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 North State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901. The EA and Regulatory Impact Review are also accessible via the internet at:
Laura Hansen, Fishery Management Specialist, 978-281-9225.
On November 15, 2017, we announced our approval of all the measures proposed by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in the Amendment 6 to the Tilefish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) final rule (82 FR 52851). The final rule implemented most, but not all, of the measures in the amendment. The amendment implemented management measures and quotas for the previously unregulated blueline tilefish fishery in the Mid-Atlantic region and additional information and analysis on these measures are provided in the EA (see
We are proposing regulations to require private recreational vessels to obtain a Federal vessel permit to fish for or a retain golden or blueline tilefish in the Mid-Atlantic, which are permitting and reporting requirements recommended by the Council and approved as part of Amendment 6.
This action does not impact the regulations for party/charter vessels and will apply to anglers using a personal vessel, to fish for and/or obtain blueline and golden tilefish. Retained fish may only be kept for personal consumption and may not be sold or bartered. We would issue this permit through an online application on the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) website. GARFO would issue and renew private recreational tilefish permits annually. Private recreational tilefish vessels would also be required to submit vessel trip reports (VTRs) for any trip targeting tilefish through any NMFS-approved electronic reporting system. There are several platforms to submit electronic reports including SAFIS eTrips, SAFIS eTrips Online, and Fish Online. Fish Online is the simplest system and is the preferred method to submit reports. Users can create an account by calling (978) 281-9188 or emailing the GARFO Helpdesk at
Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Tilefish FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
This proposed rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action, because this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that the measures approved in Amendment 6 to the Tilefish FMP, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Private recreational anglers are not considered small entities. As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required for this action and none has been prepared.
This proposed rule contains two revisions to existing collection-of-information requirements subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). NMFS has submitted these requirements to OMB for approval under control number 0648-0202 and 0648-0212.
The public reporting burden for initial private recreational tilefish permit applications is estimated to average 45 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Public reporting burden for private recreational tilefish vessel trip reports is estimated to average five minutes per response. Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be submitted to Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and by email to
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed to be amended as follows:
16 U.S.C. 1801
(a) * * *
(12) * * *
(iii)
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) An application for a private recreational tilefish permit issued under this section, in addition to the information specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, also must contain at least the following information, and any other information required by the Regional Administrator: Vessel name, owner name or name of the owner's authorized representative, mailing address, and telephone number; USCG documentation number and a copy of the vessel's current USCG documentation or, for a vessel not required to be documented under title 46 U.S.C., the vessel's state registration number and a copy of the current state registration.
(B) [Reserved]
The revisions and additions read as follows:
(b)
(1) * * *
(i)
(A) Maintain on board the vessel, and submit, an accurate fishing log report for each fishing trip, regardless of species fished for or taken, on forms supplied by or approved by the Regional Administrator.
(B) If authorized in writing by the Regional Administrator, a vessel owner or operator may submit reports electronically, for example by using a VMS or other media.
(C) At least the following information and any other information required by the Regional Administrator must be provided:
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(ii) * * *
(iii)
(iv)
(A) Vessel name;
(B) USCG documentation number (or state registration number, if undocumented);
(C) Permit number;
(D) Date/time sailed;
(E) Date/time landed;
(F) Trip type;
(G) Number of anglers;
(H) Species
(I) Gear fished;
(J) Quantity and size of gear;
(K) Soak time
(L) Depth
(M) Chart Area
(N) Latitude/longitude where fishing occurred;
(O) Count of individual golden and blueline tilefish landed or discarded; and
(P) Port and state landed
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) Private recreational tilefish electronic log reports, required by paragraph (b)(1)(iv) of this section, must be submitted within 24 hours after entering port at the conclusion of a trip.
(f)
(a) The Regional Administrator may request any vessel holding a permit for Atlantic sea scallops, NE multispecies, monkfish, skates, Atlantic mackerel, squid, butterfish, scup, black sea bass, bluefish, spiny dogfish, Atlantic herring, tilefish, Atlantic surfclam, ocean quahog, or Atlantic deep-sea red crab; or a moratorium permit for summer flounder; to carry a NMFS-certified fisheries observer. A vessel holding a permit for Atlantic sea scallops is subject to the additional requirements specific in paragraph (g) of this section. Also, any vessel or vessel owner/operator that fishes for, catches or lands hagfish, or intends to fish for, catch, or land hagfish in or from the exclusive economic zone must carry a NMFS-certified fisheries observer when requested by the Regional Administrator in accordance with the requirements of this section. The requirements of this section do not apply to vessels with only a Federal private recreational tilefish permit.
(u) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) Operate a private recreational vessel to fish for, retain, and/or possess blueline or golden tilefish, in the Tilefish Management Unit, without a valid tilefish private recreational permit as required in § 648.4(a)(12)(iii).
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) The tilefish were harvested in or from the Tilefish Management Unit by a vessel with a Federal private recreational tilefish permit or a Federal charter/party tilefish permit.
(a) * * *
(1) The recreational tilefish possession limit for charter/party and private recreational anglers is eight golden tilefish per angler per trip. Any vessel engaged in recreational fishing for golden tilefish may not retain golden tilefish, unless issued a valid Federal charter/party permit, pursuant to
(b) * * *
(1)
The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to 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.
Comments regarding this information collection received by February 28, 2020 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
The Ketchikan Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Ketchikan, Alaska. The committee is authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (the Act) and operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the committee is to improve collaborative relationships and to provide advice and recommendations to the Forest Service concerning projects and funding consistent with Title II of the Act. RAC information can be found at the following website:
The meeting will be held on February 6, 2020, at 6:00 p.m.
All RAC meetings are subject to cancellation. For status of meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under
The meeting will be held at the Southeast Alaska Discovery Center, 50 Main Street, Ketchikan, Alaska 99901. A conference line is set up for those who would like to listen in by telephone. For the conference call number, please contact the person listed under
Written comments may be submitted as described under
Penny L. Richardson, RAC Coordinator, by phone at 907-228-4105 or via email at
The purpose of the meeting is to:
1. Update members on past RAC projects, and
2. Propose new RAC projects.
The meeting is open to the public. 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 January 31, 2020, 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 to make oral comments must be sent to Penny L. Richardson, RAC Coordinator, Ketchikan Misty Fjords Ranger District, 3031 Tongass Avenue, Ketchikan, Alaska 99901; by email to
Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Notice and opportunity for public comment.
The Economic Development Administration (EDA) has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. Accordingly, EDA has initiated investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each of the firms contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firms' workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm.
Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice. These petitions are received pursuant to section 251 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms.
The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of uncoated paper from Indonesia during the period of review (POR) January 1 through December 31, 2018.
Applicable January 29, 2020.
William Miller, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3906.
The review covers PT Anugerah Kertas Utama, PT Riau Andalan Kertas, APRIL Fine Paper Macao Offshore Limited, PT Asia Pacific Rayon, PT Sateri Viscose International, A P Fine Paper Trading (Hong Kong) Limited, and APRIL International Enterprise Pte. Ltd. (collectively, APRIL).
On November 8, 2019, Commerce published the preliminary results of this administrative review in the
The merchandise under review includes uncoated paper in sheet form; weighing at least 40 grams per square meter but not more than 150 grams per square meter; that either is a white paper with a GE brightness level
Specifically excluded from the scope are: (1) Paper printed with final content of printed text or graphics and (2) lined paper products, typically school supplies, composed of paper that incorporates straight horizontal and/or vertical lines that would make the paper unsuitable for copying or printing purposes. For purposes of this scope definition, paper shall be considered “printed with final content” where at least one side of the sheet has printed text and/or graphics that cover at least five percent of the surface area of the entire sheet.
On September 1, 2017, Commerce determined that that imports of uncoated paper with a GE brightness of 83 +/− 1% (83 Bright paper), otherwise meeting the description of in-scope merchandise, constitute merchandise “altered in form or appearance in minor respects” from in-scope merchandise that are subject to this order.
Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) categories 4802.56.1000, 4802.56.2000, 4802.56.3000, 4802.56.4000, 4802.56.6000, 4802.56.7020, 4802.56.7040, 4802.57.1000, 4802.57.2000, 4802.57.3000, and 4802.57.4000. Some imports of subject merchandise may also be classified under 4802.62.1000, 4802.62.2000, 4802.62.3000, 4802.62.5000, 4802.62.6020, 4802.62.6040, 4802.69.1000, 4802.69.2000, 4802.69.3000, 4811.90.8050 and 4811.90.9080. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.
We determine the following net countervailable subsidy rate for the period January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018:
Consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries. Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, Commerce also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the amount indicated above for APRIL on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the most recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to APO of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
In response to a request for changed circumstances reviews (CCRs), the Department of Commerce (Commerce) is initiating CCRs of the antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders on certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires (passenger tires) from the People's Republic of China (China). We have preliminarily determined that: Sailun Group Co., Ltd. (Sailun Group) is the successor-in-interest to Sailun Jinyu Group Co., Ltd. (Sailun Jinyu); Sailun (Dongying) Tire Co., Ltd. (Sailun Dongying) is the successor-in-interest to Shandong Jinyu Industrial Co., Ltd. (Shandong Jinyu); and Sailun Group (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd. (Sailun HK) is the successor-in-interest to Sailun Jinyu Group (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd. (Sailun Jinyu HK). As a result, these entities should be accorded the same treatment previously accorded to this company group. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.
Applicable January 29, 2020.
Toni Page at (202) 482-1398 (AD) or Andrew Huston at (202) 482-4261 (CVD), Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
On August 10, 2015, Commerce published in the
On October 25, 2019, Sailun Jinyu requested that Commerce conduct expedited CCRs of the
The scope of these orders is passenger vehicle and light truck tires. Passenger vehicle and light truck tires are new pneumatic tires, of rubber, with a passenger vehicle or light truck size designation. Tires covered by this order may be tube-type, tubeless, radial, or non-radial, and they may be intended for sale to original equipment manufacturers or the replacement market.
Subject tires have, at the time of importation, the symbol “DOT” on the sidewall, certifying that the tire conforms to applicable motor vehicle safety standards. Subject tires may also have the following prefixes or suffix in their tire size designation, which also appears on the sidewall of the tire:
All tires with a “P” or “LT” prefix, and all tires with an “LT” suffix in their sidewall markings are covered by this investigation regardless of their intended use. In addition, all tires that lack a “P” or “LT” prefix or suffix in their sidewall markings, as well as all tires that include any other prefix or suffix in their sidewall markings, are included in the scope, regardless of their intended use, as long as the tire is of a size that is among the numerical size designations listed in the passenger car section or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book, as updated annually, unless the tire falls within one of the specific exclusions set out below.
Passenger vehicle and light truck tires, whether or not attached to wheels or rims, are included in the scope. However, if a subject tire is imported attached to a wheel or rim, only the tire is covered by the scope.
(1) Racing car tires; such tires do not bear the symbol “DOT” on the sidewall and may be marked with “ZR” in size designation;
(2) new pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a size that is not listed in the passenger car section or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book;
(3) pneumatic tires, of rubber, that are not new, including recycled and retreaded tires;
(4) non-pneumatic tires, such as solid rubber tires;
(5) tires designed and marketed exclusively as temporary use spare tires for passenger vehicles which, in addition, exhibit each of the following physical characteristics:
(a) The size designation and load index combination molded on the tire's sidewall are listed in Table PCT-1B (“T” Type Spare Tires for Temporary Use on Passenger Vehicles) of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book,
(b) the designation “T” is molded into the tire's sidewall as part of the size designation, and,
(c) the tire's speed rating is molded on the sidewall, indicating the rated speed in MPH or a letter rating as listed by Tire and Rim Association Year Book, and the rated speed is 81 MPH or a “M” rating;
(6) tires designed and marketed exclusively for specialty tire (ST) use which, in addition, exhibit each of the following conditions:
(a) The size designation molded on the tire's sidewall is listed in the ST sections of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book,
(b) the designation “ST” is molded into the tire's sidewall as part of the size designation,
(c) the tire incorporates a warning, prominently molded on the sidewall, that the tire is “For Trailer Service Only” or “For Trailer Use Only”,
(d) the load index molded on the tire's sidewall meets or exceeds those load indexes listed in the Tire and Rim Association Year Book for the relevant ST tire size, and
(e) either
(i) the tire's speed rating is molded on the sidewall, indicating the rated speed in MPH or a letter rating as listed by Tire and Rim Association Year Book, and the rated speed does not exceed 81 MPH or an “M” rating; or
(ii) the tire's speed rating molded on the sidewall is 87 MPH or an “N” rating, and in either case the tire's maximum pressure and maximum load limit are molded on the sidewall and either
(1) both exceed the maximum pressure and maximum load limit for any tire of the same size designation in either the passenger car or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book; or
(2) if the maximum cold inflation pressure molded on the tire is less than any cold inflation pressure listed for that size designation in either the passenger car or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book, the maximum load limit molded on the tire is higher than the maximum load limit listed at that cold inflation pressure for that size designation in either the passenger car or light truck section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book;
(7) tires designed and marketed exclusively for off-road use and which, in addition, exhibit each of the following physical characteristics:
(a) The size designation and load index combination molded on the tire's sidewall are listed in the off-the-road, agricultural, industrial or ATV section of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book,
(b) in addition to any size designation markings, the tire incorporates a warning, prominently molded on the sidewall, that the tire is “Not For Highway Service” or “Not for Highway Use”,
(c) the tire's speed rating is molded on the sidewall, indicating the rated speed in MPH or a letter rating as listed by the Tire and Rim Association Year Book, and the rated speed does not exceed 55 MPH or a “G” rating, and
(d) the tire features a recognizable off-road tread design.
The products covered by this order are currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4011.10.10.10, 4011.10.10.20, 4011.10.10.30, 4011.10.10.40, 4011.10.10.50, 4011.10.10.60, 4011.10.10.70, 4011.10.50.00, 4011.20.10.05, and 4011.20.50.10. Tires meeting the scope description may also enter under the following HTSUS subheadings: 4011.99.45.10, 4011.99.45.50, 4011.99.85.10, 4011.99.85.50, 8708.70.45.45, 8708.70.45.60, 8708.70.60.30, 8708.70.60.45, and 8708.70.60.60. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs purposes, the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive.
Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216, Commerce will conduct a CCR upon a request from an interested party for a review of an AD or CVD order which shows changed
Sailun Jinyu argues that Commerce's practice is to grant expedited successor-in-interest status to new companies when the evidence confirms that the company has merely changed its name.
Therefore, in accordance with the above-referenced regulation, Commerce is initiating CCRs to determine whether Sailun Group is the successor-in-interest to Sailun Jinyu, Sailun Dongying is the successor-in-interest to Shandong Jinyu, and Sailun HK is the successor-in-interest to Sailun Jinyu HK.
When it concludes that expedited action is warranted, Commerce may publish the notice of initiation and preliminary results of a CCR concurrently.
In a CCR, Commerce generally considers a company to be the successor to another company for AD cash deposit purposes if the operations of the successor are not materially dissimilar from those of its predecessor.
As a general rule, in a CVD CCR, Commerce will make an affirmative CVD successorship finding (
Should our final results remain the same as these preliminary results, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assign entries of subject merchandise exported by Sailun Group, Sailun Dongying, and Sailun HK the AD and CVD cash deposit rates applicable to Sailun Jinyu, Shandong Jinyu, and Sailun Jinyu HK, effective the date of publication of the final results.
Any interested party may request a hearing within 14 days of publication of this notice, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(c). Interested parties may submit case briefs and/or written comments no later than 14 days after the date of publication of this notice.
We are issuing and publishing this initiation and preliminary results notice in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221(c)(3).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; request for comments.
NMFS has proposed to grant a waiver of the Marine Mammal Protection Act's moratorium on the take of marine mammals to allow the Makah Indian Tribe to take a limited number of Eastern North Pacific gray whales. A formal hearing took place on November 14-21, 2019 before Administrative Law Judge George J. Jordan in the Henry M. Jackson Federal Building, 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174. NMFS now requests public comment on the proposed waiver and proposed regulations.
Comments must be submitted in writing by March 16, 2020.
You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2019-0037, by any of the following methods:
•
•
Michael Milstein, NMFS West Coast Region, 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232-1274; 503-231-6268.
On February 14, 2005, NMFS received a request from the Makah Indian Tribe for a waiver of the MMPA moratorium on the take of marine mammals to allow for take of ENP gray whales (
On April 5, 2019, NMFS published a Notice of Hearing and the associated proposed regulations in the
On November 14, 2019, Judge George J. Jordan commenced the hearing in this matter, which took place over six days. The hearing was publicly conducted and reported verbatim by an official reporter. All filings associated with the hearing, including a full transcript of the hearing, are available for public viewing and inspection at
The regulations governing this proceeding permit any interested person to file written comments on the proposed regulations and waiver, including proposed findings and
After the expiration of the comment period, the presiding officer will make a written decision based on the record and transmit it to the Assistant Administrator. There will then be another opportunity for public comment before the Assistant Administrator issues a final decision on the proposed waiver and regulations. 50 CFR 228.20.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice.
We, NMFS, have determined that a designation of critical habitat for the chambered nautilus (
This finding is made on January 29, 2020.
Electronic copies of the determination and the list of references are available from the NMFS Office of Protected Resources website at
Maggie Miller, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, (301) 427-8403.
On September 28, 2018, we published a final rule to list the chambered nautilus (
This finding describes the biology, distribution, and habitat use of the chambered nautilus and information and analyses to support the above determinations.
The following discussion of the life history and status of the chambered nautilus is based on the best scientific data available, including the
The chambered nautilus (
The chambered nautilus is found in tropical, coastal reef, deep-water habitats of the Indo-Pacific. It is generally found in association with steep-sloped forereefs with sandy, silty, or muddy-bottomed substrates. Physiologically, the chambered nautilus cannot tolerate temperatures above approximately 25° C or depths exceeding around 750-800 meters (m) (Ward
Chambered nautiluses are described as deep-sea scavenging generalists and opportunistic predators, using their
The general life history characteristics of the chambered nautilus are that of a rare, long-lived (at least 20 years), late-maturing (10-17 years), and slow-growing marine invertebrate species, with likely low reproductive output. Circumferential growth rate for the chambered nautilus is estimated to range from 0.053 mm/day to 0.23 mm/day and slows as the animal approaches maturity (Dunstan
Very little is known regarding nautilus reproduction in the wild. Observations of captive animals suggest that nautiluses reproduce sexually and have multiple reproductive cycles over the course of their lifetime. Based on data from captive
As discussed in the proposed rule (82 FR 48948, October 23, 2017) and final rule (83 FR 48976, September 28, 2018) to list the chambered nautilus, the most significant threat to the species is overutilization through commercial harvest to meet the demand for the international nautilus shell trade. Chambered nautiluses are specifically targeted for their shells, which have a distinctive coiled interior, and are sold as souvenirs to tourists and shell collectors and also used in jewelry and home décor items (where either the whole shell is sold as a decorative object or parts are used to create shell-inlay designs). Based on the available trade data, nautilus commodities are in high demand and nautilus products are globally traded, likely in the hundreds of thousands annually.
Fisheries for nautiluses tend to follow a boom-bust cycle, with serial exploitation of nautilus populations leading to reductions of 70 to 97 percent in population abundances and even extirpations of local chambered nautilus populations from waters comprising roughly three-quarters of the species' known range. The evidence of new
Critical habitat is defined by section 3 of the ESA as: (i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1) provide circumstances where the Secretary may determine that a designation would not be prudent. These include if: (1) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the degree of such threat to the species; (2) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of a species' habitat or range is not a threat to the species, or threats to the species' habitat stem solely from causes that cannot be addressed through management actions resulting from consultations under section 7(a)(2) of the Act; (3) areas within the jurisdiction of the United States provide no more than negligible conservation value, if any, for a species occurring primarily outside the jurisdiction of the United States; (4) no areas meet the definition of critical habitat; or (5) the Secretary otherwise determines that designation of critical habitat would not be prudent based on the best scientific data available. We have determined that two of the circumstances noted above apply to the chambered nautilus: (1) There are no areas that meet the definition of critical habitat; and (2) the species occurs primarily outside of U.S. jurisdiction in the Indo-Pacific, and the area where it is found within U.S. waters (
Critical habitat under the ESA consists of specific areas upon which are found those physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection. The ESA does not specifically define physical or biological features. However, court decisions and joint NMFS-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 provide guidance on how physical or biological features are expressed. Specifically, these regulations state that the physical and biological features are those that occur in specific areas and that are essential to support the life-history needs of the species, including but not limited to, water characteristics, soil type, geological features, sites, prey, vegetation, symbiotic species, or other features. A feature may be a single habitat characteristic, or a more complex combination of habitat characteristics. Features may include habitat characteristics that support ephemeral or dynamic habitat conditions. Features may also be expressed in terms relating to principles of conservation biology, such as patch size, distribution distances, and connectivity (50 CFR 424.02). Furthermore, section 3 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)) defines the terms “conserve,” “conserving,” and “conservation” to mean to use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this chapter are no longer necessary. For the chambered nautilus, we consider conservation to include the use of all methods and procedures necessary to bring the chambered nautilus to the point at which factors related to population ecology and vital rates indicate that the species is recovered in accordance with the definition of recovery in 50 CFR 402.02. Important factors related to population ecology and vital rates include population size and trends, range, distribution, age structure, gender ratios, age-specific survival, age-specific reproduction, and lifetime reproductive success.
As stated above, very little is known about the biology and ecology of
In general, many of the locations where nautiluses have been found (including Fiji, Philippines, Australia, and American Samoa) tend to share similar depth profiles—step drop-offs on the fore-reef slope that reach bottom depths within around 2 km (Dunstan
In terms of supporting important life history functions, the available information does not indicate any physical or biological features that are essential for the reproduction or growth of the species. Neither mating nor egg laying has been observed in the wild for
In terms of juvenile habitat and habitat necessary to support growth, nautilus trapping and telemetry studies have shown no difference in vertical movement behavior or depth distribution within a particular location between immature, sub-adult, or adult individuals, indicating that there is likely no partitioning of habitat between juveniles and adults of the species (Dunstan
Additionally, the general habitat characteristics described above are based on areas where nautiluses have been lured through baited traps (
The known range of the chambered nautilus includes waters off Australia, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and American Samoa, and it may also potentially occur in waters off China, Myanmar, Western Samoa, Thailand, and Vietnam (CITES 2016). Hence, the waters of American Samoa comprise only a very small portion of the known range of the chambered nautilus, which falls predominantly outside of U.S. jurisdiction.
Additionally, there is no information to suggest that the waters of American Samoa provide any more than negligible conservation value to the species. The species was not even known to occur in these waters until researchers
Within American Samoan waters, the species has only been captured from one location, Taema Bank. This area appears to comprise the easternmost extent of the range of the species. However, it is likely to contribute only negligible conservation value. As noted above, the available data do not indicate any physical or biological features or areas that are essential for the conservation of the species. Taema Bank makes up only a very small fraction of the entire range of the species and is located at the fringe of the species' distribution range. It contains habitat for a likely genetically and reproductively-isolated population of chambered nautilus (Saunders 2010; Bonacum
Additionally, there are no data to suggest that the American Samoan population is biologically significant to the taxon as a whole. As stated before, this population is likely reproductively isolated. There are no data to suggest this population is acting as part of any source-sink population dynamics and thus affecting the species' abundance or broader distribution. There is also no evidence to indicate the population exhibits unique adaptations that could protect against changes in environmental conditions, with the exception of shell size and shell coloration (Ward
In summary, based on the above information, we find that the species occurs primarily outside of U.S. jurisdiction, and the habitat at Taemea Bank, in American Samoan waters, is not essential for the recovery of the species. In fact, a designation of critical habitat at Taema Bank would provide no more than negligible conservation value for the species because there are no data to suggest the habitat within American Samoa would provide any more than a negligible impact in bringing the chambered nautilus to the point at which factors related to population ecology and vital rates would indicate that the species is recovered throughout its range.
Section 3(5)(A)(ii) of the ESA defines critical habitat to include specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a threatened or endangered species at the time it is listed, if the areas are determined by the Secretary to be essential for the conservation of the species. Regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b)(2) specify that we will designate as critical habitat specific areas outside the geographical area presently occupied by a species only upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. For an unoccupied area to be considered essential, we must determine that there is a reasonable certainty both that the area will contribute to the conservation of the species and that the area contains one or more of those physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(g) also state that critical habitat will not be designated within foreign countries or in other areas outside of U.S. jurisdiction.
Because we are unable to identify any physical or biological features of nautilus habitat that are essential to the conservation of the species, we cannot identify any unoccupied habitat that contains such features. Furthermore, due to the limited understanding of habitat use by the chambered nautilus, we cannot identify any unoccupied areas that have a reasonable certainty of contributing to the conservation of the species or are essential to the conservation of the species.
Given the best available information and the above analysis of this information, we find that there are no identifiable occupied areas under the jurisdiction of the United States that contain physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species or unoccupied areas that are essential to the conservation of the species. Therefore, we conclude that there are no specific areas within the chambered nautilus' range and under U.S. jurisdiction that meet the definition of critical habitat. Additionally, we have determined that the chambered nautilus occurs primarily outside the jurisdiction of the United States, and the areas within the jurisdiction of the United States provide no more than negligible
Although we have made this “not prudent” determination, the areas occupied by chambered nautiluses under U.S. jurisdiction will continue to be subject to conservation actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the ESA, as well as consultation pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA for Federal activities that may affect the chambered nautilus, as determined on the basis of the best available information at the time of the action. Through the consultation process, we will continue to assess effects of Federal actions on the species and its habitat.
Additionally, we remain committed to promoting the recovery of the chambered nautilus through both domestic and international efforts. As noted in the proposed and final rules (82 FR 48948, October 23, 2017; 83 FR 48976, September 28, 2018, respectively), the most significant threat to the chambered nautilus is overutilization through commercial harvest to meet the demand for the international nautilus shell trade. The international nautilus shell trade has led to the serial depletion and extirpation of local nautilus populations and has been largely unregulated, particularly in Indonesia, Philippines, and China, despite some prohibitions. However, in October 2016, the member nations to CITES, including the United States, agreed to add all nautilus species to Appendix II of CITES (effective January 2017). This listing means increased protection for the chambered nautilus and other nautilus species, but still allows legal and sustainable trade. Export of nautilus products now requires CITES permits or re-export certificates that ensure the products were legally acquired and that the Scientific Authority of the State of export has advised that such export will not be detrimental to the survival of that species in the wild.
We continue to evaluate the effectiveness of the CITES Appendix II listing of the chambered nautilus to determine whether there is a need for additional protective measures for the species. For example, we have preliminarily reviewed the information in the CITES Trade Database (
Additionally, the CITES Review of Significant Trade (defined in Resolution Conf. 12.8 (Rev. CoP13)) was designed to identify species that may be subject to unsustainable levels of international trade, and to identify problems and solutions concerning effective implementation of the Convention. As of October 2019, the chambered nautilus has not been identified by CITES as a species that may be subject to unsustainable levels of international trade (
We will continue to work towards the conservation and recovery of the chambered nautilus, both on a domestic and global level, including with our international partners. Specifically, we will work with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to continue to monitor the CITES import and export requirements; evaluate CITES implementation for sustainable trade in the chambered nautilus; and monitor the status of the species to ensure that the chambered nautilus is conserved and can eventually be delisted from the ESA.
A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon request (see
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; receipt of application.
Notice is hereby given that Wall to Wall Productions, Edgecumbe Hall, Richmond Hill, Bristol, BS8 1AT, United Kingdom (Responsible Party: James Hemming) has applied in due form for a permit to conduct commercial or educational photography on marine mammals.
Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before February 28, 2020.
These documents are available upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) 427-8401; fax (301) 713-0376.
Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to
Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.
Shasta McClenahan or Carrie Hubard, (301) 427-8401.
The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361
The applicant proposes to film marine mammals in California and Oregon to obtain footage for a wildlife documentary on parental behavior including courtship, mating, birthing, and weaning. Up to 1,200 harbor seals (
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the
The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
The final rule requires that a Person seeking access to the Limited Access DMF establish a legitimate fraud prevention interest or legitimate business purpose pursuant to a law, governmental rule, regulation, or fiduciary duty. The Certification Application Form collects information that NTIS will use to evaluate whether the respondent qualifies to receive the Limited Access Death Master File under the rule.
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
Notice of conference call meeting.
Friday, February 7, 2020, 1:00-3:00 p.m. (EDT).
EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee Conference Call.
To listen and monitor the event as an attendee:
1. Go to:
2. Enter Meeting ID: 407 367 407, Password: 252233.
Draft VVSG Requirements can be found at the TWiki page link:
Jerome Lovato, Telephone: (301) 563-3919.
Members of the public may submit relevant written statements to the Technical Guidelines Development Committee with respect to the meeting no later than 10:00 a.m. EDT on Wednesday, February 5, 2020. Statements may be sent via email to
This conference call will be open to the public.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions (EPA ICR Number 2243.09, OMB Control Number 2020-0033) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through January 31, 2020. Public comments were previously requested via the
Additional comments may be submitted on or before February 28, 2020.
Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OA-2019-0296, to (1) EPA online using
The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Candi Schaedle, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities, Mail Code 2203A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-564-6121; fax number: 202-564-0070; email address:
Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAAA) (EPA ICR Number 2072.08, OMB Control Number 2060-0544), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through March 31, 2020. Public comments were previously requested, via the
Additional comments may be submitted on or before February 28, 2020.
Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0342, to: (1) EPA online using
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-2970; fax number: (202) 564-0050; email address:
Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected facilities subject to NESHAP.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice of availability.
This document announces the broadly applicable alternative test method approval decisions that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made under and in support of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019.
An electronic copy of each alternative test method approval document is available at
This document will be of interest to entities regulated under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 60, 61, and 63; state, local, and tribal agencies; and the EPA Regional offices responsible for implementation and enforcement of regulations under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63.
You may access copies of the broadly applicable alternative test method approval documents at
This document identifies broadly applicable alternative test method approval decisions made by the EPA in 2019 under the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), 40 CFR part 60 and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) programs, 40 CFR parts 61 and 63; see Table 1. Source owners and operators may voluntarily use these broadly applicable alternative test methods in lieu of otherwise specified reference test methods. Use of these broadly applicable alternative test methods are not intended to and should not change the applicable emission standards.
The Administrator has the authority to approve the use of alternative test methods for compliance with requirements under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63. This authority is found in 40 CFR 60.8(b)(3), 61.13(h)(1)(ii), and 63.7(e)(2)(ii). Additional and similar authority can be found in 40 CFR 65.158(a)(2). The criteria for approval and procedures for submission and review of broadly applicable alternative test methods are explained in a previous
As also explained in the January 30, 2007 document, our approval decisions involve thorough technical reviews of numerous source-specific requests for alternatives and modifications to test methods and procedures. Based on these reviews, we have often found that these modifications or alternatives would be equally valid and appropriate to apply to other sources within a particular class, category, or subcategory. Consequently, we have concluded that where a method modification or an alternative method is clearly broadly applicable to a class, category, or subcategory of sources, it is both equitable and efficient to approve its use for all appropriate sources and situations at the same time.
Use of approved alternative test methods are not mandatory but rather permissive. Sources are not required to employ such a method but may choose to do so in appropriate circumstances. As specified in 40 CFR 63.7(f)(5), however, a source owner or operator electing to use an alternative method for 40 CFR part 63 standards must continue to use the alternative method until otherwise authorized. Source owners or operators should, therefore, review the specific broadly applicable alternative method approval decision at
This document specifies three broadly applicable alternative test methods that the EPA approved between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019. The alternative method decision letter/memo number, the reference method affected, sources allowed to use this alternative, and the modification or alternative method allowed are summarized in Table 1 of this document. A summary of approval documents was previously made available on our Technology Transfer Network between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019. For more detailed information, please refer to the complete copies of these approval documents available at
As also explained in our January 30, 2007 document, we will revisit approvals of alternative test methods in response to written requests or objections indicating that a particular approved alternative test method either should not be broadly applicable or that its use should be limited in some way. Any objection to a broadly applicable alternative test method, as well as the resolution of that objection, will be announced at
Source owners or operators should review the specific broadly applicable alternative method approval letter at
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Institutional Dual Use Research of Concern (iDURC) Policy Compliance (EPA ICR Number 2530.03, OMB Control Number 2080-0082) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through January 31, 2020. Public comments were previously requested via the
Additional comments may be submitted on or before February 28, 2020.
Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2016-0010, to (1) EPA online using
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Viktoriya Plotkin, National Homeland Security Research Center, Office of Research and Development, (8101R), 27 Tarzwell Drive, Narragansett, Rhode Island, 02882; telephone number: 401-782-3178; fax number: 401-782-3030; email address:
Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.
Notice.
Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3511(d), the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), and the FASAB Rules of Procedure, as amended in October 2010, notice is hereby given that the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) will hold its meetings on the following dates throughout 2020, unless otherwise noted.
The purpose of the meetings is to discuss issues related to the following topics:
Notice is hereby given that a portion of each scheduled meeting may be closed to the public. The Appointments Panel, a subcommittee of FASAB that makes recommendations to the sponsors regarding appointments for non-federal member positions, is expected to meet during each meeting. A portion of each Appointments Panel meeting will be closed to the public. The reason for the closures is that matters covered by 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) will be discussed. Any such discussions will involve discussions that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of the sponsor agencies and the disclosure of information of a personal nature where disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Such discussions will be segregated into separate discussions so that a portion of each meeting will be open to the public.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), portions of advisory committee meetings may be closed to the public where the head of the agency to which the advisory committee reports determines that such portion of such meeting may be closed to the public in accordance with subsection (c) of section 552b of title 5, United States Code. The determination shall be in writing and shall contain the reasons for the determination. A determination has been made in writing by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and the Office of Management and Budget, as required by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that such portions of the meetings may be closed to the public in accordance with subsection (c) of section 552b of title 5, United States Code.
Unless otherwise noted, FASAB meetings begin at 9 a.m. and conclude before 5 p.m. and are held at the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) Building at 441 G St. NW in Room 7C13. Agendas and briefing materials will be available at
Any interested person may attend the meetings as an observer. Board discussion and reviews are open to the public except for those portions that are closed. GAO Building security requires advance notice of your attendance. If you wish to attend a FASAB meeting, please pre-register on our website at
Ms. Monica R. Valentine, Executive Director, 441 G Street NW, Suite 1155, Washington, DC 20548, or call (202) 512-7350.
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b).
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written comments should be submitted on or before March 30, 2020. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email:
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, the FCC invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility;
Applicants are also subject to the third-party disclosure requirement of 47 CFR 73.3580. This section requires local public notice in a newspaper of general circulation of the filing of all applications for new or major changes in facilities. This notice must be completed within 30 days of the tendering of the application. This notice must be published at least twice a week for two consecutive weeks in a three-week period. A copy of this notice must be locally maintained along with the application.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the
Written comments should be submitted on or before March 30, 2020. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email:
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, the FCC invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before March 30, 2020.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
The purpose of this information collection is to continually streamline and simplify processes for wireless
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before March 30, 2020. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email
For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written comments should be submitted on or before March 30, 2020. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email:
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, the FCC invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before March 30, 2020. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.
Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email
For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice.
The Commission announces the next meeting date, time, and agenda of its Consumer Advisory Committee (hereinafter the “Committee”).
February 13, 2020, 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW, Commission Meeting Room TW-C305, Washington, DC 20554.
Scott Marshall, Designated Federal Officer of the Committee, (202) 418-2809 (voice or Relay), email:
This is a summary of the Commission's document DA 20-81, released January 21, 2019, announcing the Agenda, Date, and Time of the Committee's next meeting.
This meeting is open to members of the general public. The Commission will accommodate as many participants as possible; however, admission will be limited to seating availability. The Commission will also provide audio and/or video coverage of the meeting over the internet from the Commission's web page at:
The meeting site is fully accessible to people using wheelchairs or other mobility aids. Sign language interpreters, open captioning, assistive listening devices, and braille copies of the agenda and committee roster will be provided on site. Meetings of the Committee are also broadcast live with open captioning over the internet from the FCC Live web page at
The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841
The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The
Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than February 28, 2020.
1.
2.
The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in paragraph 7 of the Act.
Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than February 13, 2020.
1.
1.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Fax written comments on the collection of information by February 28, 2020.
To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, Fax: 202-395-7285, or emailed to
Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-7726,
In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.
Section 1701(a)(4) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300u(a)(4)) authorizes FDA to conduct research relating to health information. Section 1003(d)(2)(C) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 393(d)(2)(C)) authorizes
The Office of Prescription Drug Promotion's (OPDP) mission is to protect the public health by helping to ensure that prescription drug promotional material is truthful, balanced, and accurately communicated, so that patients and healthcare providers can make informed decisions about treatment options. OPDP's research program provides scientific evidence to help ensure that our policies related to prescription drug promotion will have the greatest benefit to public health. Toward that end, we have consistently conducted research to evaluate the aspects of prescription drug promotion that we believe are most central to our mission, focusing in particular on three main topic areas: Advertising features, including content and format; target populations; and research quality. Through the evaluation of advertising features we assess how elements such as graphics, format, and disease and product characteristics impact the communication and understanding of prescription drug risks and benefits; focusing on target populations allows us to evaluate how understanding of prescription drug risks and benefits may vary as a function of audience; and our focus on research quality aims at maximizing the quality of research data through analytical methodology development and investigation of sampling and response issues. This study falls under the topic of advertising features (content and format).
Oncology products are increasingly being promoted to consumers via direct-to-consumer (DTC) television advertising. Oncology indications are often complicated and supported by different clinical endpoints such as overall survival, overall response rate, and progression-free survival (Ref. 1) that are referenced in the DTC TV ads. The first objective of this project is to determine whether disclosing information about the nature of the endpoints that support the indications for oncology products helps consumers understand the drug's efficacy. This objective complements OPDP's research examining disclosing information about FDA's accelerated approval pathway to consumers (May 8, 2019, 84 FR 20148) and OPDP's research on disclosing oncology information to healthcare professionals (OMB control number 0910-0864—Disclosures of Descriptive Presentations in Professional Oncology Prescription Drug Promotion). Although these studies all contribute to our knowledge of the communication of cancer treatment information, the current study specifically examines particular endpoints that are well-known to the professional oncology community and are now used in DTC advertising.
Because of the length of some indications, sponsors sometimes convey some of the indication in superimposed text rather than in the audio in the TV ads. The second objective is to test whether consumers adequately comprehend indication statements when portions of the indication are presented only in the superimposed text of television ads while other information is conveyed in the audio. This objective extends OPDP's previous research on the use of dual-modality
We plan to conduct two rounds (one for each objective) of nine 1-hour in-person cognitive interviews of adults 18 years of age or older to refine the questionnaires and stimuli (18 participants total). We plan to conduct two pretests (one for each objective) not longer than 20 minutes, administered via internet panel, to test the experimental manipulations and pilot the main study procedures.
We plan to conduct two main studies (one for each objective) not longer than 20 minutes, administered via internet panel. For Study 1, we will create two television ads for fictitious oncology prescription drugs to increase the generalizability of the results (one solid tumor indication and one hematology indication). The ads will include audio claims about overall survival, overall response rate with and without a disclosure, or progression-free survival with and without a disclosure (see table 1 for the Study 1 design).
Some current television ads for oncology products include disclosures that are intended to help consumers differentiate surrogate endpoints like progression-free survival and overall response rate from overall survival. Examples include “At the time of analysis, overall survival comparison was not yet available” and “Clinical trials are ongoing to determine if there is an overall survival benefit.” The disclosure we use in the study will be based on disclosures currently in use and will be informed by consumer feedback elicited in focus groups conducted prior to the cognitive testing (approved under OMB control number 0910-0695). For example, the study disclosure may include language such as “We currently do not know if Drug X helps people live longer.”
Participants will be randomly assigned to view one prescription drug television ad and then complete a questionnaire that assesses whether participants noticed the disclosure, their interpretations of the disclosure, their retention of the endpoint, and their perceptions of the drug's benefits and risks. We will also measure covariates such as demographics, cancer history, and literacy. Without a disclosure, we hypothesize that participants will not differentiate between overall survival, overall response rate, and progression-free survival. We hypothesize that a disclosure will help participants understand the surrogate endpoints (
For the second objective, in Study 2 we will vary the presentation of the products' indication, such that material information related to the indication will appear in superimposed text only, in the audio only, in both superimposed text and audio, or in neither (the control condition; see tables 2 and 3 for the Study 2 design). Participants will be randomly assigned to view a prescription drug television ad and then complete a questionnaire that assesses their retention and comprehension of the information. Following previous research on dual-modality presentations, we hypothesize that participants who view an ad with the material information in the audio and text will have greater retention of that information than participants in any other condition. We also hypothesize that participants who view an ad with the material information in the audio only will have greater retention of that information than participants in the superimposed text condition and the control condition. To test Study 1 and
The questionnaires are available upon request from
For all phases of this research, we will recruit a general population sample of adult volunteers 18 years of age or older. We will exclude individuals who work for the Department of Health and Human Services or work in the healthcare, marketing, or pharmaceutical industries. We will use literacy quotas to ensure that our sample includes participants with a range of literacy skills. We will also exclude pretest participants from the main studies, and participants will not be able to participate in both Studies 1 and 2. With the sample sizes described below, we will have sufficient power to detect small-sized effects in Studies 1 and 2 (table 4).
In the
(Comment 1) One comment voiced support for the current study and recommended future research to examine how DTC advertising addresses value-based care.
(Response 1) We thank the commenter for their support for this study and will consider their recommendations for future research.
(Comment 2) Two comments suggested limiting study recruitment to patients already diagnosed with and/or
(Response 2) We chose a general population sample for the first study on this topic because of concerns about being able to recruit a sufficient number of participants if we selected a cancer-specific sample. However, we agree that in the future, a small, carefully-designed replication study with cancer patients and their caretakers and family members would be valuable. Prior to this study, we conducted both general-population focus groups and cancer-survivor focus groups. We will use the information gleaned from these focus groups to consider the ways in which these groups do and do not differ when discussing the limitations of the study's general-population sample. We will also ask participants if they have been diagnosed with cancer and whether they are a caregiver for someone with cancer.
(Comment 3) One comment suggested that the duration of the study ads be consistent with the duration of real-life ads.
(Response 3) The duration of the study ads will be consistent with the duration of real-life ads.
(Comment 4) One comment suggested adding screening questions to assess whether participants watch television, whether they watch ads, and how they are most likely to view DTC television ads.
(Response 4) We added questions about television viewing to the end of the questionnaire.
(Comment 5) One comment agreed with the hypothesis that consumers who view an ad with material information in both audio and text will have greater retention of that information. However, they do not believe there is enough time in a television ad to include the full indication in the audio, and they do not believe it is necessary because they believe the primary objective of ads is to raise product awareness so that consumers can seek additional information about the drug from health care providers or adequate provision sources.
(Response 5) The duration of the ads used in this study will be consistent with those currently airing on television and that duration will be sufficient to include all material information (Ref. 4) in the audio and text. While consumers may be able to find this information through other sources, the intent of this study is to determine what effect, if any, the material information has when delivered as an integrated part of the DTC advertisement.
(Comment 6) One comment notes that the Study 1 results would not be generalizable to an ad for a drug that has overall survival data but advertises with claims about overall response rate or progression-free survival.
(Response 6) We agree that our results would not generalize to this situation.
(Comment 7) One comment suggested wording changes for the claims in Study 1, including deleting “decrease the number of detectable cancer cells in the body” from the multiple myeloma overall response rate, describing progression-free survival as “delayed disease progression or live longer without cancer getting worse,” and using the disclosure statement “clinical trials are still ongoing to determine if there is an overall survival benefit with Drug X.”
(Response 7) We thank the commenter for these suggestions and will consider them, along with the feedback from our focus group participants, when we finalize the language for the main study.
(Comment 8) One comment suggested changes to the Study 1 questionnaire, including rewording Q2 to make it clearer, adding a “don't know” response to Q4, removing Q5 because it is speculative, and rewording Q7 from “any side effects it may have” to “side effects described in the ad.”
(Response 8) We revised Q2 to ask what the drug can do for people, added a “don't know” response to Q4, and edited Q7 as suggested. Q5 will only be asked of participants who already report that the drug will help people live longer; its purpose is to gauge their perception of how much longer people will live. We plan to keep this item, but we will cognitively test and pretest it to determine whether it should be revised or deleted.
(Comment 9) One comment suggested changes to the Study 2 questionnaire, including changing Q2 to ask about what disease the drug treats rather than who it is for, so it is less similar to Q4, adding Q10 from the Study 1 questionnaire to measure behavioral intentions, and revising Q7-Q12 because they are too detailed and require the respondent to recall a lot of information from the ad.
(Response 9) We agree that Questions 2 and 4 are similar; they are both designed to elicit responses related to the material information, not just the disease the drug is indicated to treat. However, Question 4 will only be asked of participants who respond “no” to Question 3. We believe this will provide context for those participants, but we will ask whether this series of questions is too repetitive or confusing in cognitive interviews, and we will review participants' responses in a pretest. We will add Q10a and Q10b to the Study 2 questionnaire. Questions 7 through 12 are designed to measure participants' retention and understanding of the material information. We will cognitively test and pretest the items to determine whether they should be revised or deleted.
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:
The following references marked with an asterisk (*) are on display at the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852) and are available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; they also are available electronically at
1. Kim, J., J. Gao, L. Amiri-Kordestani, et al., “Patient-Friendly Language to Facilitate Treatment Choice for Patients with Cancer.” The Oncologist, 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0761, 2019. Available from:
2. Aikin, K.J., A.C. O'Donoghue, C.M. Squire, et al., “An Empirical Examination of the FDAAA-Mandated Toll-Free Statement for Consumer Reporting of Side Effects in Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertisements.”
3. Sullivan, H.W., V. Boudewyns, A.C. O'Donoghue, et al., “Attention to and Distraction from Risk Information in Prescription Drug Advertising: An Eye-Tracking Study.”
4. 21 U.S.C. 321(n).
Office of the Secretary, HHS.
Notice.
In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection for public comment.
Comments on the ICR must be received on or before February 28, 2020.
Submit your comments to
Sherrette Funn,
Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of meetings of the National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council.
The meetings will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.
In the interest of security, NIH has stringent procedures for entrance into NIH federal property. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.
Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page:
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Special Emphasis Panel.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
National Institutes of Health, HHS.
Notice.
The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD) is in the process of developing a new Strategic Plan for 2022-2026 to help guide the research it supports over the next five years. Through this Request for Information, NIDCD invites researchers in academia and industry, health care professionals, patient advocates and health advocacy organizations, scientific or professional organizations, Federal agencies, and other interested members of the public to provide ideas to inform development of NIDCD's next strategic plan.
The NIDCD's Request for Information is open for public idea submission for a period of 60 days. Ideas must be received by March 31, 2020, to ensure consideration. After the idea submission period has closed, NIDCD will consider the ideas we received in a timely manner for the development of the 2022-2026 Strategic Plan of the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders.
Please visit our website to view our questions and submit your ideas to NIDCD electronically:
Laura K. Cole, Ph.D., Planning and Evaluation Officer, Science Policy and Planning Branch, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, NIH, 31 Center Drive, Suite 3C25, Bethesda, MD 20892. Phone: 301-402-2313. Email:
This notice is in accordance with the 21st Century Cures Act, NIH institutes are required to regularly update their strategic plans. The NIDCD's mission is to improve the lives of the millions of people with hearing loss and other communication disorders, spanning functions of hearing, balance, taste,
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings. The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of availability of draft report; request for comments.
From March 26, 2019 through December 15, 2019, the Coast Guard conducted The Areas Offshore of Massachusetts and Rhode Island Port Access Route Study and is now requesting your comments on a draft version of the study report. The goal of the study is to enhance navigational safety in the study area by examining existing shipping routes and waterway uses. To accomplish this goal, the Coast Guard has undertaken measures to determine what, if any, navigational safety concerns currently exist with vessel transits, examine existing shipping routes and waterway uses, and evaluate the need for establishing vessel routing measures in light of current and anticipated future demands associated with offshore wind leases in the Massachusetts and Rhode Island Wind Energy Area. A draft version of the report is available in the docket for viewing. We seek your comments on the content and development of the report.
Your comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before March 16, 2020.
You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2019-0131 using the Federal portal at
If you have questions on this notice, contact Mr. Craig Lapiejko, Waterways Management at First Coast Guard District, telephone (617) 223-8351, email
BOEM has leased seven adjacent areas of the OCS south of Martha's Vineyard and east of Rhode Island that together constitute the MA/RI WEA. Potentially seven distinct offshore renewable energy installations (“wind farms”) could be constructed, each with its own number, size, type of wind turbines, and distinct turbine layout. The topic of safe navigation routes to facilitate vessel transit through the MA/RI WEA has been discussed at various forums throughout southeastern New England. The forums have included participation by the Coast Guard, other federal, state, and local agencies, fishing industry representatives, and myriad stakeholders. Various different transit plans have been proposed through these different forums in which no consensus of all stakeholders was reached.
In response, on March 26, 2019, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Study and public meetings; request for comments entitled “Port Access Route Study (PARS): The Areas Offshore of Massachusetts and Rhode Island” in the
On April 10, 2019, we published a Notice of Public Meeting; request for comments entitled “Port Access Route Study (PARS): The Areas Offshore of Massachusetts and Rhode Island” in the
The public was afforded a 60-day comment period, and three public meetings were held (in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New York) to receive public input. The Coast Guard received 30 comments in response to our
In August 2019, after public comment closed, the Coast Guard released Navigation Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) 01-19 GUIDANCE ON THE COAST GUARD'S ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR OFFSHORE RENEWABLE ENERGY INSTALLATIONS (OREI). NVIC 01-19 provides further guidance to Coast Guard units and external stakeholders on factors the Coast Guard considers when evaluating risk in OREI. (Available in the docket folder)
In October 2019 two meetings occurred at the request of wind developers with interests in the MARIPARS study area. The first of those meetings occurred on October 9, 2019 at Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, DC, and was attended by members of Coast Guard Headquarters staff, BOEM staff and representatives from the wind developers. During that meeting the developers presented a report that outlined a 1 NM by 1 NM uniform grid for turbine installation across all seven lease areas on a north to south and east to west orientation. A second meeting was held on October 17, 2019 at the First Coast Guard District in Boston, MA attended by Coast Guard Headquarters staff, First District Staff, Sector Southeastern New England staff, BOEM staff and wind developers discussing the same proposal. On November 1, 2019 the wind developers submitted a finalized version of their proposal to Coast Guard Headquarters requesting it be considered in the MARIPARS. (Available in the docket folder)
On January 3, 2020 the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance submitted a letter proposal to the Coast Guard, BOEM and NMFS addressing the developer letter dated November 1, 2019. That proposal supports the 1 NM by 1 NM uniform grid and suggests six additional transit lane corridors 4 NM wide. (Available in the docket folder)
The Coast Guard is a cooperating agency in BOEM's review process and has no legal authority to direct placement or orientation of wind turbines. The Coast Guard is opening this second MARIPARS comment period to facilitate transparent public discussions on the information above as well as the draft report findings to date.
Comments were submitted by representatives of the maritime community, wind energy developers, non-governmental organizations, Federal and State governmental agencies, and private citizens.
Topics covered by the comments included the support for some type of designated navigation corridors of varying width and those opposed to any type of navigation corridors, concerns about Search and Rescue (SAR) within the WEA, review of a report of an allision between a vessel operating within a European wind farm and a wind turbine, potential for interference of marine radar, and concerns for wildlife conservation to include impacts to right whales.
Various comments were received concerning navigation corridors. Some commenters said navigation corridors were not necessary, whereas others said they were essential to preserve clear lanes for vessels to transit. Prior to the lease and construction of these wind farms—each with its own number, size, type of wind turbines, and distinct array layout there was no need for a coordinated routing system through the study area. The draft MARIPARS report reveals that navigation corridors could be useful to reduce risks to navigation and the environment but ultimately recommends that if the MA/RI WEA turbine layout is developed along a standard and uniform grid pattern, standard vessel routing measures would not be required.
Several comments expressed concerns about the Coast Guard's ability to conduct effective search-and-rescue (SAR) operations within a wind farm. The Coast Guard has had similar concerns and believe we have addresses these in Section III.J. of the draft report. Ultimately, the Coast Guard recommends that if the MA/RI WEA turbine layout is developed along a standard and uniform grid pattern with at least three lines of orientation and standard spacing that this will help minimize the risk to SAR operations within the MA/RI WEA.
Some commenters urged the Coast Guard to review a report on an allision between a vessel navigating within a European wind farm and an unlit wind turbine. We did review the report and address it in Section III.H.6. of the draft report. In March 2019,
Some commenters expressed their concerns about possible radar interference while transiting within the WEA. We address these comments in Section III.H.6. of the draft report were we discuss our review of several studies that address correlations between wind turbines and marine radar interference. To date, the USCG is not aware of an authoritative scientific study that confirms or refutes the concern that WTGs will degrade marine radar.
The Coast Guard received a comment requesting we consider vessel speeds in our evaluation of potential navigation routes, as cavitation and noise there from may adversely impact right whales. The Coast Guard will continue to consult with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, interagency partners and other stakeholders through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and marine planning processes as a necessary part of any action to formally establish routing measures associated with this or any other wind farm proposal.
Do you agree or disagree with the draft report's recommendations, and if so, why?
We encourage you to comment on the content and development of the report.
We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted, without change, to
We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period.
Any comments received will be reviewed and considered before a final version of the MARIPARS is announced in the
This notice is published under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 70004 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a).
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.
Notice.
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at
Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410; email Colette Pollard at
This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A. The
As the result, the system generates a disbursement to the eligible homeowner for the refund consisting of the unused portion of the paid premium. The collection information required is used to update HUD's Single-Family Insurance System. The billing of mortgage insurance premiums is discontinued as a result of the transaction. Without this information the premium collection/monitoring function would be severely impeded and program data would be unreliable. Under streamline III when the form is processed and but does not pass the series of edits the system generates in these cases the Application for Premium Refund or Distributive Share Payment to the homeowner to be completed and returned to HUD for further processing for the refund. In general, a Premium Refund is the difference between the amount of prepaid premium and the amount of the premium that has been earned by HUD up to the time the mortgage is terminated.
This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:
(1) 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; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (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 those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.
Section 2 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.
Notice.
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. HUD has revised the Form-50058 MTW Expansion in response to public comments received during the public comment period provided for by the 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection. These revisions are more thoroughly described below. This publication is to provide notice to Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) of the revisions and to give PHAs the opportunity to comment on such revisions. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at
Dawn Smith, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives, PIH, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 3178, Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-402-6488, (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Smith.
This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A. The
• Analyze assisted housing programs;
• Determine the occupancy level of public housing and calculate the operating subsidy in accordance with 24 CFR 990;
• Permit PHAs to monitor their own reporting to identify favorable and unfavorable trends;
• Monitor PHAs and participants for compliance with program regulations and requirements;
• Fraud detection and prevention via rent/income monitoring;
• Housing inventory and development of program initiatives with emphasis on the housing of special needs groups; and
• Make available accurate demographic information depicting tenant characteristics to Congress and other interested parties (however this data is typically scrubbed of any personally identifiable information).
This 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection provides PHAs with notice of revisions to the proposed Form-50058 MTW Expansion published on August 19, 2019 in the 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection at 84 FR 42943. The Form-50058 MTW Expansion published in this notice revises some of the items published in the 60-Day Notice in response to public and internal comments received. These revisions are summarized in Section D of this notice. Additionally, HUD has summarized public comments and provided responses to those comments in Section E of this notice.
This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:
(1) 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;
(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(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 those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.
Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
The following represents the most notable changes to the Form-50058 MTW Expansion. However, other changes may have also been made which may not be identified below. The Form-50058 MTW Expansion should be reviewed in its entirety to determine the exact nature and scope of these revisions. A copy of the revised Form-50058 MTW Expansion can be obtained per the information provided earlier in this notice under
• The response codes for line 2w, End of Participation reasons, were updated to reflect feedback from commenters.
• Line 2x, Interim Reexamination reasons, was added to allow HUD to know why a PHA is using action type 3, Interim Reexamination. This includes changes associated with rent hardship requests and stepped rents.
• Line 3r, Average number of hours worked per week, was one of two lines
• Line 3s, Work requirement compliance, is the second line that was added in this section to assist with capturing information about work requirements.
• Line 5i, Date of last Housing Quality Standards (HQS) inspection, was updated to remove the word “annual” from the label since PHAs may perform inspections at intervals other than annual (
• Line 7h, Prior year or current year/anticipated income, replaces the line 7h that was previously marked as “Reserved”. This line was added to capture whether a PHA is reporting prior year or current year/anticipated income for the household. The prior year provision is in the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2016 (HOTMA) and, while all PHAs will need to complete it, PHAs in cohort 2 that will study rent reform may also need to reflect “prior year” income is being used.
• The title of Section 8 of the form was changed from “Expected Income Per Year” to “Deductions and Allowances” to better reflect the content of the section. This change is cosmetic and does not affect submission of data to the PIH Information Center (PIC).
• Line 8u, Deductions and allowances not reflected above, was changed to clarify that it will capture any deductions and allowances not captured on other lines above this line in this section. It is still intended to also be used for Local, Non-Traditional Property-Based and Local, Non-Traditional Tenant-Based programs.
• Line 8x, Total allowances, was updated to reflect that line 8u will be used in the calculation to determine the value for this line.
• Line 8y, Adjusted annual income, has been changed so that it is now the same as the Form-50058.
• Lines 10u, 11u, 11ap, 12x, and 12ak were updated to reflect the updated response code labels for the MTW alternate rent types so that it is clearer that they are for MTW. This will also make it clearer when looking at the data in reports, etc.
• Lines 11d, 11e, and 11f for project-based voucher (PBV) portability have been restored to the form. They are to be used to reflect that a household that was a tenant-based voucher (TBV) participant at the initial PHA has ported to the receiving PHA and received a PBV.
• Lines 11v and 12y, Alternate HAP to owner, had been omitted and have been added to collect this information when one of the alternate rent types is utilized.
• Lines 11w and 12z, Alternate tenant rent, were updated to change the word “or” to “including” to clarify that they will be completed when a selection is made in 11u and when the program type is Local, Non-Traditional Property-Based and Local, Non-Traditional Tenant-Based.
• Lines 11ar and 12an, Alternate prorated tenant rent, had been omitted and have been added to collect this information when one of the alternate rent types is utilized.
• Line 12ap, Additional financial support for tenant-based voucher family, and line 12aq, Financial incentive for property owner, were added to assist in data collection when landlord incentives are utilized.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.
Notice.
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 30 days of public comment.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at
Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; email Colette Pollard at
Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.
This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A. The
This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:
(1) 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;
(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(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 those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
HUD encourages interested parties to submit comments in response to these questions.
Section 2 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing- Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.
Notice.
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at
Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at
This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A. The
This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:
(1) 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; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (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 those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.
Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.
Notice.
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; fax: 202-395-5806, Email:
Anna P. Guido, Reports Management Officer, QMAC, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410; email her at
This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.
The
HUD may, under the terms of its Routine Use Inventory (77 FR 17361), share these data with researchers whom HUD has awarded contracts, grants, or service agreements. HUD has shared data with contractors and grantees and will continue to share data under service agreements because it has a legal form for effectuating such an agreement. HUD does not limit access to the information to parties that have received specific funding to carry out a study through a grant or contract. Instead, HUD also shares the data with legitimate research organizations that have conceived policy-relevant analyses and that are able and willing to protect the data from unauthorized disclosure. The legal form for the service agreement is herein called a “license.”
HUD will continue making the data available for statistical, research, or evaluation purposes to organizations qualified and capable of research and analysis consistent with the statistical, research, or evaluation purposes for which the data were provided or are maintained, but only if the data are used and protected in accordance with the terms and condition stated in the license, upon receipt of such assurance of qualification and capability, and it is agreed by the organization requesting such information and HUD.
This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:
(1) 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;
(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;
(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 those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
HUD encourages interested parties to submit comments in response to these questions.
Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are proposing to renew an information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before February 28, 2020.
Send written comments on this information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget's Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior by email at
To request additional information about this ICR, contact Mr. Jarvis Gust by email at
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.
A
We are again soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the BIA; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the BIA enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the BIA minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your 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.
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 OMB control number.
The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) are proposing to renew an information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before February 28, 2020.
Send written comments on this information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget's Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior by email at
To request additional information about this ICR, contact Mr. Richard Winlock, Deputy Superintendent, Osage Agency, by email at
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.
A
We are again soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the BIA; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the BIA enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the BIA minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your 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.
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 OMB control number.
The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Notice of availability.
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared a Record of Decision. This Record of Decision is for a right-of-way for the portions of the Keystone XL Pipeline project that cross BLM and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) lands in Montana. By this notice, the BLM is announcing the availability of the Record of Decision.
The Secretary of the Department of the Interior signed the Record of Decision on January 22, 2020.
Copies of the Record of Decision are available at the Montana/Dakotas State Office, 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings, MT 59101, or may be viewed online at:
Jim Stobaugh, National Project Manager, BLM Nevada State Office, at telephone: (775) 861-6478, email:
In September 2008, Keystone filed with the United States Department of State an initial application for a Presidential Permit to construct, operate, maintain, and (eventually) decommission the Keystone XL Pipeline to transport crude oil across the U.S./Canada border near Morgan, Montana, to Steele City, Nebraska, and then from Cushing, Oklahoma, to locations along the Texas Gulf of Mexico. The original application for Presidential Permit was amended and resubmitted on May 4, 2012 to modify the Project description to: (1) Avoid the Sand Hills Region in Nebraska; and (2) remove the southern segment of the Project from Cushing, Oklahoma, to the Gulf Coast area.
In addition to its application to the Department of State, Keystone also filed a right-of-way application in March 2008 under Section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended, with the BLM. The right-of-way application was revised by Keystone in September 2012 and 2014 to reflect changes in the Project description. In November 2015, the Presidential Permit was denied. Due to the denial, Keystone requested to withdraw their right-of-way application with the BLM in February 2016.
In January 2017, Keystone refiled their application for a Presidential Permit with the Department of State. In February 2018, Keystone filed a revised right-of-way application and updated Plan of Development (POD) with the BLM to reinitiate processing their right-of-way application. In January 2020, Keystone updated the POD and reflected the most recent data on the project and clarifies minor route adjustments.
The BLM responded to Keystone's right-of-way application on Federal lands administered by the BLM and USACE to construct, operate, maintain, and (eventually) decommission the Project in compliance with the Mineral Leasing Act, BLM right-of-way regulations (43 CFR 2880), and other applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies. The only Federal lands involved in this Project are BLM and USACE administered lands in the State of Montana. The State Department has been the Lead Federal Agency for the purposes of NEPA, and BLM and the USACE have been Cooperating Agencies from the beginning of this project.
On September 24, 2018, the Notice of Availability of the Draft Supplemental
The BLM adopted the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements, and the Record of Decision to grant a right-of-way and temporary use permit for the Project pipeline and related facilities to TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP to construct, operate, maintain, and (eventually) decommission the Keystone XL Pipeline in Montana was signed on January 22, 2020.
Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
Notice of public meetings.
In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management's (BLM), John Day-Snake Resource Advisory Council (RAC) Planning Subcommittee will meet as indicated below.
The John Day-Snake Planning Subcommittee will meet via teleconference at 2:00 p.m. May 20 and Sep. 16, 2020.
The Subcommittee teleconference number is toll-free and will be published in the agenda on the RAC web page at least ten days in advance of the call at
Larisa Bogardus, Public Affairs Officer, 3100 H St., Baker City, Oregon 97814; 541-219-6863;
The 15-member John Day-Snake RAC was chartered and appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. Their diverse perspectives are represented in commodity, conservation, and general interests. The Planning Subcommittee was established to gather information, conduct research, and analyze relevant issues and facts on selected topics for future consideration by the RAC. The Subcommittee's primary goal is to provide information to the RAC that allows them to better respond to time-sensitive issues, such as responding to an environmental document within the public comment period. No decisions are made at the subcommittee level.
The Designated Federal Officer will attend the call, take minutes, and publish these minutes on the RAC web page.
All calls are open to the public in their entirety. The public may send written comments to the Subcommittee in response to material presented on the call to be forwarded to the RAC for consideration. Comments can be mailed to BLM Vale District; Attn. Don Gonzalez; 100 Oregon St.; Vale, Oregon 97918.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comments, please be aware that your 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 we will be able to do so.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The National Park Service is soliciting comments on the significance of properties nominated before January 11, 2020, for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places.
Comments should be submitted by February 13, 2020.
Comments may be sent via U.S. Postal Service and all other carriers to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, MS 7228, Washington, DC 20240.
The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before January 11, 2020. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, written comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your 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.
Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers:
Additional documentation has been received for the following resources:
Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice.
The National Park Service is soliciting comments on the significance of properties nominated before January 4, 2020, for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places.
Comments should be submitted by February 13, 2020.
Comments may be sent via U.S. Postal Service and all other carriers to the National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C St. NW, MS 7228, Washington, DC 20240.
The properties listed in this notice are being considered for listing or related actions in the National Register of Historic Places. Nominations for their consideration were received by the National Park Service before January 4, 2020. Pursuant to Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60, written comments are being accepted concerning the significance of the nominated properties under the National Register criteria for evaluation.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your 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.
Nominations submitted by State or Tribal Historic Preservation Officers:
A request for removal has been made for the following resource:
Section 60.13 of 36 CFR part 60.
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Interior.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is proposing to renew an information collection request (ICR).
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before March 30, 2020.
Send your comments on this ICR by mail to the BOEM Information Collection Clearance Officer, Anna Atkinson, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166; or by email to
To request additional information about this ICR, contact Anna Atkinson by email, or by telephone at 703-787-1025.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, BOEM provides the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps BOEM assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.
BOEM is soliciting comments on the proposed ICR described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of BOEM; (2) what can BOEM do to ensure that this information will be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the burden estimate accurate; (4) how might BOEM enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might BOEM minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including minimizing the burden through the use of information technology?
Comments submitted in response to this notice are a matter of public record. BOEM will include or summarize each comment in our request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval of this ICR. You should be aware that your entire comment—including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information—may be made publicly available at any time. In order for BOEM to withhold from disclosure your personally identifiable information, you must identify any information contained in the submittal of your comments that, if released, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of your personal privacy. You must also briefly describe any possible harmful consequences of the disclosure of information, such as embarrassment, injury, or other harm. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personally identifiable information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
BOEM protects proprietary information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and the Department of the Interior's implementing regulations (43 CFR part 2), and under applicable sections of 30 CFR parts 550 and 552 promulgated pursuant to Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) at 43 U.S.C. 1352(c).
Regulations at 30 CFR part 582 carry out these statutory requirements by governing mining operations within the OCS for minerals other than oil, gas, and sulphur and establishing a comprehensive regulatory program for such minerals.
There has been no competitive leasing activity in the OCS for minerals other than oil, gas, and sulphur for many years. Accordingly, BOEM has not generally collected information under this Part of its regulations. However, since these are regulatory requirements, the potential exists for information to be collected. Therefore, we are renewing OMB approval for this information collection.
BOEM will use the information required by 30 CFR part 582 to determine if lessees are complying with the regulations for mining minerals other than oil, gas, and sulphur. BOEM will also use the information to ensure that such operations are conducted in a manner that will result in orderly resource recovery, development, and the protection of the human, marine, and coastal environments and for technical and environmental evaluations which provide a basis for BOEM to make informed decisions to approve, disapprove, or require modification of the proposed activities.
We protect proprietary information according to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and the Department's implementing regulations (43 CFR part 2), 30 CFR 582.5 and 582.6, and applicable sections of 30 CFR parts 580 and 581. No items of a sensitive nature are collected.
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 OMB control number.
The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
On the basis of the record
The Commission instituted this investigation effective February 21, 2019, following receipt of countervailing duty and/or antidumping duty petitions filed with the Commission and Commerce on threaded rod from China, India, Taiwan, and Thailand, by Vulcan Threaded Products Inc. (“Vulcan”), Pelham, Alabama. The Commission established a general schedule for the conduct of the final phase of the investigations following notification of a preliminary determination by Commerce that imports of threaded rod from Thailand were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)).
Following notification of a final determination by Commerce that imports of threaded rod from Taiwan were being sold in the United States at LTFV,
The Commission made this determination pursuant to section 735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)). It completed and filed its determination in this investigation on January 23, 2020. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5013 (January 2020), entitled
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
60-Day notice and request for comments.
This notice announces the intention of the U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) to request a three-year extension, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the Act), of the current generic survey clearance that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) previously approved. The Commission uses this clearance to issue information collections for investigations that it is required to conduct under the Tariff Act of 1930, the Trade Act of 1974, and other trade-remedy statutes that require or authorize the Commission to make findings or determinations. The current generic survey clearance is assigned OMB Control No. 3117-0016; it will expire on June 30, 2020. The Commission requests comments concerning the proposed information collections under section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Act; this notice describes such comments in greater detail in the
To assure that the Commission will consider your comments, it must receive them no later than 60 days after publication of this notice in the
Submit signed comments to Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E St. SW, Washington, DC 20436.
You may obtain copies of the proposed information collection and supporting documentation from Nathanael Comly, Supervisory Investigator,
The Commission solicits comments as to: (1) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the Commission's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) the quality, utility, clarity, and design of the information to be collected; and (4) minimization of the burden of the proposed information collection on those who are to respond (including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological forms of information technology (
The Commission utilizes the information requested in questionnaires and five-year review institution notices issued under the generic survey clearance in the following statutory investigations: Antidumping duty, countervailing duty, escape clause, North American Free Trade Agreement safeguard, market disruption, and interference with programs of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This clearance also includes questionnaires needed for new types of trade-remedy investigations, as directed in new legislation, such as rules of origin investigations or other import injury investigations. The Commission's generic survey clearance to issue questionnaires does not apply to fact-finding investigations conducted under section 332 of the Trade Act of 1974.
The information provided by firms in response to the questionnaires provides information that the Commission uses in making its findings and determinations. Commission staff consolidates submitted information and provides it to the Commission primarily in the form of a staff report. In addition, in the majority of its investigations, the Commission releases completed questionnaires returned by industry participants to representatives of parties to its investigations under an administrative protective order, the terms of which safeguard the confidentiality of any business proprietary or business confidential information. Representatives of interested parties also receive a confidential version of the staff report under the administrative protective order. Subsequent party submissions to the Commission during the investigative process are based, in large part, on their review of the information collected. Included in the proposed generic clearance is the administrative protective order application form and the forms associated with submitting new petitions to the Commission. Also included in the proposed generic clearance are the institution notices for the five-year reviews of antidumping and countervailing duty orders and suspended investigations. The Commission will evaluate responses to the institution notices, which will form much of the record supporting the Commission's determinations to conduct either expedited or full five-year reviews of existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders.
The Commission sends questionnaires for specific investigations to all identified domestic producers that manufacture the product(s) in question. The Commission also sends importer and purchaser questionnaires to all substantial U.S. importers and purchasers of the product(s). Further, the Commission sends questionnaires to all foreign manufacturers of the product(s) in question that are represented by counsel, and, in addition, it attempts to contact any other foreign manufacturers, especially if they export the product(s) in question to the United States. Firms receiving questionnaires include businesses, farms, and other for-profit institutions; responses by domestic firms are mandatory. The Commission publishes institution notices for the five-year reviews in the
As it relates to import injury questionnaires, the content of each questionnaire will differ based on the needs of a particular investigation; questionnaires are based on long-established, generic formats. Producer questionnaires generally consist of the following four parts: (Part I) general questions relating to the organization and activities of the firm; (part II) data on capacity, production, inventories, employment, and the quantity and value of the firm's shipments and purchases from various sources; (part III) financial data, including income-and-loss data on the product in question, data on asset valuation, research and development expenses, and capital expenditures; and (part IV) pricing and market factors. (Questionnaires may, on occasion, also contain part V, an abbreviated version of the above-listed parts, used for gathering data on additional product categories.)
Importer questionnaires generally consist of three parts: (Part I) general questions relating to the organization and activities of the firm; (part II) data on the firm's imports and the shipment and inventories of its imports; and (part III) pricing and market factors similar to that requested in the domestic producer questionnaire. Purchaser questionnaires generally consist of four parts: (Part I) general questions relating to the organization and activities of the firm; (part II) data concerning the purchases of the product by the firm and the names of the firm's vendors; (part III) market characteristics and purchasing practices; and (part IV) comparisons between imported and U.S.-produced product. The Commission may send an abbreviated purchaser questionnaire: (1) In a preliminary phase investigation, consisting of two parts: (Part I) data concerning the purchases of the product by the firm; and (part II) questions regarding purchasing practices; or (2) in an adequacy phase of a review investigation, consisting of one part: (Part I) general questions regarding the industry. Foreign producer questionnaires generally consist of: (Part I) general questions relating to the organization and activities of the firm; (part II) data concerning the firm's manufacturing operations; and may include (part III) market factors. The
The Commission estimates that information collections issued under the requested generic clearance will impose an average annual burden of 409,250 hours on 12,935 respondents (
The Commission periodically reviews its investigative processes, including data collection, to reduce the information burden. Questionnaires clearly state that estimates are acceptable for certain items. They are designed in part with check-in type formats to simplify the response. The reporting burden is reduced by limiting data to a terminal year when a time series is not required. Moreover, the reporting burden for smaller firms is reduced in that the sections of the questionnaire that are applicable to their operations are typically more limited and, when pertinent, there are fewer requested data points. The Commission will not accept requests by parties to expand the data collection or add items to the questionnaire for specific investigations if it believes that such requests will increase the response burden without substantially adding to the investigative record. Respondents typically submit the information provided in response to the Commission's notices of institution for the five-year reviews in hard copy directly to the Office of the Secretary, although respondents may submit them to the Commission's Electronic Data Information System (EDIS) and Electronic Docket. In addition, the Commission has reduced the information burden by streamlining the questionnaires. For example, the Commission removed redundant fields, added auto-calculated reconciliation fields, enabled population of whole data tables, and reduced the number of years for which data is collected in certain five-year reviews. In addition, the Commission ceased collecting nonsubject pricing data in preliminary proceedings.
No record keeping burden is known to result from the proposed collection of information.
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of an investigation and commencement of preliminary phase antidumping duty investigation No. 731-TA-1472 (Preliminary) pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports of difluoromethane (R-32) from China, provided for in subheading 2903.39.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value. Unless the Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) extends the time for initiation, the Commission must reach a preliminary determination in antidumping duty investigations in 45 days, or in this case by March 9, 2020. The Commission's views must be transmitted to Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by March 16, 2020.
January 23, 2020.
Ahdia Bavari (202-205-3191), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
For further information concerning the conduct of this investigation and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207).
In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be served on all other parties to the investigation (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.
This investigation is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.12 of the Commission's rules.
By order of the Commission.
Community Oriented Policing Services, Department of Justice.
30-Day notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days for public comment February 28, 2020.
If you have comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Ms. Lashon M. Hilliard, Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 145 N Street NE, Washington, DC 20530, 202-514-6563.
Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20530 or sent to
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)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
If additional information is required contact: Melody D. Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, Room 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.
Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor.
Notice.
The Department of Labor (the Department), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA 95), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) described below. A copy of the ICRs may be obtained by contacting the office listed in the
Written comments must be submitted to the office shown in the
Joseph Piacentini, Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, N-5718, Washington, DC 20210,
This notice requests public comment on the Department's proposed collection of information regarding a customer survey that will solicit inquirers' feedback on the applicability and utility of EBSA's Participant Assistance Program. A summary of the ICR and the current burden estimates follows:
The study will include data from regional offices in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Dallas, Kansas City, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco and District offices in Miami, Seattle and Washington.
The Department is particularly interested in comments that:
• Evaluate whether the collections of information are 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 collections 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,
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the ICRs for OMB approval of the information collection; they will also become a matter of public record.
In accordance with Sections 223 and 284 (19 U.S.C. 2273 and 2395) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271,
The certifying officer may grant an application for reconsideration under the following circumstances: (1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously considered that the determination complained of was erroneous; (2) If it appears that the determination complained of was based on a mistake in the determination of facts previously considered; or (3) If, in the opinion of the certifying officer, a misinterpretation of facts or of the law
The following Applications for Reconsideration have been received and granted. See 29 CFR 90.18(d). The group of workers or other persons showing an interest in the proceedings may provide written submissions to show why the determination under reconsideration should or should not be modified. The submissions must be sent no later than ten days after publication in
The following revised certifications of eligibility to apply for TAA have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination, and the reason(s) for the determination.
The following revisions have been issued.
I hereby certify that the aforementioned determinations were issued during the period of
Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Administrator of the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221(a) of the Act.
The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved.
The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing provided such request is filed in writing with the Administrator, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, no later than February 10, 2020.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Administrator, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than February 10, 2020.
The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Administrator, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-5428, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.
In accordance with the Section 223 (19 U.S.C. 2273) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271,
In order for an affirmative determination to be made for workers of a primary firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for TAA, the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2272(a)) must be met, as follows:
(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a)(1)) is that a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm (or “such firm”) have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;
(2) The second criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(2) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied by either (A) the Increased Imports Path, or (B) the Shift in Production or Services to a Foreign Country Path/Acquisition of Articles or Services from a Foreign Country Path, as follows:
(i) The sales or production, or both, of such firm, have decreased absolutely;
(ii) (I) Imports of articles or services like or directly competitive with articles produced or services supplied by such firm have increased; OR
(II)(aa) Imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles into which one or more component parts produced by such firm are directly incorporated, have increased; OR
(II)(bb) Imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced directly using the services supplied by such firm, have increased; OR
(III) Imports of articles directly incorporating one or more component parts produced outside the United States that are like or directly competitive with imports of articles incorporating one or more component parts produced by such firm have increased;
(iii) The increase in imports described in clause (ii) contributed importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation and to the decline in the sales or production of such firm; OR
(i) (I) There has been a shift by such workers' firm to a foreign country in the production of articles or the supply of services like or directly competitive with articles which are produced or services which are supplied by such firm; OR
(II) Such workers' firm has acquired from a foreign country articles or services that are like or directly competitive with articles which are produced or services which are supplied by such firm;
(ii) The shift described in clause (i)(I) or the acquisition of articles or services described in clause (i)(II) contributed importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation.
In order for an affirmative determination to be made for adversely affected secondary workers of a firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for TAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2272(b)) must be met, as follows:
(1) A significant number or proportion of the workers in the workers' firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;
(2) The workers' firm is a supplier or downstream producer to a firm that employed a group of workers who
(3) Either—
(A) The workers' firm is a supplier and the component parts it supplied to the firm described in paragraph (2) accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or sales of the workers' firm; OR
(B) A loss of business by the workers' firm with the firm described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to the workers' separation or threat of separation determined under paragraph (1).
In order for an affirmative determination to be made for adversely affected workers in firms identified by the International Trade Commission and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for TAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(e) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2272(e))must be met, by following criteria (1), (2), and (3) as follows:
(1) The workers' firm is publicly identified by name by the International Trade Commission as a member of a domestic industry in an investigation resulting in—
(A) An affirmative determination of serious injury or threat thereof under section 202(b)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2252(b)(1)); OR
(B) An affirmative determination of market disruption or threat thereof under section 421(b)(1)of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2436(b)(1)); OR
(C) An affirmative final determination of material injury or threat thereof under section 705(b)(1)(A) or 735(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)(1)(A) and 1673d(b)(1)(A));
(2) The petition is filed during the 1-year period beginning on the date on which—
(A) A summary of the report submitted to the President by the International Trade Commission under section 202(f)(1) of the Trade Act (19 U.S.C. 2252(f)(1)) with respect to the affirmative determination described in paragraph (1)(A) is published in the
(B) Notice of an affirmative determination described in subparagraph (B) or (C)of paragraph (1) is published in the
(3) The workers have become totally or partially separated from the workers' firm within—
(A) The 1-year period described in paragraph (2); OR
(B) Notwithstanding section 223(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2273(b)), the 1-year period preceding the 1-year period described in paragraph (2).
The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination.
The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (Increased Imports Path) of the Trade Act have been met.
The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (Shift in Production or Services to a Foreign Country Path or Acquisition of Articles or Services from a Foreign Country Path) of the Trade Act have been met.
The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) of the Trade Act have been met.
In the following cases, the investigation revealed that the eligibility criteria for TAA have not been met for the reasons specified.
The investigation revealed that the requirements of Trade Act section 222 (a)(1) and (b)(1) (significant worker total/partial separation or threat of total/partial separation), or (e) (firms identified by the International Trade Commission), have not been met.
The investigation revealed that the criteria under paragraphs (a)(2)(A)(i) (decline in sales or production, or both), or (a)(2)(B) (shift in production or services to a foreign country or acquisition of articles or services from a foreign country), (b)(2) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA or downstream producer to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA), and (e) (International Trade Commission) of section 222 have not been met.
The investigation revealed that the criteria under paragraphs (a)(2)(A) (increased imports), (a)(2)(B) (shift in production or services to a foreign country or acquisition of articles or services from a foreign country), (b)(2) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA or downstream producer to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA), and (e) (International Trade Commission) of section 222 have not been met.
After notice of the petitions was published in the
The following determinations terminating investigations were issued because the petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn.
The following determinations terminating investigations were issued because the worker group on whose behalf the petition was filed is covered under an existing certification.
I hereby certify that the aforementioned determinations were issued during the period of
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Standard on 4,4′-Methylenedianiline for General Industry” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Standard on 4,4′-Methylenedianiline for General Industry (29 CFR 1910.1050) information collection. This program ensures that information is in the desired format, the reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
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 the OMB under the PRA approves it 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.
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 January 31, 2020. 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
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) revision titled, “Program Reporting and Performance Standards System for Indian and Native Americans Program Under Title 1, Section 166 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for use in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995. Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or sending an email to
This ICR seeks approval under the PRA for revisions to the Program Reporting and Performance Standards System for Indian and Native Americans Program Under Title 1, Section 166 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, OMB Control No. 1205-0422 contains two forms: ETA 9084, Comprehensive Services Program, and ETA 9085, Supplemental Youth Services Program. It also includes standard data elements for participants, the basis of the current performance standards system for WIOA section 166 grantees. ETA 9084 is completed by both tribal and non-profit private sector grantees. ETA 9085 is completed only by tribal grantees. This information collection is a revision, because this information collection request (ICR) is
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 the OMB, under the PRA, approves it 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.
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Derricks Standard”, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov website at
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OSHA, OWCP Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Derricks Standard information collection. The paperwork provisions of the Standard specify requirements for marking the rated load on derricks, preparing certification records to verify the inspection of derrick ropes, and posting warning signs while the derrick is undergoing adjustments and repairs. Certification records must be maintained and disclosed upon request. The Occupational Health and Safety Act of 1970 authorizes this information collection.
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
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 January 31, 2020. 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
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Income and Eligibility Verification System Confidentiality” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Income and Eligibility Verification System Confidentiality information collection. The Income and Eligibility Verification System (IEVS) is required by Title III of the Social Security Act, the Federal Unemployment Tax Act, and related statutes. It addresses the confidentiality and disclosure of state unemployment compensation information as well as the state income and eligibility verification provisions of the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-369). Title III of the Social Security Act (SSA), the Federal Unemployment
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 OMB Control Number.
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 January 31, 2020. 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
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Welding, Cutting, and Brazing Standard,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov website at
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Welding, Cutting, and Brazing Standard information collection. Regulation 29 CFR 1910.255(e) requires that qualified maintenance personnel and a certification record generated and maintained make a periodic inspection of resistance welding equipment. The certification shall include the date of the inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, for the equipment inspected. The maintenance inspection ensures that welding equipment is in safe operating condition, while the maintenance record provides evidence that employers performed the required inspections. The Occupational Safety and Health Act sections 2(b)(3) and 8(c) authorize this information collection.
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 the OMB under the PRA approves it 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.
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 January 31, 2020. 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
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) revision titled, “Equal Employment Opportunity in Apprenticeship Training,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for use in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995. Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or sending an email to
This ICR seeks approval under the PRA for revisions to the Equal Employment Opportunity in Apprenticeship Training. Title 29 CFR part 30 sets forth policies and procedures to promote equality of opportunity in apprenticeship programs registered with the U.S. Department of Labor (the Department) and recognized State Apprenticeship Agencies. Among other things, these policies and procedures apply to the recruitment and selection of apprentices, and to the conditions of employment and training during apprenticeship. The procedures also provide for reviewing apprenticeship programs, for processing complaints, and for deregistering non-complying apprenticeship programs. The part 30 regulations also provide policies and procedures for continuation or withdrawal of recognition of State Apprenticeship Agencies (SAAs) which register apprenticeship programs for Federal purposes. This information collection is a revision, because it includes: (1) Minor edits for clarity; (2) an update to the Office of Apprenticeship's room number; (3) a correction to the number of days (
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 the OMB, under the PRA, approves it 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 OMB Control Number.
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Employment and Training Administration
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL- ETA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or sending an email to
This ICR seeks approval under the PRA for revisions to the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC). The WOTC is a Federal tax credit available to employers for hiring individuals from certain target groups who have consistently faced significant barrier to employment. This submission includes seven WOTC program forms as follows:
ETA Form 9175, Revised November 2016—Self-Attestation Form (SAF) for the Long-Term Unemployment Recipient;
ETA Form 9058—Report 1, Revised November 2016—Certification Workload and Characteristics of Certified Individuals;
ETA Form 9061, Revised November 2016—Individual Characteristics Form;
ETA Form 9061, Revised November 2016—Individual Characteristics Form, Spanish version;
ETA Form 9062, Revised April 2016—Conditional Certification;
ETA Form 9063, Revised April 2016—Employer Certification; and
ETA Form 9065, Revised April 2016—Agency Declaration of Verification Results Worksheet. This information collection is a revision, because the burden hours significantly increased for this burden statement reporting due to incorporating the WOTC denial rate which has not been factored in historically. We believe this more accurately reflects the full total number of respondents. WOTC is authorized under §§ 51 and 3111(e) of the Internal Revenue Code authorizes this information collection.
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 the OMB, under the PRA, approves it 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 OMB Control Number.
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
Notice of availability; request for comments.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Special Dipping and Coating Operations,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.
The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before February 28, 2020.
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov website at
Submit comments about this request by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email:
Frederick Licari by telephone at 202-693-8073, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at
This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Special Dipping and Coating Operations information collection. The Dipping and Coating Operations Standard (1910.126(g)(4)) requires employers to post a conspicuous sign near each piece of electrostatic detearing equipment that notifies employees of the minimum safe distance they must maintain between goods undergoing electrostatic detearing and the electrodes or conductors of the equipment used in the process. The Occupational Safety and Health Act sections 2(b)(9), 6, and 8(c) authorize this information collection.
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 the OMB under the PRA approves it 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.
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 January 31, 2020. 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
Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the
• 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,
44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
3:00 p.m., Thursday, February 6, 2020.
NeighborWorks America—Gramlich Boardroom, 999 North Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC 20002.
Open (with the exception of Executive Session).
The General Counsel of the Corporation has certified that in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(2) and (4) permit closure of the following portion(s) of this meeting:
Rutledge Simmons, EVP & General Counsel/Secretary, (202) 760-4105;
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
License amendment application; opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an amendment to Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-59, issued to Exelon Generation Company, LLC, for operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (FitzPatrick). The amendment would adopt Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-568, “Revise Applicability of BWR [Boiling Water Reactor]/4 TS [Technical Specification] 3.6.2.5 and TS 3.6.3.2.”
Submit comments by February 28, 2020. Requests for a hearing or petitions for leave to intervene must be filed by March 30, 2020.
You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the
Samson Lee, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3168; email:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2020-0028 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Please include Docket ID NRC-2020-0028 in your comment submission.
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 will post all comment submissions at
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 into ADAMS.
The NRC is considering the issuance of an amendment to Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-59, issued to Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the licensee), for operation of FitzPatrick, located in Oswego County, New York.
The proposed amendment would adopt TSTF-568, “Revise Applicability of BWR/4 TS 3.6.2.5 and TS 3.6.3.2” (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML19325C444). TSTF-568 revises the applicability and actions of TS 3.6.2.5, “Drywell-to-Suppression Chamber Differential Pressure,” and TS 3.6.3.2, “Primary Containment Oxygen Concentration,” and presents the requirements in a manner more consistent with the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) format and content. TSTF-568 extends the allowable time to 72 hours if a differential pressure is not
Before any issuance of the proposed license amendment, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and NRC regulations.
Pursuant to section 50.91(a)(6) of title 10 of the
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
The proposed change revises the Applicability and Actions of [FitzPatrick] TS 3.6.2.4, “Drywell-to-Suppression Chamber Differential Pressure,” and [FitzPatrick] TS 3.6.3.1, “Primary Containment Oxygen Concentration,” and presents the requirements in a manner more consistent with the STS format and content. Drywell-to-suppression chamber differential pressure and primary containment oxygen concentration are not initiators to any accident previously evaluated. As a result, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not affected by the proposed change.
Drywell-to-Suppression Chamber Differential Pressure and Primary Containment Oxygen Concentration are assumptions in the mitigation of some accidents previously evaluated. The Applicability of TS 3.6.3.1 is changed from Mode 1 when thermal power is greater than 15% to Modes 1 and 2. This expands the Applicability of the TS and will not have an effect on the consequences of an accident. The existing Applicability exceptions are removed and replaced with a longer Completion Time of 72 hours. The consequences of an event that could affect the drywell-to-suppression chamber differential pressure and primary containment oxygen concentration are no different during the proposed Completion Time than the consequences of the same event during the existing Completion Times. A note referencing Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.0.4.c is added to the Actions to permit entering the Applicability with the LCO not met. The note replaces the existing Applicability exceptions. This change is administrative and has no effect on the consequences of an accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
The proposed change revises the Applicability and Actions of [FitzPatrick] TS 3.6.2.4, “Drywell-to-Suppression Chamber Differential Pressure,” and [FitzPatrick] TS 3.6.3.1, “Primary Containment Oxygen Concentration,” and presents the requirements in a manner more consistent with the STS format and content.
The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or different type of equipment will be installed). No credible new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident initiators that would have been considered a design basis accident in the UFSAR [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] are created because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has determined that hydrogen generation is not risk significant for design basis accidents.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
The proposed change revises the Applicability and Actions of [FitzPatrick] TS 3.6.2.4, “Drywell-to-Suppression Chamber Differential Pressure,” and [FitzPatrick] TS 3.6.3.1, “Primary Containment Oxygen Concentration,” and presents the requirements in a manner more consistent with the STS format and content. No safety limits are affected. No Limiting Conditions for Operation or Surveillance limits are affected. The Drywell-to-Suppression Chamber Differential Pressure and Primary Containment Oxygen Concentration Technical Specification requirements assure sufficient safety margins are maintained, and that the design, operation, surveillance methods, and acceptance criteria specified in applicable codes and standards (or alternatives approved for use by the NRC) will continue to be met as described in the plants' licensing basis. The proposed change does not adversely affect existing plant safety margins or the reliability of the equipment assumed to operate in the safety analysis. As such, there are no changes being made to safety analysis assumptions, safety limits, or limiting safety system settings that would adversely affect plant safety.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the above analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination that the license amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day comment period. However, if circumstances change during the comment period, such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day comment period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. If the Commission takes this action, it will publish in the
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at
As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.
Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document.
If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendments and make them immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.
A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).
If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's public website at
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's application dated January 23, 2020 (ADAMS Accession No. ML20023A362).
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Exemption and combined license amendment; issuance.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is granting an exemption to allow a departure from the certification information of Tier 1 of the generic design control document (DCD) and is issuing License Amendment Nos. 170 and 168 to Combined Licenses (COL), NPF-91 and NPF-92, respectively. The COLs were issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., and Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, MEAG Power SPVM, LLC, MEAG Power SPVJ, LLC, MEAG Power SPVP, LLC, and the City of Dalton, Georgia (Collectively SNC); for construction and operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4, located in Burke County, Georgia.
The granting of the exemption allows the changes to Tier 1 information asked for in the amendment. Because the acceptability of the exemption was determined in part by the acceptability of the amendment, the exemption and amendment are being issued concurrently.
The exemption and amendment were issued on December 27, 2019.
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2008-0252 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Chandu Patel, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3025; email:
The NRC is granting an exemption from paragraph B of section III, “Scope and Contents,” of appendix D, “Design Certification Rule for the AP1000,” to part 52 of title 10 of the
Part of the justification for granting the exemption was provided by the review of the amendment. Because the exemption is necessary in order to issue the requested license amendment, the NRC granted the exemption and issued the amendment concurrently, rather than in sequence. This included issuing a combined safety evaluation containing the NRC staff's review of both the exemption request and the license amendment. The exemption met all applicable regulatory criteria set forth in §§ 50.12, 52.7, and section VIII.A.4 of appendix D to 10 CFR part 52. The license amendment was found to be acceptable as well. The combined safety evaluation is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19337B326.
Identical exemption documents (except for referenced unit numbers and license numbers) were issued to SNC for VEGP Units 3 and 4 (COLs, NPF-91 and NPF-92). The exemption documents for VEGP Units 3 and 4 can be found in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML19337A741 and ML19337B139, respectively. The exemption is reproduced (with the exception of abbreviated titles and additional citations) in Section II of this document. The amendment documents for COLs, NPF-91 and NPF-92 are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML19337A926 and ML19337B183, respectively. A summary of the amendment documents is provided in Section III of this document.
Reproduced below is the exemption document issued to VEGP Units 3 and Unit 4. It makes reference to the combined safety evaluation that provides the reasoning for the findings made by the NRC (and listed under Item 1) in order to grant the exemption:
1. In a letter dated July 8, 2019, Southern Nuclear Operating Company requested from the Commission an exemption to allow departures from Tier 1 information in the certified DCD incorporated by reference in 10 CFR part 52, appendix D, as part of license amendment request 19-002, “Functional Arrangement ITAAC Optimization.”
For the reasons set forth in Section 3.2 of the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation, which can be found in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19337B326, the Commission finds that:
A. The exemption is authorized by law;
B. The exemption presents no undue risk to public health and safety;
C. The exemption is consistent with the common defense and security;
D. Special circumstances are present in that the application of the rule in this circumstance is not necessary to serve the underlying purpose of the rule;
E. The special circumstances outweigh any decrease in safety that may result from the reduction in standardization caused by the exemption; and
F. The exemption will not result in a significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the design.
2. Accordingly, SNC is granted an exemption from the certified DCD Tier 1 information, with corresponding changes to Appendix C of the Facility Combined License, as described in the request dated July 8, 2019. This exemption is related to, and necessary for the granting of License Amendment No. 170 [for Unit 3, 168 for Unit 4], which is being issued concurrently with this exemption.
3. As explained in Section 5.0 of the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation (ADAMS Accession No. ML19337B326), this exemption meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment needs to be prepared in connection with the issuance of the exemption.
4. This exemption is effective as of the date of its issuance.
By letter dated July 8, 2019 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML19189A181, ML19189A182, ML19189A183, and ML19189A184), SNC requested that the NRC amend the COLs for VEGP, Units 3 and 4, COLs, NPF-91 and NPF-92. The proposed amendment is described in Section I of this notice.
The Commission has determined for these amendments that the application complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating license or COL, as applicable, proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the
The Commission has determined that these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for these amendments.
Using the reasons set forth in the combined safety evaluation, the staff granted the exemptions and issued the amendments that SNC requested on July 8, 2019.
The exemptions and amendments were issued on December 27, 2019, as part of a combined package to SNC (ADAMS Accession No. ML19337A667).
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thursday, February 6, 2020, at 11:00 a.m.; Thursday, February 6, 2020, at 4:00 p.m.
Washington, DC, at U.S. Postal Service Headquarters, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW, in the Benjamin Franklin Room.
Thursday, February 6, 2020, at 11:00 a.m.—Closed. Thursday, February 6, 2020, at 4:00 p.m.—Open.
1. Strategic Issues.
2. Financial and Operational Matters.
3. Compensation and Personnel Matters.
4. Executive Session—Discussion of prior agenda items and Board governance.
1. Remarks of the Chairman of the Board of Governors.
2. Remarks of the Postmaster General and CEO.
3. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meetings.
4. Committee Reports.
5. FY2020 Integrated Financial Plan.
6. Quarterly Financial Report.
7. Quarterly Service Performance Report.
8. Approval of Tentative Agenda for the April 1 Meeting.
A public comment period will begin immediately following the adjournment of the open session on February 6, 2020. During the public comment period, which shall not exceed 30 minutes, members of the public may comment on any item or subject listed on the agenda for the open session above. Registration of speakers at the public comment period is required. Speakers may register online at
Michael J. Elston, Secretary of the Board of Governors, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 20260-1000. Telephone: (202) 268-4800.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
FINRA is proposing to extend the expiration date of FINRA Rule 0180 (Application of Rules to Security-Based Swaps) to September 1, 2021. FINRA Rule 0180 temporarily limits, with certain exceptions, the application of FINRA rules with respect to security-based swaps.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's website at
In its filing with the Commission, FINRA included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. FINRA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
On July 1, 2011, the SEC issued an Order granting temporary exemptive relief (the “Temporary Exemptions”) from compliance with certain provisions of the Exchange Act in connection with the revision, pursuant to Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”),
The Commission, noting the need to avoid a potential unnecessary disruption to the security-based swap market in the absence of an extension of the Temporary Exemptions, and the need for additional time to consider the potential impact of the revision of the Exchange Act definition of “security” in light of ongoing Commission rulemaking efforts under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act, issued an Order which extended and refined the applicable expiration dates for the previously granted Temporary Exemptions.
The Commission has finalized a majority of its rulemakings pursuant to Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act (the “Title VII rulemakings”).
FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness. FINRA is proposing that the implementation date of the proposed rule change will be February 12, 2020.
FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,
FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change would prevent undue burdens on market participants and undue market disruption that would otherwise result if FINRA Rule 0180 expires before the Registration Compliance Date that the Commission has specified. FINRA believes that, by extending the expiration of FINRA Rule 0180, the proposed rule change will serve to promote regulatory clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on the marketplace and facilitating investor protection.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to amend MRX's Pricing Schedule. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend Options 7, Section 3, titled “Regular Order Fees and Rebates.”
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
MRX proposes to amend its Pricing Schedule at Options 7, Section 3, titled “Regular Order Fees and Rebates.” There are two changes that are proposed to Options 7, Section 3: (1) An amendment to the Tier 2 Market Maker Penny and Non-Penny Symbol Regular Order Fees in Table 1; and (2) an amendment to the Qualifying Tier Thresholds in Table 3. Each proposed amendment will be discussed below.
The Exchange originally filed the proposed pricing changes on January 2, 2020 (SR-MRX-2020-01). On January 13, 2020, the Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this filing.
Today, the Exchange assesses the following Penny Symbol Regular Order Fees and Rebates within Table 1 of Options 7, Section 3:
Today, the Exchange assesses the following Non-Penny Symbol Regular Order Fees and Rebates within Table 1 of Options 7, Section 3:
Today, the Tier 2 Market Maker
Today the Exchange has two tiers as part of its Qualifying Tier Thresholds in Table 3 of Options 7, Section 3 as follows:
All
The Exchange proposes to amend the current Qualifying Tier Thresholds by replacing the ADV thresholds with total industry percentage thresholds. Specifically, a member would be eligible for Tier 1 if it executes 0.00%-0.7499% of Customer Total Consolidated Volume, and Tier 2 if it executes 0.75% or more of Customer Total Consolidated Volume. The Exchange also proposes to note that for purposes of measuring Total Affiliated and/or Appointed Member ADV, Customer Total Consolidated Volume means the total volume cleared at The Options Clearing Corporation in the Customer range in equity and ETF options in that month. The Exchange
While the maker/taker fees will remain the same for Non-Nasdaq MRX Market Maker orders, Firm Proprietary/Broker-Dealer orders, and Professional Customer orders regardless of the tier achieved,
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Exchange's proposal to increase the Tier 2 Market Maker Fee for both Penny and Non-Penny Symbols from $0.00 to $0.10 per contract is reasonable. While the Exchange is proposing to increase these fees for Market Makers in Tier 2, it continues to remain competitive and will continue to attract order flow. MRX is continuing to offer Market Makers the opportunity to reduce the Penny and Non-Penny Symbol Market Maker Fee if it qualifies for Tier 2 ($0.20 per contract as compared to the proposed $0.10 per contract).
The Exchange's proposal to increase the Tier 2 Market Maker Fee for both Penny and Non-Penny Symbols from $0.00 to $0.10 per contract is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. Market Makers would continue to pay a lower fee as compared to fees for orders from other non-Priority Customers. Non-Nasdaq Marker Makers (FarMM), Firm Proprietary/Broker-Dealer and Professional Customers are assessed a fee of $0.47 per contract for Penny Symbols and $0.90 per contract for Non-Penny Symbols. Market Makers add value to MRX through quoting obligations
The Exchange's proposal to amend the current Qualifying Tier Thresholds by amending Tier 1 from Total Affiliated and/or Appointed Member ADV of 0-49,999 contracts to 0.00%-0.7499% of Customer Total Consolidated Volume
The Exchange's proposal to amend the current Qualifying Tier Thresholds is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory. The proposed tiers will be applied uniformly to all market participants. Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the qualifying tier thresholds are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as all market participants may qualify for a higher tier by executing the required volume of contracts, either through the Member, its affiliates, or an Appointed Member, as is the case today. As noted above, the proposed volume requirements will primarily impact Market Makers that are eligible to qualify for the lower Tier 2 maker fee
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The proposal does not impose an undue burden on inter-market competition. The Exchange believes its proposal remains competitive with other options markets and will offer market participants with another choice of where to transact options. The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges that have been exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
The proposed fee do not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition.
The Exchange's proposal to increase the Tier 2 Market Maker Fee for both Penny and Non-Penny Symbols from $0.00 to $0.10 per contract does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition. Market Makers would continue to pay a lower fee as compared to fees for orders from other non-Priority Customers. Non-Nasdaq Marker Makers (FarMM), Firm Proprietary/Broker-Dealer and Professional Customers are assessed a fee of $0.47 per contract for Penny Symbols and $0.90 per contract for Non-Penny Symbols. Makers add value to MRX through quoting obligations
The Exchange's proposal to amend the current Qualifying Tier Thresholds does not impose an undue burden on intra-market competition. The tiers will be applied uniformly to all market participants. Furthermore, all market participants can qualify for a higher tier by executing the required volume of contracts, either through the member, its affiliates, or an appointed member, as is the case today. As noted above, the proposed volume requirements will primarily impact Market Makers that are eligible to qualify for the lower Tier 2 maker fee while all other market participants (other than Priority Customers that get the benefit of free executions) will continue to be charged the same maker/taker fees regardless of the tier achieved. The Exchange, however, anticipates minimal member impact with the proposed changes to Tier 1 and Tier 2 as no members, including Market Makers, meet the current Tier 2 ADV requirements and thus would not fall out of the higher tier as a result of this change. Furthermore, while the proposal effectively increases the volume requirements for Tier 1 and Tier 2, Market Makers will continue to be charged substantially lower maker fees than other non-Priority Customers for both tiers. For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange does not believe that its proposal will have an undue burden on intramarket competition.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “C2”) proposes to amend Rule 6.31 in connection with the Exchange's Clearing Editor. The text of the proposed rule change is provided below.
(a) No change.
(b) Trading Permit Holders may change the following fields through the Clearing Editor: (1) Executing Firm and Contra Firm; (2) Executing Broker and Contra Broker; (3) CMTA; (4) Account and Sub Account; (5) [Customer]
The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's website (
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.31 in connection with its Clearing Editor. The Clearing Editor currently allows Trading Permit Holders (“TPHs”) to update executed trades on their trading dates and revise them for clearing. Specifically, the Clearing Editor allows TPHs to correct certain bonafide errors by changing certain fields, pursuant to Rule 6.31(b), including: (1) Executing Firm and Contra Firm; (2) Executing Broker and Contra Broker; (3) CMTA; (4) Account and Sub Account; (5) Customer ID; (6) Position Effect (open/close); or (7) Capacity. The Exchange proposes to amend the rule to provide additional specificity regarding a Capacity code change. The proposed rule provides that that if the change is from a customer Capacity code of (C) to any other Capacity code, it must be accompanied by a Reason Code and notice of such change will automatically be sent to the Exchange with the submission of the change through the Clearing Editor. As proposed, Rule 6.31(b) would continue to allow a TPH to change any Capacity code to another, however, would just require a TPH to provide automatic notification and explanation to the Exchange via a prompted Reason Code of a Capacity code change from a customer Capacity code to another Capacity code.
The proposed rule change also updates the term Customer ID in Rule 6.31(b) to Client Order ID, as this term more accurately reflect the name of the
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.
In particular, by requiring a TPH to submit a Reason Code via the Clearing Editor in conjunction with a change made from a customer Capacity code, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change may prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and otherwise promote just and equitable principles of trade because it would allow the Exchange to automatically be notified of such a change and the rationale behind the change. This, in turn, would allow the Exchange to better surveil for and enforce against potential issues or abusive behavior via the Clearing Editor. As such, the proposed rule change is specifically designed to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange further notes that, for the same reasons enumerated above, the proposed rule change is also consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,
Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to update the term Customer ID to Client Order ID, a term that more accurately reflects the field name that is displayed on an order and in the Clearing Editor, would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and protect investors by mitigating any potential confusion surrounding the use of this field. Finally, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change is identical to the manner in which a Capacity code change from a customer Capacity code must be made and the term Client Order ID is used in Cboe Options Rule 6.6, previously filed with the Commission.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change would impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the Act, because it would require all TPHs to input a Reason Code via the Clearing Editor when changing from a customer Capacity code. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change does not alter or restrict any the fields that a TPH may currently change via the Clearing Editor. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on intermarket competition, because it is substantially the same as the Clearing Editor rule on Cboe Options, previously filed with the Commission. In addition to this, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change is not intended to address competitive issues, but rather, is concerned with the correction of post-trade information for purposes of enhancing surveillance and enforcement for potential issues or abuses of the Clearing Editor.
The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the proposed rule change.
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
A. significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX PEARL Fee Schedule (“Fee Schedule”) to make minor, non-substantive corrective edits and clarifying changes.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend several sections of the Fee Schedule to make minor, non-substantive edits to harmonize terms in the Fee Schedule with that of the Exchange's rulebook and the rulebooks of the Exchange's affiliates, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC (“MIAX”) and MIAX Emerald, LLC (“MIAX Emerald”). Currently, throughout the Fee Schedule, the Exchange's affiliate, MIAX, is referred to as “MIAX Options” or “MIAX Options Exchange.” The Exchange now proposes that all references throughout the Fee Schedule that are to “MIAX Options” or “MIAX Options Exchange” will be amended to delete the words “Options” or “Options Exchange” (where applicable), such that all references will be to the singular word “MIAX.” The proposed amendments would be to references to “MIAX Options” or “MIAX Options Exchange” in the following sections of the Fee Schedule: (i) the text for the definitions of MENI and MIAX in the Definitions section and the text in the last paragraph of the Definitions section
Next, the Exchange proposes to amend the Definitions section of the Fee Schedule to amend a cross-reference in one of the defined terms. Currently, the term “ABBO” contains a cross-reference to Exchange Rule 1400(f), which is meant to be a cross-reference to the definition for an “Eligible Exchange.” The correct citation to the definition for “Eligible Exchange” is Exchange Rule 1400(g).
Next, the Exchange proposes to amend Section (2)(c) of the Fee Schedule, Web CRD Fees, to make non-substantives edits to the sentence in parentheses following the FINRA Disclosure Processing Fee under the section titled “GENERAL REGISTRATION FEES.” Currently, the FINRA Disclosure Processing Fee includes the following in parentheses “(Form U4, Form U5, Form BD & amendments)”. The Exchange now proposes to delete the ampersand in that sentence and replace it with the word
Next, the Exchange proposes to amend the cross-reference in last paragraph of Section (2)(c) of the Fee Schedule. The last paragraph of Section (2)(c) currently states as follows: “The Continuing Education Fee applies to each individual who is required to complete the Regulatory Element of the Continuing Education Requirements pursuant to MIAX PEARL Rule 1304.” Recently, the Exchange reorganized and enhanced the Exchange's membership, registration and qualification rules, and consolidated these rules into new Chapter XXXI, Registration, Qualification and Continuing Education.
The Exchange notes that its affiliate, MIAX Emerald, will also make similar changes to its Fee Schedule as described above.
The Exchange believes that its proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The Exchange believes the proposed changes promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed changes make clarifying, non-substantive edits to the Fee Schedule, and update a cross-reference to the Exchange's rulebook. The Exchange believes that these proposed changes will provide greater clarity to Members and the public regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule and that it is in the public interest for the Fee Schedule to be accurate and concise so as to eliminate the potential for confusion.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is not a competitive filing but rather is designed to remedy minor non-substantive issues and provide added clarity to the Fee Schedule in order to avoid potential confusion on the part of market participants. In addition, the Exchange does not believe the proposal will impose any burden on inter-market competition as the proposal does not address any competitive issues and is intended to protect investors by providing further transparency regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On May 15, 2019, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (“BZX” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Social Security Administration (SSA).
Notice of a new matching program.
In accordance with the provisions of the Privacy Act, as amended, this notice announces a new matching program with the Department of the Treasury—Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
This computer matching agreement sets forth the terms, conditions, and safeguards under which IRS will disclose to SSA certain return information for the purpose of verifying eligibility for the Medicare Part D Low Income Subsidy (LIS) and determining the correct subsidy percentage of benefits provided under section 1860D-14 of the Social Security Act (Act).
The deadline to submit comments on the propsed matching program is February 28, 2020. The matching program will be applicable, once a minum of 30 days after publication of this notice has elapsed, February 28, 2020. The matching program will be in effect for a period of 18 months.
Interested parties may comment on this notice by either telefaxing to (410) 966-0869, writing to Matthew Ramsey, Executive Director, Office of Privacy and Disclosure, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, G-401 WHR, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235-6401, or emailing
Interested parties may submit general questions about the matching program to Mary Ann Zimmerman, Deputy Executive Director, Office of Privacy and Disclosure, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, G-401 WHR, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235-6401, at Telephone: (410) 966-5855, or send an email to
None.
SSA and IRS.
The legal authority for this agreement is Internal Revenue Code section 6103(1)(7), which authorizes IRS to disclose return information with respect to unearned income to Federal, state, and local agencies administering certain benefit programs under the Act.
Section 1860D-14 of the Act requires the Commissioner of Social Security to determine the eligibility of applicants for the prescription drug subsidy who self-certify their income, resources, and family size. Pursuant to section 1860D-14(a)(3) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-114(a)(3)), SSA must determine whether a Medicare Part D eligible individual is a subsidy-eligible individual, and whether the individual is an individual as described in section 1860D-14(a) of the Act.
This matching program establishes the conditions under which IRS will disclose to SSA certain return information for the purpose of verifying eligibility for the Medicare Part D LIS and determines the correct subsidy percentage of benefits provided under section 1860D-14 of the Act.
The individuals whose information is involved in this matching program are beneficiaries for whom SSA must make Medicare Part D LIS determinations.
SSA Responbilities—When Medicare, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, and Medicare Savings Program beneficiaries apply for LIS under section 1860D-14 of the Act, they must self-certify on the application form their income, resources, and family size. SSA will verify each applicant's self-certification information before making a subsidy determination.
When beneficiaries apply for LIS, and SSA cannot otherwise verify the income information provided on an application, SSA discloses to IRS the last four characters of the applicant's surname and Social Security number. On a weekly basis, SSA provides IRS with such identifying information for applicants for benefits available under LIS. SSA electronically transmits the records to IRS.
Once each year, SSA electronically transmits the identifying information of each current LIS recipient to IRS. SSA must notify IRS of its intent to request this annual extract at least 30 days prior to transmitting the file.
IRS Responsibilities—On a weekly basis, IRS extracts return information with respect to unearned income from the Information Returns Master File (IRMF) using the same extract process as the Disclosure of Information to Federal, State, and Local Agencies (DIFSLA) program. When there is a match of an individuals' identifier, IRS extracts and discloses the Payee Account Number; Payee Name and Mailing Address; Payee Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN); Payer Name and Address; Payer TIN and Income Type and Amouint for unearned income data pertaining to the most recent tax year for which such data is available in electronic format. When each new tax year data becomes available in electronic format, IRS provides the most recent data in response to the weekly SSA request. IRS transmits the records electronically to SSA.
Once each year, at the request of SSA, IRS extracts return information with respect to unearned income pertaining to current subsidy recipients from the IRMF using the same extract process as the DIFSLA program. IRS provides the response records electronically to SSA.
SSA provides IRS with identifying information with respect to applicants for, and recipients of, LIS from the existing Medicare Database (MDB File) system of records, 60-0321, last fully published on July 25, 2006 (71 FR 42159), as amended on December 10, 2007 (72 FR 69723), and November 1, 2018 (83 FR 54969). Unearned income information provided by IRS is maintained in the MDB File.
IRS extracts return information with respect to unearned income from the IRMF, Treasury/IRS 22.061, as published at 77 FR 47946 (August 10, 2012) as amended by 80 FR 54081 (September 8, 2015).
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of intent to rule on a request to release airport property at the Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport, Dallas, Georgia.
The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the release of land at the Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport, Dallas, Georgia.
Comments must be received on or before February 28, 2020.
Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered to the FAA at the following address: Rob Rau, Planning Lead, Federal Aviation Administration, Atlanta Airports District Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, Suite 220, College Park, GA 30337.
In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be mailed or delivered to: Terry Tibbits, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), 730 Airport Parkway, Suite 100, Dallas, GA 30157.
Rob Rau, Planning Lead, Federal Aviation Administration, Atlanta Airports District Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, Suite 220, College Park, GA 30337, (404) 305-6748,
The request to release property may be reviewed, by appointment, in person at this same location.
The FAA invites public comment on the request to release approximately 2.964 acres of airport property at Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport (PUJ) under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47107(h)(2). On September 6, 2019, the CEO of the Paulding County Airport Authority requested from the FAA that approximately 2.964 acres of property be released for sale to the Chattahoochee Technical College for use as a new public Airframe and Power Plant (A&P) school consistent with the zoning ordinances of Paulding County. The FAA has determined that the proposed property release at the Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport, as submitted by the Paulding County Airport Authority, meets the procedural requirements of the FAA and release of the property does not and will not impact future aviation needs at the airport. The FAA may approve the request, in whole or in part, no sooner than thirty days after the publication of this notice.
Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport is proposing the release of airport property totaling 2.964 acres, more or less. This land is to be used for an Airframe and Power Plant training school. The release of land is necessary to comply with Federal Aviation Administration Grant Assurances that do not allow federally acquired airport property to be used for non-aviation purposes. The sale of the subject property will result in the land at Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport being changed from aeronautical to non-aeronautical use and release the land from the conditions of the Airport Improvement Program Grant Agreement Grant Assurances. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 47107(c)(2)(B)(i) and (iii), the airport will receive fair market value for the property, which will be subsequently reinvested in another eligible airport improvement project for general aviation facilities at the Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport.
Any person may inspect, by appointment, the request in person at the FAA office listed above under
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of denials.
FMCSA announces its decision to deny applications from 130 individuals who requested an exemption from the vision standard in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
FMCSA received applications from 130 individuals who requested an exemption from the vision standard in the FMCSRs.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and concluded that granting these exemptions would not provide a level of safety that would be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be obtained by complying with § 391.41(b)(10).
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical certification.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on medical reports about the applicants' vision, as well as their driving records and experience driving with the vision deficiency.
The Agency has determined that these applicants do not satisfy the eligibility criteria or meet the terms and conditions of the Federal exemption and granting these exemptions would not provide a level of safety that would be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be obtained by complying with § 391.41(b)(10). Therefore, the 130 applicants in this notice have been denied exemptions from the physical qualification standards in § 391.41(b)(10).
Each applicant has, prior to this notice, received a letter of final disposition regarding his/her exemption request. Those decision letters fully outlined the basis for the denial and constitute final action by the Agency. This notice summarizes the Agency's recent denials as required under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(4) by periodically publishing names and reasons for denial.
The following four applicants did not have sufficient driving experience over the past three years under normal highway operating conditions:
The following 54 applicants had no experience operating a CMV:
The following 28 applicants did not have three years of experience driving a CMV on public highways with their vision deficiencies:
The following seven applicants did not have 3 years of recent experience driving a CMV on public highways with their vision deficiencies:
The following seven applicants did not have sufficient driving experience over the past 3 years under normal highway operating conditions (gaps in driving record):
The following applicant was charged with moving violations in conjunction with CMV accidents:
The following applicant had his commercial driver's license suspended during the 3-year period in relation to a moving violation:
The following applicant contributed to accident(s) in which the applicant was operating a CMV, which is a disqualifying offense:
The following two applicants did not hold a license which allowed operation of vehicles over 26,000 lbs. for all or part of the 3-year period:
The following 13 applicants were denied for multiple reasons:
The following two applicants have not had stable vision for the preceding 3-year period:
The following applicant does not meet the vision standard in his better eye:
The following nine applicants drove interstate while restricted to intrastate driving:
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of final disposition.
FMCSA announces its decision to renew an exemption for one individual from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers have “no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.” The exemption enables this individual who has had one or more seizures and is taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
The exemption was applicable on October 22, 2019. The exemption expires on October 22, 2021.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to or
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
On December 4, 2019, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew an exemption for one individual from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (84 FR 66454). The public comment period ended on January 3, 2020, and no comments were received.
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of this applicant and determined that renewing the exemption would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with § 391.41(b)(8).
The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy found in § 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which is likely
In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory criteria
FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.
Based on its evaluation of the one renewal exemption application, FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following driver from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in § 391.41(b)(8).
As of October 22, 2019, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), Anthony Martens (SD) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (84 FR 66454).
This driver was included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0118. The exemption is applicable as of October 22, 2019, and will expire on October 22, 2021.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), the exemption will be valid for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Notice of denials.
FMCSA announces its decision to deny applications from four individuals treated with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICDs) who requested an exemption from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) prohibiting operation of a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce by persons with a current clinical diagnosis of myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, coronary insufficiency, thrombosis, or any other cardiovascular disease of a variety known to be accompanied by syncope (transient loss of consciousness), dyspnea (shortness of breath), collapse, or congestive heart failure.
Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001,
To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
On October 1, 2019 FMCSA published a
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and concluded that granting these exemptions would not provide a level of safety that would be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be obtained by complying with § 391.41(b)(4). A summary of each applicant's medical history related to their ICD exemption request was discussed in the October 1, 2019,
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on information from the cardiovascular Medical Advisory Criteria, an April 2007 evidence report titled “Cardiovascular Disease and Commercial Motor Vehicle Driver Safety,”
FMCSA has published advisory criteria to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in interstate commerce.
FMCSA received three comments in this proceeding. Of the three comments received, two were duplicate comments from an anonymous commenter. The anonymous commenter supports all three individuals being granted an exemption based on the documentation that they have provided, that they have improved cardiac statuses, and that their ICDs have never deployed. The commenter states that individuals with epilepsy and diabetes are able to get approved for exemptions despite their condition and treatment. This commenter states that the Agency should do more research and make exemption decisions on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Christopher Oakland, an applicant, commented in support of FMCSA granting exemptions for 1 year to individuals who provide medical documentation from a qualified healthcare provider, that the individual is stable, the individual has no documented symptoms of syncope, dyspnea, collapse or congestive heart failure as stated in the cardiovascular standard, and the ICD has not administered therapy. Mr. Oakland commented that he submitted a total of three letters and that two of the three letters are from two different electrocardiologists. He further commented that the
In response to the first commenter, FMCSA reviews and considers each request received for an ICD exemption individually to determine whether the applicant is able to meet a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level achieved without an exemption. While the individuals' underlying cardiac conditions may demonstrate levels of improvement, their medical treatment plans also rely on the ICD device. The device, though it may not have deployed since implantation, may unpredictably deploy at a future date to deliver therapy. Based on the available medical and scientific data concerning ICDs, FMCSA finds that the applicants have an ongoing risk for incapacitation if the device discharges in response to cardiovascular symptoms. This risk for incapacitation does not meet an equal or greater level of safety that would be achieved absent an exemption. Concerning the comments on the need for additional research, FMCSA has processes and procedures in place to consider new research and existing research so that the Agency's determinations are evidence-based.
Mr. Oakland contacted the Agency prior to the close of the comment period to confirm that he submitted a total of three letters, one from his cardiologist, and letters from two separate electrophysiologists. Mr. Oakland was informed that the statement in the
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.
The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is based on an individualized assessment of each applicant's medical information, available medical and scientific data concerning ICDs, and the public comments received.
ICDs are electronic devices that treat cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation, and ventricular tachycardia, through the delivery of rapid pacing stimuli or shock therapy. ICDs treat but do not prevent arrhythmias. Therefore, the individual remains at risk for syncope or loss of consciousness. The underlying conditions for which the ICD was implanted therefore places these individuals at high risk for syncope or other unpredictable events know to result in gradual or sudden incapacitation. In addition, ICDs may discharge, which could result in loss of ability to safely control a CMV. The December 2014 focused research report referenced previously upholds the findings of the April 2007 report and indicates that the available scientific data on individuals with ICDs and CMV driving does not support that individuals with ICDs who operate CMVs are able to meet an equal or greater level of safety. FMCSA's individual assessment of the exemption applications and the public comments does not provide any basis for departing from its general views on the risks posed by individual with an underlying cardiovascular condition that requires the implantation of an ICD to control.
In the case of persons with ICDs, the underlying condition for which the ICD was implanted places the individual at high risk for syncope or other unpredictable events known to result in gradual or sudden incapacitation. ICDs may discharge, which could result in loss of ability to safely control a CMV. The December 2014 focused research report referenced previously upholds the findings of the April 2007 report and indicates that the available scientific data on persons with ICDs and CMV driving does not support that persons with ICDs who operate CMVs are able to meet an equal or greater level of safety.
The Agency has determined that the available medical and scientific literature and research provides insufficient data, even when considered with the individual assessment of each application, to enable the Agency to conclude that granting these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the exemption. Therefore, the following four applicants have been denied exemptions from the physical qualification standards in § 391.41(b)(4):
Each applicant has, prior to this notice, received a letter of final disposition regarding his/her exemption request. Those decision letters fully outlined the basis for the denial and constitute final action by the Agency. The list published today summarizes the Agency's recent denials as required under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(4).
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of a continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, FinCEN invites comment on a renewal, without change, to information
Written comments are welcome and must be received on or before March 30, 2020.
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
•
•
Please submit comments by one method only. All comments submitted in response to this notice will become a matter of public record. Therefore, you should submit only information that you wish to make publicly available.
FinCEN Resource Center at 1-800-767-2825 or 1-703-905-3591 (not a toll free number) and select option 3 for regulatory questions. Email inquiries can be sent to
On October 26, 2001, the President signed into law the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Public Law 107-56 (the USA PATRIOT Act). Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act amended the anti-money laundering (AML) provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951-1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314, 5316-5332, to promote the prevention, detection, and prosecution of international money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Regulations implementing the BSA appear at 31 CFR Chapter X. The authority of the Secretary of the Treasury (the Secretary) to administer the BSA and its implementing regulations has been delegated to the Director of FinCEN.
Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Section 311), codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A, grants FinCEN the authority, upon finding that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that a foreign jurisdiction, financial institution, class of transactions, or type of account is of “primary money laundering concern,” to require domestic financial institutions and financial agencies to take certain “special measures” to address the primary money laundering concern.
FinCEN may impose one or more of these special measures in order to protect the U.S. financial system from these threats. Special measures one through four, codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(1)-(b)(4), impose additional recordkeeping, information collection, and reporting requirements on covered U.S. financial institutions. The fifth special measure, codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(5), allows FinCEN to impose prohibitions or conditions on the opening or maintenance of certain correspondent accounts.
FinCEN issued a final rule on November 4, 2019, imposing the fifth special measure to prohibit U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, Iranian banking institutions. (84 FR 59302). The rule further prohibits U.S. financial institutions from processing transactions for the correspondent account of a foreign bank in the United States if such a transaction involves an Iranian financial institution, and requires institutions to apply special due diligence to guard against such use by Iranian financial institutions. See 31 CFR 1010.661.
The notification requirement in section 1010.661(b)(3)(i)(A) is intended to enhance cooperation from correspondent account holders in denying Iran access to the U.S. financial system. The information required to be maintained by section 1010.661(b)(4)(i) will be used by federal agencies and certain self-regulatory organizations to verify compliance by covered financial institutions with the provisions of 31 CFR 1010.661.
• 5,358 banks [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
• 5,375 federally-insured credit unions [National Credit Union Administration,
• 125 privately-insured credit unions [General Accountability Office,
• 1,130 introducing brokers [National Futures Association website, March 31, 2019];
• 64 futures commission merchants [National Futures Association website, March 31, 2019];
• 3,607 securities firms [Financial Industry Regulatory Authority website, December 31, 2018]; and,
• 7,956 U.S. mutual funds [Investment Company Institute,
FinCEN's estimated number of affected financial institutions accounts for all domestic financial institutions that could potentially maintain correspondent accounts for foreign banks, and is designed to ensure that all U.S. financial institutions are conducting their due diligence and not processing transactions that may involve Iranian financial institutions.
There are approximately 23,615 such financial institutions doing business in the United States. In addition, all U.S. persons, including U.S. financial institutions, currently exercise some degree of due diligence in order to comply with existing U.S. sanctions programs applicable to Iran.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
Departmental Offices, U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Notice.
The Department of the Treasury, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other federal agencies to comment on the proposed information collections listed below, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Written comments must be received on or before March 30, 2020.
Send comments regarding the burden estimate, or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Treasury PRA Clearance Officer, 1750 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 8100, Washington, DC 20220, or email at
Copies of the submissions may be obtained from Steven Kvalevog by emailing
44 U.S.C. 3501
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, that the National Research Advisory Council will hold a meeting on Wednesday, March 4, 2020, at 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Room 230, Washington, DC 20420. The meeting will convene at 9:00 a.m. and end at 3:30 p.m. This meeting is open to the public.
The purpose of the National Research Advisory Council is to advise the Secretary on research development conducted by the Veterans Health Administration, including policies and programs targeting the high priority of Veterans' health care needs.
On March 4, 2019, the agenda will include ethics training, briefing from Advisory Committee Management Office (ACMO), and briefings on various VA Research programs designed to enhance the research potential for Veterans. The Committee will also explore potential recommendations to be included in the next annual report. No time will be allocated at this meeting for receiving oral presentations from the public. However, public comments and presentations can be submitted to Avery Rock, Designated Federal Officer, Office of Research and Development (10X2), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, at (202) 461-9760, or by email at
(1) In order to establish increases in the duty rate on imports of certain derivative articles, subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS is modified as provided in Annex I and Annex II to this proclamation. Except as otherwise provided in this proclamation, all imports of derivative aluminum articles specified in Annex I to this proclamation shall be subject to an additional 10 percent ad valorem rate of duty, and all imports of derivative steel articles specified in Annex II to this proclamation shall be subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty, with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time on February 8, 2020. These rates of duty, which are in addition to any other duties, fees, exactions, and charges applicable to such imported derivative aluminum articles or steel articles, shall apply to imports of derivative aluminum articles described in Annex I to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, the Commonwealth of Australia (Australia), Canada, and the United Mexican States (Mexico) and to imports of derivative steel articles described in Annex II to this proclamation from all countries except Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, and South Korea. The Secretary shall continue to monitor imports of the derivative articles described in Annex I and Annex II to this proclamation, and shall, from time to time, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative (USTR), review the status of such imports with respect to the national security of the United States. In the event of a surge of imports of any derivative article described in Annex I or Annex II to this proclamation from any excepted country, the Secretary, with the concurrence of the USTR, is authorized to extend application of the tariff imposed by this proclamation on imports of any derivative article experiencing such surge from such country, or to adopt appropriate quotas for imports of such derivative article from such country, or to negotiate a voluntary agreement with such country to ensure that imports of such derivative article from such country do not undermine the effectiveness of the adjustment of imports made in Proclamation 9704 and Proclamation 9705, as amended. The Secretary shall publish such action in the
(2) The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the USTR, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, and such other senior executive branch officials as the Secretary deems appropriate, is hereby authorized to provide relief from the additional duties set forth in clause 1 of this proclamation for any derivative article determined not to be produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or of a satisfactory quality and is also authorized to provide such relief based upon specific national security considerations. Such relief shall be provided for a derivative article only after a request for exclusion is made by a directly affected party located in the United States. If the Secretary determines that a particular derivative article should be excluded, the Secretary shall publicly post such determination and notify CBP concerning such article so that it will be excluded from the duties described in clause 1 of this proclamation. For merchandise entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the date the duty established under this proclamation is effective and with respect to which liquidation is not final, such relief shall be retroactive to the date the request for relief was accepted by the Department of Commerce.
(3) Any derivative article described in Annex I or Annex II to this proclamation, except those eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, that is subject to the duty imposed by clause 1 of this proclamation and that is admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time on February 8, 2020, may only be admitted as “privileged foreign status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, and will be subject upon entry for consumption to any ad valorem rates of duty related to the classification under the applicable HTSUS subheading. Any derivative article that is described in Annex I or Annex II to this proclamation, except those eligible for admission under “domestic status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.43, that is subject to the duty imposed by clause 1 of this proclamation, and that was admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone under “privileged foreign status” as defined in 19 CFR 146.41, prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time on February 8, 2020, will likewise be subject upon entry for consumption to any ad valorem rates of duty related to the classification under the applicable HTSUS subheading added by this proclamation.
(4) Derivative articles shall not be subject upon entry for consumption to the duty established in clause 1 of this proclamation merely by reason of manufacture in a U.S. foreign trade zone. However, derivative articles admitted into a U.S. foreign trade zone in “privileged foreign status” pursuant to clause 3 of this proclamation shall retain that status consistent with 19 CFR 146.41(e).
(5) No drawback shall be available with respect to the duties imposed on any derivative article imposed by clause 1 of this proclamation.
(6) The Secretary, in consultation with CBP and other relevant executive departments and agencies, shall revise the HTSUS so that it conforms to the amendments and effective dates directed in this proclamation. The Secretary shall publish any such modification to the HTSUS in the
(7) Any provision of previous proclamations and Executive Orders that is inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation is superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.